DOCSLIB.ORG

15. Coastal Defences

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
15. Coastal Defences Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Southampton Approach Channel Dredge Updated by Further Information 15. Coastal Defences Executive Summary: Chapter 15. Coastal Defences The proposed channel dredge is consistent with the policies set out in National Planning Policy Framework Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25, which sets out the Government’s national policies on development and flood risk in England. None of the proposed works are planned to take place upon land and, therefore, this chapter can be considered to be a stand alone Flood Risk Assessment (FRA). There will be no direct effects on any of the coastal defences in the study area as a result of the proposed works. The potential indirect impacts that will arise from the proposed scheme, either through changes to the hydrodynamic or sediment regime, were assessed as: 1) Potential Impact Due to Changes in Water Levels The predicted changes in high water (HW) levels across Southampton Water and the Solent are millimetric and negligible in the context of natural variability in the wind-wave environment and would be nearly impossible to measure or observe in the field. Therefore, the impact of changes in water levels across the study area is considered to be insignificant. With respect to flood risk assessment, there will be no change to the risk of flooding as a result of the proposed dredge. 2) Potential Impact Due to Changes in the Flow and Sediment Transport Regime In Southampton Water, there will be a marginal change in the flow dynamics that will result in minor changes to existing erosion and sedimentation patterns. The predicted level of these changes would not be measurable from natural variation and would be close to the accuracy of any recording instrument. In the Solent, the pattern of flow speed and directions are largely unaffected and the only changes evident occur within the areas proposed to be dredged (i.e. not along the coast). Although the changes to flows and sedimentary processes that are predicted in Southampton Water will potentially improve the situation with respect to coastal flood protection, the overall impact across the study area is considered to be insignificant. 3) Potential Impacts Due to Ship Wash The total energy reaching the shore and seabed from vessel generated wave activity, water surface drawdown, backflow and vessel propeller wash will be marginally reduced. These changes in ship wash have the potential to marginally reduce intertidal erosion from existing conditions and the risk of overtopping existing sea defences, although this is unlikely to be discernable from background wind-wave energies reaching the shore. Therefore, the overall impact of ship wash is considered to be minor beneficial significant to the integrity of coastal defences, albeit marginal. Conclusion There will be no direct impact to coastal protection levels as a result of the proposed Southampton Approach Channel Dredge. Following completion of the capital works, the indirect impacts on flood risk will be insignificant. There will be a marginal reduction in the existing impacts to coastal defences from ship wash, which is considered to be minor beneficial significant. R/3742/8 232 R.2015 Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Southampton Approach Channel Dredge Updated by Further Information Coastal Defence Management 15.1 Operational management of coastal protection structures lies largely with District and Unitary Councils. Under the Water Resources Act 1991, the Environment Agency is responsible for supervision of all matters relating to flood defence and has permissive powers to maintain and improve water levels on main rivers. Natural England has a role in assessing the impact of coastal defence on nature conservation interests and Defra has a supervisory role, which includes providing an overarching policy framework and administering grant aid. Organisations with responsibilities and interests in shoreline protection along the south-central coast of England formed the Standing Conference on Problems Associated with the Coastline (SCOPAC) in 1986, providing a forum for debate on the difficulties relating to coastal defence and protection. 15.2 The Government’s national policies on development and flood risk in England are set out in National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25. This NPPF PPS aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and to direct developments away from areas of highest risk. This chapter demonstrates that the proposed development is consistent with the policies set out in NPPF PPS25, and on the basis that none of the development is planned to take place upon land, can be considered to be a stand alone Flood Risk Assessment (FRA). In this way, the risk of flooding arising from the development has been considered and the impacts of climate change according to Defra’s latest guidelines (2006) have been taken into account in the impact assessment. 