DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Notes of the National Angling Advisory Group Meeting Held On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Notes of the National Angling Advisory Group Meeting Held On Notes of the National Angling Advisory Group meeting held on Tuesday 18th June 2013 Canal & River Trust Fazeley Office 1. Attendees Caroline Killeavy (Head of Community Engagement) John Ellis (National Fisheries & Angling Manager) Paul Wilkinson (Ecologist West Midlands) David Kent (Chairman) Eric Bootland (Walton AC) Rod Bracey (Bathampton AA) John Castle (GUSAC) Dave Crookes (Bathampton AA) Peter Fieldhouse (Fenton & DAA) John Johnson (Nottingham AA) Dick Pilkinton (GUSAC) Glyn Williams (Worksop) 2. Apologies for Absence Apologies for absence were received from Roger Hanbury (CRT Head of Governance Services), David Turner (Nottingham AA) and Terry Wright (Kayak Anglers). 3. Notes of previous meeting held on 5th March 2013 and matters arising Apart from a typographical error relating to the date of the previous meeting (now amended) these were accepted as an accurate record of proceedings. Matters arising were as follows: 3.1 Five metre rule Kennet & Avon Canal. Bathampton AA officers were encouraged with progress made by the mooring group looking at long term arrangements for mooring on the western section of the Kennet & Avon. They remain hopeful that the 5 metre gap aspiration where they do not currently exist will continue to be adopted as a firm recommendation by the working group and in due course adopted as Waterway policy CK confirmed that two Boater Liaison Managers had recently been recruited. Both have extensive experience and background in community engagement and conflict resolution. Sorwar Ahmed will be covering the London Waterways and Matthew Symonds covering the south east and south west 1 3.2 Lure Angling Society & Pike Anglers Club. Negotiations with the Pike Anglers Club had reached a positive conclusion and they have now taken control of a 30 mile section of Lancaster canal as and from 1st May 2013. 3.3 Angling Club Signage Update. Work by the marketing team on this matter was on-going. 3.4 Waterways Code. It was agreed that JE would circulate a copy of the existing document to the group who would then provide feedback to both DK and JE by no later than 31st August. 3.5 Feedback from Fish Transfer. DC thanked the fisheries management term contractor Ian McNeil for supplying biomass and species details following the emergency fish rescue on the Bath flight. 3.6 Lee Navigation Update. JE confirmed that the majority of the Lee Navigation formerly licensed to the Lee Anglers Consortium had now been re-let to three different locally based angling clubs. Only the section downstream from Tottenham Lock to Bow Locks now remained as part of the Waterway Wanderers’ portfolio. 3.7 Overhead Powerlines Risk Assessment. JE agreed to liaise with PF regarding a new risk assessment following the removal of overhead powerlines on part of Fenton & District AS fishery. 3.8 Streetfishing. CK confirmed that it may be useful considering offering an invitation to a speaker from Europe to a future NAAG meeting. 4. National Angling Strategy Update It was confirmed that the post of National Angling Development Manager as recommended in the strategy document had now been approved for a period of three years. The post-holder would report directly to CK. There was no budget allocated apart from salary costs. The role profile was being worked up and the post advertised internally. Three internal candidates had submitted applications and would all be interviewed in late June or early July. It was envisaged formally launching the strategy document to coincide with the start date of the successful candidate. One of the initial targets for the post-holder would be to identify and deliver one angling related community engagement project for each waterway partnership. 5. Otter Project West Midlands Canals The group were asked to consider how CRT can adjust its processes in order to avoid unnecessary angst when developing initiatives where some parties may be uncomfortable with the proposal but where the project fits the Trust’s wider interests. Paul Wilkinson, Ecologist for the West Midlands, introduced the topic and explained both his day to day role and the specific background to this project. He outlined the context in which CRT aimed to raise funds, which were essentially to improve habitat but with a high profile target species that would be recognised by the public. An example of this would be restoration of wild flowers in order to improve numbers of bees. Bee numbers in principle would increase as a consequence of improving habitat for wild flowers. It was reiterated that the project goals were not to physically introduce otters to the West Midlands canal network, rather it was to improve habitat to improve fish populations which then may become a prey item for otters. Several facts regarding otters and fish were outlined. Of note was that otter territories were quite large in size and a section of canal would realistically form only part of an overall territory. 2 JE stated that in his opinion cormorants represented a much greater threat to canal fish stocks than otters as the former would prey upon fish of virtually all species and year classes. Otters were a potential risk to fisheries with populations of medium or large carp. Recently, one reservoir based syndicate in the Midlands had terminated their agreement with CRT following the loss of significant numbers of large carp through otter predation. He went on to state that generally lack of spawning was not a significant issue in canaline ecosystems, rather it was slow growth rates due to lack of macro-invertebrates that limited overall fish biomass. The meeting expressed relief that there was no intention to release otters into the canal network and welcomed the overall project focus on habitat enhancement. The chairman suggested a future joint meeting with the Environment Advisory Group to discuss matters pertaining to aquatic ecosystems of interest to both groups. He also felt it would be useful for the National Fisheries & Angling Manager to attend their meetings on an on-going basis. Action JE to arrange for DK to attend next Environment Advisory Group meeting. Two learning points were noted from the recent otter campaign: Press releases outlining projects should not be issued ahead of local consultation as this causes unnecessary tension and conflict. Local angling club licensees must be involved in discussions on matters which affect the fishery. 