DOCSLIB.ORG

Cobbins Brook/Brookmeadow Wood Upshire, Essex

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cobbins Brook/Brookmeadow Wood Upshire, Essex LAND ADJACENT TO COBBINS BROOK/BROOKMEADOW WOOD UPSHIRE, ESSEX ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING OF GEOTECHNICAL TEST PITS Client: Halcrow Group Ltd FAU project number: 1369 NGR: TL 412 021 Date of fieldwork: 7/6/04 to 8/6/04 SUMMARY Archaeological monitoring of geotechnical test pits within the area of a proposed flood alleviation scheme at Cobbins Brook, Upshire has uncovered no direct evidence for significant archaeological or palaeo-environmental remains. The consistent use of the area for meadow and woodland over a prolonged period of time seems likely from the absence of archaeological finds, features and archaeological horizons and the propensity of the area to flood. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The archaeological monitoring of twelve geotechnical test pits in advance of the proposed construction of a flood alleviation scheme at Upshire, Essex was carried out by Essex County Council Field Archaeology Unit (ECC FAU) on behalf of Halcrow Group Ltd, acting for the Environment Agency (Fig 1). 2.0 LOCATION AND FORM OF FLOOD ALLEVIATION SCHEME 2.1 The flood alleviation scheme is situated in mixed farmland to either side of Cobbins Brook, which is a tributary of the river Lea. The brook lies north of the of the village of Upshire, and flows in a south-easterly direction towards Waltham Abbey. 2.2 The flood alleviation scheme will consist of a 400m long earth embankment. The embankment will straddle Cobbins Brook and will be constructed from material extracted from borrow pits from within the area of the flood alleviation scheme. The flood alleviation scheme will eventually contain up to 300,000m2 of flood water. 3.0 PLANNING BACKGROUND 3.1 The archaeological monitoring of the geotechnical test pits was stipulated by Essex County Council Heritage Advice Management and Promotion (ECC HAMP), in consultation with the Environment Agency (ECC HAMP 2004). The work was stipulated in response to an Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report, in which it was concluded that possible archaeological deposits contained within the 1 alluvium of Cobbins Brook could be affected by the construction of the flood alleviation scheme. 3.2 Further advice on evaluation/mitigation measures relating to the flood alleviation scheme will be contained in the Cultural Heritage report in the Environmental Impact Assessment, which will be produced in July 2004. 4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND 4.1 The proposed earth embankment and related works lie within an area designated in 1992 in the Epping Forest District Local Plan as ‘ancient landscape’ (Essex Heritage Conservation Record (EHCR) 16683). Archaeological finds of all periods have been made in the general area north of Waltham Abbey, and the northern Thames tributaries, including the Lea Valley and its tributaries, are considered to be of national significance for the survival of prehistoric sites within alluvial deposits (see 4.2 below). 4.2 Contained within the area of the Lea valley and its tributaries are rare and important Mesolithic and Neolithic sites (Fig. 4) (Jacobi 1980). The most important at these is at Broxbourne in Hertfordshire where working floors and microliths are known to be present sealed below or stratified within peat deposits formed within the flood plain of the course of the Lea (Warren et al 1934). From Nazeing Mead, to the east of Broxbourne, comes an important group of Neolithic artefacts, including part of a polished flint axe head. An important assemblage of Mesolithic worked flint artefacts, now held at the British Museum, was found in a clay pit cut into the Claygate Beds at High Beech in Epping Forest (Warren 1913). Included amongst the wide variety of worked flint pieces from this site are microliths and scrapers. Groups of Mesolithic flints artefacts also come from the Cloister site, close to the Lea and Cobbins brook, in Waltham Abbey (Huggins 1970). Elsewhere in the area the discovery of Mesolithic flint artefacts as surface finds in the valleys around Harlow and Epping is relatively common. An apparent close association between Mesolithic sites and river valleys is probably partly related to the use of the rivers as principle route-ways, at a time when large parts of what is now Britain would have been difficult to travel through because they would have been densely wooded. 