DOCSLIB.ORG

PEIR Chapter 4 Alternatives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PEIR Chapter 4 Alternatives 1 © Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions UK Limited 2.3 Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives 2 © Wood Group UK Limited Contents 3. Alternatives 4 3.1 Introduction 4 3.2 Approach to design evolution 6 Introduction 6 Commitments Register 6 Design evolution process 15 3.3 Offshore site selection 16 Offshore wind farm area of search 16 Offshore export cable corridor 18 Offshore refinement since the Scoping stage 20 3.4 Onshore site selection 21 Introduction 21 Identification of grid connection location 22 Development of the onshore part of the Scoping Boundary 47 Onshore cable corridor refinement since the Scoping stage 48 Onshore substation search area refinement since Scoping 63 Cable route options to Wineham Lane North and Bolney Road / Kent Street substation search areas 69 3.5 Alternative technologies 74 Offshore 74 Onshore 76 3.6 PINS Scoping Opinion responses 77 3.7 Next steps 82 3.8 Glossary of terms and abbreviations 82 3.9 References 86 Table 3-1 Relevant embedded environmental measures to design evolution 8 Table 3-2 Description of landfall to grid connection options considered 29 Table 3-3 Summary of constraints for landfall to substation options 41 Table 3-4 BRAG appraisal approach for design refinement 49 Table 3-5 PINS Scoping Opinion responses relevant to the consideration of alternatives 78 Table 3-6 Glossary of terms and abbreviations 82 Graphic 3-1 Design evolution process 15 Graphic 3-2 Overall onshore site selection process 22 Graphic 3-3 Electricity Transmission System in Southeast England (based on National Grid, 2020) 23 Graphic 3-4 Climping to Bolney 32 Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives 3 © Wood Group UK Limited Graphic 3-5 Climping to Lovedean 34 Graphic 3-6 East Wittering to Lovedean 35 Graphic 3-7 Bracklesham to Lovedean 36 Graphic 3-8 Church Norton to Lovedean 38 Graphic 3-9 Tide Mills to Little Horsted 40 Graphic 3-10 Cable route options considered at Climping 51 Graphic 3-11 Cable route options considered at Warningcamp 53 Graphic 3-12 Cable route options considered at Norfolk Clump 55 Graphic 3-13 Cable route options considered at Washington 57 Graphic 3-14 Cable route options considered at Windmill Quarry 59 Graphic 3-15 Cable route options considered at Henfield 61 Graphic 3-16 Cable route options considered at Bolney Road/Kent Street 62 Graphic 3-17 Star Road substation search area option 65 Graphic 3-18 Wineham Lane South substation search area option 66 Graphic 3-19 Bolney Road/ Kent Street substation search area option 67 Graphic 3-20 Wineham Lane North substation search area 68 Graphic 3-21 Wineham Lane North and Wineham Lane South cable route options 69 Graphic 3-22 Bolney Lane/Kent Street cable route options 73 Volume 3: Figures Figure 3.1 Offshore site selection considerations Figure 3.2 Offshore export cable corridor Figure 3.3 Offshore design refinement Figure 3.4 Landfall to connection point options Figure 3.5 Overview of cable route refinements Figure 3.6 Onshore substation search area refinement Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives 4 © Wood Group UK Limited 3. Alternatives 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 This chapter considers the reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Development. It presents the design evolution process followed to-date, explains the outcomes of the process which have led to the refinement of the PEIR Assessment Boundary, and explains the environmental and other considerations which have been taken into account. The PEIR Assessment Boundary combines the Areas of Search for the offshore and onshore infrastructure associated with the Proposed Development. It is defined as the area within which the Proposed Development and associated infrastructure will be located, including the temporary and permanent construction and operational work areas. 3.1.2 By way of context, it is a requirement of The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (the ‘EIA Regulations 2017’) that the Environmental Statement (ES) submitted with the Application for development consent should include: ‘a description of the reasonable alternatives studied by the applicant, which are relevant to the proposed development and its specific characteristics, and an indication of the main reasons for the option chosen, taking into account the effects of the development on the environment” (regulation 14(2)(d))’. 