FEASIBILITY STUDY Kepax Pedestrian/Cycle Bridge, Worcester Prepared for Worcestershire County Council & Worcester City Council June 2018 Red Hill House 227 London Road Worcester, WR5 2JG +44 1905 361 361 Document History Client Name: Worcestershire County Council & Worcester City Council CH2M Reference: 694944.BA.23.00 This document has been issued and amended as follows: Version Date Description Created By Checked By Approved By 1.0 19/06/2018 FINAL LB MB AJR II Contents Section Page Document History ........................................................................................................................ ii Contents ..................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ v Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Feasibility .................................................................................................................................... 2 Structure Location...................................................................................................................... 2 East side ........................................................................................................................ 2 West side ...................................................................................................................... 4 Constraints and Requirements .................................................................................................. 5 Ecology and Environment ............................................................................................. 5 Existing Services ............................................................................................................ 5 Land Ownership ............................................................................................................ 6 Transport Planning ........................................................................................................ 7 Loading and Headroom................................................................................................. 8 Parapet Height and Structure Width ............................................................................ 8 Approach Gradients, Landings and Path Alignment ..................................................... 9 Construction Issues .................................................................................................................... 9 Interfacing with Existing Infrastructure ........................................................................ 9 Site Access ................................................................................................................... 12 Traffic Management and Congestion ......................................................................... 16 Flood Risk .................................................................................................................... 16 Geoenvironmental Issues ........................................................................................... 18 Design Criteria .......................................................................................................................... 19 Span Arrangements and Cross Sections ..................................................................... 19 Superstructure ............................................................................................................ 19 Substructure ............................................................................................................... 23 Aesthetics .................................................................................................................... 24 Details and Finishes .................................................................................................... 24 Maintenance ............................................................................................................... 25 Health and Safety ........................................................................................................ 26 Options Comparison ................................................................................................................ 29 Summary of Construction Cost ................................................................................................ 31 Recommendation for Further Investigations ........................................................................... 31 Summary of Preferred Options and Recommendations ......................................................... 32 Appendix A – Ecology Assessment ................................................................................................. i Appendix B – C2 Plans .................................................................................................................. ii Appendix C – Preliminary Geo-Environmental Study .................................................................... iii Appendix D – Example Drawings ................................................................................................. iv III Table(s) Table 1 - Advantages and Disadvantages Summary of Location Options Table 2 - Summary of potential pollutant pathways to be considered in a Piling Risk Assessment Table 3 - Structure Form Advantages and Disadvantages Table 4 - Options Comparison Figure(s) Figure 1 - Location Plan source: GIS2 Figure 2 - Gheluvelt Park Historic Map (Epoch 1922-1969) source: GIS2 Figure 3 - Historic Landfill sites map shown in pink hatch source: data.gov.uk Figure 4 - Land Ownership Plan Figure 5 - Public Rights of ways and footpaths Figure 6 – Northern Crossing Point at Hallow Road source: Google.co.uk Figure 7 - Southern Crossing Point at Henwick Road source: Google.co.uk Figure 8 - Plan of Eastern Access Routes Figure 9 - View over pipe culvert Figure 10 - Footpath between overhead cable pylon and ditch drain Figure 11 - Flood levels taken from Flood Information Service on Gov.uk Figure 12 - Flood Map source: Flood Map for Planning Service Figure 13 – Example of a Cable Stayed Bridge - Diglis Bridge Figure 14 – Example of a Truss bridge - Arley Footbridge Figure 15 – Example of a Tied Arch Bridge – Abbey Bridge Figure 16 & 17 - Sustainable Urban Drainage Examples; Infiltration trench and Infiltration basin respectively IV Acronyms and Abbreviations WCC Worcestershire County Council PEA Preliminary Ecology Assessment WPD Western Power Distribution STW Severn Trent Water SUD Sustainable Urban Drainage System SSSI Sites of Special Scientific Interest V Introduction CH2M have been commissioned by Worcestershire County Council to conduct a feasibility study for a proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge across the River Severn on behalf of Worcester City Council. The location for the proposed structure has been determined by Worcester City and Worcestershire County Councils to improve walking and cycling routes to the north of Worcester city in accordance with the plans set out in Worcestershire’s Local Transport Plan (LTP) 2018-2030. It is envisaged that a new east-west link and pedestrian/cycle crossing of the River Severn would have utility value with the nearby residential areas, university on the west and open green spaces being linked. There is opportunity to create circular leisure walks and bike rides along the river and it is hoped that a new crossing would encourage greater utilisation of the green fields to the west and create new attractive transport links to the university and city centre. The nearest existing pedestrian crossing of the River Severn is Sabrina Bridge approximately 1-mile South of the proposed location and the nearest northern river crossing is at Holt Fleet approximately 5 miles away. Two locations have been considered for the location of the proposed structure as discussed briefly below in Table 1: Location Advantages Disadvantages Location A Existing connections Construction Access Restrictions Gheluvelt Park/St. Johns Close to centres of population Landfill site and contaminated land Landownership held by Local Connections to west bank problematic Authorities Location B Good access for construction Ecological concerns in SSSI area Northwick Potential for further links Negotiations required with private land owners at a higher cost Opportunity to incorporate public education regarding wildlife and Limited connectivity on west bank ecology Table 1 - Advantages and Disadvantages Summary of Location Options Following a review of the Pre-feasibility Study conducted by Worcestershire County Council, Location “A” has the least design and construction constraints and can be easily tied into the existing footpath network in Gheluvelt Park. This report will focus on the feasibility of Location “A” only. There are many constraints to consider in relation to the precise location of the crossing, these will be discussed in more detail within the following sections. 1 Feasibility Structure Location The proposed location of the structure is to be between Gheluvelt Park, on the east side of the river, and the disused landfill site, formally owned by Kepax, on the west side of the river and to the north of the City centre, Figure 1. Proposed Bridge Location Figure 1 - Location Plan source: GIS2 East side Gheluvelt Park is owned by Worcester City Council and is