DOCSLIB.ORG

Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment for St James Homes Ltd by Jennifer Lowe Thames Valley Archaeological Services Site Code DPS99/77 November 1999 Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Report 99/77 by Jennifer Lowe Introduction This desk-based study is an assessment of the archaeological potential of the Deptford Pumping Station, located at Brookmill Road in the London Borough of Lewisham (TQ 3760 7660) (Fig 1). The project was commissioned by Mr Stephen Trenwith of St James Homes Ltd, Wellington House, 209–217 High Street, Hampton Hill, Middlesex, and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by redevelopment of the area. Site Description, Location and Geology A Thames Water Pumping Station currently occupies the site, covering an area of approximately 5 hectares. The site lies within Lewisham, on the boundary between this borough and Greenwich, and is located on the eastern bank of the Ravensbourne River which flows northwards to join the Thames at Deptford Creek (Fig 2). The majority of the site is open space with two covered reservoirs (infilled) being mostly set below ground. To the south of these is the James Engine House with several ancillary buildings and structures nearby. A former engine house and ancillary workshops is present to the north. The western margin of the site is now defined by the Dockland Light Railway tracks which run parallel to the river (Fig 2). The northern area, formerly playing fields is currently occupied by a contractors compound. The site is located on alluvium (BGS 1981) and lies at a height of approximately 5.7m above Ordnance Datum. Planning Background and Development Proposals Planning permission is to be sought for the redevelopment of the site for residential, live-work and office development. There are no definitive plans of the development proposals at this time. A scheme involving the creation of 16 blocks of flats with courtyards and other areas of open space has been suggested for the northern proportion of the site, with Thames Water maintaining an operational area to the south centred on the James Engine House. Although the scheme is provisional, the client considers that the foundation design will be piled and that that the structures will include basements. 2 Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16 1990) provides guidance relating to archaeology within the planning process. It points out that where a desk-based assessment has shown that there is a strong possibility of significant archaeological deposits in a development area it is reasonable to provide more detailed information from a field evaluation so that an appropriate strategy to mitigate the effects of development on archaeology can be devised: Paragraph 21 states: ‘Where early discussions with local planning authorities or the developer’s own research indicate that important archaeological remains may exist, it is reasonable for the planning authority to request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out...’ Should the presence of archaeological deposits be confirmed further guidance is provided. Archaeology and Planning stresses preservation in situ of archaeological deposits as a first consideration as in paragraphs 8 and 18. Paragraph 8 states: ‘...Where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation...’ Paragraph 18 states: ‘The desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its’ setting is a material consideration in determining planning applications whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled...’ However, for archaeological deposits that are not of such significance it is appropriate for them to be ‘preserved by record’ (i.e. fully excavated and recorded by a competent archaeological contractor) prior to their destruction or damage. Paragraph 25 states: ‘Where planning authorities decide that the physical preservation in situ of archaeological remains is not justified in the circumstances of the development and that development resulting in the destruction of the archaeological remains should proceed, it would be entirely reasonable for the planning authority to satisfy itself ... that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory provision for the excavation and recording of remains.’ Further guidance is provided by the Lewisham Borough Unitary Development Plan, 31–35 (Lewisham UDP, Adopted July 1996) 31) Although the Borough does not currently contain any Areas of Archaeological Importance nor Scheduled Ancient Monuments (within the meaning of section 33 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979) there are a number of areas in the Borough where important archaeological remains have been found, and where more may yet be found. 32) The Borough contains a rich archaeological resource spanning the full history of human activity in the British Isles. The Council, on the advice of the Museum of London’s Archaeology Service and the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit, has identified a number of ‘Areas of 2 Archaeological Priority’. Their location are illustrated on the Proposals Map, and details are set out in Schedule 3. They cover Roman remains found along the lines of the two Roman roads which ran through the Borough, through Anglo-Saxon and Medieval settlement sites, mainly beside rivers, to Deptford’s strategic role as a shipbuilding centre and later Victorian county houses in what were then green field sites within the Borough. 33) Items of archaeological importance are not always to be found buried underground, but can also include buildings with social and historical significance. The protection, excavation, removal and storage of valuable remains is becoming increasingly difficult given the pace and scale of modern development. There is a mismatch between the rate of discovery and the facilities and financial resources available to remove and store the finds. 