DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Is the Water Quality in the River Doe Lea So Poor?”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

“Why is the water quality in the River Doe Lea so poor?” Dissertation submitted as part requirement for the Degree of Master of Science in Urban Water Engineering and Management By: Mark Stevens Supervisor: Prof. David Lerner The University of Sheffield Department of Civil & Structural Engineering September 2011 Declaration: Mark Stevens certifies that all the material contained within this document is his own work except where it is clearly referenced to others. _____________________ ii ABSTRACT: STEVENS, M. 2011. Why is the water quality in the River Doe Lea so poor? MSc Urban Water Engineering and Management Dissertation, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, University of Sheffield The Doe Lea River has a long history of pollution issues which once earned it the reputation of the most polluted river in Europe. Water quality has succumbed to the pressures of mining heritage, industry, agriculture, urban growth and major highways which dominate the catchment. The catchment has a poor chemical and biological classification status with the Environment Agency and ecological statues varies between poor and bad. Conditions of poor flow are often observed, which intensify water quality issues. In order to determine the reasons for the degradation of surface water quality, a project has been devised to take a snapshot of the water chemistry. Fifty water samples were collected simultaneously across the whole catchment and repeated for each season of the year. Analysis of these samples has developed understanding of pressures and influences that are contributing to water quality degradation. Via a mass balance analysis, it has been possible to locate particular areas of concern, determine sources and quantities of pollution and devise land management options to alleviate pollution stresses. Significant pressures have been determined as the result of diffuse runoff from agricultural and urban landuses, mine related discharges and discharges from sewage treatment works. Considerable influxes of nitrate and phosphate provide the greatest water quality stresses and poorest quality waters are located in the lower urbanised reaches of the catchment. Metalliferous discharges from ex-colliery sites are observed in numerous locations and industrial polluters are pinpointed. Solutions are suggested and further study identified to improve the water quality in the river to meet the water framework directive targets of 2015. Key words: Doe Lea, river, analysis, catchment, water quality, diffuse pollution, mine drainage, nitrates, phosphates, sampling, mass balance, landuse iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Thanks must go to my dissertation supervisor, Prof. David Lerner whose guidance and input has enabled me to complete this project. Also the assistance of Andrew Fairburn in the University laboratories has been invaluable both in analysing the samples and teaching me the use of the water quality analysis equipment. A special acknowledgment must go to Tina Bardill of the National Trust without whose help the project would not run. Credit for organisation and co-ordination of the sampling events must go to Tina who has also proved an invaluable resource of local knowledge. Thanks are also extended to the fifty volunteers that joined in with each Doe Lea Dip. Without their time, a snapshot of the catchment simply would not be possible. iv CONTENTS: Content: Page Number: Abstract iii Definition of terms vii Summary of figures viii 1.0 Chapter of introduction 01 1.1 An introduction to the Doe Lea River catchment 01 1.2 Aims and objectives of the project 03 1.3 Water quality in the Doe Lea and the WFD standards 04 1.4 What knowledge is available from previous studies of the Doe Lea? 06 1.5 What parameters are being investigated to determine water quality? 10 1.6 Potential problems and anticipated errors in the data 10 1.7 Conceptual interactions 12 2.0 Methodology of data collection and analysis 14 2.1 The Doe Lea catchment and sampling locations 14 2.2 Times and dates of data collection 15 2.3 Laboratory techniques and sample analysis 16 2.4 Quality of and confidence in collected and analysed data 17 2.5 Hypothesis and expectations of sampling data 18 2.6 Representation of collected data 18 2.7 Additional field data collection 19 3.0 Analysis of Doe Lea River samples 20 3.1 Comparison of samples with EA river monitoring data 20 3.2 Agricultural pollution in the Doe Lea 22 3.3 Mining Influences on the Doe Lea Catchment 27 3.4 Industrial influences on the Doe Lea 31 3.5 Urban influences on the Doe Lea 31 3.6 Further analysis of the catchment, flow and mass balance 34 3.7 Defining catchment precipitation 36 3.8 Land use in the Doe Lea 37 3.9 Soil types within the catchment 40 3.10 Description of catchment geology 44 3.11 