DOCSLIB.ORG

T the Bush Framew Work Masterplan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Bush Framework Masterplan Prepared by LUC in association with SQW Goodson Associates Goodson Cole Transportation Cameron Rae Architects December 2012 Project Title: The Bush Framework Masterplan Client Steering Group: Midlothian Council Scottish Enterprise The University of Edinburgh Version Date Version Prepared Checked Approved Details by by by Principal 1 02/02/2012 Draft 1 GW MvG MvG 2 27/04/2012 Draft 2 GW / DMc DMc /MvG MvG 3 27/06/2012 Draft 3 DMc MvG MvG 4 10/10/2012 Final Draft HH DMc MvG 5 12/12/2012 Final Report HH / DMc DMc MvG T:\52\5278 LIVE Bush Masterplan\B Project Working\Docs\LUC Reports\Consultation Report The Bush Framework Masterplan Prepared by LUC in association with SQW Goodson Associates Goodson Cole Transportation Cameron Rae Architects December 2012 Planning & EIA LUC EDINBURGH Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Design 28 Stafford Street London Registered in England Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning Edinburgh Bristol Registered Office: Landscape Management EH3 7BD Glasgow 43 Chalton Street Ecology Tel: 0131 202 1616 London NW1 1JD LUC uses 100% recycled paper Mapping & Visualisation [email protected] FS 566056 EMS 566057 Bush Masterplan 1 14 December 2012 Bush Masterplan 2 14 December 2012 Contents 1 Executive Summary 6 2 Site Description and Analysis 13 3 Policy Context and Development Plans 51 4 Socio-Economic Analysis 61 5 Conclusions and Recommendations 73 6 Masterplan Framework 89 7 Governance Framework 99 8 Action Plan 103 Appendix 1 Characterisation Appendix 2 Stakeholder List Bush Masterplan 3 14 December 2012 Tables Figures Table 2.1 Existing bus services Figure 2.1 Study Area Location Table 3.1 Sites Allocated in Midlothian Local Plan under Policy RP3 Figure 2.2 Aerial Context Table 4.1 Fit with Local Strategies Figure 2.3 Landscape Context Table 4.2 Population change in Midlothian over the last 10 years Figure 2.4 Study Area Boundary Table 4.3 Overview of organisations and facilities Figure 2.5 Midlothian Biosciences Cluster Characterisation Figure 2.6 Topography and Hydrology Figure 2.7 Landscape Framework Figure 2.8 Figure Ground Analysis Figure 2.9 Figure Ground Analysis and Landscape Framework Figure 2.10 Historical Figure Ground Analysis Figure 2.11 Views, Vistas and Landmarks Figure 2.12 Pedestrian and Cycle Access Figure 2.13 Public Transport Links Figure 2.14 Road Infrastructure Figure 2.15 Utilities Figure 3.1 Development Allocations, Masterplans and Frameworks Figure 5.1 Strategic Objective PE2 Figure 5.2 Strategic Objective PE3 Figure 5.3 Strategic Objective PE4 Figure 5.4 Strategic Objective PE5 Figure 5.5 Strategic Objective PE6 Bush Masterplan 4 14 December 2012 Bush Masterplan 5 14 December 2012 1 Executive Summary Introduction • A strategic bridging document to link to the Midlothian 1.1 Midlothian Council, Scottish Enterprise and the University of Economic Recovery Plan and the Midlothian Economic Edinburgh have commissioned LUC (Land Use Consultants) and a Development Framework, and the relevant economic sector supporting consultant team to prepare a strategic framework action plans; masterplan for the various clusters of specialist bioscience research and business at Bush Estate (Edinburgh Technopole), • A strategic bridging document to link to the Midlothian Easter Bush, Pentlands Science Park, Biocampus and Roslin Community Plan and the Single Outcome Agreement. Biocentre in Midlothian, hereafter referred to as ‘The Bush’. 1.2 The study has presented an opportunity to consider The Bush framed against the current challenging economic climate in combination with a strategic review of recent and planned developments. It has also presented an opportunity to consider improved integration, legibility and movement of The Bush as well as how the area may develop and grow in the future. 1.3 This document sets out the findings of the study and concludes with a series of strategic recommendations and a masterplan to guide future development. It also sets out the first steps in establishing a new governance framework for The Bush. 1.4 The Bush Framework Masterplan will have a variety of uses including: • An overarching framework masterplan for the various sites and organisations within The Bush; • A supporting strategy document for funding opportunities and promoting investment; • A strategic reference document for determining relevant planning applications; • A strategic reference document for future Midlothian Local Development Plan reviews; Bush Masterplan 6 14 December 2012 Baseline Analysis Consultation 1.13 The baseline analysis of The Bush Study Area was undertaken 1.5 A stakeholder workshop was held at the Midlothian Innovation which included consideration of the following: Centre on the 7th December 2011. It was attended by over 30 stakeholders