DOCSLIB.ORG

2006 Geotechnical Investigation Results

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2006 Geotechnical Investigation Results Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Infrastructure WSI APPENDIX 1: 2006 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RESULTS (ARCHAEOSCAPE) An Evaluation of Geotechnical Borehole and Test Pit Data from Locations between Brighton and Peacehaven, East Sussex C.P. Green, ArchaeoScape, Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 OEX, UK Introduction A1.1 This report summarises the findings arising from an evaluation of forty-seven geotechnical borehole and test pit logs taken at the site of a proposed waste water treatment works (WTW/SRC) at Peacehaven and along the route of the associated infrastructure between Brighton and Peacehaven. This infrastructure comprises a tunnelled pipeline from Black Rock (Brighton), following the coast to the existing Headworks at Portobello, then across to the WTW/SRC site at Peacehaven. Along the length of the pipeline are a number of components, comprising shafts and two pumping stations. The geotechnical work was conducted by Soil Mechanics Ltd on behalf of Mott Macdonald. The geotechnical data were subsequently collated and evaluated by ArchaeoScape (on behalf of RPS) with the aim of providing an indication of the range of sub-surface conditions likely to be encountered along the pipeline route and at the WTW/SRC site. The Report is divided into two Parts. Part I provides a description and interpretation of the sediments and sub-surface conditions recorded in the boreholes and test pits. Part II lists the components of the scheme and evaluates the ground conditions and geo-archaeological potential at each component location. Part I Methods A1.2 Forty-seven geotechnical sediment logs located between Brighton and Peacehaven, and at the site of the waste water treatment works at Peacehaven, form the basis of this evaluation. The geotechnical logs consist of 29 rotary and 6 cable percussion boreholes, and 12 test pits. Figure 1 displays a summary of the rotary boreholes Page 16 Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Infrastructure WSI (scale, m OD); to emphasise the locations of the rotary boreholes, vertical lines have been used to differentiate three spatial groups (Brighton, Roedean-Telscombe and Peacehaven). Figure 2 displays a summary of the cable percussion boreholes (scale, m OD), while Figure 3 displays a summary of the test pits (scale, m OD). Along the top of each figure are the borehole or test pit reference numbers and in the case of the rotary boreholes (Figure 1) a code indicating the broad topographic character of the borehole site. A key to this coding system is shown at the bottom of Figure 1. In some cases a second code indicating the driller's log or truncation of the sequence is shown, this is also indicated in the key. The location of the dry valleys as recognised by Mortimore (1997) and components of the scheme as described in Part II are illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows the locations of the boreholes and test pits along the route of the pipeline. Rotary Boreholes A1.3 Twelve rotary boreholes were situated in the eastern suburbs of Brighton (MTR 101A, 101B, 101AA, 101BA, 103A, 103B, 103AA, MBR106, MBR107, MBR108, MTRXC1, MTRXC2) and a further eight along the proposed route between Roedean and Telscombe (MTR 106, MTR 112, MTR118, MTR128, MTR132, MTR134, MTR135, MTR135A). All the other rotary boreholes were within or very close to the site of the WTW/SRC works. The rotary boreholes extend to depths between 25 and 60 metres and in almost all cases terminate in undisturbed chalk of Grade B2 or B1. They provide a good record of weathering and disturbance in the upper part of the chalk and of sediments overlying the chalk. However, sediment recovery was not continuous and gaps in the cores of up to 2m are recorded and may affect the detailed interpretation of contacts between sediment units. The upper 25m of five of the rotary boreholes were not recorded in detail (driller's descriptions only). Cable Percussion Boreholes A1.4 The cable percussion boreholes were all put down in the Peacehaven area. The cable percussion boreholes are shallower (15m and in one case 20m) and provide a less refined record of the sediments recovered than the rotary boreholes. Page 17 Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Infrastructure WSI Test Pits A1.5 All the test pits