15.3 The characteristics of the coastal defences and their management types and practices protecting the coastline in the study area are presented in Figure 15.1. New coastal defences and changes to existing coastal defences are designed with future changes to sea level and the potential for overtopping taken into account. The timescale over which designed defences provide protection is typically in the order of 10 to 50 years depending on the coastal area. The saltmarshes and mudflats of the study area act as an additional natural block to wave energy and inhibit erosion of the backing coast and any manmade defences. The presence of these natural features, therefore, enhances the effectiveness of manmade protection works and effectively provides a two-tier coastal defence. The baseline distribution of marine and coastal habitats in the study area has been reviewed in Chapter 11 and the status of the saltmarsh, with respect to erosion and accretion patterns, is reviewed in Chapter 8. 15.4 Coastal defence strategies that cover the coastline of the study area are currently set out in the Western Solent and Southampton Water Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) North Solent Shoreline Management Plan, the East Solent SMP and the Isle of Wight SMP. These management plans are being revised and are expected to be completed by the end of 2009 (see Chapter 5). In addition to these SMPs, there is an Estuary Management Plan (EMP) for the Hamble Estuary. ABPmer have also undertaken an estuary processes study on behalf of Mouchel Parkman for Southampton City Council and backed by Eastleigh and Fareham Borough Councils in support of the coastal defence strategy for the River Itchen, Weston Shore, Netley and Hamble (ABPmer, 2006). The study describes the key issues and problems facing the study area based on current information, supported through the use of the photographs taken during a survey of the study frontage. R/3742/8 233 R.2015 Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Southampton Approach Channel Dredge Updated by Further Information 15.5 The following baseline sections review the levels of protection along the key areas of coastline in the context of existing coastal defence strategies and associated studies, as well as additional information provided on the SCOPAC website. Baseline Information Southampton Water and Test, Itchen and Hamble Estuaries 15.6 Over 26km of the shoreline in Southampton Water and its component tributaries is protected by a wide range of coastal protection works. Prevailing south-westerlies mean that the estuary is relatively sheltered with slightly more energy reaching the eastern shore than the western shore. Coastal protection works include steel piling and concrete sea walls, stone, rock armour and rubble revetments, shingle ridges, stone walls, gabion baskets, concrete revetments, steel pipes, concrete and timber piles, and sandbanks. Table 15.1 summarises the lengths of coastline in Southampton Water and its component tributaries protected by various engineering structures. Southampton City Council and the Port of Southampton own the majority of these defences. However, defences are also owned by the New Forest District Council, Fareham Borough Council, commercial organisations and private owners. Table 15.1 Summary of manmade coastal defences in Southampton Water and its tributaries Southampton Southampton % Length (m) River Test River Itchen River Hamble Total Water West Water East of Total Concrete wall 1640 290 430 1610 1030 5000 19 Shingle ridge 0 890 0 270 0 1160 4.4 Rock armour 2200 0 0 0 0 2200 8.3 Steel pipe 420 0 0 0 0 420 1.16 Steel piling 3510 0 665 2710 1450 8335 31.6 Gabion basket 50 0 160 110 290 610 2.3 Concrete pile 280 0 0 90 0 370 1.4 Concrete revetment 50 0 0 400 90 540 2 Rubble revetment 1150 0 0 120 520 1790 6.8 Timber pile 0 0 75 20 200 295 1.1 Stone revetment 0 0 0 1940 2490 4430 16.8 Sand bags 0 0 250 0 0 250 1 Stone wall 0 0 550 0 420 970 3.7 Total 9300 1180 1880 7270 6490 26370 100 (Source: Western Solent and Southampton Water SMP) 15.7 With respect to natural defences, the majority of the lower intertidal shoreline in Southampton Water and its tributaries comprises mudflat, the western side of the estuary being largely backed by saltmarsh and the eastern side backed by natural low cliffs, such as Netley Cliff. Over 32km of the shoreline is currently not protected by manmade coastal defences (i.e. it is protected by existing natural habitat), which constitutes over
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hamble River Logboat: Report on Recent Investigation by HWTMA