representing various organisations with direct • Existing landscape context and setting; interest in the study area. • Historic context; 1.6 The following topics were presented and discussed: • Characterisation of the site; • Project Introduction; • Topography and Hydrology; • Baseline Analysis; • Built form; • The Physical Environment and Identity; • Views, Vistas and Landmarks; • Movement, Transportation and Infrastructure; • Current Development Allocations; • The Socio – Economic Future and Capacity for Growth. • Pedestrian and Cycling Connectivity; 1.7 The stakeholder workshop provided a forum to raise awareness of • Public Transport; the project. It also enabled the consultant team to gather further valuable information and insight on key constraints and • Road Infrastructure; opportunities for the area as well as highlighting the aspirations of • Orientation and Way-finding; the many different stakeholders. • Drainage and Water; 1.8 In addition to the workshop, a number of separate consultation meetings were held to discuss specific and / or technical aspects of • Existing planning policy; the project. • Socio-economic context. 1.9 In February 2012 a short consultation paper was prepared to summarise the draft recommendations underpinning The Bush Masterplan Framework. These recommendations took the form of a series of strategic objectives that had been identified by the project team based on analysis of environmental, physical and socio economic conditions, discussions with the Client Steering Group, the stakeholder workshop and other consultations. 1.10 This Consultation Paper was issued to all stakeholders who had been contacted previously about the project and they were encouraged to provide feedback on the content. 1.11 A second consultation paper, comprising an Executive Summary, was issued to all stakeholders in May 2012. 1.12 Feedback gained from stakeholder engagement has influenced the content of the study report at the various stages of the project. Bush Masterplan 7 14 December 2012 Conclusions and Recommendations Physical Environment 1.14 The baseline analysis stage of the project informed the Strategic Objective PE1 development of a series of conclusions and recommendations in 1.19 Ensure that the necessary utility infrastructure is in place to the form of a series of socio economic (SE) and physical accommodate future development and expansion environment (PE) strategic objectives as follows: Strategic Objective PE2 Socio-economic 1.20 Improve the main gateways into the site and create a hierarchy of Strategic Objective SE1 orientation nodes, including development of proposals for improvements to the A702(T) / Bush Loan junction 1.15 Raise awareness with key stakeholders of the collective gain in working together to fully achieve the economic potential of The Strategic Objective PE3 Bush 1.21 Reinforce Bush Loan and Bush Farm Loan as the main access Strategic Objective SE2 spines of the site 1.16 Establish a strong governance structure inclusive of all key Strategic Objective PE4 partners to oversee the strategic direction of The Bush and 1.22 Improve pedestrian and cycling access and connectivity manage its future development throughout The Bush Strategic Objective SE3 Strategic Objective PE5 1.17 Establish a central (virtual) ‘hub’ of shared facilities and 1.23 Identify and preserve potential future road infrastructure information to encourage social and business interaction requirements between Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian Innovation Strategic Objective SE4 Centre and BioCampus, and within Technopole 1.18 Promote The Bush under one environmental and life sciences Strategic Objective PE6 brand 1.24 Encourage integrated and sustainable development expansion Strategic Objective PE7 1.25 Support the establishment of commercial incubation facilities operated by Roslin Biocentre at The Bush Bush Masterplan 8 14 December 2012 The Bush Masterplan 1.26 The Bush Masterplan brings together the Physical Environment recommendations within one proposals plan. 1.27 Some of the key components contained within the Bush Masterplan include: • The existing detailed development masterplans and frameworks (most notably Edinburgh Technopole and Easter Bush) shall be respected; • The identification of new development areas, in addition to those areas currently allocated for development via the Local Plan, is currently not required; • There should be a focus on better integrating existing isolated campuses institutions via improved pedestrian and cycling connectivity throughout The Bush; • Detailed technical designs for the A702 (T) / Bush Loan junction need to be developed in consultation with Transport Scotland; • Public Realm improvements are required for Primary and Secondary nodes, as well
Recommended publications
  • MINUTE of MEETING of the Sesplan JOINT COMMITTEE Held on 27Th September, 2010 at 2.00 P.M