6. Control of Pest Animals by shooting or other lethal methods This topic had come to prominence both as a result of potential badger culling (DEFRA project) and an increase in the number of angling club fishery managers approaching the Trust with a view to obtaining a cormorant shooting license from Natural England in order to help manage predator numbers to prevent excessive damage to fish stocks. The topic in so far as it related to cormorants and other piscivorous birds has been previously discussed at the January 2012 meeting, a few months before the launch of the Trust. The notes from that meeting are reproduced below A member had asked for this item to be included on the agenda following an enquiry from a member club based in the north-west regarding the challenges they were having in gaining BW support for licensed cormorant shooting on a reservoir where the fishing rights were owned incorporeally. JE explained that BW had in the past periodically applied for cormorant shooting licenses (some granted, others refused) on its own commercial fisheries as a supplementary measure to the daily scaring regime. The following policy statement was proposed ‘that on reservoirs under its ownership BW will support any cormorant shooting/scaring activities legally authorised by the licensing regulatory authority i.e. if Natural England grant consent and the police are also aware of the situation and have no issues with the methodology then BW will not oppose it, subject to receiving in advance acceptable risk assessment and method statements from the angling club’. The position with regard to cormorant scaring and shooting on canals was debated. Generally there would be a presumption against cormorant shooting on canals, except perhaps in very rural areas. The group understood the need for this approach and were comfortable with the 3 reality of the situation, albeit it is recognised that cormorants are negatively impacting on fish stocks in many canal fisheries. DP outlined the case of Tringford trout fishery where its’ commercial viability and hence job security for fishery employees was in doubt. JE apologised to the group for only circulating the latest internal briefing paper to delegates at short notice. It was agreed that attendees needed time to formulate a view as to whether the BW policy remained appropriate for the Trust going forward or whether the Trust needed to review its position given its wider remit. Action All. It was agreed that NAAG members would provide initial feedback to DK and JE by August 31st. 7. Draft Stoppage Programme One criticism of the former British Waterways was its lack of consultation with anglers regarding the winter stoppage programme. This year the fisheries department had taken the lead and forwarded the winter works programme public consultation document to all those clubs with secretary’s contactable via email and this was welcomed. Members welcomed the reasonable level of notice offered and reiterated the need for prior consultation. The group felt that it would be beneficial to invite a Waterway Manager to a future meeting to explore some general principles pertaining to communication with angling customers. The debate then moved to the topic of events procedures with two matters highlighted. Firstly it was advised that the National Fisheries & Angling Manager should remind all license clubs of the need to notify CRT (or Chris Stanley) of those events where in excess of 50 persons would be participating.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Middlesex University Research Repository an Open Access Repository Of
    Middlesex University Research Repository An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Read, Simon ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2380-5130 (2017) Cinderella River: The evolving narrative of the River Lee. http://hydrocitizenship.com, London, pp. 1-163. [Book] Published version (with publisher’s formatting) This version is available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/23299/ Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University’s research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners unless otherwise stated. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). They may not be sold or exploited commercially in any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s). Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author’s name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pag- ination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award. If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterway Dimensions
    Generated by waterscape.com Dimension Data The data published in this documentis British Waterways’ estimate of the dimensions of our waterways based upon local knowledge and expertise. Whilst British Waterways anticipates that this data is reasonably accurate, we cannot guarantee its precision. Therefore, this data should only be used as a helpful guide and you should always use your own judgement taking into account local circumstances at any particular time. Aire & Calder Navigation Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Bulholme Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 6.3m 2.74m - - 20.67ft 8.99ft - Castleford Lock is limiting due to the curvature of the lock chamber. Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Castleford Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom 61m - - - 200.13ft - - - Heck Road Bridge is now lower than Stubbs Bridge (investigations underway), which was previously limiting. A height of 3.6m at Heck should be seen as maximum at the crown during normal water level. Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Heck Road Bridge Length Beam Draught Headroom - - - 3.71m - - - 12.17ft - 1 - Generated by waterscape.com Leeds Lock tail to River Lock tail - Leeds Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 5.5m 2.68m - - 18.04ft 8.79ft - Pleasure craft dimensions showing small lock being limiting unless by prior arrangement to access full lock giving an extra 43m. Leeds Lock tail to River Lock tail - Crown Point Bridge Length Beam Draught Headroom - - - 3.62m - - - 11.88ft Crown Point Bridge at summer levels Wakefield Branch - Broadreach Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 5.55m 2.7m - - 18.21ft 8.86ft - Pleasure craft dimensions showing small lock being limiting unless by prior arrangement to access full lock giving an extra 43m.