3.1.3 Chapter 2: Policy and legislative context sets out the underlying and supporting documentation for development of offshore wind energy development. The information provided in this chapter will be updated for inclusion in the ES in accordance with the EIA Regulations 2017 and other relevant legislation as the design of the Proposed Development evolves. The design process for the Proposed Development has taken full consideration of the National Policy Statement (NPS) for Energy (EN-1) (DECC, 2011a), the National Policy Statement (NPS) for Renewable Energy (EN-3) (DECC, 2011b), the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2019), and Design Principles for National Infrastructure (National Infrastructure Commission, 2020). 3.1.4 Section 4.4 of NPS EN-1 indicates the need to present the main alternatives considered as part of the Proposed Development and to demonstrate consideration of environmental, social and economic effects including, where relevant, technical and commercial feasibility (paragraph 4.4.2). 3.1.5 Section 4.5 of NPS EN-1 sets out the principles of good energy infrastructure design. Paragraph 4.5.4 indicates that a project Application should be able to demonstrate how the design process was conducted and how the proposed design evolved. Where multiple design options were considered, the Applicant should set out the reasons for the selection of chosen option. NPS EN-1 also highlights the importance of good design in terms of siting relative to the existing landscape character, landform and vegetation which the Applicant should demonstrate (paragraph 4.5.3). 3.1.6 Section 2.4 of NPS EN-3 indicates that renewable energy proposals should demonstrate good design in relation to landscape and visual amenity whilst also Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives 5 © Wood Group UK Limited demonstrating how design has evolved to mitigate impacts such as noise and effects on ecology (paragraph 2.4.2). 3.1.7 NPS EN-3 also addresses the need for flexibility in the Application process for offshore wind NSIPs to allow for situations where full parameters of the project may be unknown at the time of submission (NPS EN-3, paragraph 2.6.43). In such instances, EN-3 recommends the use of the 'Rochdale Envelope' method which allows for the maximum adverse and positive scenario to be assessed in the EIA and a DCO granted on this basis (NPS EN-3, paragraph 2.6.43). 3.1.8 Section 127 of the NPPF sets out the design considerations helping decision- making for developments and indicates that developments: a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit; e) optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience. 3.1.9 The NPPF recommends early discussions between applicants, the relevant local planning authorities and local community, and consideration of the community’s point of view regarding the design and style of the emerging scheme (paragraph 128). 3.1.10 The Proposed Development takes into consideration the Design Principles for National Infrastructure (National Infrastructure Commission, 2020). This guidance identifies four principles to guide the planning and delivery of major infrastructure projects: climate, people, places and value. The National Infrastructure Commission’s Design Group developed the principles in consultation with all infrastructure sectors. They are intended to be applied to all economic infrastructure, including: digital communications, energy, transport, flood management, water and waste. As a renewable energy development, Rampion 2 follows the four principles of this guidance. Climate, people, places and value are considerations that have informed the design of the onshore offshore components of the Proposed Development. 3.1.11 Throughout the design development phase for the Proposed Development, prior to the publication of this Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR), full Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 3: Alternatives 6 © Wood Group UK Limited consideration has been given to reasonable alternatives. This is both for the technical engineering design
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strategic Planning Business Unit Planning Applications
    SP - Allocated Applications Week Starting 14 12 2015 District Area Site Name Planning Site Address Description Xpoint Ypoint Proposal Received Prev.History Consulting Member Date to Deadline Deadline (WSCC Ref.) Reference Date & Comments Officer Date Date S106 Adur & Worthing CDBS - AWDM/124/15 AWDM/0124/15 M G M House, Heene Road, Worthing, West Sussex 513950 102255 Demolition of main MGM office building and offices in Heene Place and 17-Dec-2015 Recons Tim Townsend Ian Gledhill (HW) Michael Cloake 17-Dec-2015 07-Jan-2016 03-Jan-16 Councils Coastal replacement by a new part four and part five storey building on main part of site to Kevin Brook (SWD) (Worthing Pier) provide 33 retirement flats (C3) and 58 unit Assisted Living Extra Care Adam Charlton (S106) Development (C2) together with 10 affordable apartments (C3) in a two storey building by Heene Place, communal and support facilities, open car parking for 60 spaces, landscaping and alterations to access. Amended Plans. Adur & Worthing CDBS - AWDM/1361/15 AWDM/1361/15 267, Brighton Road, Lancing, West Sussex, BN15 8JP 519357 104056 Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 3 storey dwelling. 