34) Accordingly, the current approach of the DoE and English Heritage is to ensure that potentially important sites are identified and evaluated prior to development, and that any significant remains are preserved in situ and not destroyed by the development. In this way their preservation for the future is secured despite being inaccessible for the time being. Where it is not practicable to preserve remains in situ, consideration will be given to their excavation and recording prior to their destruction by development. 35) The potential damage from development can be reduced by appropriate land use policies, and many of the ‘Areas of Archaeological Priority’ are designated for open space. The site, due to its close proximity to the Ravensbourne River, does fall within one of the Boroughs’ ‘Areas of Archaeological Priority’ Methodology The assessment of the site was carried out by the examination of pre-existing information from a number of sources recommended by the Institute of Field Archaeologists paper ‘Standards in British Archaeology’ covering desk-based studies. These sources include historic and modern maps, the Greater London Sites and Monuments Record, geological maps, and any relevant publications or reports. Archaeological Background A search was made of the greater London Sites and Monuments Records (GLSMR) on 20th October 1999 for a radius of 500m around the site, the results are summarised in Appendix 1 and the locations of the entries are shown on Figure 1. The search revealed a substantial number of entries for this area, ranging from Prehistoric to post-Medieval, with five entries being located within the development area itself. The GLSMR entries for the site include features associated with the water industry, or industry in general. The earliest entry located on the site is for a Roman cremation [Fig 1; 35]; a ‘blackware urn’ was found on the site in 1853. Other entries for the site date to the Medieval/post-Medieval periods. A Medieval flour mill/water mill is recorded as being on the site around 1588, and may well correspond to the mill which lay outside the site 3 on the western bank of the Ravensbourne which was demolished by the 1850s [30]. Similarly, a wooden water wheel and wooden pipes were recorded during a watching brief of flood prevention work; the pipes may be part of the original 19th century works [35]. Ravensbourne Farm, possibly of 18th century date, lay on the western side of the river on Mill Lane, now Brookmill Road [34]. This area was built on for terraced housing by 1880. Prehistoric activity is recorded in this area, although it is relatively sparse. The Lewisham Borough UDP points out that the Ravensbourne River has provided a quantity of prehistoric finds, with Mesolithic tools and weapons, and two bronze age axes being recovered form the river [40]. Other prehistoric evidence comes from archaeological investigations close by. To the north-west of the site an Iron Age pit was excavated which contained a flint artefact and a fragment of quernstone [18], and immediately north of the site four flint flakes were uncovered during a watching brief [36]. As indicated above, Roman activity has been recorded on the development site itself, in the form of a Roman cremation burial, presumably human. An inhumation burial was uncovered on Vanguard Street in 1868 to the north-west of the site. It was originally interpreted as Roman due to the depth at which is was encountered (2.75m) and the fact that it was aligned east-west, however, no further dating evidence was found [17]. Roman activity is in the area is also suggested by a few sherds of residual Roman pottery from the south-east [42], and a ditch and a pit located during an excavation to the north-west of the site [18]. The possible remains of a Roman building were uncovered during sewer works in 1866, on Deptford High Street, when a portion of tessellated pavement was revealed as well as massive brickwork [13].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Whose River? London and the Thames Estuary, 1960-2014* Vanessa Taylor Univ
    This is a post-print version of an article which will appear The London Journal, 40(3) (2015), Special Issue: 'London's River? The Thames as a Contested Environmental Space'. Accepted 15 July 2015. Whose River? London and the Thames Estuary, 1960-2014* Vanessa Taylor Univ. of Greenwich, [email protected] I Introduction For the novelist A.P. Herbert in 1967 the problem with the Thames was simple. 'London River has so many mothers it doesn’t know what to do. ... What is needed is one wise, far- seeing grandmother.’1 Herbert had been campaigning for a barrage across the river to keep the tide out of the city, with little success. There were other, powerful claims on the river and numerous responsible agencies. And the Thames was not just ‘London River’: it runs for over 300 miles from Gloucestershire to the North Sea. The capital’s interdependent relationship with the Thames estuary highlights an important problem of governance. Rivers are complex, multi-functional entities that cut across land-based boundaries and create interdependencies between distant places. How do you govern a city that is connected by its river to other communities up and downstream? Who should decide what the river is for and how it should be managed? The River Thames provides a case study for exploring the challenges of governing a river in a context of changing political cultures. Many different stories could be told about the river, as a water source, drain, port, inland waterway, recreational amenity, riverside space, fishery, wildlife habitat or eco-system.