4.2 Within the area of the proposed flood alleviation scheme deposits of alluvium lie above Head and Eocene London Clay. 2 5.0 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 5.1 The main aim of the monitoring of the test pits was to provide a very basic level of information on stratigraphy and the potential for environmental study. 5.2 During the monitoring particular attention was paid to the following: The survival of alluvial deposits, especially the presence or absence of a palaeosol, and whether there was evidence for truncation or erosion The preservation of deposits within cut features or natural channels and hollows The preservation of organic deposits, such as peat beds, with ecofactual evidence with potential analysis Deposit formation in general The presence of artefacts 6.0 METHOD 6.1 Twelve geotechnical test pits (numbered from 1 to 13 - number 9 not used/excavated) were excavated by Halcrow Group Ltd using a mechanical excavator with a narrow toothless bucket. The test pits were approximately 1.6m long and 0.8m wide, and between 2.5m and 3.3m deep. 6.2 Test pits 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 13 were located close to the brook, below the 35m contour line. Tests pits 4, 8, 10, 11 and 12 were placed higher up sides of the valley, between the 35m and 40m contour lines. Test pit 7 lay at the far east end of the alleviation scheme, on the brow of a hill (Fig. 2). 6.3 The test pits were assessed for their palaeo-environmental potential and were inspected for archaeological finds and deposits. 6.4 The depth of each deposit below present day ground level was recorded and each deposit was individually numbered and described. The approximate location of each pit was recorded by eye. The height above sea-level of each deposit was not recorded. 6.4 No environmental samples were taken because no well-stratified deposits containing plentiful artefacts or carbonised or waterlogged material were encountered. 7.0 FIELDWORK RESULTS 7.1 Forty-seven deposits were identified (Table 1 and figures 5 to 16). Three deposits apiece were identified in test pits 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 3 13, four deposits apiece in pits 3, 5, and 6, and six and seven deposits apiece in pits 2 and 1 respectively. 7.2 Apart from the interface between deposits 36 and 37 in test pit 10, the interfaces between deposits were easy to identify. 7.3 The water table was encountered in only two of the test pits. In test pit 1 it was c. 1.8m below ground level, and in test pit 2 c. 1.95m below ground level. 7.4 No artefacts were seen in the test pits or in the extracted deposits. The test pits uncovered no cut-features, organic deposits or palaeosols. The only visible organic remains, apart from carbonised wood in a few of the deposits, were infrequent small pieces of soft black wood in deposit 5 in test pit 1. 7.5 Many of the deposits were encountered in more than one test pit (Table 1: deposit groups A, C, H, J and L). 7.6 In eleven of the twelve test pits, the test pit was taken down to the level of the London Clay (Table 1: deposit group L). The median depth of the London Clay, which varied from 0.7m to 2.9m, was 1.95m. 7.7 Deposits of yellowish/orange brown silt, sand, clay and gravel overlay the London Clay in four of the test pits (Table 1: test pits 2, 7, 8 and 13, deposit groups I, J and K). These deposits were at their thickest in test pits 7 and 8, on the high ground at the east end of the flood alleviation scheme. 7.8 Grey soft silt sand clay and gravel overlay the yellowish/orange brown soft silt sand and gravel in test pit 2 and the London Clay in test pits 1, 3, 5 and 6 respectively (Table 1: deposit group H). It occurred in the test pits closest to the north side of the brook and had a median depth of 0.8m. 7.9 Single or double deposits of silt clay with either none or very few inclusions were seen in the upper sections of all of the test pits apart from test pit 7, which was located above the 40m contour line (Table 1: deposit groups B, C, F and G). In contrast to the other test pits, in between the two deposits of silt clay in test pit 1 were thin bands of brownish grey clay silt and brownish grey silt sand respectively. Plotting of the thickness of the silt clay suggests that it is at its shallowest in the approximate centre of the proposed flood alleviation scheme (Fig. 3). 