entran
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd
Drummond Park, Ludgershall Preliminary Geo-environmental Assessment
Environmental Transportation entran
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd
Drummond Park, Ludgershall Preliminary Geo-environmental Assessment
Revision Date Notes Author Checked Approved
2 October 2010 Report reference DH RE AK, ND TEC1006005.001.01 3 November 2010 Report reference DH RE ND TEC1006005.001.02
Entran Limited Eden Lodge Studios Eden Office Park Chapel Pill Lane Ham Green Bristol BS20 0BX
T: 01275 375 007 F: 01275 376 333 www.entranltd.co.uk entran
CONTENTS PAGE
1! INTRODUCTION 1! 2! SITE DESCRIPTION 3! 3! SITE HISTORY 7! 4! ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 10 ! 5! SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS & ASSESSMENTS 19! 6! OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL 20 ! 7! GROUND ENGINEERING 26 ! 8! POTENTIAL GROUND SOURCE ENERGY 28 ! 9! CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 31 !
Figures Figure 1 - Site Location Plan Figure 2 - Existing Site Layout – Key Features Figure 3 - Site Walkover Photograph Locations
Appendices Appendix A - Site Photographs Appendix B - Historical Maps Appendix C - GroundSure® Appendix D - British Geological Survey Records Appendix E - Correspondence Appendix F - Risk Evaluation entran
1 INTRODUCTION
Terms of Reference
1.1 Entran Ltd has been commissioned by Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd to undertake a preliminary geo-environmental assessment of the site at Drummond Park, Ludgershall. This report has been prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Ltd in association with Entran Ltd.
Background
1.2 The site is located off the A342 on the western edge of Ludgershall, approximately 10km north-west of Andover. The site is centred at National Grid Reference 425800, 150900 and the nearest postcode is SP11 9RT (Figure 1). The area of the site is approximately 13.3Ha and is elevated at around 135m to 145m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD).
1.3 The site is understood to be a former Ministry of Defence Medical Supplies Depot (MoD Medical Supplies Agency) and it is proposed to develop the site for residential use, comprising the construction of approximately 500-550 residential units
1.4 The aim of these works is to provide a review of preliminary information on geo- environmental and engineering conditions and constraints associated with the site with regard to the proposed development.
Scope of Works
1.5 The scope of work undertaken as part of this report is presented below:
Preliminary Risk Assessment. This phase of assessment involves development of an initial site conceptual model, based on desk study research and a site reconnaissance survey, in order to establish whether or not there are potentially unacceptable risks, and also whether or not further action is required.
1.6 The above scope of work has been undertaken in accordance with current guidance such as CLR 11 ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination’ (Environment Agency, 2004), and BS10175:2001.
1.7 The report is presented in the following format.
Preliminary Risk Assessment: Section 2 – Site Description Section 3 – Site History Section 4 – Environmental Setting
1 entran
Section 5 – Summary of Previous Investigations & Assessments Section 6 – Outline Conceptual Model
Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment: Section 7 – Ground Engineering Considerations
Preliminary Ground Source Energy Feasibility Assessment: Section 8 – Potential Ground Source Energy Section 9 - Conclusions and Recommendations
2 entran
2 SITE DESCRIPTION
Site Location
2.1 The site is located on the western edge of Ludgershall (Figure 1) and is bounded by the following features (Table 2.1):
Table 2.1: Site Boundary Features Direction from Site Description
North A342 followed by arable fields, including a dismantled railway.
East Small wooded area followed by rail lines, further woodland and residential properties.
South Rail lines followed by a grassed area, a wooded area and open land beyond, currently understood to be developed for commercial use.
West Arable fields with open land towards the southern end of the western boundary.
Land Use and Site Condition
2.2 A site reconnaissance survey was undertaken on 29 June 2010. A summary of the observations is presented below with the key features observed during the walkover survey shown on Figure 2. Photographs taken during the site reconnaissance survey are presented in Appendix A with photograph locations shown on Figure 3. Photographs 1 to 20 provide general views of the site conditions, while Photographs 21 to 53 provide detail of some of the potential significant features observed at the site.
Current Site Use
2.3 The site is located off the A342 on the western edge of Ludgershall (Figure 1). The site is located on a former Ministry of Defence (MoD) site used predominantly as a medical supplies depot prior to the site’s disposal. The site is currently split into two areas, separated by a military road running in a north-east / south-west direction, which is utilised by the public. The southern part of the site currently consists of a number of warehouses, storage areas, offices and vehicle servicing areas while the northern half of the site is understood to have been utilised for accommodation, medical and dental services and a blood support depot. The western part of the site is currently
3 entran covered with thick vegetation including deciduous mature trees, while to the north is a former sports field. A plan indicating the current site layout is presented in Figure 2.
2.4 During the site reconnaissance survey, a number of potentially significant features were observed, including fuel storage tanks, boilers, cold storage areas, paint, battery and gas stores, corrosive, biohazard and flammable material stores, electricity sub-stations, a vehicle wash-down area, underground water storage tanks, a battery charging area, vehicle servicing areas, electrical water pumps and a disused rail line running through the southern section of the site.
Site Topography
2.5 The site was observed as rising in elevation toward the north-west with elevations of between ~132.5m AOD and ~137mAOD recorded along the south-eastern boundary and elevations of ~141.5mAOD to ~147.0mAOD at the northern boundary.
Hard and Soft Landscaping
2.6 Much of the site was observed to be laid to a combination of concrete and tarmacadam hardstanding. Both were encountered as in various states of repair, but typically were recorded as being in a poor to moderate condition.
2.7 Minor areas of soft landscaping were observed during the walkover and a areas of trees were noted within the western and north-western parts of the site (Figure 2).
Hydrocarbon Storage
2.8 Above ground fuel storage areas were observed in three locations at the site: the main boiler house, located in the south-eastern part of the site (Photographs 21 to 24), a smaller boiler house located in the central part of the site (Photographs 25 to 30) and small boiler houses located in two of the building in the northern part of the site (Photographs 33 to 36). It should be noted that no boiler room was observed in the third building located in the northern part of the site. In addition, areas of potential Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) storage were recorded at two locations at the site: within the eastern part of the site (Photographs 31 and 32) and within the northern part of the site.
2.9 Two large (approximately 32000 litre) above ground storage tanks (ASTs) were observed near the central part of the south-eastern boundary, located within a brick bund (Photographs 21 and 22). At the time of the walkover the bund was observed to be filled with water
4 entran
(Photograph 23), although, it should be noted that no evidence of hydrocarbon contamination (i.e. a hydrocarbon sheen) was observed at the time of the walkover survey.
2.10 Further fuel-oil storage was observed in the central part of the site (Photographs 26 and 27), where 3000 litre and 4000 litre ASTs were observed. An undrained oil sump was also observed (Photograph 27) within the fuel storage area. Strong olfactory evidence of hydrocarbon spillages was recorded within the adjacent boiler-room (Photograph 29). A fuel-oil delivery point was observed some 20m to the north of the fuel storage area. No evidence of significant hydrocarbon contamination from spillages was observed in this area.
2.11 A further large AST was observed in the northern section of the site near the northern boundary, contained within a brick bund (Photograph 33 and 34). A boiler house was observed below the main building of the northern part of the site (not entered during the walkover survey) and a second boiler house was observed in the accommodation building to the west. However, it should be noted that no boiler room was observed in the the blood support unit located in this part of the site and it is unclear how this building was heated.
2.12 Potential underground LPG storage was observed in the eastern part of the site (Photographs 31 and 32) and within the northern part of the site adjacent to the main building. LPG heaters were observed within the storage warehouses and offices in the eastern section of the site.