were put down in the Peacehaven area within or very close to the site of the treatment works. The test pits were all put down to a depth of 5m. Results of the Geotechnical Boreholes and Test Pit Logs A1.6 From an evaluation of the borehole and test pit logs, thirteen sediment types can be identified and possible depositional origins can be suggested as shown in section A1.7 below. A1.7 The following is a list of sediment types identified from the borehole and test pit logs (Unit Number; Unit Name; Unit Description): 0; Made Ground 1; Topsoil; Brown to dark brown sandy clay with fine to coarse angular to sub- angular flint clasts, penetrated by many modern roots 2; Flinty Head; Comprising of colluvial deposit of brown to dark brown more or less sandy clay with fine to coarse angular to sub-angular flint clasts 3; Chalky Head; Colluvial deposit of brown more or less sandy clay with fine to coarse angular to sub-angular flint clasts and sub-angular to sub-round clasts of weathered chalk 4; Sandy Head; Colluvial deposit of brown to dark brown sandy clay 5; Flint Gravel; Water-laid deposit of fine to coarse angular to sub-round flint clasts 6; Solution pipe infill; Variable mixture of sandy and stony clay, infilling larger solution features in chalk 7; Woolwich Beds; Palaeocene sand and sandstone overlying Chalk; sometimes iron cemented 8; Disturbed/displaced chalk(Chalk grades Dc and Dm); Structureless mass of abraded chalk gravel, sand and silt, often stained orange or yellow mixed Page 18 Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Infrastructure WSI with variable amounts of angular to sub-angular flint (and occasionally sandstone - probably sarsen), light brown silty loam and brown or dark brown sandy clays. This unit probably includes both colluvial Combe Rock deposits and chalk severely disturbed by periglacial processes and mixed with overlying Tertiary and Quaternary sediments 9; Weathered chalk(Chalk grades C5, B5, B4); Chalk, often stained orange or yellow, retaining its original structure, but often with open joints infilled with silty chalk or silt, clay or sand derived from overlying Tertiary or Quaternary sediments; or small solution features with similar infills 10; Sound chalk(Grades B3, B2 and B1); Chalk, slightly weathered and unweathered in situ chalk 11; Chalk with flints; Driller's description 12; Beach shingle; Includes both the Pleistocene Black Rock Raised Beach and Recent beach shingle Interpretation of the Geotechnical Boreholes and Test Pit Logs A1.8 Rotary Boreholes: The sequences recorded from the rotary boreholes provide the most reliable record of sub- surface conditions. These sequences fall into three broad types, as indicated below: A1.9 Characteristics of Type A, B and C: A - Sound chalk (Grades B3, B2 or B1) overlain by less than 5m of disturbed/displaced and weathered chalk and/or Quaternary sediments B - Sound chalk (Grades B3, B2 and B1) overlain by more than 5m of disturbed/displaced chalk and/or Quaternary sediments C - Sound chalk (Grades B3, B2 and B1) underlying Woolwich Beds sands and sandstone A1.10 On this basis, the rotary boreholes have been assigned as either Type A, Type B or Type C as discussed below. Page 19 Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Infrastructure WSI Type A A1.11 The Type A group includes MBR106, MBR107, MBR108, MTR101A, MTR101B, MTR103A, MTR103B, MTR128, MTR134, MTR135, MPR100C and MPR102. These boreholes can be divided into three sub-groups. A.i This sub-group includes two low-level boreholes (MBR106 and MBR107) put down on the foreshore in the Black Rock area from ground surfaces below 6m OD. MBR 107 passed through Made Ground down to 3.81m OD and directly into sound chalk (Grade B3). MBR106 passed through Made Ground down to 2.86m OD. Below this level core recovery was incomplete but sediment logged as 'raised beach' was encountered intermittently between 2.26m and 0.76m OD and the borehole reached sound chalk (Grade B3) at 0.26m OD. The interpretation of deposits in borehole MBR 106 as 'raised beach' is accepted in the Interpretative Report prepared by Mott MacDonald (2005). However, the beach deposits recorded in borehole MBR106 almost certainly represent the modern beach, buried during the construction of the marina. At levels between 0.76m and 2.26m OD, they are some 5.6m below the lowest level at which the base of the Black Rock Raised Beach has ever previously been recorded (Hutchinson and Millar 1998 - see discussion of boreholes