15-Dec-2015 Recons Ian Hayward Ian Hayward (HW) Mick Clark 15-Dec-2015 05-Jan-2016 - Councils Coastal (Saltings) Further Information Adur & Worthing CDBS - AWDM/1677/15 AWDM/1677/15 197, Brighton Road, Worthing, West Sussex 516103 102808 Change of use from 7 bedsitting rooms with communal facilities to 5 self contained 14-Dec-2015 WB/1022/04 - Lawrence Stringer SRU (HW) Roger Oakley 15-Dec-2015 04-Jan-2016 - Councils Coastal flats (3no.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Defibrillators Fulking
    Local Defibrillators If you are planning a cardiac event then it makes sense (i) to have it in a location that has a defibrillator available, (ii) to have with you a companion who knows exactly where the defibrillator is, and (iii) for that companion to have some idea how to use it. The text, maps, and photos on this webpage are intended to facilitate the first two goals. With regard to the third goal, modern public access defibrillators are designed to be usable without prior instruction (they talk you through the process) but your companion will feel much more confident about saving your life if they have attended one of the many defibrillator and resuscitation courses on offer locally. Contact HART to discover times and locations. Finally, you can encourage your companion to do some relevant reading. Fulking The Fulking defibrillator is in the centre of the village. The red door to the right is the entrance to the green corrugated iron shack that has served as the village hall for the last ninety years. The porch to the left is the entrance to a tiny brick chapel now used as the church bookstore. The defibrillator is in this porch and is accessible 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Edburton The Edburton defibrillator is located at Coles Automotive which is at the end of Browns Meadow, a track that begins roughly opposite to Springs Smoked Salmon. It is kept in their reception area and is thus only accessible during garage opening hours. Poynings: The Forge Garage Poynings has two defibrillators.
    [Show full text]
  • East Worthing Flood Alleviation Scheme Teville Stream – Hydraulic Modelling Report
    East Worthing Flood Alleviation Scheme Teville Stream – Hydraulic Modelling Report November 2011 Environment Agency EW FAS Teville Stream Model Build Report November 2011 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Background 2 1.2 Objectives 2 1.3 Location 2 1.4 Catchment Description 2 1.5 Topography 3 1.6 Geology 3 2 QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF FLOOD RISK 4 2.1 Sources 4 2.2 Pathways 4 2.3 Receptors 4 3 MODELLING APPROACH AND JUSTIFICATION 6 3.1 Modelling Approach 6 3.2 Modelling Limitations and Uncertainty 6 3.3 Model Accuracy and Appropriateness 6 3.4 Model Verification 6 4 INPUT DATA PLAN 7 4.1 Data Used 7 4.2 Data Quality 7 4.3 Data Uncertainties 7 4.4 Previous Studies 8 5 TECHNICAL METHOD AND IMPLEMENTATION 9 5.1 Hydrology 9 5.2 Hydraulic Modelling 9 5.2.1 Surface Water Modelling 10 5.2.2 Fluvial Modelling 11 5.3 Modelling Results Post-processing 13 6 MODEL PROVING 14 6.1 Run Performance 14 6.1.1 Surface Water Model 14 6.1.2 Fluvial hydraulic model 14 6.2 Model Calibration and Verification 14 6.2.1 Surface Water Model 14 6.2.2 Fluvial hydraulic model 15 6.3 Sensitivity Analysis 15 7 MODEL RESULTS 16 7.1 Model Runs 16 7.2 Model results and flood risk summary 17 8 LIMITATIONS 22 8.1 Model Shortcomings 22 8.2 Model Improvements 22 8.2.1 Surface Water Model 22 8.2.2 Fluvial Model 22 8.3 Further Uses for the Model 23 9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 24 EW FAS Teville Stream Hydraulic Modelling Report v01.doc ii Environment Agency EW FAS Teville Stream Model Build Report November 2011 Appendices Appendix A – Model User Report Appendix B – Tabulated
    [Show full text]
  • DC/20/0386 Name: Mrs Caroline Clarke Address: Wyndham Pool Frylands Lane Wineham APPLICANT: Henfield West Sussex BN5 9BP
    PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT TO: Planning Committee BY: Head of Development DATE: 19 May 2020 DEVELOPMENT: Permission in Principle for the erection of 2-4 residential units SITE: Wyndham Pool Frylands Lane Wineham Henfield West Sussex BN5 9BP WARD: Cowfold, Shermanbury and West Grinstead APPLICATION: DC/20/0386 Name: Mrs Caroline Clarke Address: Wyndham Pool Frylands Lane Wineham APPLICANT: Henfield West Sussex BN5 9BP REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: The application if approved would represent a departure from the development plan; More than eight persons in different households have made written representations raising material planning considerations that are inconsistent with the recommendation of the Head of Development. RECOMMENDATION: To refuse Permission in Principle 1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT To consider the application for Permission in Principle. BACKGROUND 1.1 The application seeks Permission in Principle for residential development at the site under Part 2A of the Town and Country Planning (Permission in Principle) Order 2017. 1.2 The grant of a Permission in Principle does not constitute the grant of planning permission, rather it sets out that if granted the principle of the location, land use, and amount of development proposed is acceptable. Following the grant of a Permission in Principle, the applicant would need to apply for Technical Details Consent. The grant of Technical Details Consent would then create the planning permission. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION 1.3 The scope of assessment for a permission in principle application is limited to location, land use and amount of development. The Applicant has submitted a Location Plan and indicative Block Plans to show how 2 dwellings or 4 dwellings may be positioned within the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 19TH JUNE 2012 at 2.00 P.M
    Park North, North Street, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1RL Tel: (01403) 215100 (calls may be recorded) Fax: (01403) 262985 DX 57609 HORSHAM 6 www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive - Tom Crowley Personal callers and deliveries: please come to Park North E-Mail: [email protected] Direct Line: 01403 215465 Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 19TH JUNE 2012 AT 2.00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER, PARK NORTH, NORTH STREET, HORSHAM Councillors: Roger Arthur David Jenkins Adam Breacher Liz Kitchen Jonathan Chowen Gordon Lindsay Philip Circus Chris Mason George Cockman Sheila Matthews David Coldwell Brian O’Connell Ray Dawe Roger Paterson Brian Donnelly Sue Rogers Andrew Dunlop Kate Rowbottom Jim Goddard Jim Sanson Ian Howard Tom Crowley Chief Executive AGENDA 1. Election of Chairman 2. Appointment of Vice-Chairman 3. Apologies for absence 4. To approve the time of meetings of the Committee for the ensuing year 5. To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 15th May 2012 (attached) 6. To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee – any clarification on whether a Member has an interest should be sought before attending the meeting. 7. To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive 8. To consider the following reports and to take such action thereon as may be necessary Paper certified as sustainable by an independent global forest certification organisation Head of Planning & Environmental Services Appeals Applications for determination by Committee
    [Show full text]
  • HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL – LIST of NEW APPS (Parish Order) Data Produced 20Th February 2017
    HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL – LIST OF NEW APPS (Parish Order) Data produced 20th February 2017 Parish: Ashington PC Ward: Chanctonbury Case No: DC/17/0250 Case Officer: Tamara Dale Date Valid: 10 February 2017 Comments by: 10 March 2017 Decision Level: Delegated Decision App Type: Minor Other Agent: Applicant: Mr James Thorns Proposal: Erection of stable with storage room using existing access Site Address: Winstons Farm Muttons Lane Ashington Pulborough West Sussex RH20 3AL Grid Ref: 511786 115456 Parish: Ashington PC Ward: Chanctonbury Case No: DC/17/0321 Case Officer: Oguzhan Denizer Date Valid: 15 February 2017 Comments by: 17 March 2017 Decision Level: Delegated Decision App Type: LBC Alteration Agent: Applicant: Mrs Wendy Botevyle Proposal: Installation of Boiler and associated work to replace the existing boiler with a new combi boiler in airing cupboard. (Listed Building Consent) Site Address: Willow Wren Mill Lane Ashington Pulborough West Sussex RH20 3BX Grid Ref: 512925 115692 Parish: Ashington PC Ward: Chanctonbury Case No: DC/17/0348 Case Officer: Luke Simpson Date Valid: 16 February 2017 Comments by: 10 March 2017 Decision Level: Delegated Decision App Type: Householder Agent: Mr Mark Alford Applicant: Mrs Sara Simpson Proposal: Proposed two storey side extension Site Address: 9 Mill Mead Ashington Pulborough West Sussex RH20 3BE Grid Ref: 513076 115498 Parish: Billingshurst PC Ward: Billingshurst and Shipley Case No: DC/17/0281 Case Officer: Nicola Pettifer Date Valid: 13 February 2017 Comments by: 9 March 2017 Decision Level:
    [Show full text]
  • MEDIA PACK 2021 a COMMUNITY MAGAZINE for HENFIELD and the SURROUNDING VILLAGES Henfieldbn5.Co.Uk