4 8.0 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 The monitoring of the geotechnical test pits has confirmed that deposits of alluvium lie across most of the area of the proposed flood alleviation scheme. No alluvium appears to be present above the 40m contour line, on the top of the hill around test pit 7. 8.2 In contrast to other sites, such as the Rivers Lea, Stour and Blackwater, where deep deposits of organic silt and peat have been uncovered through test pitting, no organic remains appear to be present within the vicinity of the proposed flood alleviation scheme (Bedwin 1991, Brown and Germany 2002).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HA16 Rivers and Streams London's Rivers and Streams Resource
    HA16 Rivers and Streams Definition All free-flowing watercourses above the tidal limit London’s rivers and streams resource The total length of watercourses (not including those with a tidal influence) are provided in table 1a and 1b. These figures are based on catchment areas and do not include all watercourses or small watercourses such as drainage ditches. Table 1a: Catchment area and length of fresh water rivers and streams in SE London Watercourse name Length (km) Catchment area (km2) Hogsmill 9.9 73 Surbiton stream 6.0 Bonesgate stream 5.0 Horton stream 5.3 Greens lane stream 1.8 Ewel court stream 2.7 Hogsmill stream 0.5 Beverley Brook 14.3 64 Kingsmere stream 3.1 Penponds overflow 1.3 Queensmere stream 2.4 Keswick avenue ditch 1.2 Cannizaro park stream 1.7 Coombe Brook 1 Pyl Brook 5.3 East Pyl Brook 3.9 old pyl ditch 0.7 Merton ditch culvert 4.3 Grand drive ditch 0.5 Wandle 26.7 202 Wimbledon park stream 1.6 Railway ditch 1.1 Summerstown ditch 2.2 Graveney/ Norbury brook 9.5 Figgs marsh ditch 3.6 Bunces ditch 1.2 Pickle ditch 0.9 Morden Hall loop 2.5 Beddington corner branch 0.7 Beddington effluent ditch 1.6 Oily ditch 3.9 Cemetery ditch 2.8 Therapia ditch 0.9 Micham road new culvert 2.1 Station farm ditch 0.7 Ravenbourne 17.4 180 Quaggy (kyd Brook) 5.6 Quaggy hither green 1 Grove park ditch 0.5 Milk street ditch 0.3 Ravensbourne honor oak 1.9 Pool river 5.1 Chaffinch Brook 4.4 Spring Brook 1.6 The Beck 7.8 St James stream 2.8 Nursery stream 3.3 Konstamm ditch 0.4 River Cray 12.6 45 River Shuttle 6.4 Wincham Stream 5.6 Marsh Dykes
    [Show full text]
  • 36 Highbridge Street, Waltham Abbey
    36 HIGHBRIDGE STREET, WALTHAM ABBEY Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Statement Alcomax (Investments) Ltd SLR Ref: 408-07833-00001 Version No: 5 October 2018 36 Highbridge Street, Waltham Abbey : FRA and SWDS Filename: 181017_408-07833-00001_36HSWA_FRA_v5 SLR Ref No: 408-07833-00001 October 2018 BASIS OF REPORT This document has been prepared by SLR Consulting Limited with reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the manpower, timescales and resources devoted to it by agreement with Alcomax (Investments) Ltd. (the Client) as part or all of the services it has been appointed by the Client to carry out. It is subject to the terms and conditions of that appointment. SLR shall not be liable for the use of or reliance on any information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document for any purpose by any person other than the Client. Reliance may be granted to a third party only in the event that SLR and the third party have executed a reliance agreement or collateral warranty. Information reported herein may be based on the interpretation of public domain data collected by SLR, and/or information supplied by the Client and/or its other advisors and associates. These data have been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid. The copyright and intellectual property in all drawings, reports, specifications, bills of quantities, calculations and other information set out in this report remain vested in SLR unless the terms of appointment state otherwise. This document may contain information of a specialised and/or highly technical nature and the Client is advised to seek clarification on any elements which may be unclear to it.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Plan Respresentations