MTRXC1 and MTRXC2 below). The possibility that these deposits represent the Black Rock Raised Beach can therefore be discounted. A.ii Borehole MTR128 was located near the axis of a dry valley that reaches the coast at Saltdean (DV4 of Mortimore 1997). This is the longest of the dry valleys reaching the coast between Newhaven and Brighton and is cut down closer to the present sea level than the shorter and more severely truncated valleys (Figure 4). The borehole passed through 4.01m of Made Ground to reach sound chalk (Grade B3) at a depth of only 4.45m (10.51m OD). This result is somewhat unexpected as Mortimore (1997) states that 15m of weathered chalk underlies the dry valley here. It seems possible therefore that the zone of deeply weathered chalk beneath this dry valley is relatively narrow, possibly truncated by the downcutting of the valley, and that the borehole lies outside this zone of deep weathering.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Population Change in an East Sussex Town Lewes 1660-1800
    SUSSEX INDUSTRIAL HISTORY Winter 1971/72 & Section of the River. -i _1 7o* re, eo ,ae? /tie Enjoy the fuller flavour of Carling Black Label SUSSEX INDUSTRIAL HISTORY Journal of the Sussex Industrial Archaeology Study Group THREE WINTER 1971/72 page POPULATION CHANGE IN AN EAST SUSSEX TOWN : 2 LEWES 1660-1800 James P. Huzel KINGSTON MALTHOUSE, 1844-1971 20 Adrian Barritt NOTES AND NEWS 29 BOOK REVIEW 32 Edited by John Farrant, Arts Building, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN 1 9QN . Sussex Industrial History has as a principal objective the publication of the results of recording, surveying and preservation of industrial monuments and processes done under the aegis of the Sussex Industrial Archaeology Study Group . But its field is not narrowly defined, for it aims to integrate the findings of industrial archaeology into general historical thinking and writing, by studying the impact of industrial change, principally during the past two centuries, on a rural county. The Editor is very interested to hear from prospective contrib- utors of articles of any length, and to receive items for the `Notes and News' section on work in progress, requests for information and assistance, recent publications, forthcoming conferences and meetings. Published twice yearly ; annual subscription 75p (15s.). Subscriptions and all business or advertising correspondence should be addressed to the publisher, Phillimore & Co . Ltd., Shopwyke Hall, Chichester, Sussex . Contributions and correspondence about editorial content should be addressed to the Editor. Members of S.I.A.S.G. receive Sussex Industrial History free; enquiries about membership should be addressed to the General Secretary, E.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item 7 Report PC15/17 Report to Planning Committee Date
    Agenda Item 7 Report PC15/17 Report to Planning Committee Date 9 March 2017 By Director of Planning Title of Report Revised Policies for the Pre-Submission South Downs Local Plan Purpose of Report To comment on the revised policies of the Pre-Submission South Downs Local Plan Recommendation: The Committee is recommended to 1) Endorse the direction of the policies as detailed in Appendices 1 to 7 of this report for inclusion in the Pre-Submission Local Plan document, subject to any comments made by the Planning Committee being addressed. 2) Note that the Pre-Submission Local Plan will be reported to Planning Committee for consideration prior to publication for public consultation, and 3) Note that the Pre-Submission Local Plan document will be subject to final approval by the National Park Authority. 1. Summary 1.1 This report introduces the following revised draft Local Plan policies, which are set out as appendices to this report: Appendix 1: Sites & Settlements Appendix 2: Strategic Sites Appendix 3: Affordable Housing Appendix 4: Green Infrastructure Appendix 5: Water Appendix 6: Climate Change Appendix 7: Design 1.2 The first recommendation is that they are endorsed for inclusion in the emerging Local Plan, subject to any comments made by the Planning Committee being addressed. This endorsement would also acknowledge that the policies may need further amendments prior to being incorporated into the whole document, in order to fit within other draft policies. Recommendations (2) and (3) also note that the complete draft Pre-Submission Local Plan will be reported to Planning Committee for consideration prior to final approval by the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) for consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Case Shoreham Western Harbour