    [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]
  • Alexandra Palace to Tottenham Hale Walk
    Saturday Walkers Club www.walkingclub.org.uk Alexandra Palace to Tottenham Hale walk Alexandra Palace, the Parkland Walk (a former railway line), two restored Wetlands and several cafés in north London Length Main Walk: 15¾ km (9.8 miles). Three hours 45 minutes walking time. For the whole excursion including trains, sights and meals, allow at least 7 hours. Short Walk 1, from Highgate: 11½ km (7.1 miles). Two hours 35 minutes walking time. Short Walk 2, to Manor House: 11½ km (7.1 miles). Two hours 45 minutes walking time. OS Map Explorer 173. Alexandra Palace is in north London, 10 km N of Westminster. Toughness 3 out of 10 (2 for the short walks from Alexandra Palace, 1 for the others). Features This walk is essentially a merger of two short walks. The first part is the popular Parkland Walk, a linear nature reserve created along the trackbed of a disused railway line. The second part links two new nature reserves created from operational Thames Water reservoirs, using a waymarked cycle/pedestrian route along residential streets. The walk starts with a short climb through Alexandra Park to Alexandra Palace, with splendid views of the London skyline from its terrace. This entertainment venue was intended as the north London counterpart to the Crystal Palace and although it was destroyed by fire just two weeks after opening in 1873 it was promptly rebuilt. Its private owners tried to sell the site and parkland for development in 1900 but it was acquired by a group of local authorities for the benefit of the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Looking Forward to the Next Ten Years
    Looking forward to the next ten years London Waterway Partnership Ten Year Strategic Plan 2014 1 Welcome I am delighted to present the London Waterway Partnership’s Strategic Plan. Preparation of the plan has taken a good deal of the Partnership’s early effort, but we have been much helped by the reception and comments arising from our draft document and the two consultation meetings held in December 2013. We are also grateful for the written comments received from the Heritage Lottery Fund; the Hillingdon Canal Partnership; London Boaters and Mark Walton, the River Lee Tidal Mill Trust and Westminster City Council. The document has been strengthened by the valuable points made by our respondents, particularly in emphasising the way in which London waterways can enrich regeneration opportunities and support education, training and volunteering. Our strategy is not set in stone. It is designed to develop over time with the continuing input from those supporting our waterways. We will report progress at our Annual Meeting. Our aspirations are ambitious and how quickly the objectives are met, will depend on the resources available in terms of money and support from within the Canal & River Trust and externally. What is not in question is our conviction that the regional and local elements of the Trust’s overall strategy should be emphasised. We set up the Partnership Board of 12 members in July 2013 and deliberately chose to make the board as diverse as possible in order to reflect the very wide range of interests in canals and waterways. I have been impressed by the Board’s commitment and enthusiasm, characteristics which have been reflected in the many people we have met in getting to know the key elements of London’s very diverse waterways.