Summary of artificial contributions and abstractions 45 3.12 Conceptual interactions of river and groundwater 47 3.13 Estimations of flow 48 3.14 Flow estimations for April analysis 48 3.15 Flow estimations for the July analysis 49 3.16 Analysis by method of mass balance 53 v 3.17 Effects of seasonal variability on water quality in the Doe Lea 59 4.0 Discussion 61 4.1 The mass balance analysis and finding of interest 62 4.2 Seasonal variability of the April and July dips 66 4.3 Expectations of November and February dips 66 4.4 Problems encountered with techniques, conditions and findings 67 4.5 How can the project be improved for future dips? 69 4.6 Further study 70 5.0 Conclusions 72 5.1 Summary of suggested changes to future sampling 75 5.2 How do the project results compare to initial hypotheses? 75 5.3 Why is the water quality in the Doe Lea so poor: A final summary 76 6.0 References 79 Appendix A: 85 A.1 Analysis of water samples for April sampling 85 A.2 Flow estimation for April Sampling 90 A.3 Laboratory results for April sampling 91 A.4 Mass balance results for April sampling 92 A.5 Analysis of water samples for July sampling 97 A.6 Flow estimation for July Sampling 102 A.7 Laboratory results for July sampling 103 A.8 Mass balance results for July sampling 104 A.9 Comparison of April and July sampling results 109 Appendix B: 111 B.1 Detailed map of the North half of the Doe Lea Catchment 111 B.2 Detailed map of the South half of the Doe Lea Catchment 112 Appendix C: 113 River sediment monitoring and dioxin analysis in the Doe Lea: A literature 115 survey of Environment Agency studies between 1991 and 1998 117 Appendix D: 119 D.1 Enlarged map of landuse in the Doe Lea Catchment 119 D.2 Plot of additional known land users across the catchment 120 vi DEFINITION OF TERMS: BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand BPEO Best Practice Environmental Option BETP Biological Effluent Treatment Plant CBC Chesterfield Borough Council CEH Centre for Ecology and Hydrology CIWEM Chartered Institute of Water & Environmental Management CoGAP Code of Good Agricultural Practice CSC Catchment Science Centre DEFRA Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs DNRA Dissimilatory Nitrate Reduction to Ammonium DO Dissolved Oxygen EA Environment Agency GIS Geographical Information System HOST Hydrology of Soil Types MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food NERC Natural Environment Research Council ND Nitrate Directive NRA National Rivers Authority NRFA National River Flow Archive NSA Nitrate Sensitive Area NSRI National Soil Research Institute NT National Trust NVZ Nitrate Vulnerable Zone SEPA Scottish Environmental Protection Agency SS Suspended Solids SSSI Site of Specific Scientific Interest STW Sewage Treatment Works SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage System USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency UWWTD Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive WFD Water Framework Directive vii SUMMARY OF FIGURES: Chapter One: Figure 1.1 Map of the Doe Lea Catchment in Derbyshire, UK Figure 1.2 Assessment of the Water Framework Directive ecological status within the Doe Lea Catchment Figure 1.3 Representation of Environment Agency data for current water quality against the EU Water Framework Directive standards for 2015 Figure 1.4 Representation of river dioxin concentrations Figure 1.5 The remains of Coalite Chemicals in 2011. Figure 1.6 Rainfall maps displaying the percentage of average rainfall across Britain for the months of March, April, May and June 2011 Figure 1.7 Presentation of conceptualised interactions within the catchment Chapter Two: Figure 2.1 Map of the 50 sampling sites within the Doe Lea Catchment Chapter Three: Figure 3.1 EA values for phosphate and nitrate against samples from the Catchment Science Centre Figure 3.2 Comparison of results with published results from the EA Figure 3.3 EA classifications for Phosphate and Nitrate in UK rivers Figure 3.4 Plot of EA data showing reduction in N & P in the River Doe Lea over the past 5 years Figure 3.5 Doe Lea N & P against the EA classification Figure 3.6 A plot of the mining influences in the Doe Lea Catchment Figure 3.7 Concentrations of heavy metals at sampling point 33 Figure 3.8 Effects of nitrification in Pools Brook after an influx of ammonium at Long Duckmanton STW. Figure 3.9 A Conceptual interaction of pathways of pollutants to the river Figure 3.10 Rainfall estimates over the Doe Lea catchment Figure 3.11 Maps of the land use in the Doe Lea catchment Figure 3.12 Distribution estimate of precipitation for a range of land uses viii Figure 3.13 Plot of soil types in the catchment as described by the NSRI Figure 3.14 Plot of HOST soil types in the catchment Figure 3.15 Geological features of the Doe Lea Catchment Figure 3.16 Plot of known discharges/abstractions to/from the Doe Lea
Recommended publications
  • A Sheffield Hallam University Thesis