    Hamble River Logboat: Report on Recent Investigation by HWTMA Hampshire and Wight Trust for Maritime Archaeology September 2010 Hamble River Logboat Study Report Contents I. DOCUMENT CONTROL ........................................................................................................... 1 II. LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES .................................................................................................. 1 III. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................................... 2 1. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 PROJECT AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................ 2 1.2 THE RIVER HAMBLE ........................................................................................................... 2 1.3 HISTORY OF THE HAMBLE LOGBOAT ................................................................................... 2 1.4 THE HAMBLE LOGBOAT TODAY............................................................................................ 5 2. INVESTIGATION OF THE HAMBLE LOGBOAT................................................................. 6 2.1 DENDRO-CHRONOLOGY (BY NIGEL NAYLING)...................................................................... 6 3. ANALYSIS OF THE HAMBLE LOGBOAT........................................................................... 7 3.1 CONTEXT .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Abbots Worthy Fishery River Itchen, Hampshire
    Abbots Worthy Fishery River Itchen, Hampshire Abbots Worthy Fishery River Itchen, Hampshire Winchester 3 miles (London Waterloo 57 mins), Alresford 6 miles and Stockbridge 10 miles. Syndicate membership for the Abbots Worthy beat on the Itchen Introduction The River Itchen is considered to be one of the finest English chalk streams by anglers worldwide. Rising from the Hampshire chalk downland near New Cheriton, the river has a reported catchment area of 280 miles from its source where it is known as the Titchbourne Stream. The river is approximately 28 miles long and flows north to New Alresford where it is joined by two spring fed streams, the Erle and the Candover Brook, becoming the River Itchen flowing west past Ovington and Itchen Abbot, east to Abbots Worthy and south to Winchester and Southampton where the river becomes tidal and joins the reaches of the River Test on Southampton Water. The river is highly sought after for its quality of water and fly fishing and almost completely wild trout population. Situation The Abbots Worthy beat on the Upper Itchen is located on the edge of the village of Abbots Worthy approximately 3 miles to the north of the cathedral city of Winchester. Within Abbots Worthy and the adjacent Kings Worthy there are everyday conveniences including shops, post office and public house. Winchester provides a comprehensive range of shops, cultural and recreational facilities and a wide choice of restaurants and wine bars. Travel and communications are excellent with the A33, A34 and M3 adjacent giving access to both London and the south coast, Oxford, the north and the A303 for the west country.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Evidence Net Fishing Management for Estuaries, Harbours and Piers in Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight
    Supporting Evidence Net Fishing Management for Estuaries, Harbours and Piers in Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight Annex I: Table of Proposed Net Management Areas Annex II: Existing Measures Annex III: Net Management Area Selection Evidence Annex IV: Temporal Salmonid Migration Annex I – Table of Proposed Net Management Areas 21 No. Area Map Management proposal Timing 1. Chichester Harbour 1 No additional net use closure - 2. Langstone Harbour: Bridge 1 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year Lake and associated rivers 3. Langstone Harbour: all areas 1 No additional net use closure - excluding Bridge Lake 4. Portsmouth Harbour: Fareham 1 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year Creek and River Wallington 5. Portsmouth Harbour: all areas 1 No additional net use closure - excluding Fareham Creek 6. Southsea Pier 1 Closure to all net use within 100 All year metres of pier structure 7. River Meon 2 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year 8. Rivers Test, Itchen and 2 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year Hamble 9. Southampton Water – Dock 2 Closure to all net use within 3 metres All year Head to Calshot of the surface, except ring nets 10. Lymington River 4 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year 11. Keyhaven 4 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year 12. Sandown Pier 3 Closure to all net use within 100 All year metres of pier structure 13. Bembridge Harbour and River 3 Closure to all net use, except ring nets All year Yar (eastern) 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Fareham Borough Local Plan 2037
    Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Fareham Borough Local Plan 2037 Screening and Appropriate Assessment Report for the Publication Plan September 2020 Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Fareham Borough Local Plan 2037 Screening and Appropriate Assessment Report for the Publication Plan Client: Fareham Borough Council Report No.: UE0192 HRA- Fareham Publication Plan_3_200921 Author: Proofed: Approved: Giulia Civello BSc(Hons) MSc PIEMA Nick Pincombe BA(Hons) MSc CEnv Nick Pincombe BA(Hons) MSc CEnv Nick Pincombe BA(Hons) MSc CEnv MIEMA MCIEEM MIEMA MCIEEM MIEMA MCIEEM Revision No.: Status/Comment: Date: 0 Draft for comment 4 August 2020 1 Final draft 12 August 2020 2 Final 16 September 2020 3 Revised final 22 September 2020 HRA for the Fareham Local Plan 2037: Screening & Appropriate Assessment Report for the Publication Plan September 2020 UE0192 HRA- Fareham Publication Plan_3_200921 Contents 0 Executive Summary i 0.1 Introduction i 0.2 Scope of the Assessment i 0.3 Impact Pathways ii 0.4 Summary of Findings ii 0.5 Conclusions iii 0.6 Consultation Arrangements iii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of this Report 1 1.2 The Fareham Borough Local Plan 2037 1 1.3 Habitats Regulations Assessment 2 1.4 Scope and Structure of this Document 2 2 Methodology 3 2.1 Good Practice Guidance 3 2.2 Screening 4 2.3 Appropriate Assessment 5 2.4 Counteracting Measures 6 2.5 In Combination Effects 7 3 European Sites 9 3.1 Scope of the Assessment 9 3.2 Conservation Objectives for SAC and SPA 10 3.3 Conservation Objectives for Ramsar Sites 21 3.4 Condition
    [Show full text]
  • University of Southampton
    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON FACULTY OF NATURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ocean and Earth Science Population structure and ecology of wild Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg, 1793) on the south coast of England by Stephanie Rachael Anne Mills Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2016 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF NATURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ocean and Earth Science Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Population structure and ecology of wild Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg, 1793) on the south coast of England By Stephanie Rachael Anne Mills Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg, 1793) is native to Japan and Korea, but has achieved global distribution through human mediated dispersal pathways and natural larval dispersal. Considerable variation in recruitment to wild aggregations has been seen regionally across the globe. Wild recruitment of C. gigas in England has increased in frequency since the millennia however a detailed understanding of their occurrence is limited to an area within the Thames estuary. There have been no English studies to date that reveal how C. gigas interacts with recipient ecosystems, or what impacts winter conditions have. Furthermore conclusive evidence has yet to be presented that feral C. gigas in England are self-sustaining. Intertidal surveys found substrate type and shore height to have the greatest impact on the locality and abundance of C. gigas recruitment. Gametogenesis initiated in C. gigas when water temperatures increased above 9.5 °C. Maturity was generally reached in the summer, however spawning differed between locations. Wild, intertidal C. gigas were found to spawn twice in a single reproductive season. Initially, spawning was triggered through tidally induced temperature shocking as water temperatures increased above 18 °C.
    [Show full text]
  • CAMDEN STREET NAMES and Their Origins
    CAMDEN STREET NAMES and their origins © David A. Hayes and Camden History Society, 2020 Introduction Listed alphabetically are In 1853, in London as a whole, there were o all present-day street names in, or partly 25 Albert Streets, 25 Victoria, 37 King, 27 Queen, within, the London Borough of Camden 22 Princes, 17 Duke, 34 York and 23 Gloucester (created in 1965); Streets; not to mention the countless similarly named Places, Roads, Squares, Terraces, Lanes, o abolished names of streets, terraces, Walks, Courts, Alleys, Mews, Yards, Rents, Rows, alleyways, courts, yards and mews, which Gardens and Buildings. have existed since c.1800 in the former boroughs of Hampstead, Holborn and St Encouraged by the General Post Office, a street Pancras (formed in 1900) or the civil renaming scheme was started in 1857 by the parishes they replaced; newly-formed Metropolitan Board of Works o some named footpaths. (MBW), and administered by its ‘Street Nomenclature Office’. The project was continued Under each heading, extant street names are after 1889 under its successor body, the London itemised first, in bold face. These are followed, in County Council (LCC), with a final spate of name normal type, by names superseded through changes in 1936-39. renaming, and those of wholly vanished streets. Key to symbols used: The naming of streets → renamed as …, with the new name ← renamed from …, with the old Early street names would be chosen by the name and year of renaming if known developer or builder, or the owner of the land. Since the mid-19th century, names have required Many roads were initially lined by individually local-authority approval, initially from parish named Terraces, Rows or Places, with houses Vestries, and then from the Metropolitan Board of numbered within them.