    29 January 2018 bc Local Plan Regulation 19 Representation Planning Policy Team Epping Forest District Council Civic Offices Ben Thomas 323 High Street Epping Essex CM16 4BZ 33 Margaret Street London W1G 0JD T: +44 (0) 20 7499 8644 savills.com Epping Forest District Council Submission Version Local Plan We write on behalf of Crest Nicholson in relation to the site known as the former Pickfield Nursery at Pick Hill, Waltham Abbey (SLAA Reference SR-0161). Flawed / Absent Local Plan site selection process to-date: Pickfield Nursery was submitted to EFDC in response to the Call for Sites consultation in 2008 and has subsequently been promoted through the current Local Plan process since its inception in 2012. EFDC’s July 2012 SLAA referred to Pickfield Nursery as site SR-0161 but incorrectly identified it as a duplicate site with a much larger parcel (SLAA Reference SR-0020). Representations were then submitted in October 2012 highlighting this mistake. However, despite the submission of detailed representations and subsequent regular liaison with EFDC’s officers (including a positive formal pre-application meeting), EFDC’s Site Selection evidence base published in 2016 discounted Pickfield Nursery prior to Stage 1 of the selection process, once again incorrectly considering it as a duplicate site. Pickfield Nursery was finally acknowledged as an individual site in the Local Plan evidence base in the “Sites for consideration following Regulation 18 consultation” list published in July 2017. However, at the time of writing these representations (26th January 2018, one working day before the Pre-Submission consultation deadline) an assessment of these sites has still not been undertaken and Appendix C1 of the Report on Site Selection (December 2017) has not been completed.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Risk of Non-Point Source Pollution From
    Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11(1), 601613, 2007 Evaluating the risk of non-point source pollution from biosolids: integrated modelling of nutrient losses at field and catchment scales www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/11/601/2007 © Author(s) 2007. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Evaluating the risk of non-point source pollution from biosolids: integrated modelling of nutrient losses at field and catchment scales P.G. Whitehead1, A.L. Heathwaite2, N.J. Flynn1, A.J. Wade1 and P.F. Quinn3 1Aquatic Environments Research Centre, Department of Geography, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AB, UK 2Centre for Sustainable Water Management, Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK 3Department of Civil Engineering, University of Newcastle, NewcastleUK Email for corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract A semi-distributed model, INCA, has been developed to determine the fate and distribution of nutrients in terrestrial and aquatic systems. The model simulates nitrogen and phosphorus processes in soils, groundwaters and river systems and can be applied in a semi-distributed manner at a range of scales. In this study, the model has been applied at field to sub-catchment to whole catchment scale to evaluate the behaviour of biosolid-derived losses of P in agricultural systems. It is shown that process-based models such as INCA, applied at a wide range of scales, reproduce field and catchment behaviour satisfactorily. The INCA model can also be used to generate generic information for risk assessment. By adjusting three key variables: biosolid application rates, the hydrological connectivity of the catchment and the initial P-status of the soils within the model, a matrix of P loss rates can be generated to evaluate the behaviour of the model and, hence, of the catchment system.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Thames Basin Area Profile: Supporting Documents
    National Character 111: Northern Thames Basin Area profile: Supporting documents www.naturalengland.org.uk 1 National Character 111: Northern Thames Basin Area profile: Supporting documents Introduction National Character Areas map As part of Natural England’s responsibilities as set out in the Natural Environment White Paper1, Biodiversity 20202 and the European Landscape Convention3, we are revising profiles for England’s 159 National Character Areas (NCAs). These are areas that share similar landscape characteristics, and which follow natural lines in the landscape rather than administrative boundaries, making them a good decision-making framework for the natural environment. NCA