DOCSLIB.ORG

Solent Waterfront Sites Register Sep 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1. Key Waterfront Sites in the Solent This Waterfront Sites Register accompanies the report titled 'Maritime Futures: Solent Waterfront Sites" by AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Limited, published on 16-09-15 Contents Sheet number Sheet name 1 Contents 2 Introduction 3 Overview Map of Waterfront Sites 4 Definitions, Assumptions and Sources of Information 5 Register of Waterfront Sites Research by AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Limited Prepared for Solent Local Economic Partnership Version Date Prepared Reviewed Approved Draft v1 8th May 2015 Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Senior Consultant Project Manager Project Manager Draft v2 3rd June 2015 Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Senior Consultant Project Manager Project Manager Final 6th August 2015 Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Senior Consultant Project Manager Project Manager 2. Introduction to the Study 1.1 Introduction 1.1 AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Limited was commissioned by the Solent Local Economic Partnership (LEP) to develop an evidence base of key waterfront employment sites in the Solent region and inform planning policy decision making on waterfront site retention. 1.2 This register of waterfront sites and their assets accompanies the report titled 'Maritime Futures: Solent Waterfront Sites" by AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Limited, published on 16-09-15 That report provides information on: - The study context - The study scope - Approach - An overview of key findings of the register - Explanation of the Typologies and Relative Importance levels and how they could inform thinking on policy direction and investment strategies. 1.3 The register is a key output of a research which has two main objectives: To identify 1. the strategic waterfront employment sites in the Solent LEP region that support (or are designated to support) marine-manufacturing, defence, port-related or leisure marine uses; and 2. the underlying rationale for: why at a macro level, the retention of marine employment waterfront access sites are vital for the prosperity of the sector and the wider economy of the region; and why the retention of each individual site is advantageous to the local economy. 1.4 The waterfront sites register is aimed at supporting the marine and maritime sector in the Solent LEP region by, amongst other things: - Providing a greater understanding of why waterfront employment sites are key to the local marine & maritime sector and wider Solent economy - Highlighting specific key waterfront employment sites - Providing local authorities with evidence when considering planning application decisions - Providing a reference for potential inward investment enquiries 3. Overview Map of Waterfront Sites and Inset Maps 4. Register of Waterfront Sites: Information Presented Register Structure and Definitions The structure of the register is set out below. For each field we provide an explanation or definition of the data capatured and presented and explain any assumptions used. In addition to the explanations made below a small number of entries have the following symbols: * Unable to access site due to security / access constraints ** Data not sourced n/a Not applicable Yes - No Y Yes N No Relative Importance Location Existing Site Characteristics Strategic Access: Road or Rail Navigational Access Development Prospects Flood Risk Site Allocations / Policy Designations Employment Capacity Site Typology (Based on current use) Evidence of Clustering of Proportion of Mean High Water Mean High Water Neap Mean Low Water Neap Mean Low Water Marine and Maritime Size of Strategic Road Freight Rail Public Transport Water Depth Above at Permanent Water Location of measure Site Area Current Land Use Marine / Maritime Key Site Occupiers Building Quality Site Quality On Site Assets (Of relevance to the Marine and Maritime Sector) Servicing of Site Spring Tide Tide Tide Spring Tide Water Frontage Land / Buildings Not in Current Use Area built on Opportunities for Intensification Investment Requirements Within flood risk area Employment (B-use class activities) European / National Local Businesses and Related Buildings Access Access Access CD Access for MHWS and MHWN Business Activities (MHWS) (MHWN) (MLWN) (MLWS) Business Activities on Site • Road side Intensification Prospects: Risk level: Site Number Site Name Address Post Code Local Authority Cluster Indicative Current Job Capacity of Sites Proportion of Additional Comments loading/unloading • n/a • High Additional Proportion of Proportion of • Very Good • Very Good • Direct Metres Metres Metres Metres Tier 1 = Prime Site Estimated area Yes (Y) Name of main Medium- on Site Assets: Yes (Y) • Off road Adjacent to the Land Yes (Y) Estimated Proportion of Land Built-On • No Comment on capital investment • Medium Typologies 1 to 8 as per comments on % Small-sized Large-sized • Good • Good • Indirect Describe (at closest place (at closest place (at closest place (at closest place Reference place (Sqm) (Not including MOD, Southampton or Tier 2 = Secondary (sqm) No (N) occupier(s) sized Brief description of No (N) loading/unloading • (Metres) No (N) (Metres) (%) • Low required to improve site conditions. • Low Report land use Buildings Buildings • Poor • Poor • No Access reference) reference) reference) reference) Portsmouth ports, Commercial Ferries, oil Tier 3 = Tertiary Buildings assets: Loading Bays • Medium • Very Low • Very Poor • Very Poor refineries or Marinas) • Not dedicated • High • None Vacant Land (%) Land Vacant Observed Vacant Buildings (%) Buildings Vacant Observed Observed Derelict Buildings (%) Buildings Derelict Observed Commercial Ferry / Port / Ferry Commercial Activities Defence &Recreation Leisure Marine Repair and Building Boat Manufacturing Component Marine Chain) (Supply Development and Research Office General Industry General Storage Open Warehousing Waste / Minerals / Aggregate Retail Residential Leisure / Recreation / Community Utilities Generis Sui Derelict and Land Vacant Buildings Quay Pier / Pontoons / Moorings / Jetty Slipway (Jib/Tower) Cranes Fixed Lifts / Hoists Boat Mobile Rails Boat Storage Dry Covered Storage Dry Open Facilities Transfer Freight Facilities Cargo Container Facilities Cargo Ro-Ro Facilities Cargo Bulk Dock Dry Facility Maintenance Other Land Employment Authority Local Policy Access Water or Designation or Mixed-use Authority Local Designation Policy Regeneration (SPA) Area Protection Special (RAMSAR) site Ramsar Conservation of Area Special (SAC) Interest Scientific Special of Site (SSSI) Environmental Local All Designations Unique identifier. - - - Local authority The cluster within Area of land Land use categories describe how the site is mainly, currently used. Includes identifier for vacant land. - An estimate of the Whether the site (not the As observed from site Defined as Defined as Defined as units An assessment of building quality based on An assessment of the quality of the environment within Assets identified from the field survey of sites and supporting desk-based research. Provides specifics on Assessment of a Whether a site Description of a General description Greatest depth of water Yes = whether the Depth in metres at Mean Depth in metres at Mean Depth in metres at Mean Depth in metres at Mean The Admiralty Chart Data Length of the Does not include Proportion of Estimated proportion Estimated total area Proportion of the site which is Intensification is judged to be a Comment on potential investment Flood risk is identified by the Environment Sites designated for employment land (B1a/b, As per policy designations High level estimate of the potential number of See report for explanation See report for explanation area within which which the site falls. within site Based upon field survey of sites and supporting desk-based research. area of the site used surrounding area) includes surveys. units units 10,000 sqft +, the following: the site and its immediate surroundings: assets where identified site's strategic has direct access site's access to of servicing of site: accessible from site greatest depth of water High Water Spring tide High Water Neaps tide Low Water Neap tide Low Water Spring tide used for this research site's perimeter in temporary uses buildings on the site of vacant floorspace of building footprints. taken up by building footprints. function of the following: required to improve the site's utilisation Agency's classification of risk of flooding B1c, B2 or B8 use classes) or with water provided by local authorities, jobs that the site could currently support. In The order of sites runs from east to the site falls. Clustering has boundary. by marine and business activities which <1,000 sqft, 1,000 sqft + to as observed and relevant to note e.g. access to the trunk to the freight rail public transport road site, off road taking into account accessible from the reduced to Chart Datum reduced to Chart Datum reduced to Chart Datum reduced to Chart Datum measures MHWS, metres, which such as car which are not fit for in buildings which Includes derelict This estimate provides an • Land which is underused (including for marine and maritime employment from Rivers and Sea. access; as per policy designations provided this field flags all sites which absence of any data at a site specific level this west (Havant, Portsmouth, Gosport, been defined Measured in maritime support marine and maritime as observed <10,000 sqft, using aerial • Very Good: buildings in immaculate state, • Very
Recommended publications
  • Download Network