    [Show full text]
  • Havant Borough Townscape, Landscape and Seascape Character Assessment February 2007 13
    HAVANT BOROUGH TOWNSCAPE, LANDSCAPE AND SEASCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FEBRUARY 2007 13 HAVANT BOROUGH TOWNSCAPE, LANDSCAPE AND SEASCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT SECTION 2: FORMATIVE INFLUENCES ON THE LANDSCAPE HAVANT BOROUGH TOWNSCAPE, LANDSCAPE AND SEASCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FEBRUARY 2007 14 FORMATIVE INFLUENCES ON THE LANDSCAPE 2.1 Introduction The patterns and distinctive features of the Havant Borough landscape are a result of the interaction of its physical structure, the nature of the vegetation, the land uses which have resulted, its built form and the continuing influence of human activity. This section draws out the most significant past and present physical and human influences that have shaped the development of Havant Borough. The meaning of technical terms which have been used in this section are set out in the Glossary at the end of the report. 2.2 Landscape, Townscape and Seascape Context Although Havant Borough is relatively small, its landscape, townscape and seascape development is very varied and complex, reflecting the pattern of the wider landscape, townscape and seascape which surround it. Topographically and geologically it sits in the lower levels (below 50mAOD) on the Hampshire Basin clays and sands which extend along the southern seaboard of Hampshire and the Solent. However, the southern part of the Borough, like its neighbour Portsmouth, is distinguished by the higher outcrop of the chalk escarpment at Portsdown Hill. Its coastal lowlands are typical of the mix of urban growth and exposed open landscapes along the Hampshire coast east of Southampton Water, but Hayling Island, in particular, is unique in its harbour and coastal setting and predominantly rural character.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin of Southampton Water
    1 THE ORIGIN OF SOUTHAMPTON WATER. WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF ITS EARLIEST NAVIGATORS. By T. W: SHORE, F.G.S., Hon. Organising Secretary. I do not propose in this Paper to discuss the commercial • advantages of Southampton Water or its great capabilities as a trade channel, or to enlarge .upon its natural beauties; but I wish to describe the origin of this remarkable estuary, and the geological conditions connected with it; and. as J cannot fully describe its origin without some references to "early man,:I must also give a brief account of the primitive , inhabitants of this neighbourhood, some of whom were here before Southampton Water existed, while others probably witnessed its formation, and were its earliest navigators, •• Again, the historical events connected with this estuary . are of great interest, and form part of our national history, butthey do not come within the scope of this Paper. I intend to deal as simply as I can, apart from geological technicalities, with far earlier circumstances than those which history records, viz., with those geological conditions which led to the origin of this remarkable estuary, as proved . by modern engineering work, and by scientific observation, seeing that these circumstances and events must be regarded as the remote cause of all the maritime facilities of Southampton, and of all the great commercial possibilities in- the future which its situation on this estuary may have in store for it. What Southampton was as a great port in the Middle Ages, what it is now, or what it may become in the future, is due for the most part to those geological conditions by which this great estuary, part of Hampshire's lowest valley,.was formed.
    [Show full text]
  • Solent and Southampton Water SPA
    Solent and Southampton Water SPA Description: The Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) is located on the south English coast. The 54 km² area extends from Hurst Spit to Hill Head along the south coast of Hampshire, and from Yarmouth to Whitecliff Bay along the north coast of the Isle of Wight. The site comprises a series of estuaries and harbours with extensive mudflats and saltmarshes together with adjacent coastal habitats ContainsNot to be OusedS data for ©navigation. Crown copyright and database right (2019) including saline lagoons, shingle beaches, reedbeds, damp woodland and grazing marsh. The mudflats support beds of Enteromorpha spp. and Zostera spp. and have a rich invertebrate fauna that forms the food resource for the estuarine birds. In summer, the site is of importance for breeding seabirds, including gulls and four species of terns. In winter, the SPA holds a large and diverse assemblage of waterbirds. Qualifying Features: Solent and Southampton Waters SPA breeding common tern (Sterna hirundo), little tern (Sterna albifrons), Mediterranean gull (Larus melanocephalus), roseate tern (Sterna dougallii) and sandwich tern (Sterna sandvicensis). It also supports overwintering black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa islandica), dark-bellied brent goose (Branta bernicla bernicla), ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula), and teal (Anas crecca). The area also regularly supports at least 20,000 waterfowl. Management: • The harbour authorities within the SPA have their own guidance and codes of conduct - Bird Aware Solent. • Notice to Mariners Stakeholder Concerns: Online stakeholders identified motor boating, towed water sports, and jetskis as being the greatest threats to the SPA given their potential for pollution and noise.
