DOCSLIB.ORG

Flood Risk Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flood Risk Assessment NORTH LONDON WASTE AUTHORITY NORTH LONDON HEAT AND POWER PROJECT FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT The Planning Act 2008 The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Regulation 5 (2) (e) AD05.14 Amec Foster Wheeler Revision 0 October 2015 Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this disclaimer. The report was prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler at the instruction of, and for use by our client, and takes into account the instructions and requirements of our client. It does not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to access it by any means. Amec Foster Wheeler excludes to the fullest extent lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report by any third party. We do not however exclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or death resulting from our negligence, for fraud or any other matter in relation to which we cannot legally exclude liability. North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Flood Risk Assessment Contents Page Executive summary 1 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Introduction 4 1.2 Purpose of this document 4 1.3 Document structure 5 1.4 The Applicant 5 1.5 The Application Site 6 1.6 Surrounding area 7 1.7 The Project 8 1.8 Stages of development 12 2 The existing Application Site 19 2.1 Application Site description 19 2.2 Topography 19 2.3 Hydrology 22 2.4 Existing drainage 24 2.5 Geology, hydrogeology and soils 24 3 Proposed ground cover 28 4 Planning context 29 4.2 National Policy Statement for Energy (NPS EN-1) 29 4.3 National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (NPS EN-3) 30 4.4 National Planning Policy Framework 30 4.5 National Planning Policy Guidance 33 4.6 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 33 4.7 Enfield Development Management Document 34 4.8 Enfield Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 34 4.9 London Plan 34 4.10 Environment Agency 35 4.11 Climate change 35 5 Flood risk 36 5.1 Potential sources of flood risk 36 5.2 Fluvial flood risk 36 5.3 Groundwater flood risk 40 5.4 Surface water flood risk 40 5.5 Sewer flooding 41 5.6 Artificial sources 42 AD05.04 | Issue | October 2015 | Amec Foster Wheeler E&I UK Ltd North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Flood Risk Assessment 6 Mitigation for flood risk 44 6.1 Fluvial flood risk 44 6.2 Artificial sources 53 7 Surface water management 54 7.1 Introduction 54 7.2 Preliminary Drainage Strategy 54 8 Conclusions 56 Tables Table 2.1: Summary of current land cover ........................................................... 19 Table 2.2: Depth and thickness of the clay layer at the Application Site .............. 25 Table 3.1: Ground cover at the Application Site ................................................... 28 Table 3.2: Ground cover for the Temporary Laydown Area ................................. 28 Table 4.1: Requirements of NPS EN-1 ................................................................ 29 Table 4.2: Flood Zone classification (Table 1 from National Planning Practice Guidance: Flood Risk and Coastal Change) ....................................... 31 Table 4.3 Flood Risk vulnerability classification (from Table 2 National Planning Practice Guidance: Flood Risk and Coastal Change) ......................... 32 Table 4.4: Flood Risk Vulnerability and Flood Zone Compatibility (Table 3 of National Planning Practice Guidance) ................................................. 32 Table 5.1: Summary of flood risks identified ........................................................ 36 Table 5.2: Modelled in-river flood levels adjacent to the Application Site (mAOD) – defended scenario ............................................................................... 39 Figures Figure 2.1: Site topography ................................................................................... 21 Figure 2.2: Hydrology features .............................................................................. 23 Figure 2.3: Source Protection Zones at the Application Site ................................. 26 Figure 5.1: Environment Agency Flood Zone mapping ......................................... 37 Figure 5.2: Flood mapping from the Environment Agency - defended scenario .... 38 Figure 5.3: Reservoir flood inundation zone modelled by the Environment Agency ............................................................................................................ 43 Figure 6.1: EcoPark House overlaid on flood map showing the 1 per cent AEP plus climate change defended flood extent ................................................. 45 Figure 6.2: Excerpt from Topography Survey – existing sea cadet building on the wharf ................................................................................................... 45 Figure 6.3: EcoPark House flood storage compensation ...................................... 46 Figure 6.4: EcoPark House flood storage compensation shown in wider site context ................................................................................................ 47 AD05.04 | Issue | October 2015 | Amec Foster Wheeler E&I UK Ltd North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Flood Risk Assessment Figure 6.5: Flood map showing the 1% AEP plus climate change defended flood extent .................................................................................................. 48 Figure 6.6: Excerpt from Topography Survey – existing car park .......................... 