    Download Network

    Milton Keynes, London Birmingham and the North Victoria Watford Junction London Brentford Waterloo Syon Lane Windsor & Shepherd’s Bush Eton Riverside Isleworth Hounslow Kew Bridge Kensington (Olympia) Datchet Heathrow Chiswick Vauxhall Airport Virginia Water Sunnymeads Egham Barnes Bridge Queenstown Wraysbury Road Longcross Sunningdale Whitton TwickenhamSt. MargaretsRichmondNorth Sheen BarnesPutneyWandsworthTown Clapham Junction Staines Ashford Feltham Mortlake Wimbledon Martins Heron Strawberry Earlsfield Ascot Hill Croydon Tramlink Raynes Park Bracknell Winnersh Triangle Wokingham SheppertonUpper HallifordSunbury Kempton HamptonPark Fulwell Teddington Hampton KingstonWick Norbiton New Oxford, Birmingham Winnersh and the North Hampton Court Malden Thames Ditton Berrylands Chertsey Surbiton Malden Motspur Reading to Gatwick Airport Chessington Earley Bagshot Esher TolworthManor Park Hersham Crowthorne Addlestone Walton-on- Bath, Bristol, South Wales Reading Thames North and the West Country Camberley Hinchley Worcester Beckenham Oldfield Park Wood Park Junction South Wales, Keynsham Trowbridge Byfleet & Bradford- Westbury Brookwood Birmingham Bath Spaon-Avon Newbury Sandhurst New Haw Weybridge Stoneleigh and the North Reading West Frimley Elmers End Claygate Farnborough Chessington Ewell West Byfleet South New Bristol Mortimer Blackwater West Woking West East Addington Temple Meads Bramley (Main) Oxshott Croydon Croydon Frome Epsom Taunton, Farnborough North Exeter and the Warminster Worplesdon West Country Bristol Airport Bruton Templecombe
  • MOD Heritage Report 2011 to 2013

    MOD Heritage Report 2011 to 2013

    MOD Heritage Report 2011-2013 Heritage in the Ministry of Defence Cover photograph Barrow Clump, Crown Copyright CONTENTS Introduction 4 Profile of the MOD Historic Estate 5 Case Study: RAF Spadeadam 6 World Heritage Sites 7 Condition of the MOD Historic Estate 8 Scheduled Monuments 8 Listed Buildings 9 Case Study: Sandhurst 10 Heritage at Risk 11 Case Study: Otterburn 12 Estate Development and Rationalisation 13 Disposals 13 Strategy, Policy and Governance 14 Management Plans, Heritage Assessments 14 Historic Crashed Aircraft 15 Case Study: Operation Nightingale 16 Conclusion 17 Annex A: New Listed Building Designations 19 New Scheduled Monument Designations 20 Annex B: Heritage at Risk on the MOD Estate 21 Annex C: Monuments at Risk Progress Report 24 MOD Heritage Report 2011-13 3 Introduction 1. The MOD has the largest historic estate within Government and this report provides commentary on its size, diversity, condition and management. This 5th biennial report covers the financial years 11/12 and 12/13 and fulfils the requirement under the DCMS/ English Heritage (EH) Protocol for the Care of the Government Estate 2009 and Scottish Ministers Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP). It summarises the work and issues arising in the past two years and progress achieved both in the UK and overseas. 2. As recognised in the 2011 English Heritage Biennial Conservation Report, the MOD has fully adopted the Protocol and the requirements outlined in the SHEP. The requirements for both standards have been embedded into MOD business and reflected within its strategies, policies, roles and responsibilities, governance, management systems and plans and finally data systems.
  • Peat Database Results Hampshire

    Peat Database Results Hampshire

    Baker's Rithe, Hampshire Record ID 29 Authors Year Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 6926 1041 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Preserved timbers (oak and yew) on peat ledge. One oak stump in situ. Peat layer 0.15-0.26 m deep [thick?]. Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available -1 m OD Yes Notes 14C details ID 12 Laboratory code R-24993/2 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description [-1 m OD] Oak stump Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3735 ± 60 BP 2310-1950 cal. BC Notes Stump BB Bibliographic reference Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 'Our changing coast; a survey of the intertidal archaeology of Langstone Harbour, Hampshire', Hampshire CBA Research Report 12.4 Coastal peat resource database (Hazell, 2008) Page 1 of 86 Bury Farm (Bury Marshes), Hampshire Record ID 641 Authors Year Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 3820 1140 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available Yes Notes 14C details ID 491 Laboratory code Beta-93195 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description SU 3820 1140 -0.16 to -0.11 m OD Transgressive contact. Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3080 ± 60 BP 3394-3083 cal. BP Notes Dark brown humified peat with some turfa. Bibliographic reference Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 'Stratigraphic architecture, relative sea-level, and models of estuary development in southern England: new data from Southampton Water' in ' and estuarine environments: sedimentology, geomorphology and geoarchaeology', (ed.s) Pye, K.
  • Electric Field Signatures of Ships in Southampton Water