2.13 Minor fuel storage is understood to have been undertaken at the pumping station located adjacent to the below ground tanks within the eastern part of the site (Photographs 37 and 38). Further below ground water storage is understood to have taken place within the northern part of the site (adjacent to the entrance) although it is unclear how water was delivered to this location (Photograph 39).
Other Features
2.14 Evidence of storage of potentially hazardous materials was observed during the site walkover, including the storage of paint, lithium batteries, corrosive materials, biohazards, petroleum spirit and flammable materials.
2.15 Two cold storage areas were observed within the main warehousing: three units were recorded within the central part (Photograph 40) and three newer refrigeration units were observed in the western part of the warehousing (Photograph 41).
2.16 Two electricity sub-stations were observed at the site (Photographs 42 and 43). These were noted to be in a generally good state of repair.
5 entran
2.17 Hazard warning signs were present on access doors of a number of structures, indicating that the storage of potential hydrocarbons may have been historically undertaken at these locations (Photographs 44, 45 and 52).
2.18 Potentially asbestos containing roofing materials (ACM) were observed in two locations at the site (Photographs 46 and 47), with the ACM recorded in the eastern part of the site observed to be in a poor condition. It should be noted that due to the age and former use of the buildings at the site the presence of further ACM at the site is considered likely.
2.19 A battery charging area (Photograph 48) and a vehicle wash-down area were recorded in the eastern part of the site (Photograph 51). Drainage interceptors were recorded in the wash- down area.
2.20 Vehicle inspection pits were observed at two locations: one in the eastern and the second in the south-eastern part of the site (Photographs 49 and 50).
2.21 A biohazard warning sign was observed on the access doorway of a small secure storage structure in the northern part of the site (Photograph 53).
Asbestos Containing Materials
2.22 As indicated above, potentially asbestos containing materials (ACM) were observed within the roofing materials at two locations. However, due to the age and former use of the site, the presence of further asbestos containing materials in other locations cannot be discounted.
Site Drainage
2.23 It is understood that surface water is collected and fed to the below ground water tank located in the northern part of the site (Photograph 39), while the source of the water pumped to the larger below ground tanks located in the eastern part of the site (Photograph 37) is unclear.
2.24 Drainage interceptors were recorded in the wash-down area located in the eastern part of the site (Photograph 51).
6 entran
3 SITE HISTORY
Introduction
3.1 Details of the site history have been obtained through the review of historical Ordnance Survey (OS) mapping. The mapping reviewed is contained within Appendix B. It should be noted that maps of current and former MoD sites frequently omit information, particularly on maps produced during the period around World War II.
3.2 It is not the purpose of this section to provide a comprehensive account of development history, but only to detail those factors that are or could be relevant to the potentially contaminative history of the site and surrounds and the development of an outline site conceptual model.
Site History
3.3 The following represents a summary of potentially significant features recorded within the site area (Table 3.1).
Table 3.1: Site Features Site Features Ordnance Survey Dates The site comprises largely undeveloped open land. 1880 – 1936 Rail lines (South-western Junction Railway (Ludgershall & 1909 - 2010 Tidworth) Line) are indicated to have been constructed just within the south-eastern boundary. The 1984 mapping onwards shows the railway by-passing the site to the south- east. Small structures recorded across the site, possibly associate 1936 with “Windmillhill Camp” (use unknown). The eastern (brick-built) warehouse and eastern part of main 1957 – 1972 warehouse (also brick built) indicated on the 1957 edition. The western part of the site is shown to be occupied by 12 uniform rectangular structures. A cut slope is shown to the north-west and west of the main warehouse structure The railway lines within the site are shown in their current location. Additional lines are indicated within the site boundary. The water tanks in the northern and eastern part of the site are shown in their current locations (each marked as “Tank”). Additional buildings are shown in the eastern part of the site to those currently at the site. Additional buildings, probably housing, is shown on the mapping within the northern part of the site. The 1969 mapping records the site as “Depot (Army Medical Equipment)”.
7 entran
Site Features Ordnance Survey Dates A Fire Engine Station is indicated in the central/eastern part 1969 of the site. A tank is indicated within the number of rectangular 1969 structures in the south-west of the site. Ludgershall House is indicated to have been constructed in 1969 – 2010 the northern part of the site The sports ground is shown to have been established in the 1969 – 2010 north-west of the site An electricity sub-station is shown within the central part of 1969 the site (close to the location of one of the current electricity sub-stations). Residential housing shown on the 1957 mapping in the north- 1969 western part of the site are no longer present. Two residential units are shown adjacent to the site entrance. 1969 - 1984 An electricity sub-station is recorded in its current location 1984 – 2010 within the central part of the site. Extensive expansion of the warehousing is shown (as the 1984 – 2010 current layout). The vehicle maintenance building is shown on eastern 1984 – 2010 boundary. The railway is shown to by-pass the site to the south-east and additional buildings are recorded along this boundary (in their current layout).
Neighbouring History
3.4 The land uses within the immediate vicinity of the general site area have been considered. Based upon the reviewed map information the following potentially significant features have been identified (Table 3.2).
Table 3.2: Surrounding Features Surrounding Features Ordnance Distance Direction Survey Dates Road shown forming the northern 1873 - 2010 Adjacent North site boundary (later marked as A432) Tidworth Down Farm / 1873 – 2010 ~600m South-west Sweetapple Farm Manor Farm / Castle Farm 1873 – 2010 ~350m North-east Smithy 1873 - 1901 ~500m East Well 1873 - 1899 ~470m East
8 entran
Surrounding Features Ordnance Distance Direction Survey Dates Railway lines 1899 – 1957 ~35m North-east 1909 - 2010 Adjacent South-east Sidings – marked as “Goods 1909 - 2010 Adjacent East Yard” after 1923 Railway Station 1901 – 1976 ~500m East Engine shed 1909 – 1924 ~15m East Nursery 1924 – 1926 ~130m North-east Tank 1924 – 1972 ~20m East Isolation Hospital 1923 ~700m South-west Allotment Gardens 1923 – 2002 ~670m East Tanks 1923 – 2002 ~800m West “Windmillhill Camp” (possibly 1936 - 1957 Adjacent West military) “Hedge-end Camp” (Possibly 1957 ~300m South military) “Works” (previously recorded as 1957 ~700m South-west the site of an Isolation Hospital) “Fowler Barracks” and “Busigny 1957- 2002 ~500m South Barracks” Warehouse 1957 – 2002 ~200m South-east Path 1972 – 2010 Adjacent West “Refuse Destructor” (previously 1974 ~700m South-west recorded as the site of an Isolation Hospital) Hedge End Plantation Depot 1973 – 2010 ~290m South Nursery 2002 – 2010 ~650m South-east School (marked on the 2010 1957 - 2010 ~450m South-west Edition as “Castledown Comprehensive School”) Pump House 2010 ~700m South-east
9 entran
4 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Information Sources
4.1 Environmental information for the site has been obtained through review of a GroundSure® report for the site. This report provides extensive information, obtained from regulatory and commercial sources, regarding the environmental setting of the site. The GroundSure® report has been included within Appendix C.
Geology and Hydrogeology
4.2 Published geological and hydrogeological information indicate the following geological sequence at the site:
Table 4.1: Geological and Hydrogeological Setting Geological Unit Thickness Aquifer Status
Upper Chalk >100m Principal aquifer
4.3 The published geology for the site is shown on British Geological Survey (BGS) sheet 283 (Andover) Solid and Drift Edition as being underlain by Upper Chalk of Cretaceous age.
4.4 The BGS’s website “Lexicon of Named Rocks” describes the Upper Chalk as white chalks (microporous coccolithic limestone), with beds of flint, nodular chalks, hardgrounds and marl seams.