    MEDIA PACK 2021 A COMMUNITY MAGAZINE FOR HENFIELD AND THE SURROUNDING VILLAGES henfieldbn5.co.uk Memories of local POWs November 20 #172 September 20 #170 May 20 #166 July 20 #168 August 20 #169 Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking www.henfieldbn5.co.uk www.henfieldbn5.co.uk www.henfieldbn5.co.uk www.henfieldbn5.co.uk www.henfieldbn5.co.uk Henfield | Small Dole | Woodmancote | Blackstone | Edburton | Fulking 2 ABOUT BN5 HOW DO I BOOK? BN5 magazine is the go-to source of information for anything Take a look at our sizes and rates to see which will work for you. and everything about Henfield. Published since 2006 To check availability call us on 01273 494002 or email your with around 12,000 reads each month, BN5 is an excellent requirements to [email protected] platform for promoting your business. For our full terms and conditions, go to BN5 in print is supported by a strong social media and web henfieldbn5.co.uk presence. The publication is well respected locally and has become essential for the Henfield community, helping to give your business the credibility it deserves. Local interest | JULY 2020 JULY 2020 | Local interest 4,900 copies printed each month A5 gloss colour in high quality print Royal Mail delivery to 3,950
    [Show full text]
  • 155 04 SD397 NEECA 2 Schedule 19 Appendix A
    Project Title: East Worthing FAS – Teville Stream Hydraulic Study Project Number: IMSO001181 Project Stage: Initial Assessment Environment Agency Project Manager: Contact Details for EAPM: Address: Telephone: E-mail: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM: The Teville Stream lies within the town of Worthing, West Sussex. The River Adur Catchment Flood Management Plan (Capita Symonds, 2008) identified possible areas of flood risk, but did not carry out broadscale modelling of the catchment and instead based it’s assessment of risk on the Flood Zone maps. The CFMP states that the current baseline is insufficient to appropriately determine fluvial flood risk within the system. This project seeks to accurately determine the level of fluvial flood risk within the Teville Stream catchment area. The catchment is densely populated with much of the upper area being culverted and integrated with the surface water of the town. The semi-natural part of the upper watercourse is not very well defined, having several tributary streams and agricultural drainage channels. The main channel is a mixture of culverts and open sections, running under and alongside a pharmaceutical works, an industrial estate, historic landfill sites, a public amenity tip and a sewage works, finally emerging in an open channel which enters Brooklands Lake, a public leisure facility/boating lake occupying the area of the former tidal basin. This freshwater lake is maintained artificially by a terminal control structure at the seaward end, which drains into the sea after passing under the A259 seafront road. Flow from the north is augmented by runoff from the A27 highway and is discharged from a retention structure constructed on one of the tributaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Committee (South) Date: 20Th June 2017
    Planning Committee (South) Date: 20th June 2017 Report by the Head of Development: APPEALS Report run from 04/05/2017 to 07/06/2017 1. Appeals Lodged I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been lodged:- Officer Committee Ref No. Site Date Lodged Recommendation Resolution High Croft Hampers Lane Storrington DC/16/1930 10th May 2017 Refuse Refuse Pulborough West Sussex RH20 3HY 2 Henderson Walk Steyning DC/16/2673 14th May 2017 Refuse West Sussex BN44 3SG Lower Barn Brooks Green Road Coolham DC/16/2427 16th May 2017 Refuse Horsham West Sussex RH13 8GR Steyning Football Club Shooting Field Refuse Prior DC/17/0383 Steyning 18th May 2017 Approval West Sussex BN44 3RQ Chates Cottage Henfield Road Cowfold DC/16/2719 31st May 2017 Refuse Horsham West Sussex RH13 8DU 2. Live Appeals I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals are now in progress: Appeal Officer Committee Ref No. Site Start Date Procedure Recommendation Resolution 9 Freemans Close Billingshurst 23rd May DC/16/2579 Fast Track Refuse West Sussex 2017 RH14 9UQ St Josephs Hall Greyfriars Lane Storrington 24th May DC/14/1515 Written Reps Refuse Pulborough 2017 West Sussex RH20 4HE Chestnut Cottage Water Lane Storrington 23rd May DC/16/1904 Written Reps Refuse Pulborough 2017 West Sussex RH20 3LY High Chaparral London Road Washington 24th May DC/16/1963 Written Reps Refuse Refuse Pulborough 2017 West Sussex RH20 3BP Yew Tree Stud Farm Harbolets Road West
    [Show full text]
  • TARRING FLOOD ACTION GROUP Rain Garden Proposals