    Electric Field Signatures of Ships in Southampton Water

    f1.cY' /SSN 0/4/ OIi/4. Journu! 01 thr SociUl'f;lr Undmratcr Techno!ogl', Vo/. 24. No. 2. pp. 51-{)() , 1999!2000 ltndc ec no ogy GI•• caD. Electric Field Signatures 01 Ships in A. 'i Southampton Water u .c'e u GI M. VARNEY, S. BAILEY and M. SIDDALL I- Sclzool of' Ocean and Eartlz Seiences, Univers/tl' 0/ Soutlzampton. Soutlzampton Oceanograplzy Centre, European Wal'. Soutlzampton SOI43ZH. UK Abstract reasons, with an emphasis on acoustic (and recently, non-acoustic) methods far detecting Continuous measurements of electric poten- (and hiding) ships, submarines and mines. tials were taken from a fixed point at the Simulations of underwater electric fields near entrance to Southampton Water, adjacent to ship hulls have been reported by Harrison [9]. the Solent. This provided a regular and wide spectrum of electric field sources for study. Southampton Water has a considerable move- 2. Introduction ment of vessel traffic entering and leaving the Port of Southampton, and a significant tidal All sea-going vessels emit an electric current into movement each day. Underwater electric the surrounding seawater. Steel hulls may be con- fields were measured adjacent to a shipping sidered as large floating corrosion cells-complex channel of approximately 7 m depth. Analysis in nature because of the presence of many dissim- of signals allowed various signatures and ilar metals. To minimise corrosion, it is universal sources of electrical noise to be identified. practice to install cathodic protection systems on Regular ferry traffic allows the reprod ucibi Iity ships. The 'impressed cathodic current system' of the sensor response to be examined.
  • Naval Dockyards Society

    Naval Dockyards Society

    20TH CENTURY NAVAL DOCKYARDS: DEVONPORT AND PORTSMOUTH CHARACTERISATION REPORT Naval Dockyards Society Devonport Dockyard Portsmouth Dockyard Title page picture acknowledgements Top left: Devonport HM Dockyard 1951 (TNA, WORK 69/19), courtesy The National Archives. Top right: J270/09/64. Photograph of Outmuster at Portsmouth Unicorn Gate (23 Oct 1964). Reproduced by permission of Historic England. Bottom left: Devonport NAAFI (TNA, CM 20/80 September 1979), courtesy The National Archives. Bottom right: Portsmouth Round Tower (1843–48, 1868, 3/262) from the north, with the adjoining rich red brick Offices (1979, 3/261). A. Coats 2013. Reproduced with the permission of the MoD. Commissioned by The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England of 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn, London, EC1N 2ST, ‘English Heritage’, known after 1 April 2015 as Historic England. Part of the NATIONAL HERITAGE PROTECTION COMMISSIONS PROGRAMME PROJECT NAME: 20th Century Naval Dockyards Devonport and Portsmouth (4A3.203) Project Number 6265 dated 7 December 2012 Fund Name: ARCH Contractor: 9865 Naval Dockyards Society, 44 Lindley Avenue, Southsea, PO4 9NU Jonathan Coad Project adviser Dr Ann Coats Editor, project manager and Portsmouth researcher Dr David Davies Editor and reviewer, project executive and Portsmouth researcher Dr David Evans Devonport researcher David Jenkins Project finance officer Professor Ray Riley Portsmouth researcher Sponsored by the National Museum of the Royal Navy Published by The Naval Dockyards Society 44 Lindley Avenue, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO4 9NU, England navaldockyards.org First published 2015 Copyright © The Naval Dockyards Society 2015 The Contractor grants to English Heritage a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, perpetual, irrevocable and royalty-free licence to use, copy, reproduce, adapt, modify, enhance, create derivative works and/or commercially exploit the Materials for any purpose required by Historic England.
  • SANITARY SURVEY REPORT the Solent 2013