    [Show full text]
  • Cinderella River © Simon Read 2017
    Cinderella River © Simon Read 2017 Editor: Penny Rogers (SfEP) Publication commissioned by through the Arts & Humanities Research Council Connected Communities programme All images by Simon Read unless otherwise credited Printed by CDS (Corporate Document Services) Design and layout by U2R Design October 2017 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. 1 2 Simon Read Simon Read is a visual artist and Associate Professor of Fine Art at Middlesex University London. As someone who has an intimate understanding of coastal dynamics, he has used his position as a senior academic to foster discussion on an interdisciplinary and international basis over the vital importance of understanding the cultural implications of environmental change. Aside from the study that generated this publication, he is actively engaged at a community level in Suffolk with estuary management schemes. Ongoing and recent research projects include CoastWEB, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council and led by Plymouth Marine Laboratory, to use locations on the Welsh coast in a study of the community benefits of a healthy intertidal saltmarsh environment. His studio work has been exhibited widely both in the UK and abroad and is held in several major national and international collections. He has carried out several public commissions, including “A Profile of the River Thames, from Thames Head to Sea Reach” for the Thames Flood Barrier (1996) and “Memory and the Tideline” for the flood defence works on Poole Town Quay (2001).
    [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]
  • Tottenham Hale to Lea Bridge) Ferry Lane
    Lea Valley Walk Directions: From Tottenham Hale Station turn left out of the station onto Section 3 (Tottenham Hale to Lea Bridge) Ferry Lane. Continue up the hill and straight on. Cross Mill Mead Road to the Lea Valley Walk sign. At Tottenham Lock turn right down the slope to Version 1 : June 2010 start on the towpath of the Lee Navigation. Note that the ramp is cobbled so might not be accessible to all. Continue south, passing under the first of two railway lines, where the Navigation joins the River Lea again. Just after passing under the second railway bridge the Walk passes the Markfield recreation ground. Enter the Start: A503 Ferry Lane (TQ347894) park to find the Markfield Beam Engine. A Station: Tottenham Hale This remarkable engine was built by Wood Brothers, of Sowerby Bridge, Finish: Towpath at end of Southwold Road / Yorkshire, and was commissioned on the 12th July 1888. The engine can North Mill Fields (TQ354867) be viewed on the second Sunday of the month, from March to November. Station: Clapton Return to the towpath keeping the river on the left, you pass the last great Distance: 2 miles (3.2 km) reservoir (Warwick West), and come next to Springfield Park and Marina. Introduction: Section 3 starts at Tottenham Hale and finishes at Lea Springfield Park was created in 1905 from the grounds of three 19th century Bridge, a distance of two miles or you can continue on Section 4 to Bromley houses. The climb to the top of the hill, created by deposits from the Ice by Bow.
    [Show full text]
  • River Lee Floods
    El A- Box ^ 1947 RIVER LEE FLOODS YEARS50 ON River Lee Catchment Area Showing Land Liable To Flood (based on extent of 1947 flooding) River Lee Catchment Area Chingford River Thames 8B& S3B Land Liable to Flood Main Rivers Stratford Hackney River Lee Navigation Hertford Union C aul Central London River Lee Flood Relief Channel Thames Barrier Urban area Major roads Minor roads 5 Km £ £A - f (.eo^L I w X CONTENTS page Introduction 1 The Nature of Flooding 1 ® L Responsibility for Managing Flood Protection in the Lee Valley The 1947 Flood Damage Caused by th e Flood r - Transport, Communications and Services 3 - Property 3 Flood Protection Measures - Prior to the 1947 Flood 3 Fig 1 Proposed river improvements in Stratford (1930) 4 Flood Protection Measures - Following the 1947 Flood 5 / 6 / 7 Table 1 Flow Control Structures on the River Lee Flood R elief Channel The Future of Flood Defence in the Lee Valley Appendix I Damage to Property from the 1947 Flood Appendix II References and Acknowledgments 10 Appendix III Working diagrams of: Labyrinth/Folded Weirs 11 Vertical Lift Gates 12 Radial Gates 13 Siphon Spillways 14 Map 1 The River Lee Catchment Area (including the Area Liable to Flood) Inside front cover Map 2 The River Lee Flood R elief Channel (including the location of flow control structures) Inside back cover Front cover River Lee flooding effecting Lee Bridge Rd. ENVIRONMENT AGENCY Note: Not all photographs in this document are of the 1947 flood, however, pictures are indicative of that event. Environment Agency 1947 River Lee Floods - SO Years On 1 INTRODUCTION 3 RESPONSIBILITY FOR FLOOD PROTECTION IN THE LEE VALLEY 1997 marks the 50th anniversary of one of the River Lee’s most damaging floods.