    A Sheffield Hallam University Thesis

    An evaluation of river catchment quality in relation to restoration issues. AHMED, Badria S. Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/19204/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/19204/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. Return to Learning Centre of issue Fines are charged at 50p per hour 2 6 JUL J U X V U l 1 V /-L i REFERENCE ProQuest Number: 10694084 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10694084 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346 An Evaluation of River Catchment Quality in Relation to Restoration Issues.
  • Michelle Smith Eversheds LLP Bridgewater

    Michelle Smith Eversheds LLP Bridgewater

    Michelle Smith Our Ref: APP/R1010/A/14/2212093 Eversheds LLP Bridgewater Place Water Lane LEEDS LS11 5DR 12 March 2015 Dear Madam TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (SECTION 78) APPEAL BY ROSELAND COMMUNITY WINDFARM LLP: LAND EAST OF ROTHERHAM ROAD, BOLSOVER, DERBYSHIRE APPLICATION REF: 12/00159/FULEA 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, Paul K Jackson BArch (Hons) RIBA, who held a public local inquiry which opened on 4 November 2014 into your client’s appeal against the decision of Bolsover District Council (the Council) to refuse planning permission for a windfarm comprising 6 wind turbines, control building, anemometer mast and associated access tracks on a site approximately 2.5km south of Bolsover between the villages of Palterton and Shirebrook, in accordance with application reference 12/00159/FULEA, dated 25 April 2012. 2. On 20 June 2014 the appeal was recovered for the Secretary of State's determination, in pursuance of section 79 of and paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, because it involves a renewable energy development. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector recommended that the appeal be dismissed and planning permission refused. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions except where indicated otherwise, and agrees with his recommendation. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report.
  • Old Peverel Road

    Old Peverel Road

    PANEL 1 Old Peverel Road Few aspects of landscape history have had more Old Peverel Road, one of which survives in part as an nonsense written about them than roads and unmetalled track in the modern village of Duckmanton trackways. Generations of antiquaries have sought and the other is now part of Markham Lane. These lie to identify stretches of modern road or footpath as to the west of Bolsover and can hardly have been part prehistoric, Roman or medieval, or link references in of a route to South Wingfield. medieval deeds to routes on the ground. In fact there There is probably enough historical and is generally little evidence for the age of roads in use topographical evidence, as well as local tradition, to today, most of which (apart from those built from accept that there was a road (which may not have scratch since the 18th century) have probably been in followed the same route throughout its history) use since the area through which they pass was first connecting William Peverel’s castle at Bolsover with settled, long before they are mentioned in documents South Wingfield. It was presumably created after the or shown on maps. two manors were granted to Peverel, rather than before In some areas there are established traditions of the Norman Conquest. As a through route it would have roads built for particular purposes in the Middle Ages become redundant once Bolsover and South Wingfield which have since gone out of use. An example of this passed into different hands in the mid-12th century.
  • The Five Pits Trail