48 Figure 6.7: Existing and proposed Application Site layout – improved Advent Way access ................................................................................................. 48 Figure 6.8: Floodplain compensation area ............................................................ 50 Appendices Appendix A : Site Photos A.1 Appendix B : Environment Agency Correspondence and Flood Risk Information B.1 Appendix C : Preliminary Drainage Strategy C.1 Glossary Refer to Project Glossary (AD01.05) AD05.04 | Issue | October 2015 | Amec Foster Wheeler E&I UK Ltd North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Flood Risk Assessment Executive summary i.i.i This Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been prepared for the North London Heat and Power Project (the Project) at Advent Way, Enfield in North London. This report supports an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO). i.i.ii This FRA has been prepared in line with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1 and other relevant national, regional and local policy and guidance. The Environment Agency (EA) and London Borough Enfield (LB Enfield) have been consulted on the approach. i.i.iii Current EA flood risk mapping shows that most of the Application Site is located in Flood Zone 1, with the central section of Edmonton EcoPark within Flood Zone 2, i.e. there is a low probability of flooding across the majority of the Edmonton EcoPark, but some areas are at risk during an extreme fluvial flood (the 0.1 per cent Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) event). The Temporary Laydown Area is entirely located within Flood Zone 2. Watercourses which are close to the Application Site are Enfield Ditch and Salmon’s Brook which are adjacent to Edmonton EcoPark, and the River Lee Navigation. The River Lee itself is located approximately 25m to the east of the Temporary Laydown Area. i.i.iv The Project is appropriate for Flood Zone 2. As such, the Exception Test does not need to be passed. The Sequential Test is deemed to be passed because the Application Site has been allocated for the current (and the proposed) use by LB Enfield in their development planning documents; the Edmonton EcoPark is already in use for waste processing and power generation and will continue to be used as such. There is, however, a remaining requirement to apply a sequential approach to the development within the red line boundary. i.i.v Once an allowance for climate change has been taken into account, three small areas of the Edmonton EcoPark are within the defended 1 per cent AEP flood extent. The first of these is on the wharf adjacent to the River Lee Navigation where EcoPark House is proposed. 11.0m3 flood storage compensation would be provided for loss of floodplain volume under the climate change scenario. Level for level storage would be provided on-site upstream of the wharf on the west bank of Enfield Ditch. Finished floor levels be set at or above 10.97m AOD, which incorporates a 300mm freeboard above the design flood level. The second area relates to a small existing car park in the southern section of the Application Site. Part of this is to be developed to provide an improved southern access road from Advent Way to the Edmonton EcoPark, and floodplain compensation is also proposed here. Approximately 107m3 of compensation would be provided on the northern bank of Enfield Ditch. The cross section of the new crossing over Enfield Ditch for the improved southern access would remain unchanged compared to that for the existing crossing, to ensure no impact elsewhere as a result of constriction of flows. The third area is located on 1 Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012. Page 1 AD05.04 | Issue | October 2015 | Amec Foster Wheeler E&I UK Ltd North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Flood Risk Assessment the western edge of Edmonton Eco Park, associated with the flood extent of Salmon’s Brook. i.i.vi Upgrades are proposed to one crossing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rye Meads Water Cycle Study\F-Reports\Phase 3\5003-Bm01390-Bmr-18 Water Cycle Strategy Final Report.Doc
    STEVENAGE BOROUGH COUNCIL RYE MEADS WATER CYCLE STRATEGY DETAILED STUDY REPORT FINAL REPORT Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited 2212959 Aston Cross Business Village 50Rocky Lane Aston Birmingham B6 5RQ United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)870 000 3007 Fax: +44 (0)870 000 3907 www.hyderconsulting.com STEVENAGE BOROUGH COUNCIL RYE MEADS WATER CYCLE STRATEGY DETAILED STUDY REPORT FINAL REPORT James Latham/ Dan Author Vogtlin Checker Renuka Gunasekara Approver Mike Irwin Report No 5003-BM01390-BMR-18-Water Cycle Strategy Final Report Date 5th October 2009 This report has been prepared for STEVENAGE BOROUGH COUNCIL in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment for WATER CYCLE STRATEGY dated April 2008. Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited (2212959) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party. RYE MEADS WATER CYCLE STRATEGY—DETAILED STUDY REPORT Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959 k:\bm01390- rye meads water cycle study\f-reports\phase 3\5003-bm01390-bmr-18 water cycle strategy final report.doc Revisions Prepared Approved Revision Date Description By By - 2/10/2008 Draft Report Structure JL 1 18/11/2008 First Report Draft JL/DV MI 2 27/01/2009 Draft Report JL/DV MI 3-13 03/04/2009 Final Draft Report as amended by stakeholder comments JL/DV RG 14 09/07/2009 Final Draft Report JL/DV RG 15 10/07/2009 Final Draft Report Redacted JL/DV RG 16 21/08/2009 Final Draft Report JL/DV RG 17 21/09/2009 Final Draft following core project team meeting comments JL/DV RG 18 05/10/2009 Final Report JL/DV MI RYE MEADS WATER CYCLE STRATEGY—DETAILED STUDY REPORT Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd-2212959 k:\bm01390- rye meads water cycle study\f-reports\phase 3\5003-bm01390-bmr-18 water cycle strategy final report.doc CONTENTS 1 Introduction and Summary of Key Outcomes ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 1 BRITISH WATERWAYS BOARD
    LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 1 BRITISH WATERWAYS BOARD ACC/2423 Reference Description Dates LEE CONSERVANCY BOARD ENGINEER'S OFFICE Engineers' reports and letter books LEE CONSERVANCY BOARD: ENGINEER'S REPORTS ACC/2423/001 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1881 Jan-1883 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/002 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1884 Jan-1886 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/003 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1887 Jan-1889 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/004 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1890 Jan-1893 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/005 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1894 Jan-1896 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/006 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1897 Jan-1899 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/007 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1903 Jan-1903 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/008 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1904 Jan-1904 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/009 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1905 Jan-1905 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/010 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1906 Jan-1906 Lea navigation Dec 1 volume LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 2 BRITISH WATERWAYS BOARD ACC/2423 Reference Description Dates ACC/2423/011 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1908 Jan-1908 Lea navigation/ stort navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/012 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1912 Jan-1912 Lea navigation/ stort navigation Dec 1 volume ACC/2423/013 Reports on navigation - signed copies 1913 Jan-1913 Lea navigation/ stort navigation
    [Show full text]
  • BAA Airport Wide Hydrogen Feasibility Study Stationary & Portable Fuel
    BAA Airport Wide Hydrogen Feasibility Study Stationary & portable fuel cells Final Report 10/03/11 [email protected] [email protected] Element Energy Limited 1 • Introduction & Executive Summary • Back-up and prime power applications • Hydrogen supply options • Building CHP and trigeneration applications • Biogas-fuelled systems • Portable power and UPS • Conclusions 2 Introduction: drivers for fuel cells This study is an assessment of opportunities for deployment of stationary and portable fuel cells at Heathrow Airport. The document complements a separate analysis of the opportunities for hydrogen transport applications. There are a number of drivers for consideration of fuel cells in stationary power applications at Heathrow. Key drivers include: • Reduction of CO2 emissions – Fuel cells offer the potential to reduce Heathrow’s CO2 emissions through more efficient heat and power generation. • Air Quality improvement – Use of fuel cells produces fewer NOx and particulate emissions, compared to incumbent systems. • Reliability and availability – Fuel cells can outperform batteries and gensets in certain critical back-up applications. • Low noise – Noise pollution is a significant issue at Heathrow. Fuel cells offer very quiet operation compared to incumbent gensets. • Integration with waste processing – Fuel cells could deliver benefits as part of an integrated waste management system at Heathrow • Synergy with transport applications – Adoption of hydrogen in both stationary and transport applications could be mutually beneficial 3 Introduction: Potential applications There are a range of potential applications around Heathrow where fuel cells could play a role: Prime and back-up power – diesel gensets are currently employed in a number of back-up power applications and there is interest in use of on-site generation in a peak-shaving mode (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Management Plan London Borough Of
    SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAIN LONDON LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD FINAL DRAFT v2.0 Quality Management Quality Management DOCUMENT INFORMATION Title: Surface Water Management Plan for London Borough of Enfield Owner: Ian Russell Version: v3.0 Status: Final Project Number: CS/046913 File Name: DLT2_GP4_Enfield_SWMP Final_V3.0 REVISION HISTORY Date of Summary of Changes Completed By Version Issue Initial draft SI 12/06/2011 1.0 Final Draft SI 01/08/2011 2.0 Final IR 05/01/2012 3.0 AUTHOR Name Organisation and Role Stephanie Ip Senior Consultant, Capita Symonds Ruth Farrar Consultant, Capita Symonds APPROVALS Name Title Signature Date Ruth Goodall Director, Capita Symonds Principal Consultant, Capita Michael Arthur Symonds Ian Russell Senior Engineer, LB Enfield Kevin Reid Programme Manager DISTRIBUTION Name Organisation and Role Ian Russell Senior Engineer, LB Enfield Kevin Reid Programme Manager, GLA RELATED DOCUMENTS Date of Doc Ref Document Title Author Version Issue i Acknowledgements Acknowledgements A number of people and organisations outside Enfield Council have contributed to this Surface Water Management Plan. Their assistance is greatly appreciated, and in particularly inputs and information provided by: • The British Geological Survey • British Waterways • Drain London Group 4 boroughs: o London Borough of Haringey o London Borough of Hackney o London Borough of Waltham Forest o London Borough of Newham o London Borough of Tower Hamlets • The Environment Agency • The Greater London Authority • London Councils • The London Fire Brigade • Network Rail • Thames Water • Transport for London and London Underground ii Executive Summary Executive Summary This document forms the Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) for the London Borough (LB) of Enfield.