    SANITARY SURVEY REPORT the Solent 2013

    EC Regulation 854/2004 CLASSIFICATION OF BIVALVE MOLLUSC PRODUCTION AREAS IN ENGLAND AND WALES SANITARY SURVEY REPORT The Solent 2013 SANITARY SURVEY REPORT SOLENT Cover photo: Oyster sampling in the Solent CONTACTS: For enquires relating to this report or For enquires relating to policy matters on further information on the the implementation of sanitary surveys in implementation of sanitary surveys in England: England and Wales: Simon Kershaw Beverley Küster Food Safety Group Hygiene Delivery Branch Cefas Weymouth Laboratory Enforcement and Delivery Division Barrack Road, Food Standards Agency The Nothe Aviation House Weymouth 125 Kingsway Dorset London DT43 8UB WC2B 6NH +44 (0) 1305 206600 +44 (0) 20 7276 8000 [email protected] [email protected] © Crown copyright, 2013. Native oysters and other bivalve species in the Solent 2 SANITARY SURVEY REPORT SOLENT STATEMENT OF USE: This report provides a sanitary survey for bivalve molluscs in the Solent, as required under EC Regulation 854/2004. It provides an appropriate hygiene classification zoning and monitoring plan based on the best available information with detailed supporting evidence. The Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science (Cefas) undertook this work on behalf of the Food Standards Agency (FSA). CONSULTATION: Consultee Date of consultation Date of response Environment Agency 19/04/2013 - Isle of Wight Council 19/04/2013 - New Forest District Council 19/04/2013 - Portsmouth Port Health 19/04/2013 - Southampton Port Health 19/04/2013 - Southern IFCA 19/04/2013 21/05/2013 Southern Water 19/04/2013 - RECOMMENDED BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE: Cefas, 2013. Sanitary survey of the Solent. Cefas report on behalf of the Food Standards Agency, to demonstrate compliance with the requirements for classification of bivalve mollusc production areas in England and Wales under of EC Regulation No.
  • North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Coastal Sub-Cells 5A, 5B and 5C

    North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Coastal Sub-Cells 5A, 5B and 5C

    North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Coastal sub-cells 5A, 5B and 5C Selsey Bill to Hurst Spit, including Chichester, Langstone and Portsmouth Harbours & Southampton Water North Solent Shoreline Management Plan New Forest District Council Coastal Group Town Hall Avenue Road Lymington Hampshire SO41 9ZG Tel 023 8028 5818 www.northsolentsmp.co.uk Document Title: North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Reference: NSSMP CPW1839 Status: Final Date: 16 December 2010 Approved By: A. Colenutt (Project Manager) New Forest District Council have prepared this plan and the supporting appendices on behalf of and in conjunction with the members of the North Solent SMP Client Steering Group. This document should be referenced as: New Forest District Council (2010), North Solent Shoreline Management Plan North Solent Shoreline Management Plan North Solent SMP Volume 1 including Policy Statements & Action Plan Appendix A SMP Development Volume 2 Appendix B Stakeholder Involvement Appendix C Baseline Process Understanding Volume 3 Appendix D Thematic Review Volume 4 Appendix E Issues and Objectives Evaluation Appendix F Initial Policy Appraisal and Scenario Development Appendix G Scenario Testing Appendix H Economic Appraisal and Sensitivity Testing Volume 5 Appendix I Metadatabase and Bibliography Database Appendix J Appropriate Assessment Appendix K Strategic Environmental Assessment Addendum to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Appendix L Water Framework Directive North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Contents Page No 1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1
  • Lepe to Fawley History - Rosemary Devereux-Jones (July 2019)

    Lepe to Fawley History - Rosemary Devereux-Jones (July 2019)