profiles are guidance documents which can help communities to inform their decision-making about the places that they live in and care for. The information they contain will support the planning of conservation initiatives at a landscape scale, inform the delivery of Nature Improvement Areas and encourage broader partnership working through Local Nature Partnerships. The profiles will also help to inform choices about how land is managed and can change. Each profile includes a description of the natural and cultural features that shape our landscapes, how the landscape has changed over time, the current key drivers for ongoing change, and a broad analysis of each area’s characteristics and ecosystem services. Statements of Environmental Opportunity (SEOs) are suggested, which draw on this integrated information. The SEOs offer guidance on the critical issues, which could help to achieve sustainable growth and a more secure environmental future. 1 The Natural Choice: Securing the Value of Nature, Defra NCA profiles are working documents which draw on current evidence and (2011; URL: www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8082/8082.pdf) 2 knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Thameswater Tida L T Hames Defence Levels Preliminary Report on River Lee Flows and Levels
    ThamesWater Tida l T hames Defence Levels Preliminary Report on River Lee Flows and Levels August 1987 A R CHI VE : PLEA SE D O N OT DES TR O Y ThamesWater Tidal T ha mes Defe nce Levels Preliminary Report on River Lee Flows and Levels August 1987 Sir William Ha !crow & Partners Ltd Institute of Hydrology PREL IMINARY RIVER LEE ANALYSIS CONTENT S Page No GLOSSARY SUMMA RY 1. INTRODUCT ION 1 1.1 Objectives 1 1.2 The Lower River Lee Sys tem , 1 1.3 Da ta Availability 2 2 . DATA COLLECT ION 3 2.1 Tida l Wa ter Level Data 3 2 .2 Flood Da ta for the Lower Lee and Tribu taries 3 2 .3 Sub-catchment Area s 3 2 .4 Urban Area s 4 3 . TR END ANALYSES 5 3 .1 Water Leve l Trend s 5 3 .2 Flood Trend s 5 4 . FREQUENCY ANA LY SES OF T IDAL WATER LEVELS 6 4 .1 Frequen cy of Tida l Wa ter Leve ls 6 4 .2 Adj ustment to Lee Mouth 6 7 . FLOOD FREQUENC IES AT RIV ER GAUGING STAT IONS ON THE LOW ER LEE 7 5 .1 General Approach 7 5.2 Flood Frequencies Based on Data Ana lyses 7 5.3 Flood Frequencies Using FSR P rocedures 8 5.4 Propo sed Flood Frequenc ies for Ga uging Station s 9 6 . FLOOD FREQUENC IES IN LOW ER LEE CHA NNELS 10 6 .1 Flood Freq uencies in Lee Flood Relie f Channe l 10 6 .2 Flood Frequenc ies in Lee Nav iga tion Chan ne l 11 FIGURES 1.1 Diagramma tic Sys tem o f the Lower Lee 3.1 Flood Trends 4 .1 Concurren t Peak Water Leve ls at Brunsw ick Wha rf and Tow er P ier 5 .1 Feildes Weir Con current Flood s , Instan taneous and Mean Da ily 5.2 Flood Frequency Ana ly ses 5.3 G row th Fac to rs fo r Main Lee 5.4 G rowth Fac tors fo r Low er Lee Tributaries
    [Show full text]
  • Meetin S Atwarrenweir
    Meetin s at Warren Weir EXCLUSIVE, PRIVATE AND TRANQUIL The Warren Weir Suite, complete with private garden and overlooking the River Lea, comprises five individually designed function rooms adaptable for conference or leisure use and licensed for weddings and civil ceremonies, Warren Lounge, business desk, syndicate suite and dedicated leisure facilities. Importance is placed on meeting the flexibility, comfort and support required for every guest at Warren Weir, whether it’s for a major product launch, an annual conference with syndicate meetings or a memorable civil ceremony and reception. The Lea Suite on the ground floor offers the largest of Warren Weir’s conferencing spaces. This columned room with open fireplace, adjacent terrace and direct access from Warren Weir’s catering facilities and kitchen can accommodate up to 280 for banqueting and 340 for a reception. The Ravensbourne Suite on the first floor can seat 330 guests, the Bayford Brook is ideal for syndicates or a more intimate pre-dinner meeting area and Cobbins Brook, which is connected to Bayford Brook by double doors, can seat 160 theatre-style. WWW.ELITEHOTELS.CO.UK/MEETINGS THE ELITE EXPERIENCE WARREN WEIR FLOOR PLANS GROUND FLOOR 1 LEA SUITE (342 m2) 1 2 WARREN LOUNGE 2 (16.98m x 10.89m ) FIRST FLOOR 6 3 RAVENSBOURNE SUITE (21 m x 13.5m ) 4 BAyFORD BROOK (10m x 8.5m ) 3 5 COBBINS BROOK 4 (11.55m x 7.9m plus 7.07m x 6.9m ) 5 6 TURNFORD BROOK (7.55m x 4.9m ) ROOM CAPACITIES AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION s s t g s m t n n g i i o t e n o o n i h k o t R c P n g i e i o d