    [Show full text]
  • Applicant's Responses to Written Representations
    Riverside Energy Park Applicant's responses to Written Representations VOLUME NUMBER: PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE NUMBER: EN010093 DOCUMENT REFERENCE: 08 8.02.14 June 2019 Revision 0 (Deadline 3) APFP Regulation 5(2)(q) Planning Act 2008 | Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Riverside Energy Park Applicant’s Response to Written Representations Contents 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Local Authority .............................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Greater London Authority .............................................................................................. 2 2.2 Kent County Council .................................................................................................... 63 2.3 London Borough of Bexley .......................................................................................... 68 2.4 London Borough of Tower Hamlets ............................................................................ 97 3 Statutory Organisations ............................................................................................................... 99 3.1 East London Waste Authority ...................................................................................... 99 3.2 Environment Agency ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AD06.02 Environmental Statement Volume 2 Appendices 11.1 to 11.3
    NORTH LONDON WASTE AUTHORITY NORTH LONDON HEAT AND POWER PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT: VOLUME 2 APPENDICES 11.1 TO 11.3 AD06.02 NORTH LONDON WASTE AUTHORITY NORTH LONDON HEAT AND POWER PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT: VOLUME 2 APPENDIX 11.1 WATER RESOURCES AND FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AD06.02 North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Environmental Statement Volume 2 Appendix 11.1 Water Resources and Flood Risk Assessment Methodology AD06.02 The Planning Act 2008 The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Regulation 5 (2)(a) Issue October 2015 Amec Foster Wheeler E&I UK Ltd This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It does not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to access it by any means. Amec Foster Wheeler excludes to the fullest extent lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. We do not however exclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or death resulting from our negligence, for fraud or any other matter in relation to which we cannot legally exclude liability. North London Waste Authority North London Heat and Power Project Environmental Statement Volume 2 Appendix 11.1 Water Resources and Flood Risk Assessment Methodology Contents Page 1 Water Resources and Flood Risk Assessment Methodology 2 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Engagement 2 1.3 Legislation and guidance 10 1.4 Baseline conditions
    [Show full text]
  • Salmons Brook Healthy River Challenge: the Start-Up Performance of Three Constructed Wetlands at Improving Water Quality
    Salmons Brook Healthy River Challenge: The start-up performance of three constructed wetlands at improving water quality. Water sampling, analysis and report by Dr. Nathalie Gilbert, Thames21. May 2016 Executive Summary This report assesses the start-up performance of three constructed wetlands at improving water quality in the period immediately after construction and planting. The systems were located in the catchment of the Salmons Brook, a tributary of the River Lea, in Enfield north London and consisted of: i) an integrated wetland (Glenbrook), ii) an infiltration basin (Grovelands Park) and a reedbed (Grovelands Park). Water quality was investigated by a twice-monthly regime of water sampling (April – November), laboratory testing and statistical analysis of concentrations of nutrients (total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrate, phosphate), heavy metals (copper, zinc, lead, cadmium) and coliform bacteria. Additionally, on three occasions each of the six basins of the integrated wetland were sampled in order to assess the performance of each basin at improving water quality. Results indicated that all three constructed wetlands were all highly effective at removing nitrogen compounds and coliform bacteria. Statistically significant differences in these parameters were reported, with average reductions between the inflow and outflow to the system of up to 67% of ammonia, 68% of nitrate, and 55% of total nitrogen. According to EU bathing water standards (the only standards available for this parameter, but not applicable to non-designated bathing water areas), classification improved from poor (imperative) at the system inflows to good at the outflows. During all but the highest flows, the infiltration basin (Grovelands Park) captured all polluted water and allowed it to slowly filter into the ground, indicating almost total effectiveness in preventing all pollutants from entering the Salmons Brook.