4.5 No superficial deposits are indicated on the geological mapping. In addition, the GroundSure® report for the site indicates that no significant quantities of made ground are present at the site.
4.6 There are no reported faults within 500m of the site boundary.
British Geological Survey Borehole Database
4.7 Five logs were obtained for exploratory holes constructed within the vicinity of the site form the British Geological Survey (BGS). These are provided in Appendix D and are summarised below:
10 entran
A borehole (ref: SU25SE2), located at “Simons Brewery”, some 200m south of the site (426150, 150650), proved 35.05m (115 feet) of “Upper Chalk”. No further information provided.
A trial pit (ref: SU25SE29), located to the north of the Tidworth Road Overbridge some 240m to the south-east of the site (426250, 150760), proved chalk to a depth of 3.2m. The log records the presence of 0.65m of Made Ground at this location, which was underlain by 0.15m of stiff light brown clayey silt with much fine gravel sized very weak chalk.
A borehole (ref: SU25SE3), located at the school off James Street, Ludgershall, approximately 340m to the east of the site (426300, 150880), while not providing any geological data, indicates a groundwater level some 24.77m (February) to 25.83m (“Autumn”) below ground level in 1964.
Two trial pits (ref: SU25SE38 and SU25SE39), located approximately 4500m north- west of the site at the junction between A342 and A346 (425075, 151435), proved chalk to a depth of 2.2m and 2.1m, respectively. The logs indicate the presence of Upper Chalk below 0.7m of Made Ground in SU25SE38 and 0.4m of Made Ground and 0.2m of light brown clayey silt with occasional medium to coarse gravel sized chalk fragments. Below this the chalk was recorded to be Grade III below between 1.3m and 1.6m, respectively.
Ground Gas
4.8 In accordance with current guidance (Wilson, Card and Haines (2009)), the ground gas generation potential of the natural strata reported to underlie the site may be classified as being very low with a negligible risk for on site development and a negligible risk of lateral migration.
4.9 The property is reported to be located within a Radon Affected Area (as defined by the Health Protection Agency (HPA)), as between 1% and 3% of properties are above the Action Level. No radon protection measures are reported to be required for new properties or extensions to existing ones as described in BR211 by the Building Research Establishment.
Hydrogeology
4.10 The GroundSure® report for the site has classified the underlying Upper Chalk over much of the site as a major aquifer with intermediate leaching potential, with some areas on the westernmost edge of the site classified as a major aquifer with high leaching potential. The soils of
11 entran high leaching potential are described as soils which readily transmit liquid discharges because they are either shallow, or susceptible to rapid by-pass flow directly to rock, gravel or groundwater. The soils of intermediate leaching potential are described as soils which can possibly transmit a wide range of pollutants.
4.11 The Environment Agency Groundwater Protection: Policy and Practice (GP3) classified the underlying strata of England and Wales into Principal, Secondary A, Secondary B and Secondary Undifferentiated Aquifers and Unproductive Strata.
4.12 The Environment Agency website identifies the strata beneath the site as a Principal Aquifer. The Environment Agency defines principal aquifers as follows:
“Principal Aquifers - These are layers of rock or drift deposits that have high intergranular and/or fracture permeability – meaning they usually provide a high level of water storage. They may support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. In most cases, principal aquifers are aquifers previously designated as major aquifers”
4.13 The western half of the site is reported to be situated within an Environment Agency Source Protection Zone 3 (Total Catchment’). The SPZ2 (Outer Catchment) is reported to be located approximately 285m west of the site boundary.
4.14 The Environment Agency classifies the groundwater Source Protection Zones as follows:
SPZ1 (Inner Catchment) - Defined as the 50 day travel time from any point below the water table to the source. This zone has a minimum radius of 50 metres.
SPZ2 (Outer Catchment) - Defined by a 400 day travel time from a point below the water table. The previous methodology gave an option to define SPZ2 as the minimum recharge area required to support 25 per cent of the protected yield. This option is no longer available in defining new SPZs and instead this zone has a minimum radius of 250 or 500 metres around the source, depending on the size of the abstraction.
SPZ3 (Total Catchment) - Defined as the area around a source within which all groundwater recharge is presumed to be discharged at the source. In confined aquifers, the source catchment may be displaced some distance from the source. For heavily exploited aquifers, the final Source Catchment Protection Zone can be defined as the whole aquifer recharge area where the ratio of groundwater abstraction to aquifer recharge (average recharge multiplied by outcrop area) is >0.75. There is still the need to define individual source protection areas to assist operators in catchment management.
12 entran
4.15 No groundwater abstraction licences are reported within 1000m of the site.
4.16 Two potable water abstraction licences are reported within 2000m of the site.
Table 4.2: Potable Water Abstraction Licences Location Distance Direction
Faberstown Ps - Groundwater ~1920m East
Leckford Bridge Borehole ~1990m North-west
4.17 Three licensed discharge consents for discharges into land are reported approximately 355m south of the site, located at Ludgershall Vehicle Depot. One of these is for sewage discharges and two are for trade discharges associated with site drainage.
4.18 Based on the hydrogeological map of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (published by the Institute of Geological Sciences and The Southern Water Authority, 1979), groundwater levels at the site are anticipated to be at around 110mAOD (~20m to ~30mbgl). It should be noted that some change in groundwater level is anticipated since the publication of this map, it is considered unlikely to be significant.
4.19 No British Geological Survey groundwater flooding susceptibility areas are reported to exist within 250m of the site boundary. The BGS confidence rating for the Groundwater Flooding susceptibility areas is reported as moderately high.
4.20 Based upon the above information the geological and hydrogeological setting of the site is considered to be of Moderate to High Sensitivity.
Hydrology
4.21 There are no main watercourses reported within 500m of the site.
4.22 There are no surface abstraction licences reported within 1000m of the site.
4.23 There are no licensed discharge consents or recorded pollution incidents to surface waters reported within 250m of the site.
4.24 The site is not reported to be located within 250m of any Environment Agency Zone 2 or Zone 3 floodplains.
13 entran
4.25 Given the above information, the hydrology of the site is considered to be of Low Sensitivity.
Environmental Data
4.26 Additional environmental data from the GroundSure® report for the site is summarised in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Additional Environmental Data Summary Category 0- 250- Details 250m 500m Authorisations, Incidents and Registers Part A Licences (IPC 0 0 N/A Processes) LAPPC (LAPC) 0 0 N/A Authorisations Dangerous Substances 0 0 N/A Inventory Sites Registered Radioactive 0 1 MoD Engineer Regiment, Substance Licenses Swinton Barracks, Andover, Hampshire SP11 9LQ Waste Management Landfills and/or other waste 0 0 N/A management sites Current Land Uses Potentially contaminative 10 - Including the following within land uses 250m: Electricity sub-stations – 1 no. on-site; ~170m south-east Tanks – 3 no. on-site Depots – 2 no. on-site A G & G Timber (Garden Goods) – ~200m south-east Warehouse (Container and Storage) – ~200m south-east G Lillywhite (Vehicle Repair and Servicing) – ~240m east Petrol and fuel sites 0 0 N/A Ecological Designated Areas Site of ecological value 1 1 North Wessex Downs (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) – ~415m north On-site (Nitrate Vulnerable Zone)
14 entran
Engineering Considerations
4.27 Engineering considerations identified from the GroundSure® report for the site are summarised below:
Table 4.4: Engineering Considerations Category Yes/No Details Natural Hazards Negligible The site is at very low risk of ground dissolution. A negligible risk associated with shrinking or swelling clay, landslides, compressible deposits and running sand been identified on the site and a null- negligible risk of collapsible ground has been identified. Mining Hazards No Some localised, small scale mining probably associated with the underlying chalk may have occurred on site, ~215m to the north and ~640m to the south, but these are considered to be restricted in their extent.