    The Five Pits Trail

    The Five Pits Trail Walkers, cyclists and horse riders can all enjoy the countryside of the Five Pits Trail. Follow the 5.5 mile off-road surfaced route from Grassmoor Country Park to Tibshelf Ponds or extend your route to 7.5 miles by exploring the route through Williamthorpe Ponds and Holmewood Woodlands. The trail mostly follows the route of the Great Central Railway. Since the large collieries and smaller pits along the railway closed, the landscape has changed dramatically. Parts of the land were opencast and Holmewood Sculpture Funded by the Young Roots Heritage Lottery Fund, students from most of the original railway line removed. Deincourt School worked with artists from Gotham-D to design this sculpture. Using metal, stone and wood, the sculpture shows leaves and keys (seeds) and takes its inspiration from both the Now you will find a rolling trail that has some long steep slopes. This may limit some people's access in places - look for natural and industrial heritage of the area. the 'steep slope' symbols on the map. There are no stiles or steps and you will find seats along the way to stop, rest and enjoy the views. Look out for the information boards with large site maps showing some of the heritage and wildlife along the trail. Mansfield Road Walking Routes Williamthorpe Walkers can explore the surrounding landscape on Public Rights of Way by following one of the Five Ponds Pits Trail Circular Walks. These walks are between 2.5 and 5.5 miles in length and each walk is waymarked This network of ponds, with a coloured disc.
  • Its Land, Fndustries & People

    Its Land, Fndustries & People

    DUCKIITANTON I.OOR Its Land, fndustries & people by G. Downs-Rose Dt CKtttAt{TON I.OOR, ITS LAI{D, INDUSTRIES AflD pEOpLE Copyrlght O G. Dorrns-Rose 1993 i |'r**J , ti h ,'*U c-,*,-f L'=--- ,, ?* -r Lo.*-,\ "^V-oxtAt- N". I of 1o DITCKIiANTON l,tOOR, ITS LAND, IIDUSTRIES AIID PEOPLE COTITEIITS l. Introductlon, page I 2. Early Hlstory, page 3 3. Ducknanton lioor ln t776, paEe 4 {. Farnlng Settlements on the l,ioor: 4.1. 1-g The Croft Settleuents, pp 6-20 4.2. l-7 The Farns, pp 21-36 5. Industrtal Settlenents on the ltioor: 5. 1 The Iron Uorks Coununtty, pp 37-+1 5.2 The Arkwright Tomr Conmunity,pp 4Z-S1 6. Ducknanton l{oor ln 1993, page 52 7. The Evldence From Fleld Names, page 54 8. liaps: Ducknanton Hoor ln 1776, page 2 Ducknanton ltloor ln 1837, page 10 Duckmanton lrbor ln 1919, page 3O 9. Plans: Duckaanton llorks Cottages, page 38 Arkwrtght Tonrn OId Vlllage, page 4{ 1O. Photograph: OId Arkrrlght Tour, Pre-lnprovement ff page 42 DUCKITANTON !|OOR,ITS LAND, ITIDUSTRIES AIID pEOpLE 1. INTRODTrcTION The locatlon name 'Ducknanton lrloor' ln North East Derbyshire occurred Ln records from the late slxteenth century and remalned ln use, e. g. by the Ordnance Survey, lnto the twentleth century long after lt had lost lts sl$nlf lcance. The nalre tms originatly used to denote that part of the lrlanor of Ducknanton wtrich remalned unenclosed lnto late uedlevar tlnes. For our purposes, lts boundaries (See lr{ap 1 oaEe 2) are those used in earller tlnes: the courses of brooks and civll boundarles.
  • PC-Minutes280219.Pdf

    PC-Minutes280219.Pdf

    GLAPWELL PARISH COUNCIL Minutes of meeting of Glapwell Parish Council held on Thursday 28 February 2019 At the Glapwell Centre Present: Tricia Clough David Clough Clive Fleetwood Rachel Hibbert Jackie Hole Tony Trafford (Chair) Keith Woollen Also in attendance – Councillor Ann Syrett, Councillor Clive Moesby, David and Janet Sanders, Richard Jepson, Alan Page, Ian Horner – Item16/19, Sue O’Donnell (Parish Clerk) 14/19 Apologies for Absence – John Jepson 15/19 Declarations of Interest – None 16/19 Public Forum Old Dairy Building, Beech Crescent – Alan Page and Richard Jepson reported that there continued to be activity involving motor homes despite the planning permission being refused in 2018. Dog Fouling – They also reported a number of cases of dog fouling but had not been able to get photographic evidence. They requested a dog bin on Beech Crescent. Speeding Traffic on The Hill – Mr and Mrs Sanders presented a petition asking for speed cameras on The Hill. The petition had been signed by all residents on The Hill. They had contacted Derbyshire County Council and an officer from the Highways Department had visited. Tony Trafford acknowledged that this continued to be a serious concern and since the opening of Sports Direct in Shirebrook the number of lorry’s using The Hill had increased. Councillor Syrett agreed to approach Sports Direct for assistance in reducing the speed of their vehicles through the village. Councillor Moesby referred to the result of a traffic volume and speed check undertaken in 2017.Since then there had been no evidence presented about any serious incidents. He said that he would take the petition to the County Council and also start the process to engage with Crest to carry out an investigation.
  • Lowland Derbyshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2011-2020