    [Show full text]
  • Outlook and Benefits of an Efficient U.S. Coal Fleet Final Report January 2019
    woodmac.com Outlook and Benefits of An Efficient U.S. Coal Fleet Final Report January 2019 Trusted Intelligence woodmac.com INTRODUCTION woodmac.com Outlook of US HELE Plants Objectives of this study (1) Benchmark the installed capacity of US HELE plants against other jurisdictions o Benchmarking of the US installed capacity of HELE plants o Lessons learned from other jurisdictions on what it takes to foster the development of HELE plants o Realistic scenarios for the pace of development of HELE plants in the US, in light of the experience of countries ahead of the curve (2) Estimate the positive impact of HELE plants not monetized by private investors o Estimate other benefits not monetized, not properly captured by private investors o Social valuation of HELE plants, encompassing benefits currently not monetized by investors (3) Drive implications for policies and regulations o Findings to foster the development of HELE plants in the US o Potential implications for coal policies and regulations 2 OUTLOOK AND BENEFITS OF AN EFFICIENT U.S. COAL FLEET woodmac.com Coal-fired power plants capacity has grown 62% globally since 2000, exceeding 2,000 GW in 2018 Coal still is and will continue to be a predominant fuel in the global energy matrix Global Coal-Fired Power Plants Installed Capacity GW 2,500 CAGR 2000-2018 2,013 2,000 +1.4% +2.7% -4.6% +62% 1,500 1,243 -0.8% +3.1% 1,000 998 +7.8% 500 440 +4.7% 282 238 -0.9% 0 2011 2004 2005 2006 2000 2001 2002 2003 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 United States China India JKT1 Germany Western Europe2 Rest of World Note: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Investing in Our Communities
    Investing in our communities Community Investment Programme Summary 2014-2020 Walthamstow Wetlands Our commitment to Public Value is all about contributing to society while delivering life’s essential service. Protecting the environment, enriching lives and helping those who need it most is at the heart of this commitment, and we’re proud to be part of the communities we serve. We work in five-year funding cycles (AMP periods), which we agree with our regulator Ofwat. At the end of our last funding Did you know? cycle, we committed to investing £8.5 million in community-based Our community investment initiatives within our region over five years. This was funded by our shareholders in agreement with Ofwat and formed the basis of our AMP6 community investment programme has reached over programme. one million people This report details some the fantastic partners we’ve worked with to make our community investment projects a success. £2 million for our Trust Fund £6.5 million for community investment and education Summary Programme Investment Community 2015-2020 We provided £2 million for our Thames Water Trust Fund - a We allocated £6.5 million to fund 60 community projects as well as our popular education centres. registered charity that provides critical assistance for our most vulnerable customers. Focusing on engagement, learning and environmental enhancement, we contributed to schemes in the following areas: Our Trust Fund is split into two areas: the Organisational Grant Programme, which provides debt and money advice services to the local community, and the Hardship Fund, which helps people who are in need of more immediate support by Education and Biodiversity and Sustainable urban Improving green Encouraging Heritage Health through Citizen Science 2015-2020 providing grants towards essential household items.