Regulatory Consultations
4.28 The following regulatory consultation have been undertaken with respect to possible environmental issues and ground conditions at the site and in the surrounding area. A summary of the responses is given below with copies of the responses provided in Appendix D.
Contaminated Land Officer – Wiltshire Council
4.29 The Contaminated Land Officer for Wiltshire Council was contacted to obtain information regarding any known potential or existing environmental issues associated with the site or the surrounding area. Records of the following features within 500m of the site are held with the Local Authority which were summarised on a plan indicating the location of such environmental processes and incidents :
Two areas where tanks are located are recorded to be present on site;
One area with tanks is present approximately 110m south of the southern site boundary;
Three/four electricity sub-stations are located between 250m and 400m east of the site boundary;
Railways are present to the south and east of the site;
A possible petroleum storage facility is located around 450m east of the site boundary; and
15 entran
Extensive military land is located to the south of the site
Building Control – Wiltshire Council
4.30 Building Control was contacted to obtain information on any known foundation issues on site and in the surrounding area. The following key information was provided:
No records of subsidence or instability are held for the area;
The underlying ground conditions are chalk sub-soil with good load bearing capacity;
Foundations in the area are generally traditional strip or trench fill;
The anticipated ground conditions are likely to be of virgin undisturbed ground likely to be chalk;
No records are held regarding the presence of unexploded ordnance at the site; and
No records are held of any previous site investigations for the site.
Petroleum Officer – Wiltshire Council
4.31 The Petroleum Officer of Wiltshire Council was contacted to obtain information on fuel storage on site and in the surrounding area. Wiltshire Council hold no records of petrol storage facilities, either as above ground, below ground or can stores, for the site. However, as the land was MoD operated (and therefore confidential), and tanks have been observed during the site reconnaissance, this information may be inaccurate.
4.32 The nearest recorded off-site fuel storage record is located at the NAAFI warehouse 600m to the east of the site.
16 entran
Additional Information
4.33 Owing to the military history of the site, further web-based research has been undertaken. The following points have been noted, based on information obtained during the additional research:
The site was established as a medical supply depot for the army in 1939/40;
In 1943 a railway line from the army depot south of Tidworth Road was built to join the Ludgershall to Tidworth line that had been opened in 1901;
The site was used by the U.S. Army in the run-up to the invasion of France and was used for vehicle maintenance and storage after WWII;
Subsequently, the site has been primarily utilised as a medical supplies depot and a medical supply training facility for the British Army, Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy;
The site is reported to have contained a purpose built laboratory, special storage facilities, temperature controlled facilities and specialist medical supplies in case of biological/chemical warfare;
The medical supply stores were rebuilt between 1971 and 1982;
Until the site’s recent closure, the site was owned by the Medical Supplies Agency.
4.34 BACTEC International Limited have been commissioned to conduct an On-Call Explosive Ordnance Threat Assessment for the site. The BACTEC response (Appendix E) indicates the following:
No evidence suggests the site to have been targeted or bombed during WWII;
Within the BACTEC database there are no records of Abandoned Bomb Searches, MoD Clearance Tasks or Home Guard operations at the site;
There is a risk that former military operations may have left a legacy of ordnance contamination, which may pose a risk to intrusive works;
There are no registered abandoned bombs within the site boundary;
BACTEC considered there to be a negligible risk of explosive ordnance being encountered during the proposed above ground demolition works;
17 entran
BACTEC considered there to be a risk of encountering items of unexploded ordnance at the site (the risk is considered higher in the open areas within the northern part of the site); and
BACTEC recommended the following remedial measures to minimise the risk of inadvertently encountering unexploded ordnance during the intrusive works (including ground investigation works) at the site:
o Non-intrusive Advanced Geophysical System Survey and targeted investigation ahead of intrusive works;
o Explosive Ordnance Safety and Awareness Briefings to all personnel conducting intrusive works; and
o Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Engineer presence on site to monitor all open excavations.
General Summary
4.35 Given the above Environmental Setting and the general land use for the area, discussed in Section 2, this site is considered to be of Moderate to High Overall Environmental Sensitivity .
18 entran
5 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS & ASSESSMENTS
Background
5.1 It is understood that a Land Quality Assessment (LQA) was undertaken by Enviros Ltd. in 2005 for Defence Estates, a summary of the key points is outlined below.
Contamination Risk
5.2 Following the desk study research undertaken as part of the initial Phase One LQA, the following potentially contaminative risks were identified by Enviros:
Mounds are located in the centre and at the eastern boundaris of the site. These indicate the potential presence of underground bunkers or air-raid shelters which may contain soil/vapour gas, toxic metals, organics, inorganics and asbestos;
A vehicle wash-down area is located in the eastern part of the site that may indicate contamination from detergents, organics and heavy metals;
The potential for contamination from herbicides and organics may be present along the railway lines;
Asbestos within soils may be present around previously demolished buildings, ie within the eastern and northern parts of the site;
Contamination in and around the waste disposal building may include soil vapour / gas, toxic metals, organics, inorganics, unexploded ordnance, asbestos;
Contamination from hydrocarbons and organics derived from current or historic bulk fuel storage;
Contamination from the corrosive material store and underground spillage tank (poison, corrosive or oxidizing agents);
Contamination from detergents, inorganics, ethanol and ammonitrate from storage facility for inflammables;
Contamination from metals, organics and inorganics within the paint store;
Contamination from PCBs around historic electricity sub-stations; and
Contamination from PAHs and inorganics at the historic incinerator.
19 entran
6 OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Introduction
6.1 The assessment of potential risk associated with any identified contamination is based upon the identification and evaluation of Significant Pollutant Linkages.
6.2 A Significant Pollutant Linkage exists on a site only if three conditions are satisfied. These conditions are:
The presence of substances (potential contaminants / pollutants) that may cause harm (a Source);
The presence of a target which may be harmed e.g. site residents, groundwater (a Receptor); and
A linkage between the Source and the Receptor e.g. ingestion of soil, inhalation of vapour (a Pathway).
6.3 In each case, the existence of a pollutant linkage requires that not only does both a Source and a Receptor have to exist, but that a demonstrable Pathway also exists. Therefore, the presence of measurable concentrations of contaminants within the ground or groundwater environment does not automatically imply that a contamination problem exists on site.
6.4 The nature and importance of both pathways and receptors, which are relevant to a particular site, will vary according to the actual or intended use of the site, its characteristics and its surroundings.
6.5 This process of the identification of Pollutant Linkages has been applied below to assess the potential risks associated with the site.
Hazard Identification
6.6 Potentially contaminative current and historic processes have been identified on and within the vicinity of the site and are presented in Table 6.1.
20 entran
Table 6.1: Identified Potential Hazards Potential Location Details Hazard/Source Made Ground On and off- Based on the historic development of the site site, and given the potentially contaminative processes historically undertaken at the site, the presence of made ground of unknown chemical composition, including the presence of asbestos, on the site cannot be discounted. Potentially On-site A number of potentially contaminative contaminative current and historic processes have been current and identified at the site including ASTs, paint, historic processes battery and gas stores, vehicle servicing areas, a fire engine station, corrosive, biohazard and flammable substance stores, electrical sub-stations, generators, railway lines, storage depots and, potentially, USTs. BACTEC considered there to be a risk of encountering items of unexploded ordnance at the site (the risk is considered higher in the open areas within the northern part of the site). Off-site A number of potentially contaminative current and historic processes have been identified within close proximity (less than 100m) to the site. These include railway lines, an engine shed and goods yard and potential fuel storage tanks. Ground Gas On and off- Made ground may provide a potential source (general made site. of ground gas generation subject to ground and natural composition and thickness. strata) In addition, carbonate rich ground material may provide a potential source of ground gas generation (carbon dioxide). Notwithstanding this, the generation potential of such ground gas sources may be classified as being very low and the risk of lateral migration may be classified as negligible. The site is reported as being located within a radon affected area. However no radon protective measures are considered necessary.