    COAST TO CAPITAL Shoreham Western Harbour Arm Flood Defences Adur District Council Full Business Case Purpose "Successful project delivery starts with a good business case" Contents 1 Executive Summary 2 Strategic Case 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Business Need 2.3 The project 2.4 Strategic Options for Delivery 2.5 Constraints 2.6 Initial Affordability Assessment 2.7 Long Term Sustainability 3 Economic Case and Option Appraisal 3.1 Development and appraisal of options 3.2 Short listed options 3.3 Cost benefit analysis 4 Delivery 4.1 Project management arrangements 4.2 Procurement Strategy 4.3 Implementation Timescales 4.4 Contract management Arrangements 5 Financial Case – the cost to the public purse and budgeting 5.1 Budget Profile 5.2 Budget Arrangements 6 Management Case 6.1 Project Dependencies 6.2 Project Governance, Organisation Structure and Roles 6.3 Communication and Stakeholder Management 6.4 Project Reporting 6.5 Key Issues for Implementation 6.6 Risk Management Strategy 6.7 Project Evaluation List of Appendices Appendix A – Letter of Support from Cllr Parkin Appendix B – Letter of Support from Sussex Yacht Club Appendix C – Letters of Support from developers Appendix D – Letter of Support from Environment Agency Appendix E - Letter of Support from West Sussex County Council Appendix F – Letter of Support from Shoreham Harbour Port Authority Appendix G – Letter from NorthGates Limited (surveyors) on cost of replacement clubhouse Appendix H – Shoreham Harbour Flood Risk Management Guide Technical Annex Appendix I – Sussex Yacht Club Flood Defences – Addendum Report July 2016 Appendix J - Proposed layout plans for flood defence wall Appendix K - Shoreham Port Masterplan Appendix L - Planning for the Future Rivers Arun to Adur flood and erosion management strategy 2010 - 2020 1 Executive Summary 1.1 A sum of £3.5 million was identified for flood defences to unlock developments on Shoreham’s Western Harbour Arm in Local Growth Fund Round 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Employment Land Review Final Report
    Site Name Malling Brooks (West), Lewes Reference ELW1a Total site area (ha) 1.2 Current uses Vacant Undeveloped land (ha) 1.2 Number of units 0 Grid reference 541832 110820 Sequential status N/A (offices only) Site status Undeveloped site allocated in Local Density N/A Plan (LW1) Criteria Comment Score (out of 5) Strategic access 1.9 km to A27 via the A26 which is only 600m from the site via Brooks 5 Road and South Downs Road. The A26 is a single lane carriageway in good repair. Local accessibility Access via South Downs Road onto Brooks Road, a standard single 5 (local road access and carriageway estate road of good repair. No congestion noted at time of public transport) visit although likely that there is congestion at roundabout at peak times. Bus stop immediately adjacent to site and is served 10 times per hour to town centre (500m) and 4 times per hour to train station 1km away. Proximity to urban areas Lies on edge of Lewes town and adjacent to settlement of South 5 and access to labour & Malling. Wide range of services and sizable labour force available in the services town. Compatibility of adjoining Residential uses to the north which is separated by an area of 4 uses grassland protected for a landscape buffer in Local Plan, business uses to east and south and playing fields to the west. Development and Small, level, relatively regular shaped site with extended north western 3 environmental edge, Identified contamination and lies within Flood Zone 3. constraints Market attractiveness Good location within an existing employment area.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreham Harbour Western Harbour Arm Development Brief