    [Show full text]
  • “Peelers Progress”
    “PEELERS PROGRESS” Policing Waltham Abbey since 1840 by Bryn Elliott Foreword The police in Waltham Abbey are not a unique band of men and women in themselves. The station buildings occupied by the police in the locality were never structures considered in the forefront of architectural style. Although there were a few well known cases, no mind shattering, world famous crimes were ever said to have taken place in the area, and yet...... Here is a story of one relatively insignificant police station situated for 160 years on the outer edges of the Metropolitan Police District. It may be a surprise to learn that from the pages of this story that some well known cases were indeed enacted within its jurisdiction, and that the officers serving there were, on occasion, embroiled in famous events outside of the town. In writing this history of Waltham Abbey police officers, and the buildings in which they served, I have attempted to refrain from setting down the whole history of local law and order. Brief mention is made of the arrangement in force prior to the arrival of the Metropolitan Police in the area, hopefully in context. Other than those few instances I have avoided the period that would inevitably include such well known figures as the highwaymen Dick Turpin and the Gregory Gang, who included large swathes of Epping Forest in their plundering forays. Highwaymen have strong connections with the area during the 18th Century, but this is primarily the story of the modern police and the locality they served. It is unfortunate that few of the 19th Century local historians thought fit to make more than a passing mention of their local police force.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.0 THORNWOOD COMMON FRINGES 3.1 Overview 3.2 Visual
    3.0 THORNWOOD COMMON FRINGES 3.1 Overview 3.1.1 Thornwood Common is situated to the northeast of Epping, north of Coopersale and west of North Weald Bassett. The settlement is predominantly situated within Epping Green Farmland Plateau Landscape Character Area (C9), with the southern edge of the village within North Weald Ridges and Valleys Landscape Character Area (F5). 3.1.2 The western landscape setting of Thornwood encompasses a patchwork of small, medium and large-scale fields that are lined with hedgerows. To the north of the settlement, mature field trees are also a feature. Similarly, medium to large-scale arable fields line the eastern edge of the settlement. To the east, however, the corridor of the M11 motorway introduces a source of noise and movement. 3.1.3 At the southern edge of the village, dense, mature woodland within the Lower Forest provides a strong sense of enclosure and also provides physical and visual separation from the settlements of Coopersale and Epping to the south. 3.2 Visual Character 3.2.1 The analysis of key visual characteristics and attributes that contribute to variations in the overall character of the landscape within the fringes of Thornwood Common are illustrated on Figure 3.1 and described in summary below: The majority of the settlement edges are lined with mature hedgerows, trees or large blocks of woodland, which create soft, green edges; There is a small patch of harsh urban edge at the northern edge of the settlement where low or gappy hedgerows within the back gardens allow short distance
    [Show full text]
  • 19LAD0106 Crest Nicholson Eastern
    April 2019 Hearing Statement for Epping Forest Local Plan Examination Matter 15: Places and Sites Hearing Date: 14th May 2019 On Behalf of Crest Nicholson Eastern 1 Introduction 1.1. This Hearing Statement has been prepared on behalf of Crest Nicholson (Eastern) in relation to land at Pickfield Nursery (SLAA site reference SR-0161). It has specifically been prepared to address Matter 15: Places and Sites, and responds to the associated issues and questions raised by the Inspector to test the legal compliance and soundness of the emerging Epping Forest District Local Pan 2011-2033 (“the Plan”). 1.2. In order to make the Plan sound, the following amendments are considered necessary: The identification of Pickfield Nursery as residential allocation WAL.R9 for approximately 90 homes under ‘Policy P3: Waltham Abbey’ and an amendment to Map 5.6 to reflect this, as shown at Appendix 1; and An amendment to Map 5.6 to remove the delivered site Knolly’s Nursery (located east of Pickfield Nursery and identified as site WAL.R8) from the Green Belt, which the Plan currently ignores. 