    Lowland Derbyshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2011-2020

    Published by the Lowland Derbyshire Biodiversity Partnership 2011 Biodiversity Lowland 2011 Derbyshire ‐ 2020 Action Plan Contents Click links to go the various sections of the LBAP Section Quick start Guide Introduction Generic Action Plan Area Action Plans and Targets Action Area 1: Magnesian Limestone Action Area 2: Rother and Doe Lea Valleys Action Area 3: Peak Fringe Action Area 4: Erewash Valley Action Area 5: Claylands Action Area 6: Derby Action Area 7: Trent and Dove Valleys Action Area 8: National Forest area Cumulative Targets UK Priority Habitats—Background Information Farmland Grassland Heathland Wetland Woodland List of Lowland Derbyshire LBAP Partners Appendix 1: Detailed Maps of All Eight Action Areas (with Priority Habitats) these are available as eight 4MB files on CD or from www.derbyshirebiodiversity.org.uk Cover photos, clockwise from top left: Bulfinch. Credit: Laura Whitehead White Admiral. Credit: Debbie Alston Green Lane, north‐east Derbyshire. Credit: Debbie Alston www.derbyshirebiodiversity.org.uk Quick Start Guide 2 Quick Start Guide This Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) covers the Lowland Derbyshire region for the period 2011 to 2020. It identifies the basic actions we must collectively take if we are to protect and enhance the key biodiversity of this region. The UK Government recognises its international obligations and the economic urgency to protect biodiversity and ecosystems. This LBAP is part of that delivery and local reporting mechanism. Only those habitats and species meeting the UKBAP definitions of ‘Priority Habitat’ or ‘Priority Species’ are included in the targets for the Lowland Derbyshire Action Plans. The history and rationale behind the Local Biodiversity Action Plan is given in the Introduction.
  • NRA Dioxins and the River Doe Lea

    NRA Dioxins and the River Doe Lea

    SJfcr* U>af-<J- (^oalik Si" NRA Dioxins and the River Doe Lea Plain English Report ?"%^hitebrici fA U , 15J , / * » •*« | fJWl&rougl ^ A 671 Lodge \ K V * I \VWestfield iT^S % ' Bo (jht<Xi.fi<ilds •,^:- “ TM ■*Y-*~ 'Srkl' Pnory | ' I X r ^ . , . f y j r % v-----A- - ^ Breck. ••'. VT Fm ; ■* ■ $ 1 3 ester i a ^ __ * ^ v _ Mine I s '*,Barrow Hiui yrc "tci' (dis) I -Wr ' ; l ) r J M o o o f S r ^ , p <o 1 m l j Clowne < y /’ '•‘ .V '-H fT I^X^AtjoWne . Nethertforpe ^ X J n ?il ' ' r«/ ». V Wollingwood W >.".// x«J$®-EY ^ --y] U ^tMiddletrottjiT^^P. - /t fflaw ]w.; : ■■ ■:•$fl x Woodii^eD**^*^^J 08 ’ / 'vf $ P — SnutttuCvood Common f l i p p y \ . -fM Oxcroft i o t | s | x . I M V fEstatej/'-- /# i',V Inkersall , I __w ' he d b „ ? 0 Wi^inWfc*t Elmton p,irk "W eElmt of 153 Brimii-K^on h i%»;••' C o c u r v o a c r X i 166 ! /# / *rJ . - 1 •'fU_vW4_-/Cai Farnsworth > v % - • ■ Limekiln // Fw Field B oU over M oor ^ ,uckn?S y ^ i 4> Lorocourse SL / 407 7 BOLS0VER4 ° I / I - ^ 1!,. f e ^ M Moor________|x ^AlTi^ ^aCo1- Green Town H *5 Fo ‘ <to * /7 °T~Si/^tonWoo~d^°^-trf Sprmot /,- 94 1I \X 3Hn» ru, ,SpdngwC j m J Fm M61 E • i V Roi JUlty u 27 1 GlapweiT 1166 smoor t|VV ■ >\ 148Ji 'l (%\x\ Vy Heath' Lanes ^ *1* \ , , o , r j 5 V -'■• 1 >5A ^ C hapel/ PH 5 .
  • Inkersall Road Solar Farm