    SHOREHAM HARBOUR WESTERN HARBOUR ARM DEVELOPMENT BRIEF Allies and Morrison Urban Practitioners July 2013 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1.1 Western Harbour Arm: Images of the site and 4 the surrounding context 2.1 Regional position 8 2.2 Joint Area Action Plan and Development Brief 10 boundaries 2.3 Consultation events 18 3.1 Planning Considerations 24 3.2 Existing key land uses 26 3.3 Port Masterplan 33 4.1 Illustrative concept plan 36 4.2 Existing views along the northern bank of the 43 River Adur 5.1 Indicative phasing plan 46 5.2 Land use plan 54 5.3 Connections diagram 60 5.4 Sketch Illustration of Western Harbour Arm 64 looking west along the River Adur 5.5 Open space - indicative locations 66 5.6 Development form 68 5.7 Examples of possible block configuration 69 5.8 Sketch-up view 70 5.9 Place-making 72 5.10 Sketch Illustration of Western Harbour Arm 74 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 4 IlluSTRatIVE FRAMEWORK 37 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Status of brief and relationship with 3 5 GUIDING PRINCIPLES 47 Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP) 5.1 SO1 Sustainable Development 47 5.2 SO2 Shoreham Port 53 2 CONTEXT 9 5.3 SO3 Economy and Employment 55 2.1 A Vision for Shoreham Harbour 9 5.4 SO4 Housing And Community 57 2.2 Relationship with other Planning Policy 5.5 SO5 Sustainable Transport 59 Documents 14 5.6 SO6 Flood Risk And Coastal Processes 61 2.3 Consultation 17 5.7 SO7 Local Environment 63 2.4 Sustainability Appraisal 21 5.8 SO8 Recreation And Leisure 65 5.9 SO9 Place Making And Design Quality 69 3 PlaNNING CONSIDERatIONS APPENDICES aND OPPORTUNITIES 25 A List of abbreviations 77 3.1 Character and Land use 25 B Key references 79 3.2 Historic Assets 28 3.3 Access, Transport and Highways 29 3.4 Property Market Analysis 31 3.5 Site Topography 32 3.6 Technical Constraints 32 3.7 Shoreham Port operation 33 1 INTRODUCTION Image caption 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW 1.1.1 This document is a Development Brief for the Western Harbour Arm, part of the Shoreham Harbour Regeneration area that lies within Adur.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape and Ecology Study of Greenfield Sites in Worthing Borough
    Landscape Architecture Masterplanning Ecology Landscape and Ecology Study of Greenfield Sites in Worthing Borough November 2015 Rev B hankinson duckett associates telephone: 01491 838175 email: [email protected] website: www.hda-enviro.co.uk post: The Stables, Howbery Park, Benson Lane, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, OX10 8BA Hankinson Duckett Associates Limited Registered in England & Wales 3462810 Registered Office: The Stables, Howbery Park, Benson Lane, Wallingford, OX10 8BA Landscape and Ecology Study of Greenfield Sites in Worthing 2015 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This Landscape and Ecology Study of Greenfield Sites in Worthing was prepared by Hankinson Duckett Associates (HDA). The study was commissioned and funded by the joint authority of Adur and Worthing Councils. The work has been guided by Ian Moody, Principal Planning Officer of Adur and Worthing Councils. Landscape and Ecology Study of Greenfield Sites in Worthing 2015 CONTENTS Fgures 1 Introduction page 1 Fig 1 Greenfield Site Locations page 5 2 Method Statement page 1 Fig 2 Solid and Drift Geology page 6 3 Policy Context page 3 Fig 3 Topography page 7 4 Landscape and Ecology Context page 3 Fig 4 Agricultural Land Classification page 8 5 Site 1: Land North of Beeches Avenue (WB08176) page 20 Fig 5 National Character Areas and Landscape Typologies page 9 Site 2: Worthing United Football Club (WB0162) page 26 Fig 6 West Sussex Landscape Character Areas page 10 Site 3: Upper Brighton Road (WB08063) page 30 Fig 7 Local Landscape Character Areas page 11 Site 4: Goring-Ferring Gap (WB088182)
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Strategic Sites
    8. STRATEGIC SITES Introduction 8.1 This chapter sets out the policies for the strategic sites within the National Park. These sites represent one-off opportunities for developments of exceptional quality. They have the potential to make a substantial contribution towards sustainable growth and deliver multiple ecosystems services, which in turn promotes the National Park’s purposes and helps to achieve the vision set out in this Plan. The strategic sites are: Shoreham Cement Works, Upper Beading; and North Street Quarter and adjacent East gate area, Lewes. 8.2 Whilst the former ‘Syngenta’ site in Fernhurst is also a strategic site, it has already been allocated for a sustainable mixed-use development incorporating residential (approximately 200 homes), commercial development and other suitable uses in the Fernhurst Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP), which was made in 2016. 