1.3. In light of our evidence put forward to date from the outset of the Plan preparation process, we request that Pickfield Nursery is considered thoroughly by the Inspector, as it is suitable, available and deliverable for development in the first three years of the Plan period. A summary of the site promotion that has been undertaken to date is included at Appendix 2. 1.4. Pickfield Nursery’s contribution to the purposes of the Green Belt is extremely limited and lower than nearby sites to the north of Waltham Abbey that have been proposed for allocation in the emerging Local Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Hadham Parish News June 2014
    Little Hadham Parish News June 2014 Rector of Parish: Revd. Giles Tulk Asst. Priest: Revd. Clive Slaughter 01279 842609 01279 844955 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Team Vicar: Revd. Stephen Fielding 01279 771892 e-mail: [email protected] Churchwarden: Don Gibson 771325 Log on to www.littlehadham.com for issues dating back to May 2006 Letter from the Rectory Dear friends in Little Hadham Are we a Christian Country? Writing in The Church Times just before Easter, our Prime Minister, David Cameron, caused a bit of a stir in the national media when he stated that people in the UK should be more confident about our status as a Christian country. This prompted a letter by 50 public figures to The Daily Telegraph insisting that the UK was a non-religious and plural society, and that to claim otherwise fosters alienation and division. The problem with those disputing that Britain is a Christian country is that they tend to paint a picture of what they think Christians believe, and then they attack this picture, rather than the reality of Christian faith in this country. Too often, militant atheists or aggressive secularists assume (or like to assume) that Christians are fundamentalists; people who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, and are not open to reason or science. In my experience nothing could be further from the truth. I would suggest that the vast majority of people within the Church of England have a Christian belief that is open to reason and never in conflict with the trusts and insights provided by science, and sometimes by philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Analysis of the River Lee and Major Tributaries Within the Perimeter of the M25, from Waltham Abbey to Bow Locks
    A water quality analysis of the River Lee and major tributaries within the perimeter of the M25, from Waltham Abbey to Bow Locks. Client: Thames21 Consultant: Grieg R Davies Water sampling and analyses dates: 22 November – 04 December 2011 Date issued: 13 December 2011 Executive summary This report was commissioned to assess the biological, physical and chemical water quality of the London River Lee and its main tributaries within the M25 perimeter, from the M25 near Waltham Abbey to Bow Locks in Bow, London. A pilot water quality investigation was developed to assess 38 sites within seven watercourses, including the London River Lee. Common physical and chemical water quality parameters were measured in the field and analysed by means of representative samples in a laboratory. Samples and measurements were taken during a period of ‘reference’ water levels within the watercourses. Results were compared and analysed against existing water quality classifications from the EU Water Framework Directive amongst others. The investigation determined that the overall water quality within the London River Lee and its tributaries is very poor. Excessive concentrations of reactive phosphate (orthophosphate) in combination with low saturation of dissolved oxygen were common place within many of the sampled sites, as well as high counts of total coliforms and the presence of considerable levels of faecal coliforms. Values for chemical oxygen demand were also found to be excessively high within the majority of sample sites. A simple water quality index determined that the most deteriorated watercourse in the investigation was Stonebridge Brook, while the most deteriorated sample sites were located on the Pymmes Brook and Salmons Brook.
    [Show full text]