    [Show full text]
  • Zero Carbon Haringey Stage 1 Technical Report
    Haringey Borough Council Zero Carbon Haringey Stage 1 Technical Report Issue 2 | 18 March 2018 This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party. Job number 258282-00 Ove Arup & Partners Ltd 13 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ www.arup.com Document Verification Job title Zero Carbon Haringey Job number 258282-00 Document title Stage 1 Technical Report File reference 4-07 Document ref Revision Date Filename ZC_Haringey_Stage -1-Report_Draft-1_2018-01-29.docx Draft 1 29 Jan Description First draft 2018 Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Stephanie Robson Anne Gilpin Stephen Cook Signature Issue 26 Feb Filename ZC_Haringey_Stage -1-Report_Issue_2018-02-26.docx 2018 Description Issue to client Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Stephanie Robson Anne Gilpin Stephen Cook Signature Issue 2 18 Mar Filename ZC_Haringey_Stage -1-Report_Issue 2_2018-03-18c.docx 2018 Description Update following client comments Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Stephanie Robson Anne Gilpin Stephen Cook Signature SR AG Filename Description Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Signature Issue Document Verification with Document | Issue 2 | 18 March 2018 ZC_HARINGEY_STAGE-1-REPORT_ISSUE 2_2018-03-18.DOCX ZC_HARINGEY_STAGE-1-REPORT_ISSUE 2_2018-03-18.DOCX Haringey Borough Council Zero Carbon Haringey Stage 1 Technical Report Contents Page 1 Introduction 6 2 International, national and regional
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Enfield Biodiversity Action Plan an Addendum to Enfield's
    Enfield London Borough Council Review of the Enfield Biodiversity Action Plan An addendum to Enfield's Blue and Green Strategy Final report Prepared by LUC April 2021 Enfield London Borough Council Review of the Enfield Biodiversity Action Plan An addendum to Enfield's Blue and Green Strategy Project Number 10871 Version Status Prepared Checked Approved Date 1. Preliminary Draft SS n/a n/a n/a 2. Second Draft – completed text, SS MP MP 09.11.2020 incl. initial client feedback 3. Issue SS MP MP 25.11.2020 4. Issue 02 – final client comments SS MP MP 26.11.2020 5. Issue 03 – final consultee SS MP MP 07.04.2021 comments Bristol Land Use Consultants Ltd Landscape Design Edinburgh Registered in England Strategic Planning & Assessment Glasgow Registered number 2549296 Development Planning London Registered office: Urban Design & Masterplanning Manchester 250 Waterloo Road Environmental Impact Assessment London SE1 8RD Landscape Planning & Assessment landuse.co.uk Landscape Management 100% recycled paper Ecology Historic Environment GIS & Visualisation Contents A Review of Enfield's Biodiversity Action Plan April 2021 Contents Chapter 1 Chapter 6 Introduction 1 Review of Enfield BAP Objectives 34 Nature for People: A Biodiversity Action Plan for Enfield 1 Objective 1: To review our LWS SINC regularly and Aims of the BAP Review 2 designate and re-designate sites as appropriate 34 Cross-Compatible Studies 2 Objective 2: To implement ecological management plans for all council- managed SINC LWS by 2015, and to encourage other SINC landowners managers
    [Show full text]
  • Forty Hall Revisited
    TES News No 186 • Summer 2012 The newsletter of The Enfield Society Forty Hall revisited The Society is looking forward to the reopening of Forty Hall following its total restoration supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund. At last this magnificent Grade I listed building will be in a condition appropriate to its historic importance in Enfield. We congratulate everyone who has played a part in this splendid transformation. The Hall will be open again to the public in July and on the 18th September the Society will be holding a very special celebratory event in the Banqueting Suite at Forty Hall as part of our Heritage Programme for 2012 – see page 7 for full details. We are currently discussing with the Council, among other things, the possible sponsorship of its planned education programme, especially for children, at Forty Hall; the Society recognises the importance of this project and welcomes this link with such an important historic asset in our Borough. agreed with the Council and detailed This would be the second time the plans finalised to develop the House as a Society has become very much involved heritage centre and to seek grant funding Call for assistance with Forty Hall. for building improvements. A Friends of For many years the Society has We have always had concerns over Forty Forty Hall voluntary group was to be had a stand at the annual Enfield Hall and especially about its long term established and an experienced manager Autumn Town Show. This has future. In 1999 our concern was was selected to run the Hall.
    [Show full text]