    MINUTE of MEETING of the Sesplan JOINT COMMITTEE Held on 27Th September, 2010 at 2.00 P.M

    SESPLAN JOINT COMMITTEE 6 DECEMBER 2010 ITEM 4 MINUTE of MEETING of the SESplan JOINT COMMITTEE held on 27th September, 2010 at 2.00 p.m. ------------------ Present: - Councillor J. Beare (Convener), Fife Council Councillor A Martin, Fife Council Councillor J. Lowrie, City of Edinburgh Council Councillor J. Mowat, City of Edinburgh Council Councillor P. McLennan, East Lothian Council Councillor R. Imrie, Midlothian Council Councillor C. Riddell-Carre, Scottish Borders Council Councillor V. Davidson, Scottish Borders Council Councillor R. de Bold, West Lothian Council Councillor M. Day, West Lothian Council Apologies:- Councillor B. Turner, East Lothian Council Councillor D. Milligan, Midlothian Council In Attendance:- Mr. J. Bury, City of Edinburgh Council Mr. J. Inman, City of Edinburgh Council Mr. P. Collins, East Lothian Council Mr. I. Glen, East Lothian Council Mr. K. Winter, Fife Council Mr. A. Ferguson, Fife Council Mrs E. Mair, Fife Council Mr. I Johnson, Midlothian Council Ms. J. Long, Midlothian Council Councillor N. Watson, Scottish Borders Council Mr. I. Lindley, Scottish Borders Council Mr. M. Wanless, Scottish Borders Council Mr. S. Field, West Lothian Council Mr. C. McCorriston, West Lothian Council Mr. I. Angus, SESplan Mrs A. Miles, SESplan Mr. L. Harrison, SEStran 1. WELCOME The Chair welcomed Ian Angus to his first meeting of the Committee following his recent appointment to the post of Strategic Development Plan Manager. Ian gave a brief outline of his previous experience. 2./ CFP/MISC MINS & WRKNG GRPS/Min SESplan Joint Com 270910 CD 1 - 2 - 2. MINUTE The Minute of Meeting of 26th March, 2010 had been circulated. Decision The Committee approved the Minute.
  • Discovery & Excavation in Scotland

    Discovery & Excavation in Scotland

    1991 DISCOVERY & EXCAVATION IN SCOTLAND An Annual Survey of Scottish Archaeological Discoveries. Excavation and Fieldwork EDITED BY COLLEEN E BATEY WITH JENNIFER BALL PUBLISHED BY THE COUNCIL FOR SCOTTISH ARCHAEOLOGY ISBN 0 901352 11 X ISSN 0419 -411X NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS 1 Contributions should be brief statements of work undertaken. 2 Each contribution should be on a separate page, typed or clearly hand-written and double spaced. Surveys should be submitted in summary form. 3 Two copies of each contribution are required, one for editing and one for NMRS. 4 The Editor reserves the right to shorten published contributions. The unabridged copy will be lodged with NMRS. 5 No proofs will be sent to Contributors because of the tight timetable and the cost. 6 Illustrations should be forwarded only by agreement with the Editor (and HS, where applicable). Line drawings should be supplied camera ready to suit page layout as in this volume. 7 Enquiries relating to published items should normally be directed to the Contributor, not the Editor. 8 The final date for receipt of contributions each year is 31 October, for publication on the last Saturday of February following. Contributions from current or earlier years may be forwarded at any time. 9 Contributions should be sent to Hon Editor, Discouery & Excavation in Scotland, CSA, c/o Royal Museum of Scotland, Queen Street, Edinburgh, EH2 1JD. Please use the following format:- REGION DISTRICT Site Name ( parish) Contributor Type of Site/Find NCR (2 letters, 6 figures) Report Sponsor: HS, Society, Institution, etc, as appropriate. Name of Contributor: (where more than one, please indicate which name should appear in the list of contributors) Address of main contributor.
  • Continuation of Clydesdale Survey Project Biggar Archaeology Group Tam Ward 2004 - 2012