    Summary of Historical Potential Lepe to Fawley history - Rosemary Devereux-Jones (July 2019) Statement of Historical Potential for Lepe to Fawley This trail paths to the east of the Dark Water River are shown on Thomas Milne’s map of 1791 and shown as rights of way, including the paths to the west in Exbury, on the OS map of 1810. The Cadland Estate is owned by R Drummonds Esq – large portions of this land is later sold to construction of Fawley Refinery. The trail covers areas extensively used during WW2 and for D-Day preparation and activity. An area on Badminston Common includes the holding tank area for PLUTO used during WW2 for fuel supplies. Near Mopley pond are the remains of the pump house used in the PLUTO operation. There are several remains of WW2 military installations throughout the trail area. The trail includes areas of ancient woodland at Chale Wood on path 13 and Calshot National Nature Reserves and SSSi on path 4 which is nationally important for overwintering waders and wildfowl. Indicated on the ArcGIS map is an ironworks on path 503 on the River Dark Water. There is the site of a brickworks, brick kiln and claypits on Whitefield Rough, mentioned in the 1841 census, next to clay pits to the south of this footpath. The bricks are said to have been used around Exbury and Beaulieu. Mills are indicated at Mopley and Stanswood on Taylor’s map 1759 (paths 12a and 10) although the Mills archive mentions only Stanswood watermill. There are stories of smuggling with the Mopley area being used for storage of contraband.
  • Annexes to Maibinvreport 23/2017

    Annexes to Maibinvreport 23/2017

    Annex A Southampton port passage plan Part 1 form PassagePassage PlanPlan PartPart 11 Southampton Ship’s Name: Date: No: Ship’s Details Tugs Pilotage Details Ship’s Agent No. Ordered? Actual Boarding Point Actual Draught Confirmed? Chargeable Board Point DWT Tug 1 (name) Boarding Time/Date GT Tug 2 (name) Sailing Time/Date NT Tug 3 (name) Landing Point LOA Tug 4 (name) Landing Time/Date Vessel Defects Y / N See below Eng. Test Astern Y / N Berth: SSTQ PSTQ Depth: Tidal Information UKA HW Portsmouth ( %) Nab Channel LW Portsmouth Thorn Channel HW Portsmouth ( %) North Channel LW Southampton ( ) Docks 1st HW Southampton Nab Rise at hrs m 2nd HW Southampton Minimum UKA to be expected on Passage LW Southampton ( ) Location: m Tidal Calculations Passage Times Inwards Outwards Time of LW Draught S Nab Berth Time height req’d UKA Nab Dock Hd Interval from LW Depth Warner Hook Predicted Ht of LW Datum N Stur Lepe Rise from LW ( ) Ht of Tide req’d P C P C Height of Tide Met correction Lepe N Stur Met Correction Corrected Ht of tide Hook Warner Corrected Ht of Tide LW height NW Net Nab Datum Req’d rise ( ) Berth S Nab Depth Interval from LW Radio Channels Checked Y / N Draught Time of LW Weather Forecast UKA Earliest / Latest Time Discussed? Y / N Attached? Y / N Hours Calshot West Bramble Prince Consort C Anchorage Warner Nab Channel Hours 6B 022’ T 1.8 052’ T 2.0 084’ T 2.5 103’ T 1.2 122’ T 0.6 085’ T 0.7 6B 5B 038’ T 1.0 054’ T 2.1 090’ T 2.7 109’ T 1.6 129’ T 1.2 078’ T 1.6 5B 4B 070’ T 0.4 055’ T 2.0 091’ T 2.7 114’ T 1.7 129’ T 1.3 078’
  • Solent Waterfront Strategy