8.3 This chapter identifies how the strategic sites can collectively and individually contribute to meeting the National Park’s purposes, and how their development could be justified by exceptional circumstances and be in the public interest, in accordance with Policy SD3: Major Development in the South Downs National Park. 8.4 There are also three strategic housing allocations, these are set out with all the other allocations in Chapter 10. Land at Old Malling Farm in Lewes (Allocation Policy SD77) is a greenfield site that will make a significant contribution to meeting the unmet housing need of Lewes and was originally allocated in the Lewes Joint Core Strategy. The Depot / Brickworks site and former Holmbush Caravan Park, both located in Midhurst and both brownfield sites, will contribute significantly to the unmet housing need of Midhurst.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Planning and Highways Sub Committee Date
    Agenda Item No. 5A Committee: Regulatory Planning and Highways Sub Committee Date: 18 September 2002 Report by: Assistant Director - Policy Proposal: Construction of a new road between A259 Drove Road roundabout and port area south of Newhaven to Seaford railway and creek including environmental buffer and landscaping Site Address: Newhaven Eastside Applicant: Assistant Director - Development Application No. LW/2061/CC Key Issues: (i) Development Plan (ii) Environmental Statement (iii) Ecological implications SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS To grant planning permission subject to conditions. CONSIDERATION BY DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORT AND ENVIRONMENT 1. Introduction 1.1 This application is for the renewal of planning permission for the Port Access Road at Eastside, Newhaven. The original permission (ref. LW/1751/CC) was granted in 1996, subject to conditions, and expired in 2001. The current application was registered prior to the date of expiry. 1.2 Although the original application was accompanied by a voluntary environmental appraisal, which provided an assessment of the likely impacts of the proposed development, involving both the road and ‘environmental buffer’, the current application is accompanied by a formal Environmental Statement, as it was subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). An EIA was required primarily as a result of the increase in significance attached to the Tide Mills Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI), within which most of the application site resides, particularly in respect of the increased importance attached to the Great Crested Newt population, a protected species. 1.3 The current application is materially identical to the original and all the relevant issues relating to it have already been considered as part of the original permission (refer to the County Planning Officer’s report at Appendix A).
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Meeting of Rottingdean Parish Council on Monday 4 January 2020
    Minutes of the meeting of Rottingdean Parish Council on Monday 4 January 2020 Present: Cllr John (Chair), Cllr Sheppard, Cllr Fenwick, Cllr Levins, Cllr McKenzie, Cllr Lawrence, Cllr Turnbull. C Hayes, Parish Clerk. (Minutes) Public Gallery: Ward Cllr Fishleigh, Mark Cherrie, John Bryant, Mike Sexton, Libby Darling. Questions from the Public: Mr Bryant said he had seen the proposals for changes to the Budget for the final quarter of the year and was of the opinion that moving money from the Lower High Street budget to distribute around other budgets was unwise. On the proposals for a 21/22 budget he said that some of the assumptions on expenditure in the final quarter of the year were unrealistic. In particular, he expressed doubt that the £50,000 for the refurbishment of Park Road toilets would be invoiced during 20/21. Cllr John (Chair) thanked Mr Bryant for his input which would be considered in the discussion of the budget proposals later in the meeting Cllr Fishleigh advised that she was working with the Friends of Beacon Hill and the Beacon Hill Ranger to address concerns raised in a petition by a number of residents about grazing arrangements and proposals for extensive fencing on the east and west side of the Reserve. Cllr Fishleigh said she was confident a compromise could be found. Cllr John (Chair) advised that the Beacon Hill Stewardship Group had discussed some of these issues with the Ranger on 19 December and were waiting a response. Libby Darling said that the prolonged and extensive grazing had detrimentally affected the wildlife on Beacon Hill and was concerned about the impact on the wildlife corridor of the proposed fencing.