Potential Receptors and Pathways
6.7 Potential receptors identified as part of this preliminary risk assessment are:
Current/future site users;
Construction workers; and
21 entran
Controlled waters (principal aquifer).
6.8 Potential contaminant pathways relating to the identified receptors and contaminants of concern include:
Dermal contact – contact with soil, dust or water;
Ingestion - ingestion of soil, dust or water;
Inhalation – inhalation of soil, dust or vapours;
Vertical migration – seepage of contaminants at the ground surface (e.g. leakage/spillage of hydrocarbons) through cracks in hardstanding and/or leaching of contaminants within the unsaturated zone resulting in vertical contaminant migration; and
Horizontal migration – lateral migration of contaminants within the saturated zone and along preferential pathways such as drainage pipes and bedding.
Hazard Assessment and Risk Estimation
6.9 Potential significant pollutant linkages identified as part of this preliminary risk assessment are summarised in the Outline Site Conceptual Model presented in Table 6.2. References to risk estimations are made in accordance with the methodology presented in CIRIA publication C552 (2001) titled ‘Contaminated Land Risk Assessment: A Guide to Good Practice’ and summarised in Appendix F.
22 entran
Table 6.2: Outline Conceptual Model (Hazard Assessment and Risk Estimation) Potential Potential Potential Pathway to Associated Hazard Scale of Potential Potential Likelihood for Significant Source- Risk Hazard/ Receptor Receptors Impact Consequence of Receptor Linkage Classification Source Source-Receptor Linkage
Made Ground Current and Exposure to potential Risk of harm to human Local Medium Likely: Based on the historic development of the Moderate risk future site end contaminants through health site, and given the potentially contaminative users and ingestion, inhalation and processes undertaken at the site, the presence construction dermal contact of made ground of unknown chemical workers composition, including the presence of asbestos, cannot be discounted.
Controlled Infiltration of water Risk to Principal Aquifer Local to Medium Likely: The presence of potentially Moderate risk Waters through the unsaturated Regional contaminative substances within the made zone. Potential leaching ground at the site cannot be discounted. In and horizontal and addition, the site is underlain by a Principal vertical migration of Aquifer and the western part of the site in with an potential contaminants Environment Agency Total Catchment Source within the groundwater Protection Zone (SPZ3). Vertical and lateral migration of contaminants within the subsurface strata may be possible and, therefore, the risk to controlled waters cannot be discounted.
23 entran
Potential Potential Potential Pathway to Associated Hazard Scale of Potential Potential Likelihood for Significant Source- Risk Hazard/ Receptor Receptors Impact Consequence of Receptor Linkage Classification Source Source-Receptor Linkage
Potentially Current and Exposure to potential Risk of harm to human Local Medium Likely: A number of potentially contaminative Moderate risk contaminative future site end contaminants through health current and historic processes have been current and users and ingestion, inhalation and identified at the site, primarily as a result of its historic construction dermal contact. former military use. processes workers Potential on-site In addition, a number of potentially contaminative contaminant migration current and historic processes have been from potential off-site identified within close proximity to the site. sources. Therefore, a risk of harm to human health cannot be discounted.
Controlled Infiltration of water Risk to Principal Aquifer Local to Medium Likely: A number of potentially contaminative Moderate risk Waters through the unsaturated Regional current and historic processes have been zone. Potential leaching identified at the site, primarily as a result of its and horizontal and former military use. vertical migration of In addition, a number of potentially contaminative potential contaminants current and historic processes have been within the groundwater identified within close proximity to the site.
Vertical and lateral migration of contaminants within the subsurface strata may be possible and, therefore, the risk to controlled waters cannot be discounted.
24 entran
Potential Potential Potential Pathway to Associated Hazard Scale of Potential Potential Likelihood for Significant Source- Risk Hazard/ Receptor Receptors Impact Consequence of Receptor Linkage Classification Source Source-Receptor Linkage
Ground Gas Current and Migration, ingress, Risk to human health Local to Severe Low Likelihood: In accordance with current Moderate risk (general made future site end accumulation and and damage to Regional guidance (Wilson, Card and Haines (2009)), the ground and users and inhalation of ground structures ground gas generation potential of the natural natural strata) proposed gasses strata reported to underlie the site (Upper Chalk) development may be classified as being very low with a structures negligible risk for on site development and lateral migration.
In addition, the site is reported to be located within a Radon Affected Area (as defined by the Health Protection Agency (HPA)), as between 1% and 3% of properties are considered to be above the Action Level. However, no radon protection measures are reported to be required for new properties or extensions to existing ones as described in BR211 by the Building Research Establishment.
25 entran
7 GROUND ENGINEERING
7.1 Engineering considerations identified from the preliminary risk assessment for the site are discussed below.
Proposed Development
7.2 The proposed development is understood to comprise the construction of approximately 500-550 residential units with associated gardens, parking and access roads. It is also proposed that some small scale commercial development (e.g. public house, crèche etc) of the site will be will be included within the development. The north-western part of the site is understood to remain as a recreational area, with a grassed sports area to the north and a wooded area to the west.
Potential Geotechnical Hazards
7.3 The published geology for the site is shown on British Geological Survey (BGS) sheet 283 (Andover) Solid and Drift Edition as being underlain by Upper Chalk of Cretaceous age. This is comprised mainly of white chalks with beds of flint, nodular chalks, hardgrounds and marl seams. No drift deposits are indicated on the map.
7.4 The GroundSure® report for the site indicates that the site is at very low risk of ground dissolution.
7.5 Information obtained from the Local Authority (Wiltshire Council) indicates that the underlying ground in the area to be of undisturbed chalk subsoil with good load bearing capacity. Foundations in the area are typically of traditional strip of trench fill design.
7.6 It is anticipated that groundwater levels are a depth, i.e. below 15m depth across the site and therefore groundwater ingress to excavations is not considered to be problematic during construction.
7.7 Given the historic development at the site, the presence of relict sub-surface structures and foundations are likely within the site extents, which may require removal as part of the site preparation works.
7.8 While information obtained from the GroundSure® report indicates that no radon protection measures are required at the site, there is the potential for gas generation (carbon dioxide) from the underlying natural strata.
Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations
26 entran
7.9 Based upon the findings of this desk study, it is anticipated that traditional strip or trench fill foundations may be appropriate across the site. However, it is recommended that an appropriate geotechnical investigation be undertaken to ascertain foundation design parameters for any proposed on-site development.
7.10 Given the potential presence of made ground, it is recommended that appropriate investigation works be undertaken to properly characterise ground gas conditions in accordance with current regulatory and industry practice.
27 entran
8 POTENTIAL GROUND SOURCE ENERGY
Background
8.1 The potential for ground source energy has been considered as part of this assessment.
Overview
8.2 Ground source heat pumps (GSHPs) use renewable energy stored in the ground and are considered to provide a highly energy-efficient method of heating buildings. GSHP’s are suitable for a wide variety of building types and are particularly appropriate for low environmental impact projects. The implementation of such schemes are being encouraged by the UK Government zero carbon guidelines, the Energy Act 2008, climate change taxes and grant schemes. Furthermore, the rising cost of non-renewable energy is making renewable energy schemes significantly more cost effective in the long term.