    Inkersall Road Solar Farm

    PROPOSED INKERSALL ROAD SOLAR FARM NEAR STAVELEY, DERBYSHIRE LANDSCAPE VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR LOW CARBON JUNE 2020 PROPOSED INKERSALL ROAD SOLAR FARM LANDSCAPE VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Planning Policy Context 3.0 Assessment Methodology and Criteria 4.0 Site Description and Proposals 5.0 Landscape Baseline 6.0 Landscape Effect 7.0 Visual Assessment 8.0 Mitigation Measures and Residual Degree of Effect 9.0 Cumulative Assessment 10.0 Conclusion References Figure 01: Survey Site Location Figure 02: Heritage Assets Figure 03: Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Figure 04a: Potential Visual Receptors PROW Figure 04b: Potential Visual Receptors RRE Figure 05: Viewpoints Figure 06: Landscape and Biodiversity Scheme Figure 07: Cumulative Zone of Theoretical Visibility Appendix A: Landscape Setting of Listed Building – Inkersall Farm Appendix B: Selected Panoramas Report Ref D34.19 No: Hilary R Ludlow Author: MSc CMLI, CEnv Scientific Steven Weber check: BSc MCIEEM Presentation Zoe Lewis check: BA (Hons) Date: June 2020 LANDSCAPE SCIENCE CONSULTANCY LTD 2 | Page L:\LSC\D34.19 Staveley (Inkersall) LVIA\D34.19a Inkersall LVIA update\Reports & Drafts\Inkersall Road Solar Farm - LVIA - FINAL.doc PROPOSED INKERSALL ROAD SOLAR FARM LANDSCAPE VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Landscape Science Consultancy Ltd (LSC) was commissioned to conduct a Landscape Visual Impact Assessment at Inkersall near Staveley, Derbyshire in relation to proposals for a solar farm, hereafter referred to as the ‘Proposed Development’ within the ‘Survey Site’. The assessment defines the existing landscape and visual baseline and assesses the sensitivity to change and considers the effect of the Proposed Development on the landscape and its visual resources over a wider area centred on the Survey Site which is defined by the anticipated visual envelope – hereafter referred to as the ‘Study Area’.
  • Local Environment Agency Plan

    Local Environment Agency Plan

    6 o x I local environment agency plan SOUTH YORKSHIRE & NORTH EAST DERBYSHIRE FIRST ANNUAL REVIEW May 1999 BARNSLEY ROTHERHAM SHEFFIELD CHEST ELD E n v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE HEAD OFFICE Rio House, Waterside Drive, Aztec West. Almondsbury, Bristol BS32 4UD South Yorkshire & North East Derbyshire LEA P First Annua! Review SOUTH YORKSHIRE AND NORTH EAST DERBYSHIRE AREA ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES W . 'H D i SwllhoJ* j Oram iRNSLEY DONCASTER ) ROTHERHAM SHEFFIELD (DERBYSHIRE DALES) KEY CHESTERF.IEUD) BOLSOVER - CATCWENT BOUNDARY RIVER ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARY MAIN ROAD SGRTH EAST \ 0 2 4 6 8 10km ___1 i_________ i_________ i_________ i_________ i Scale ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 032505 South Yorkshire & North East Derbyshire LEAP First Annual Review EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The South Yorkshire & North East Derbyshire LEAP First Annual Review reports on the progress made during the last year against LEAP actions. The actions published in the LEAP are supplemental to our everyday work on monitoring, surveying and regulating to protect the environment. Some of the key achievements on our everyday work include: i) In September 1998 Michael Clapham MP officially opened the Bullhouse Minewater Treatment Plant. The scheme is a pioneering £1.2m partnership project funded by European Commission, Coal Authority, Environment Agency, Hepworths Building Products, Barnsley MBC and Yorkshire Water. Within one week a visible reduction could be seen in ochre levels in the River Don, after more than 100 years of pollution. ii) Monckton Coke and Chemical Company have successfully commissioned a combined heat and power plant, costing approximately £7 million.
  • Michelle Smith Eversheds LLP Bridgewater Place Water Lane