    [Show full text]
  • Maps -- by Region Or Country -- Eastern Hemisphere -- Europe
    G5702 EUROPE. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G5702 Alps see G6035+ .B3 Baltic Sea .B4 Baltic Shield .C3 Carpathian Mountains .C6 Coasts/Continental shelf .G4 Genoa, Gulf of .G7 Great Alföld .P9 Pyrenees .R5 Rhine River .S3 Scheldt River .T5 Tisza River 1971 G5722 WESTERN EUROPE. REGIONS, NATURAL G5722 FEATURES, ETC. .A7 Ardennes .A9 Autoroute E10 .F5 Flanders .G3 Gaul .M3 Meuse River 1972 G5741.S BRITISH ISLES. HISTORY G5741.S .S1 General .S2 To 1066 .S3 Medieval period, 1066-1485 .S33 Norman period, 1066-1154 .S35 Plantagenets, 1154-1399 .S37 15th century .S4 Modern period, 1485- .S45 16th century: Tudors, 1485-1603 .S5 17th century: Stuarts, 1603-1714 .S53 Commonwealth and protectorate, 1660-1688 .S54 18th century .S55 19th century .S6 20th century .S65 World War I .S7 World War II 1973 G5742 BRITISH ISLES. GREAT BRITAIN. REGIONS, G5742 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .C6 Continental shelf .I6 Irish Sea .N3 National Cycle Network 1974 G5752 ENGLAND. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G5752 .A3 Aire River .A42 Akeman Street .A43 Alde River .A7 Arun River .A75 Ashby Canal .A77 Ashdown Forest .A83 Avon, River [Gloucestershire-Avon] .A85 Avon, River [Leicestershire-Gloucestershire] .A87 Axholme, Isle of .A9 Aylesbury, Vale of .B3 Barnstaple Bay .B35 Basingstoke Canal .B36 Bassenthwaite Lake .B38 Baugh Fell .B385 Beachy Head .B386 Belvoir, Vale of .B387 Bere, Forest of .B39 Berkeley, Vale of .B4 Berkshire Downs .B42 Beult, River .B43 Bignor Hill .B44 Birmingham and Fazeley Canal .B45 Black Country .B48 Black Hill .B49 Blackdown Hills .B493 Blackmoor [Moor] .B495 Blackmoor Vale .B5 Bleaklow Hill .B54 Blenheim Park .B6 Bodmin Moor .B64 Border Forest Park .B66 Bourne Valley .B68 Bowland, Forest of .B7 Breckland .B715 Bredon Hill .B717 Brendon Hills .B72 Bridgewater Canal .B723 Bridgwater Bay .B724 Bridlington Bay .B725 Bristol Channel .B73 Broads, The .B76 Brown Clee Hill .B8 Burnham Beeches .B84 Burntwick Island .C34 Cam, River .C37 Cannock Chase .C38 Canvey Island [Island] 1975 G5752 ENGLAND.
    [Show full text]
  • Ndex of Persons/Places
    INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES 581 The majority of references are to Part II of the Calendar (Additions) and apply to item numbers. References to Part I (Corrections) are by page numbers, and are placed last in each group of references in which they appear. None of the Rotuli Scotiae material has been incorporated in the Index. Where any person is mentioned in a document solely as a witness, the appropriate index reference has been distinguished by the prefix (W). Similarly the prefixes (S) and (C) denote that a person was merely a signatory to the document con- cerned, or is named as having been present in the Privy Council on a particular date. When necessary, these have been com- bined, for example as (CS). Obscure individuals bearing surnames common in both England and Scotland, and described as Scottish in the originals, are designated as such by the abbreviation (Sc) in the index entries. The same abbreviation is used to distinguish certain subjects, such as parliaments, which could be either English or Scottish. Aaron, Jew l^ of York], Dieulacresse son of, 21 Agen, Idep. Lot-et-Garonne, France], scriviner (named) of, Abchester see Habchester 725 Abel, Adam, messenger, 562(b) Agenais (Agen), [France], 734 Aberconway, Cam, -see Conway Aiguillon (AguUyn), Idep. Lot-et-Garonne, France), lands Aberdeen, bishops of see Cheyne, Henry, Kininmund in, 640 Aberdeen (Aberden, Aberdene), lAberdnsl, 327. 343, Airaines (Darreyns), Bernard, 329 492(xiii), 562(b), 584, 620. 1050, 1063 Aird (Dulard, Lard), Cristian (Cristin) alias Christian de, brewers of, 475 valet, 472(n,w) burgesses (nawecfl of, 35, 632 Airedale (Airdale), LVorksJ, valley, Esholt priory in, 708 castle.
    [Show full text]