8.3 An initial feasibility assessment for each potential method that may be utilised at the site has been provided below based on the geological and environmental conditions observed during the preliminary geo-environmental phase of assessment.
Open-Loop Feasibility
8.4 In an open-loop system groundwater is abstracted from the underlying aquifer or a surface water feature and is passed directly through a heat exchanger / heat pump where it provides energy. Due to the conductive nature and high specific heat capacity of water, an open loop system is capable of delivering significant quantities of thermal energy.
8.5 No surface water features have been identified at the site and therefore groundwater installations only are considered feasible for this site.
8.6 Based on the hydrogeological mapping for the area, groundwater levels at the site are anticipated to be at around 110mAOD (~20m to 30mbgl) and testing undertaken within the Upper Chalk of the River Test catchment has demonstrated typical groundwater transmissivity values of between 1000 and 2500m2/d. making it suitable for an open loop GSHP system.
8.7 However, the Upper Chalk is classified by the Environment Agency as a Principle Aquifer and, in order to operate an open-loop GSHP system, an abstraction licence and consent to discharge would be required from the Environment Agency.
28 entran
8.8 Based on information gained to-date, the potential for open-loop ground source energy via vertical boreholes drilled into the underlying aquifer should be considered as it is considered likely that sufficient quantities of groundwater would be available from the underlying chalk aquifer. However, investigation will be required to characterise the environmental, geological, hydrogeological and thermogeological setting of the site, to allow for the detailed design of the system and relevant licensing from the Environment Agency.
Closed-Loop Feasibility
8.9 In a closed-loop system thermal energy is transferred by conduction to a buried pipe(s). Depending on site conditions, the pipe can either be laid horizontally in a trench or installed into a series of drilled boreholes on-site.
8.10 No surface water features have been identified at the site and therefore below ground installations only are considered feasible for this site (as with the open-loop system).
8.11 A series of vertical boreholes are considered to provide the energy needed for the proposed development. In addition, based in the current scheme proposals sufficient space is available for the borehole field that would be required, although it must be recognised that, at this stage, the number and length of boreholes will depend on a number of factors, including the heating/cooling requirements and the underlying geology of the site.
8.12 The permitting regime for the implementation of closed-loop ground source energy systems is not subject to the lengthy licensing and permitting procedures that apply to open-loop systems. However, it is recommended that consultation should be sought with the Environment Agency prior to commencing works.
8.13 As with the recommendations for the open-loop system, further investigation will be required to characterise the environmental, geological, hydrogeological and thermogeological setting of the site, to allow for the detailed design of the system.
Summary
8.14 Based on our current understanding of the underlying geological and hydrogeological conditions together with the available space, the installation of either an open or closed loop energy scheme via vertical boreholes is considered to be feasible at this site. However, the underlying strata (Upper Chalk) are classified by the Environment Agency as a Principal Aquifer and, in order to operate an open-loop GSHP system, an abstraction licence and consent to discharge would be required from the Environment Agency.
29 entran
8.15 Further investigation will be required to characterise the environmental, geological, hydrogeological and thermogeological setting of the site, to allow for the detailed design of the system and relevant licensing from the Environment Agency.
30 entran
9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
9.1 The site has been utilised as a military base since WWII when it was used by the U.S. Army during the preparations for the invasion of France. After this, the site is understood to have been used for vehicle maintenance and storage prior to its use a medical supply depot. As a result, potentially contaminative historic land uses have been identified at the site, including rail lines, supply depots, below and above ground tanks and electricity sub-stations. In addition, the extensive railway land to the south and east of the site has been identified as potentially contaminative.
9.2 A number of potentially significant features have been identified during the site reconnaissance, including above ground fuel storage tanks, chemical and hazardous chemical storage areas, vehicle servicing areas, vehicle wash-down areas, boilers and heaters, electrical sub-stations, battery charge points and disused railway lines. Visual and olfactory evidence of potential ground contamination and potential asbestos containing materials was also recorded during the site reconnaissance.
9.3 The site is considered to be of moderate to high environmental sensitivity due primarily to the underlying strata being classified as a Principal Aquifer and the proposed residential end use.
9.4 Identified potential hazards and sources include made ground associated with potentially contaminative historic on and off-site processes, made ground of unknown composition and the ground gas associated with the made ground and natural strata.
9.5 Based upon our current conceptual understanding of the site and the proposed end use, the following main potential Significant Pollutant Linkages have been identified:
Human health (including future site end users, construction workers and future maintenance workers) - potential exposure to contaminants identified within made ground through the ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact pathways within proposed soft landscaped areas;
Human health (including current and future site end users, construction workers and future maintenance workers) - potential exposure to possible localised volatile contaminants associated with residual hydrocarbon contamination within the made ground and groundwater via the inhalation pathway;
31 entran
Human health and proposed development structures - migration, ingress and accumulation / inhalation of potential ground gasses associated with made ground;
Controlled water (groundwater) - infiltration of water through the unsaturated zone resulting in leaching of potential contaminants within the made ground (including the imported materials) and potential vertical and horizontal migration of contaminants along preferential pathways such as piled foundations and current/historic site drainage features;
Potential vertical and horizontal migration of hydrocarbon contamination within the saturated zone resulting in possible off-site contaminant migration; and
Potential vertical and horizontal migration of hydrocarbon contamination associated with the ASTs and USTs (i.e. potential surface spillages and leakages of USTs).
Geo-Environmental Risk Evaluation
9.6 Based upon the information contained within this report, it is considered that the site, in relation to the proposed development, generally represents a moderate risk of geo-environmental liability due to the presence of potential Significant Pollutant Linkages.
Identification of Feasible Remediation Options
9.7 Significant risks identified within the conceptual model can be mitigated through the breaking of the significant pollution linkage by the removal of at least the source, receptor or pathway. Within reference to the site’s conceptual models the following preliminary remediation approach has been prepared. This preliminary remediation approach may need to be presented in more detail within a Remediation Strategy, the content of which will require agreement in writing of the Regulatory Authorities prior to commencing any remediation on site.
Ground Engineering
9.8 Based upon the findings of this desk study, it is anticipated that traditional strip or trench fill foundations may be appropriate across the site. However, it is recommended that an appropriate geotechnical investigation be undertaken to ascertain foundation design parameters for any proposed on-site development.
9.9 Given the historic development at the site, the presence of relict sub-surface structures and foundations are likely within the site extents, which may require removal as part of the site preparation works.
32 entran
9.10 While information obtained from the GroundSure® report indicates that no radon protection measures are required at the site, there is the potential for gas generation (carbon dioxide) from the underlying natural strata.
9.11 Given the potential presence of made ground, it is recommended that appropriate investigation works be undertaken to properly characterise ground gas conditions in accordance with current regulatory and industry practice.
Unexploded Ordnance
9.12 Due to the site’s historic use as a military supplies depot during WWII, the presence of Unexploded Ordnance cannot be discounted at the site. However, research conducted for the site found no evidence to suggest that the site was targeted or bombed during WWII. Furthermore, no records of abandoned bombs are held for the site. However, it is considered that there is a risk of encountering items of unexploded ordnance at the site (the risk is considered higher in the open areas within the northern part of the site) and appropriate assessment and mitigation is considered necessary.
Ground Source Energy
9.13 Based on our current understanding of the underlying geological and hydrogeological conditions together with the available space, the installation of either an open or closed loop energy scheme via vertical boreholes is considered to be feasible at this site. However, the underlying strata (Upper Chalk) are classified by the Environment Agency as a Principle Aquifer and, in order to operate a GSHP system, an abstraction licence and consent to discharge would be required from the Environment Agency.