    Continuation of Clydesdale Survey Project Biggar Archaeology Group Tam Ward 2004 - 2012

    - 1 - Continuation of Clydesdale Survey Project Biggar Archaeology Group Tam Ward 2004 - 2012 Glencaple Farm, Abington Lead smelting site NS 92 SW NS 92366 20897 295m OD On the lower east flank of Craig Dodd and about 30m east of the track there is a lead smelting site. The site is seen as a bare patch of vegetation free ground measuring 4m across by 6m downhill, and on a slope of about 1m. The bare ground is covered in small lumps of black glassy slag, and flecks of charcoal are also visible. A hill drain has been cut immediately above the site. At the time of the survey, the surrounding area was bushy heather making the site difficult to see. Lead smelting site NS 92 SW NS 92641 20215 305m OD On the lower east flank of Craig Dodd there is a lead smelting site. The site is seen as a bare patch of vegetation free ground measuring 3m across by 6m downhill, and on a slope of about 1m. The bare ground is covered in small lumps of black glassy slag; flecks of charcoal and a few small lumps of burnt stone are also visible. At the time of the survey, the surrounding area was grazed grass making the site easy to see. Enclosures NS 92 SW c NS 9275 2025 310m OD On the lower west flank of Kirkton Rig and surrounding a dry stane sheep stell, there is a D shaped enclosure made with large boulders set in line with a turf bank, the latter is eroded in places leaving only occasional boulders.
  • A Strategy for Public Transport 2020 - 2035

    A Strategy for Public Transport 2020 - 2035

    Keeping Edinburgh MOVING A Strategy for Public Transport 2020 - 2035 December 2019 Keeping Edinburgh MOVING The City is Slowing Down Edinburgh is suffering from worsening traffic congestion which delays buses and hinders efforts to curb the growth in car use. Unlike many other large UK cities which have well-developed suburban rail services, Edinburgh’s public transport is provided mostly by buses using the same roads as general traffic, resulting in low average speeds. A top priority for the city over the next few years must be to accelerate public transport journeys. 119.2 million passenger journeys were made on Lothian Buses in 2018, a decrease from 121.1 million in 2017, which the company’s directors attributed to slower journeys because of congestion and changes in travel patterns. These figures compare with the 212.3 million journeys made in the year to May 1962, despite competition from Scottish Omnibuses – highlighting the fact that city bus usage has almost halved over 55 years, while the population has grown from 464,000 to 518,000 people. The council’s recently-approved City Centre Transformation Strategy seeks to achieve a step-change in the quality of the environment of Edinburgh City Centre with a range of schemes to be pursued over the next ten years. Successful delivery of many aspects of the strategy will depend on a substantial reduction in the levels of traffic movement within the city centre. The strategy assumes a 25% reduction in vehicle movement, but is not linked to any wider programme of action to achieve significant modal shift from private car to public transport across the city.
  • Cloich Forest Wind Farm Chapter 5 EIA Report LVIA

    Cloich Forest Wind Farm Chapter 5 EIA Report LVIA

    CLOICH FOREST WIND FARM EIA Report – Volume 1 – EIA Report Text Chapter 5 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Cloich Forest Wind Farm Chapter 5 EIA Report LVIA 5 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5.1 INTRODUCTION 1. This Chapter of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (‘the EIA Report’) evaluates the effects of the Cloich Forest Wind Farm (‘the Development’) on the landscape and visual resource. This assessment was undertaken by Chartered Landscape Architects (CMLI) from LUC (Land Use Consultants) on behalf of Cloich Windfarm Partnership LLP (‘the Applicant’). 2. This Chapter of the EIA Report is supported by the following Technical Appendix documents provided in Volume 3 Technical Appendices: A5.1: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) Methodology; A5.2: Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Mapping and Visualisation Methodology; and A5.3: Residential Visual Amenity Assessment (RVAA). 3. Accompanying figures are included as Figures 5.1.1 – 5.1.11 contained in Volume 2b – LVIA Figures. Accompanying visualisations are illustrated as Figures 5.2.1 – 5.2.26 contained in Volume 2c: LVIA Visualisations and have been prepared in accordance with the methodology set out in Appendix A5.2. 4. This Chapter includes the following elements: Legislation, Policy and Guidance; Consultation; Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria; Landscape Baseline Conditions; Visual Baseline Conditions; Cumulative Baseline; Assessment of Potential Effects (including Cumulative Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (CLVIA)); Mitigation and Residual Effects; Summary of Effects; Statement of Significance; and Glossary. 5. The CLVIA has been incorporated into the tables found within Section 5.9: Assessment of Potential Landscape and Visual Effects. 5.2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDANCE 6.
  • Upper Clydesdale Through the Ages the M74 Project (1992) by Tam Ward