    Michelle Smith Eversheds LLP Bridgewater Place Water Lane

    Michelle Smith Our Ref: APP/R1010/A/14/2212093 Eversheds LLP Bridgewater Place Water Lane LEEDS LS11 5DR 12 March 2015 Dear Madam TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (SECTION 78) APPEAL BY ROSELAND COMMUNITY WINDFARM LLP: LAND EAST OF ROTHERHAM ROAD, BOLSOVER, DERBYSHIRE APPLICATION REF: 12/00159/FULEA 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, Paul K Jackson BArch (Hons) RIBA, who held a public local inquiry which opened on 4 November 2014 into your client’s appeal against the decision of Bolsover District Council (the Council) to refuse planning permission for a windfarm comprising 6 wind turbines, control building, anemometer mast and associated access tracks on a site approximately 2.5km south of Bolsover between the villages of Palterton and Shirebrook, in accordance with application reference 12/00159/FULEA, dated 25 April 2012. 2. On 20 June 2014 the appeal was recovered for the Secretary of State's determination, in pursuance of section 79 of and paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, because it involves a renewable energy development. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector recommended that the appeal be dismissed and planning permission refused. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions except where indicated otherwise, and agrees with his recommendation. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report.
  • The Avenue Hornbeam Drive Wingerworth Derbyshire S42 6SZ

    The Avenue Hornbeam Drive Wingerworth Derbyshire S42 6SZ

    The Avenue Hornbeam Drive Wingerworth Derbyshire S42 6SZ Find us using what3words ///plants.splits.scratches THE AVENUE WINGERWORTH 01246 643267 [email protected] tiliahomes.co.uk A STUNNING COLLECTION OF 2, 3, 4 & 5 BEDROOM HOMES Healeys Print Group Reg. 2108 Welcome to The Avenue Nestled in the idyllic village of Wingerworth, The Avenue is an exceptional collection of two, three, four and five bedroom homes. With amazing surroundings and spectacular country views, The Avenue has become the creation of a new suburb that is placed at the heart of the Wingerworth community. This computer generated image is for illustrative purposes only. Its purpose is to give a feel for the development, not an accurate description of each property. Please enquire for further details. 1 Location At The Avenue, you will be ideally positioned just outside the busy town of Chesterfield. You can find an excellent range of local amenities which cater to your daily needs, as well as having an award-winning parkland and wildlife reserve adjacent to the development. 2 Hardwick Old Hall 09 15 A61 Built between 1587 and 1596 by Bess of Hardwick, one of the richest women of the Elizabethan age. 08 ARKWRIGHT TOWN 06 05 A619 CHESTERFIELD M1 BRAMPTON A617 BOYTHORPE A61 14 BIRDHOLME A617 04 WALTON A61 SUTTON SCARSDALE A617 01 SLATEPIT DALE 07 03 02 The Royal Oak Pub GRASSMOOR The oldest pub in Chesterfield which was WINGERWORTH A617 once a ‘rest house’ for the Knights Templars. A61 HOLMEWOOD 11 A61 10 16 13 12 Your nearest transport links Chesterfield Manchester M1 Train Station Airport Chesterfield Market One of the largest open-air markets in England, has a rich history dating back to 1165.