    [Show full text]
  • Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project
    Agenda Item No. 5A Committee: Regulatory Planning Committee Date: 6 August 2008 Report by: Director of Transport and Environment Proposal: Brighton and Hove Wastewater Treatment Project Site Address: New Waste Water Treatment Works & Sludge Recycling Centre at Peacehaven, Wastewater Flow Transfer Infrastructure from East Saltdean to the proposed Wastewater Treatment Works & Onward to a new Long Sea Outfall at Friar’s Bay, a New Pumping Station at Portobello in Telscombe Cliffs, Sewer Connections and Access Shafts. Applicant: Southern Water Services Ltd Application LW/537/CM (EIA) No’s Key Issues: Need Policy Framework Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) Alternative sites Traffic impact Landscape impact Recreational impacts Rights of Way Air Quality Noise Ecology & nature conservation Water protection Impact of shaft and tunnelling works Cultural heritage Compatibility with land uses Agricultural impact Waste minimisation SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee is recommended to approve the application subject to completion of the following procedure by the Director of Transport and Environment: 1) To refer the application to the Secretary of State as being in conflict with provisions of parts of the development plan; 2) Subject to confirmation from the Secretary of State that she does not wish to call in the application and the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement/unilateral undertaking including the resolution of the matters in paragraph 3.13.; to authorise the grant of planning permission subject to the conditions along the lines set out in Appendix 3 of this report. CONSIDERATION BY DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORT AND ENVIRONMENT 1. Introduction 1.1 Southern Water submitted a planning application to this Authority in January 2008 for the development of the Brighton & Hove Wastewater Treatment Works and associated infrastructure, from the County Boundary to Friar’s Bay Peacehaven within East Sussex.
    [Show full text]
  • Transport Modelling Background Mott Macdonald Report Oct2017
    Hastings Town Centre and White Rock Area Action Plan Background Information Report October 2017 East Sussex County Council Mott MacDonald Stoneham Place Stoneham Lane Southampton SO50 9NW United Kingdom T +44 (0)23 8062 8800 F +44 (0)23 8064 7251 mottmac.com East Sussex County Council County Hall Hastings Town Centre and St Anne's Crescent 386238 1 B Lewes White P:Rock\Southampton\ITW \ProjectsArea\386238 Hastings Action AAP Stage Plan East Sussex BN7 1UE 1\wp\Background_Information_Report_revB_final.docx Mott MacDonald Background Information Report October 2017 Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered in England and Wales no. 1243967. Registered office: Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE, East Sussex County Council United Kingdom Mott MacDonald | Hastings Town Centre and White Rock Area Action Plan Background Information Report Issue and Revision Record Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description A Sept J Alkhanizi G Goble / N I Johnston Draft 2017 /M Gordon / Gordon M Sanca B October N Gordon P Eveleigh I Johnston Updated following comments 2017 Document reference: 386238 | 1 | B Information class: Standard This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above- captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property.
    [Show full text]
  • Authority Monitoring Report 2020
    AUTHORITY MONITORING REPORT 2020 Contents 1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 5 2. Strategic Need A: Challenge to improve employment, educational attainment and economic performance ..................................................................................................... 12 A1. Increase the population of settlements and their prosperity .......................................12 A2. Enhance the viability/vitality and appeal of Town Centres, with Folkestone as a major commercial, cultural and tourism centre featuring upgraded connections and public realm ........................................................................................................................13 A3. Achieve real terms increases in gross incomes .........................................................14 A4. Grow the proportion of residents with higher-level qualifications ...............................15 A5. Deliver a flexible supply of employment land in terms of location, size and type ......15 A6. Maximise the efficient use of infrastructure and secure further improvements unlocking the development of priority sites, communities and areas ...............................15 A7. Provide housing of a quality and type suited to long-term economic development needs..................................................................................................................................18 A8. Regenerate deprived neighbourhoods, including Central
    [Show full text]