    Upper Clydesdale Through the Ages the M74 Project (1992) by Tam Ward

    Clydesdale Project Upper Clydesdale through the Ages The M74 Project (1992) by Tam Ward Interim Report on Fieldwalking of forestry areas in Daer Valley PAGE 1 1 Upper Clydesdale Through The Ages The M74 Project (Archaeology) 1992 ISBN 0 9520145 0 5 [ DIGITAL FORMAT CREATED 2019 ] The out of print report by Tam Ward on the survey work by the Biggar Archaeology Group as part of the M74 upgrade in Clydesdale, now South Lanarkshire, in 1990, is now available in digitised format. [ www.biggararchaeology.org.uk ]. The fully indexed report consists of one hundred and sixteen survey plans with full descriptions, three chapters describing the project, the history of the area and a discussion of the sites included. Appendices cover the following: I. Taped offset method of survey II Finds III Damage caused to unenclosed platform settlements IV Wildshaw Burn Stone Circle, possible astronomical significance V Identification of a burnt mound VI Other recent surveys in Clydesdale VII. Site types in Upper Clydesdale VIII. Footnotes and references in text IX. Abbreviations Since the survey was completed a vast amount of excavation, research and further survey work has been accomplished in the Upper Clyde valley, by both BAG in a voluntary capacity, and by others especially involved in development funded archaeology. For example; BAG have completed major projects within reservoirs, commercial forests and in arable fields since this report was produced, significantly new discoveries and research has taken place by BAG, including aspects of the Late Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age periods. All are reported on www.biggararchaeology.org.uk.
  • Glenochar Bastle House and Fermtoun

    Glenochar Bastle House and Fermtoun

    Glenochar Bastle House and Fermtoun An account of the discovery, survey, consolidation, excavations and research of a 17th-century defensive farmhouse and buildings in Clydesdale, with supplementary contextual information. By Tam Ward Report contributions by Robin Murdoch (glass), Dennis Gallagher (tobacco pipes), Dr Jennifer Miller (wood), Jennifer Thoms (bone) and the late Ian Paterson BAG (catalogues), Ann Mathieson (testaments). Illustration contributions by John Borland, Margaret Brown, Alan Cadzow, Sandra Kelly and Ian Fisher, 2017. Daer Main Report PAGE 1 Glenochar Bastle House and Fermtoun An account of the discovery, survey, consolidation, excavations and research of a 17th-century defensive farmhouse and buildings in Clydesdale, with supplementary contextual information. By Tam Ward Report contributions by Robin Murdoch (glass), Dennis Gallagher (tobacco pipes), Dr Jennifer Miller (wood), Jennifer Thoms (bone) and the late Ian Paterson BAG (catalogues), Ann Mathieson (testaments). Illustration contributions by John Borland, Margaret Brown, Alan Cadzow, Sandra Kelly and Ian Fisher 2017 Abstract Survey and excavation has demonstrated that Glenochar was the site of a bastle house with an associated 17/18th century settlement and farming landscape. Remains of buildings and finds from the site indicate occupation beginning around AD 1600 and ending around AD 1760; the time of the recently researched Lowland Clearances. The evidence from Glenochar, taken along with other sites excavated by BAG, show that defensive farm houses were built in Clydesdale and further north of the Anglo-Scottish border than was previously known. Furthermore, archaeologically proven for the first time, is that major land clearance of people did take place in both Clydesdale and in neighbouring Tweeddale in the mid-18th century.
  • EIAR Chapter 5 – Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment

    EIAR Chapter 5 – Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment

    Daer Wind Farm Issue Date Revision Details Chapter 5. 1246773A 03/03/2021 Released Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) Contents 5.1. INTRODUCTION 3 5.2. SCOPE AND ASSESSMENT 3 5.3. METHODOLOGY 5 Zone of Theoretical Visibility & Visualisation Production 5 5.4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6 5.5. EMBEDDED MITIGATION 7 Site location and layout 7 Proposed Turbines 7 Aviation Lighting 7 Access Tracks 8 Crane Pads 8 Cabling, Substation, Control Building, Energy Storage and Permanent Compound 8 Construction Compound 8 Borrow Pits 8 Construction Methods and Landscape Reinstatement 8 Decommissioning 8 5.6. LANDSCAPE PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT 8 5.7. BASELINE CONDITIONS 9 Designated & Protected Landscapes 10 Visual Baseline 11 Selected Viewpoints 12 5.8. LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT 15 Effect on Landscape Fabric and character of the Proposed Development Area 15 Effect on Landscape Character in the Wider Landscape 16 LCT 217: Southern Uplands – Glasgow & Clyde Valley 16 LCT 177: Southern Uplands – Dumfries & Galloway 17 LCT 209: Upland Glens – Glasgow & Clyde Valley 18 Non-Significant Effects – Landscape Character 18 Effect on Designated and Protected Landscapes 19 Leadhills & the Lowther Hills SLA 19 Thornhill Uplands RSA 19 Moffat Hills Regional Scenic Area 20 Talla – Hart Fells Wild Land Area 20 Environmental Impact Assessment Report 5-31 Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) Daer Wind Farm 5.9. VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 21 Term Definition Effect on Selected Viewpoints 21 Rivox Land This Forestry and Land Scotland (formerly Forestry Commission) owned area of Viewpoint 5: Unclassified Road at Watermeetings 22 Portion commercial forestry sits to the east of the Daer Land Portion.
  • EIAR TA 5.4 – Visual Assessment

    EIAR TA 5.4 – Visual Assessment

    Daer Wind Farm Issue Date Revision Details Appendix 5.4 1246779A 02/03/2021 Released Visual Assessment Contents A5.1 INTRODUCTION 2 Visual Receptors 2 Viewpoints 2 Settlements 15 Route Receptors 16 A5.2 SUMMARY 20 Glossary Term Definition The Applicant The applicant is “RWE Renewables UK Developments Limited”. Proposed The proposed Daer Wind Farm. Development Proposed The project development area within the site boundary. Development Area Daer Land Scottish Water Land Ownership, comprising of land east and south of Daer Reservoir. Portion Wholly within the South Lanarkshire Local Authority Area. Kinnelhead The Kinnelhead Land Portion is situated wholly within the Dumfries & Galloway Local Land Portion Authority Area. Rivox Land This Forestry and Land Scotland (formerly Forestry Commission) owned area of Portion commercial forestry sits to the east of the Daer Land Portion. Situated wholly within the Dumfries & Galloway Local Authority Area. List of Abbreviations List and describe your abbreviations here. Abbreviation Description AOD Above Ordnance Datum LCT Landscape Character Types LVIA Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment NATS National Air Traffic Services RSA Regional Scenic Area RWE RWE Renewables UK Developments Ltd, the Applicant EIAR Technical Appendix A5.4-1 Appendix 5.4: Visual Assessment Daer Wind Farm Abbreviation Description A5.1 INTRODUCTION SLA Special Landscape Area A5.1.1 This Appendix of the EIAR identifies and assesses the potential effect of the Proposed Development on the Visual ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility Amenity of the 45 km study area. A5.1.2 Analysis of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) maps (see Figures 5.5 – 5.6) established which visual receptors within 45 km of the Proposed Development would potentially be affected.
  • Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996. by Tam Ward, with Contributions from Chris Barrowman and Dr Jennifer Miller

    Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996. by Tam Ward, with Contributions from Chris Barrowman and Dr Jennifer Miller

    Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996. by Tam Ward, with contributions from Chris Barrowman and Dr Jennifer Miller. Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996. PAGE 1 Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996 Tam Ward, with contributions from Chris Barrowman (Area 4 excavation) Dr Jennifer Miller (charcoal identification) Sandra Kelly (finds illustration) Abstract Page 3 Prehistory North of Biggar Project Page 3 Introduction to excavations Page 6 Excavations at Melbourne Page 8 Area 1 Page 13 Area 6 Page 15 Area 2 Page 19 Area 3 Page 29 Area 4 Page 42 Area 5 Page 54 Project conclusion Page 58 Acknowledgements Page 61 References Page 62 Appendix I Charcoal results Page 64 Appendix II Radiocarbon dates Page 70 Appendix III Excavation finds list Page 71 Appendix IV Fieldwalking finds list Page 75 All illustrations follow the report text Pre-History North of Biggar Project. Excavations at Melbourne Farm 1996. PAGE 2 ABSTRACT Following on from successful fieldwalking at Melbourne Farm, four miles north of Biggar, excavations revealed a landscape of in situ features with ceramic and lithic assemblages dating from the Early and Late Neolithic, but including a beaker burial. Rescue excavation was allowed by the kind permission of Scottish Woodlands Ltd. The following report is given as a preamble to the main report on excavations and it has been modified slightly since it was written in 1996. PREHISTORY NORTH OF BIGGAR PROJECT Abstract. This short report outlines the rationale and initial results of a project to inspect ploughed land between Biggar and West Linton over the years beginning in 1995.
  • South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Main Issues Report

    South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Main Issues Report

    South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan Main Issues Report 2017 Technical Report 2 Call for Change Site Assessments Community and Enterprise Resources Technical Report 2 Site Assessments 1. Introduction 1.1 As part of the consultation and engagement process for preparation of the Main Issues Report, the Council invited interested parties to put forward sites they considered should be included in the LDP. This ‘call for sites’ was advertised in the local papers and on the Council’s website, and letters were sent to developers and agents. This generated 118 sites for consideration including a number of sites owned by the Council as potential surplus assets. Two sites were subsequently withdrawn. 1.2 An initial screening of the sites indicated that they fell into 2 categories: · Category 1: 14 small scale sites that would be more appropriately considered through the submission and assessment of a planning application (15 call for sites submissions, 2 were for same site) · Category 2: Sites that require to be considered against emerging spatial strategy, impact on infrastructure and environmental considerations. (102 call for sites submissions) 1.3 Section 1 lists the sites within the first category. The parties who submitted these sites were informed by letter of this decision regarding the status of their sites. 1.4 The main purpose of this report therefore is to outline the assessment process carried out for the Category 2 sites. Section 2 includes individual assessment forms for each site, grouped by area. 1.5 The purpose of this assessment is to highlight the factors affecting each of the sites and how they may fit or otherwise with the emerging spatial strategy.
  • Fieldwalking and Excavations at Cornhill Farm, Coulter by Biggar, Scotland Interim Report – January 2001 by Tam Ward

    Fieldwalking and Excavations at Cornhill Farm, Coulter by Biggar, Scotland Interim Report – January 2001 by Tam Ward

    Biggar Gap Project Fieldwalking and Excavations at Cornhill Farm, Coulter by Biggar, Scotland Interim Report – January 2001 by Tam Ward Interim Report – Fieldwalking and Excavations at Cornhill Farm, PAGE 1 Summary An arable fieldwalking project was started in 1990, specifically at that time to give young archaeologists and others, experience in artefact retrieval, identification and recording. The project base proved to be rich in lithic scatters which were identified over several years, and as a consequence, limited excavation by test pitting was finally undertaken in 1999 to establish the nature of any archaeological deposits which may have survived below the plough soils, thus giving a better understanding of artefact movement and the survival of archaeology in arable fields. An antiquity model of Cornhill Farm has been produced as a result of the project and for the sake of completeness; results of fieldwalking in three adjoining fields to the east of the A702 road and a field belonging to Wolf Clyde Farm are included. Interim Report – Fieldwalking and Excavations at Cornhill Farm, PAGE 2 Introduction. Fig.1 Project Area Project Area. Figs 1 - 4. crops” but with “soil limitations” (Macaulay 1986). Cornhill Farm [NT 023355] is bounded on the west The spur is bounded on the west side by the River by the River Clyde and by Coulter Water and it lies Clyde and the Coulter Water; it is probable that it was between the A72 road on the north and the A702 originally surrounded by morass on the north, east and road on the east. Cornhill Road connects these two south sides.