Recommended Further Works
9.14 Given the assessment presented within this report, additional works would be recommended to fully define the potential issues identified associated with the site. Such assessment is likely to include, but may not be limited to, the elements listed below:
Further assessment is considered necessary to clarify the potential geo-environmental risks identified during the preliminary risk assessment (this study). This would include a Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment involving refinement of the site Outline Conceptual Model presented here. This would be based on the findings of an intrusive investigation.
Should unacceptable risks be identified, a feasible remediation options appraisal would be provided and/or a Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment recommended. The purpose of
33 entran
the Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment would be to further refine the conceptual model and use more detailed site specific information and criteria to determine whether there are unacceptable risks.
Appropriate geotechnical investigation to ascertain foundation design parameters.
Appropriate investigation works to properly characterise ground gas conditions in accordance with current regulatory and industry practice.
If required, further investigation will be required to characterise the environmental, geological, hydrogeological and thermogeological setting of the site, to allow for the detailed design of the system and relevant licensing from the Environment Agency.
Further assessment and investigation regarding the potential for unexploded ordnance at the site.
34 entran
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BGS and Environment Agency (2000) The Physical Properties of Major Aquifers in England and Wales
BS5930 – British Standards Institute (1999) Code of Practice for Site Investigation.
BS8485 – British Standards Institute (2007) Code of Practice for characterisation and remediation from ground gas in effected developments
BS10175 - British Standards Institute (2001) Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Land - Code of Practice.
CIRIA C665 (2007) Assessing Risk Posed by Hazardous Ground Gasses to Buildings (revised).
CIRIA C681 (2009) Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) A guide to the construction industry.
DEFRA and the Environment Agency (2004). Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination. R&D Publication CLR11.
Environment Agency (2001) Land Contamination: Technical Guidance on Special Sites: MoD Land R&D Technical Report P5-042/TR/01. Bristol: Environment Agency.
Environment Agency (2005) The UK Approach for Evaluating Human Health Risks from Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soils. Science Report P5-080/TR3.
Environment Agency (July 2005) Guidance on Requirements for Land Contamination Reports.
NHBC (2008) - National House Building Council Standard.
NHBC (March 2007) ‘Guidance on evaluation of development proposals on sites where methane and carbon dioxide are present’
Wilson, Card, and Haines (2009) Ground Gas Handbook
Web Resources
BGS – Lexicon of Rocks: www.bgs.co.uk/lexicon
British History (1995) – Parishes – Ludgershall: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=115432
Environment Agency – What’s in Your Backyard: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/37793.aspx
Wiltshire Council (2008) – Ludgershall Concise History: http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/community/getconcise.php?id=145
35 entran
FIGURES
36
& ! " ( !
#$ !
(
. /0 ! ! ( - ! ( #$ !
,
!"
% ! &
,
! ! !!
)"" ' ( !
! + ( & ' !
" ( !
' !
( "! * ! " " '
"! ' !
)("
& ! " !
" !
' !
! " "
* % ! & !
! ' !
0110 2" &'(%$$)$$*+$$% "#$%$ !,-./# 22
&8 26 *2 &9 2)
2*
2$ 2& 27 &% && $% 28 67 *% *& 29 &7 &2 &$ 62 2% & 6) $* $
$8 $) $7 $9 $$ 67
6$ &6 2 $6 9 $& 6% $2 &* 6
*$ &)
7 69 6& 8
) * 66
6* ! "!#
34435!1 ' (&%%)%%*+%%& !$%&% ,-./012 entran
APPENDIX A – SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Limited
Qut hu ) Brr hy vr s ur urhr h s ur vr yxvt ur
Qut hu !) Brr hy vr s ur urhr h s ur vr yxvt ur uvt ur hv ivyr
!"#$ %
Qut hu ") Brr hy vr s ur urhr h s ur vr yxvt ur
Qut hu #) A r hvy s rvtu urq
!"#$ %
Qut hu $) Shvyh ur rh s ur vr yxvt rh
Qut hu %) Brr hy vr s ur urhr h s ur vr yxvt urh r ur vr th ur hv h rur
!"#$ %
Qut hu &) Brr hy vr s ur urr h s ur vr yxvt u
Qut hu ') Brr hy vr s ur pr hy h s ur vr yxvt urh
!"#$ %
Qut hu () Brr hy vr s ur rr h s ur vr yxvt ur
Qut hu ) Brr hy vr s ur rhr h s ur vr yxvt ur
!"#$ %
!"#$ %
!"#$ %
!"#$ %
! " " #
$ % &"
!"#$ %
' ( &" &" &
) * # " +"
!"#$ %
Qut hu ! ) Hhv ivyr ivyqvt v urhr h s ur vr yxvt rh
Qut hu !!) Hhv ivyr ivyqvt v urhr h s ur vr yxvt u
!"#$ %
Qut hu !") 7q iry sry htr hx hqwhpr ivyr ivyqvt v u rhr h s ur vr
Qut hu !#) Pvysv rq ivyr v urhr h s ur vr
!"#$ %
Qut hu !$) 7vyr ur v ur pr hy h s ur vr
Qut hu !%) # yv r sryvy htr hx v ur pr hy h s ur vr h rpq hx "$ yv r h ir rq iruvq uv hx
!"#$ %
Qut hu !&) T iry hx ir rq v pr hy h s ur vr Qut hu !%
Qut hu !') Pvysv rq ivyr v ur pr hy h s ur vr
!"#$ %
+ , ) -
% ,
!"#$ %
! !!
!"#$ %
"#
$ % & ' !
!"#$ %
' % (
) *! (
!"#$ %
+ , !
- *!! ( ! ! & + M ( !&# &
!"#$ %
/ % & !
$0 *! ! (
!"#$ %
!"#$ % Drummond Park, Ludgershall
Photograph 43:Electricity sub-station located in the eastern-central part of the site.
Photograph 44:Paint and lithium battery store located in the south-eastern part of the site.
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd 1006005.001 Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Ltd Drummond Park, Ludgershall
Photograph 45:Plant room located in the south-western part of the site (Petroleum Spirit hazard sign noted).
Photograph 46:Potential asbestos containing roof materials located in the eastern part of the site.
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd 1006005.001 Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Ltd Drummond Park, Ludgershall
Photograph 47:Potential asbestos containing roof materials located in the main warehousing.
Photograph 48:Battery charging area located in the eastern part of the site.
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd 1006005.001 Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Ltd Drummond Park, Ludgershall
Photograph 49:Vehicle inspection pit located in the south-eastern part of the site.
Photograph 50:Vehicle inspection pit located in the eastern part of the site.