    Active Community Fund GRANT APPLICATION FORM Section D: Your funding application Community Group Tarring Flood Action Group SuDs retro solutions to surface water flooding Project Title recommendations from earlier Feasibility study. Description of issues, needs and/or initiatives Within the West Tarring Conservation Area (See attached supplementary paper -map Appendix 1) there are a number of areas that large amounts of water collects on a regular basis, and more importantly, there have been a number of occasions in the recent past (2000, 2012) when flash floods have badly affected the area, resulting in flooding of, and damage to, a number of residential and commercial properties. Tarring High Street, in the conservation area, has had several floods in recent years and old buildings at the south end of the street and at the north end of South Street / Priory Close have suffered in particular. Following discussions at a TFAG Multi-Agency Meeting, the general consensus is that the floods were caused by a number of contributing factors:- • Climate Change impacting on localised intensity of rainfall • An inability of the network of drains and gullies to cope with heavy downpour events • Blocked drains and gullies • An aging, predominantly combined, surface water and sewage system • Discharge of roof water directly on to pavements/roads • Bow-wave surges caused by uncontrolled through-traffic • The influence of the Teville Stream and its confluence with Broadwater Brook, although this factor is subject to debate. • The lack of empirical data on problem areas of pooling and flooding in the Worthing area. • The dominance of a hard landscape and the lack of any ‘natural’ means of absorbing excessive rainwater before it can develop into flooding.
    [Show full text]
  • Worthing Core Strategy?
    Core Strategy April 2011 Foreword Foreword This Core Strategy was adopted by Worthing Borough Council on 12th April 2011. The document, part of the Local Development Framework (LDF), will help guide planning and development in the Borough for the next 15 years and will be used to inform decision making on all planning applications. Regeneration is the key focus of the document with the strategic development at West Durrington and 12 areas of change identified as major regeneration opportunities. The Core Strategy also outlines how development needs will be met with a series of policies on key issues such as housing, employment, retail and environmental protection. An independent examination of the plan was carried out and the Inspector concluded that, ‘There is a clear vision at the heart of the Core Strategy of a thriving, prosperous and healthy town that plays a central role in the wider sub region.’ The document is the result of a number of years of preparation and consultation and we are really pleased that all the hard work has paid off and the Inspector has approved our plan and has confirmed it is deliverable. The Core Strategy is incredibly important, as it helps us work towards delivering a thriving and stronger Borough. Bryan Turner Cabinet Member for Regeneration Adopted Core Strategy April 2011 1 Foreword 2 Adopted Core Strategy April 2011 Contents Section A - Introduction, Context and Vision 1 Introduction 6 2 Characteristics of the Borough 12 3 Issues and Challenges 20 4 The Vision and Strategic Objectives 32 Section B -
    [Show full text]
  • PEIR Chapter 24 Transport
    1 © Wood Group UK Limited 2.24 Volume 2, Chapter 24 Transport Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 24: Transport 2 © Wood Group UK Limited Contents 24. Transport 6 24.1 Introduction 6 24.2 Relevant legislation, policy and other information and guidance 7 Introduction 7 National planning policy 7 Other relevant information and guidance 15 24.3 Consultation and engagement 16 Overview 16 Scoping Opinion 16 Evidence Plan Process (EPP) 21 Informal consultation and further engagement 23 24.4 Scope of the assessment 26 Overview 26 The Proposed Development 26 Spatial scope and Study Area 29 Study Area overlap 32 Temporal scope 32 Potential receptors 33 Potential effects 34 Activities or impacts scoped out of assessment 35 24.5 Methodology for baseline data gathering 36 Overview 36 Desk study 37 Site surveys 39 Data limitations 40 24.6 Baseline conditions 41 Study Area 1 – onshore 41 Baseline traffic flows 48 Existing accident record 51 Study Area 2 – onshore impacts of offshore works 57 24.7 Future baseline 61 Study Area 1 – Onshore works 61 Study Area 2 – Onshore impacts of offshore works 62 24.8 Basis for PEIR assessment 63 Maximum design scenario 63 The Proposed Development – construction phase – onshore works 67 The Proposed Development – operation and maintenance phase – onshore impacts of offshore works 72 The Proposed Development – decommissioning phase – onshore works 72 Embedded environmental measures 74 24.9 Methodology for PEIR assessment 79 Introduction 79 Rampion 2 PEIR. Volume 2, Chapter 24: Transport 3 © Wood Group UK Limited Methodology
    [Show full text]