    Solent Waterfront Strategy

    Solent Waterfront Strategy Volume One : Report Adams Hendry Consulting Ltd, WS Atkins & Marina Projects Ltd December 2007 Adams Hendry Consulting Ltd Solent Waterfront Strategy Volume One : Report Adams Hendry Consulting Ltd, WS Atkins & Marina Projects Ltd December 2007 Adams Hendry Consulting Ltd TITLE: Solent Waterfront Strategy CLIENT: SEEDA PROJECT NO: SEEDA/718 REPORT NO: SEEDA/718/071211/JP/01 ADAMS HENDRY CONSULTING LTD RTPI Planning Consultancy of the Year 2006 7 St Peter Street, Winchester, SO23 8BW 01962 877414 T 01962 877415 F info@ adamshendry.co.uk E www.adamshendry.co.uk W Name Signature Date Author Philip Rowell December 2007 Checked by Martin Hendry December 2007 Certified to ISO9001 Standard ISO 9001 Registration Number Q10324 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 8 The Consultant Team and the Steering Group 8 Our approach 8 2. SETTING THE SCENE 10 Defence and shipbuilding 11 The Port of Southampton 11 Other Ports 14 Marine Leisure Industries 15 3. THE EXISTING POLICY AND STRATEGY CONTEXT 17 4. EXISTING MARINE ACTIVITY 22 Commercial Port Activities 22 Defence Activities 23 Marine Leisure and Recreation Activities 24 Ship and Boat Building 24 Safety 25 Research and Education 25 Skills Development 26 MEMPS 26 Marine Industries Centre of Vocational Excellence 26 Regional Resource Centre (RRC) 26 Marine infrastructure 27 Land infrastructure 28 Rail 28 Road 29 Definition of marine industry 30 Standard Industrial Codes 32 Empirically Based Definition of Marine Activity 33 5. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF MARINE ACTIVITIES 35 Introduction
  • Portsmouth Harbour: the Geography of Defence! STUDENT INTRODUCTION Portsmouth Is a City on the South Coast of England

    Portsmouth Harbour: the Geography of Defence! STUDENT INTRODUCTION Portsmouth Is a City on the South Coast of England

    KS3 Geography 111103 Coasts: Interactions Portsmouth Harbour: The Geography of Defence! STUDENT INTRODUCTION Portsmouth is a city on the south coast of England. With a population of 205,400 (2011 census), it is one of the south coast’s major urban areas. In fact, together with the wider built up area along this stretch of coast, which includes the city of Southampton, it forms a single population centre that is larger than other large urban ‘giants’ in England like Liverpool or Newcastle; it is a pretty important place! There has been a settlement here since Roman times, where a settlement called ‘Portus Adurni’ was built in the 3rd Century in what is now a suburb of the northwest of the city. Before your trip on Wightlink Ferries, you are going to find out a little bit more about both the physical and human geography of Portsmouth and the wider PRE-VISIT Solent area. TASKS Firstly, let’s make sure that you understand these terms. Using the words in the word box (each is only used once – cross them of as you use them!), complete each sentence to define each term: 1. Physical Geography is… 2. Human Geography is… Include is nature and systems industry it natural cause landscapes to and how over change topics rivers and weather time migration at is people processes it topics population like /climate and settlements coasts develop concerned covers with tourism about natural looks and Well done – you should now be happy with these key terms. You are now going to do a little bit of map-detective work, and thinking, to fnd out more about the specifc physical and human geography of the area.
  • Timetable Consultation December 2022 2 | Timetable Consultation December 2022

    Timetable Consultation December 2022 2 | Timetable Consultation December 2022

    Timetable consultation December 2022 2 | Timetable Consultation December 2022 Contents 3 Foreword 4 About this consultation South Western Railway 5 who we are and what we do 7 About Network Rail 8 Context 12 Passenger forecasts Route by route specifications 16 Main Suburban routes 21 Windsor routes 27 Mainline routes 14 34 West of England routes 37 Island Line routes 37 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads 37 Heart of Wessex 39 Outcomes 41 FAQs 42 Feedback questions and how you can respond 43 What happens next? Some images in this document were taken before Covid. 3 | Timetable Consultation December 2022 Foreword We are acutely aware that in the past we have responded to ever growing customer demand by increasing the number of trains on the South Western Railway (SWR) network, often at the expense of the performance and reliability of our services. But, as we emerge from the Covid-19 pandemic, we have a unique opportunity to build back a better railway for the future. Since March 2020, we have been supported by SWR, Network Rail and the Department for the Government to run a reduced service that has Transport are therefore undertaking a strategic kept key workers moving. This period has shown review of our timetable. We are proposing changes that our performance improves significantly when which, while resulting in a slight reduction in we are able to run fewer trains while still meeting frequencies, will still deliver capacity at 93% of customer demand for our services. Customer pre-Covid levels and improve significantly on the satisfaction has also increased in this period.