Zog Brownfield Ventures Ltd 1006005.001 Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Ltd
QR
!"" #$ $
!"#$ %
QR
!"" #$ $
!"#$ %
% Q&'R
!"#$ % entran
APPENDIX B – HISTORICAL MAPS
Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Limited
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: MasterMap
Map date: 2010
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: National Grid
Map date: 1980-1984
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: National Grid
Map date: 1969-1972
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1936
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1924
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1900
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1880
Scale: 1:2,500
Printed at: 1:2,500
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: National Grid
Map date: 2010
Scale: 1:10,000
Printed at: 1:10,000
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: 1:10,000 Raster
Map date: 2002
Scale: 1:10,000
Printed at: 1:10,000
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: National Grid
Map date: 1973-1976
Scale: 1:10,000
Printed at: 1:10,000
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: Provisional
Map date: 1957
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1923-1926
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1909
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1899-1901
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1879
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
Site Details:
Drummond Park, , Ludgershall, SP11 9RT
Client Ref: 1006005 Report Ref: HMD-176-886596 Grid Ref: 425750, 150860
Map Name: County Series
Map date: 1873
Scale: 1:10,560
Printed at: 1:10,560
Produced by GroundSure Ltd. T: 08444159000 E: [email protected] W: www.groundsureinsight.com
Crown copyright all rights reserved. Licence No: 10001511162
Production date: 05 July 2010
entran
APPENDIX C – GROUNDSURE ®
Prepared by Tweedie Evans Consulting Limited 6
#% 5 3 5''+
% #/ -'-
! "#$%&'()&**)+(
, ! "#'--)--
#
0 90
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+( 5 . !0
. .0 ..90 .. 5 : .0 .. 5 --;2 2 < #% 5 3 5''+ ! "#8 '-(+' = !#';2)
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
> ! ! " . ! " " . 2 9 9 " " 9" 2 9 9 "?&?9" 2
. " <9 !" ! @AB ! 0 9 0
'2 5 6 " '& -'& '---& -&- '& - & -- '--- '--
'2'6 5 4
" ! "65 ---- & &
" !5 @'B 655 " - - - - & &
" ! 6 0 ! @. 0 ! ---- & & " .9" B " ! % " @. 0 ! ---- & & " " B
" ! '% 9 " 6 0 - - - - & & " ! % 9 " 6 0 - - - - & &
" !5 @ B 5 " ! " - - - - & &
" ! 0; 8 "9 " ---' & &
" !" % " - - - ; & & " !5 = 9 " - - - - ! "
'2 " ! >$ <6 ---- & &
'2; "0 " 5 6 " < 6 " " 0 - - - & & &
< 6 " " 0 ' - - - & & &
'28 % 5 66 5 ---- & & '++-
'& -'& '---& -&- '& - 2 ! > & -- '--- '--
2' !
"0 ! - - - - - &
!% C>. ! - - - - - &
"0 " ! ------
!% C< &>. ! - - - - - & 4% !0 ------
" 0 ! % ------
2 ! >
>. ! % . - - - - & &
< &>. ! % . - --- & & "0" ------
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
'& -'&
& -&- '& - '---&'-- ;2 D -- '--- ;2' 6 % ) -8& & &
;2 " !5 - --- & &
;2;D 5 > 5. - - - - & &
82 0 % ".
82' 0" ! !" $ . 9 < 0 EF
82 0" !.!" %! 0. 9 < 0 EF
82; " ! "3 09 0 F ! " 2 "#" #'#---- *;
F " " 0 -9!!= 2
'& -'& '--'&
& -&- '& - 20 0 0 0 -- '--- ---
2' "0 G 90 !"
6 $ 7!. E < & & & & & 6 $ H 7!. E , & & & & &
0 !" " . E , & & & & &
2 9 " " " @ '--- ! 0 - --- - & B2
2;! " 9 " " " @ '--- ! 0 - --- - & B2 285 9 9 " " " @ --- ! 0 - --- - B2 2 0 "5 " I -- ! 0 E ,
2) J 0 & -&- '& - '&-- -'&'--- '--'&'--
6 0 "0 ! 7 0 < < < < < < -- ! 0 E
2(% < 3 -- ! - - - - & &
2*! " ! - ! 0 < < < & & &
)2
)2' 0 "0 " I ! . - ! < 0 E
)2 0 "0 " I ;! . - ! < 0 E )2; 0 %! " - ! 0 E <
)28 0 9 ! ! %! " - ! 0 E <
)2 0 ! - ! 0 E < )2) K ".90 - ! < .." 9 0 E
)2( " ! " ! ".90 E $ 0
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
(2% 0 '& -'& '--'&
& -&- '& - -- '--- '--
(2' " ! !." " !"6 @6B - - - - & &
(2 " !< < @<< B - - - - & &
(2; " ! " < @< B - - - - & &
(28 " !." ! @ B - - - - & &
(2 " !." 5 " @5 B - - - - & &
(2) " ! - --- & & (2( " ! - --- & &
(2* " ! 0 - - - - & &
(2+ " ! !> < 0@ >< B - - - ' & &
(2'- " !< 5 3 - --- & &
(2'' " !< - --- & & (2' " !< G 9I ' --- & &
*2< =
*2' K 3 ! 9 "E G0
+2$
+2' 0" ( ! 0 E <
+2 3 ! 9 " '- ! 0 E
+2; 09 !!" ( ! 0 E <
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
D . ! . 90 ! 5 ! 9 .& & 3 2 . . 9H" L
9 2 " " ! " #
'2 5 6 " 5 ! 6 " 5 6 " " 90 0 2 " " " . --2
2 ! > 5 ! ! 0. 3 0 2 " " " . '--2
;2 D 5 ! " 0. 3 0 !. "
! " . " 2 " " " !. --2 " !
. 0" . ! . .. 2
82 0 5 ! !" .!" . 9 "39 0 2
20 0 0 0 5 ! 90 " . 9 " " "5 "
I @5IB 7 02 " " " !. ---2
)2 5 ! ! " ! ! ! " ! ! 2 " " " !. -2
(2% 0 5 ! !." " !"6 @6B< < @<< B." ! @ B ." 5 " @5 B " < @< B ! > < 0@ >< B< 5 3 @<5B 0 < < G 9I 2 " " " !. --2
*2< = 5 ! ! = 0. 3 0 2 ! " " 9 "2
+2$ 5 ! !" 2
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
'-2 " " !. . " ". ! 09 . 09 9 . ! ! . 2 0 . !" " . @-*888'+---B! ! ! "2
< #$ . > 0" ! . " . . 2 ! . . ! " !" 92 9 ! ! .. " ! . 9 2 !" 9 ." ! 3 ! ! &6#'6# "2 ! . "" . K0 9 9 " " ! . ! 2@22! " . 09 !M N . 9 ! . 0 ! ' ; '-
9 . B2
! . 9 " . 9 M< N2
" . $ @B2%" " . " <#< # <#< ! . ! 0 9 02
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
'2 5 6 " $ .
6 " .02 " "<9#'---; -(
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
'2 5 6 "
'2' 6 " " 4
" ! ! . 90 "0 " ! ! #
!# #$ %&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# ) * $ #%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# + (! ) ( # ,#% *%&''
( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# ! # $ ) ( # # % *% &'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# ,# (%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# - ,# (%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# )-* .# #%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# $ (/ 0! #,# ##%&'' (
! " "@; 8B" . . 6 " .#
6% % "OP %" >. 0. 5 % <9
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
;)2- $ $ Q. $++ % ! & "3 D >! .. #& . " !!" 5''+J $ @ ! #& )-" 'B2 ! . # - -'&-)&-'
!# # # $ %&'' ( /
! " % " " . . 6 " .#
6% % " %" < % ' ;82- 8 )-8- # G"%. " #6 '--- G"%. #< @ +'**L . "'- 0 " !! 0.# % " & '++B 4 !! &< . 0 6 #(44'++) 5<9#5-)'- !!"% #(44'++) 5G #' " % #& ;82- 8 )-8- # G"%. " #6 '--- G"%. #< @ +'**L . "'- 0 " !! 0.# % " & '++B % 6 #+44'++) 5<9#5-)'-) !!"% #+44'++) 5G #' " % #& ; ;82- 8 )-8- # G"%. " #6 '--- G"%. #< @ +'**L . "'- 0 " !! 0.# % " & '++B % 6 #+44'++) 5<9#5-)'-( !!"% #+44'++) 5G #' " % #&
!# 12 ,#$ #%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
'2 % =
!# $3415611%&'' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
'2; "0 " 5 6 "
!# 6 # !# ( -%-&' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
!# 6 # !# ( %-&' ( '
% 9 " ! 2
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(
'28 % 5 66 5 '++-
1 %( # # # 78! # # ' %&'' (9 '
% 9 " ! 2
. ! "#$%&'()&**)+(