    [Show full text]
  • Attach Signage to Totem
    Canal/River Location Standard Description of standard Description Programmed works Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 49, Barrowford Road Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. STPO o/s ladder fails CRT standard In project program Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 45, Top Lock Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. o/s ladder fails CRT standard Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 46, Lock 2 Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. STPO Tps lock ladder fails std In project program Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 47, Car Park Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. Tps lock ladder fails CRT standard Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 48, Lock 4 Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. STPG o/s Lock ladder fails std In project program Lock ladders must extend 900mm below water level or to the lock invert level where Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 51, Bottom Lock Locks 2.d.1.a this cannot be achieved. STPO O/s ladder fails CRT standard In project program Lock ladders must have hoops. Hoops must be a continuation of the stringers of the Leeds & Liverpool Canal Lock 51, Bottom Lock Locks 2.d.1.c ladder.(NEW) STPO Tps ladder fails CRT standard In project program Lock ladders must have sufficient tread depth to allow a secure foothold during use.
    [Show full text]
  • Hale Wharf Tottenham Hale
    HALE WHARF TOTTENHAM HALE REVISED DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT Allies and Morrison January 2017 PROJECT TEAM Local Authority: London Borough of Haringey Developer: Muse Devlopments Canal and River Trust Architect: Allies and Morrison Civil, Structural, Geotechnical and Environmental Engineer: Ramboll UK Ltd. Services Engineer and Sustainability Consultant: Hilson Moran Bridge Designers: Witherford Watson Mann Engineers HRW Landscape Architect: Landscape Projects Planning Consultant: Quod Cost Consultant: Core Five LLP Project Manager: Stace LLP Transport Engineer: Odyssey Markides Access Consultant: Centre for Accessible Environments CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 3 DESIGN EVOLUTION AND CONSULTATION 37 1.1 FORM OF THE APPLICATION 1 3.1 EVOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 37 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT 3 3.2 BUILDING MASSING STUDIES 41 1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 5 3.3 CONSULTATION AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 45 1.4 DESIGN BRIEF AND OBJECTIVES 7 3.4 SECURE BY DESIGN CONSULTATION 49 1.5 PLANNING POLICY SUMMARY 8 4 OUTLINE ILLUSTRATIVE MASTERPLAN 51 2 SITE CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS 11 4.1 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTERPLAN AND DESIGN CODES 51 2.1 TOTTENHAM HALE (STATEGIC CONTEXT) 11 4.2 BRIDGES 57 2.2 SITE LOCATION AND CONTEXT 13 4.3 USE AND AMOUNT 65 2.3 SITE HISTORY 17 4.4 TYPOLOGY 71 2.4 THE SITE AND ITS USES TODAY 19 4.5 SCALE AND MASSING 75 2.5 CONNECTIVITY 21 4.6 GAPS AND VIEWS THROUGH 93 2.6 LOCAL FACLITIES 23 4.7 APPEARANCE 101 2.7 SITE CONSTRAINTS 27 4.8 TRANSPORT AND PARKING 119 2.8 SITE OPPORTUNITIES 33 4.9 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE REALM 123 4.10 REFUSE AND
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Character Study
    Urban character study February 2015 2 Haringey urban character study Februrary 2015 Foreword The Urban Characterisation Study is one of the key evidence studies to support Haringey’s Local Plan, including our emerging Wood Green Tottenham AAP, Development Management policies and Sites Allocations DPD, as well as future policies such as the planned Wood Green AAP. The study helps us identify areas with high townscape or landscape value, to identify appropriate locations for tall buildings and high density, to identify issues adversely Highgate affecting the quality of townscapes, to guide the urban design of new development in regeneration areas, and to protect signifi- Green Lanes cant vistas and view corridors. We hope that it will also provide Seven Sisters a useful resource for those seeking background information on some of what makes different areas of Haringey distinctive, interesting and beautiful. Tottenham Hale Muswell Hill Hornsey Stroud Green Crouch End North Tottenham & Bruce Grove Northumberland Park "If you wish to have just a notion of the magnitude of this city, you must be satisfied with seeing its great streets and squares, but must survey the innumerable little lanes and courts. It is not in the showy evolutions of buildings, but in the multiplicity of human habitations which are crowded together, that the wonderful immensity of London consists. Samuel Johnson 3 Haringey urban character study Februrary 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 2 Borough wide 3 Neighbourhoods 4 Conclusions Purpose and objectives 04 Historic settlement pattern 09 North Tottenham & Northumberland Park 55 Finding and conclusions 234 Policy context 05 Landscape and topography 19 Bruce Grove 74 General recommendations 236 Methodology 06 Movement and legibility 25 Tottenham Hale 93 Views 242 Building form 27 Seven Sisters 111 Building heights 29 Green Lanes 127 Character Types 35 Wood Green 141 Appendices Neighbourhoods 48 Hornsey 160 i.
    [Show full text]