    [Show full text]
  • EC1 Local History Trail EC1 Local Library & Cultural Services 15786 Cover/Pages 1-4 12/8/03 12:18 Pm Page 2
    15786 cover/pages 1-4 12/8/03 12:18 pm Page 1 Local History Centre Finsbury Library 245 St. John Street London EC1V 4NB Appointments & enquiries (020) 7527 7988 [email protected] www.islington.gov.uk Closest Tube: Angel EC1 Local History Trail Library & Cultural Services 15786 cover/pages 1-4 12/8/03 12:18 pm Page 2 On leaving Finsbury Library, turn right down St. John Street. This is an ancient highway, originally Walk up Turnmill Street, noting the open railway line on the left: imagine what an enormous leading from Smithfield to Barnet and the North. It was used by drovers to send their animals to the excavation this must have been! (Our print will give you some idea) Cross over Clerkenwell Rd into market. Cross Skinner Street. (William Godwin, the early 18th century radical philosopher and partner Farringdon Lane. Ahead, you’ll see ‘Well Court’. Look through the windows and there is the Clerk’s of Mary Wollestonecraft, lived in the street) Well and some information boards. Double back and turn into Clerkenwell Green. On your r. is the Sessions House (1779). The front is decorated with friezes by Nollekens, showing Justice & Mercy. Bear right off St John Street into Sekforde Street. Suddenly you enter a quieter atmosphere...On the It’s now a Masonic Hall. In the 17th century, the Green was affluent, but by the 19th, as Clerkenwell was right hand side (rhs) is the Finsbury Savings Bank, established at another site in 1816. Walk on past heavily industrialised and very densely populated with poor workers, it became a centre of social & the Sekforde Arms (or go in if you fancy!) and turn left into Woodbridge Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Thames Conservancy Act, 1950
    Thames Conservancy Act, 1950 14 GEO. 6 Cli. 1 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short and collective titles. 2. Division of Act into Parts. 3. Amending definition of Thames in Act of 1932. 4. Interpretation. 5. Repeal of enactments. PART II CONSTITUTION AND PROCEEDINGS OF CONSERVATORS 6. Constitution of Conservators. 7. Increase in number of Conservators. 8. Term of office of Conservators. 9. Conservator interested in a contract. 10. As to contracts. PART III FURTHER POWERS IN RELATION TO CONSERVANCY NAVIGATION ETC. 11. Amendment of sections 69 70 and 71 of Act of 1932. 12. Power to enter and inspect vessels. 13. Name of launch to be conspicuously displayed. 14. Amendment of section 92 of Act of 1932. 15. Owner of pleasure boat to afford information as to person in charge. 16. Removal of sunk stranded or abandoned vessels. PART IV LANDS 17. Purchase of lands. PART V PREVENTION OF POLLUTION 18. Special interpretation relating to pollution. 19. Map of Thames catchment area. A Ch. I Thames Conservancy 14 GEO. 6 Act, 1950 Section 20. Amendment of section 124 of Act of 21. Sanitary authorities owners and occupiers to afford information. 22. Provision in case of neglect of sanitary authority to perform certain duties. 23. Inspection of sanitary arrangements of vessels. 24. Removal of dead animals. PART VI CHARGES ON VESSELS MERCHANDISE ETC. (a) Tolls on merchandise traffic 25. Tolls on merchandise traffic. (b) Tolls for piers 26. Tolls leviable at piers and landing places. (c) Lock tolls and charges on pleasure boats 27. Lock tolls on pleasure boats.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability
    In this section of the report, we highlight how customer engagement underpins everything we do. We’ve engaged with nearly a million customers to understand what their needs are and what they want from us as we look to develop our strategy and long-term plans. We submitted our draft business plan to our regulator Ofwat on 3 September 2018 and published it on our website here. We also highlight how working in partnership with our stakeholders and regulators is fundamental to the way we do business. We know that the decisions we make today affect our ability to deliver our services sustainably in the future. That’s why we’re committed to working collaboratively with partners who can align to our vision and values to deliver excellently on our customer and stakeholder promises. We describe our corporate responsibility programme which focusses on education, engagement and enhancement - designed to engage our people, customers and stakeholders on key business and environmental issues. We also show how we offer support to charitable groups within the communities we serve, through projects linked to our core business of providing essential water and wastewater services. Sustainable and resilient financing is crucial to our long-term provision of essential services to customers. We outline how we’re simplifying our structure and closing our Cayman Islands subsidiaries, and how we’re increasing resilience and diversity in our funding portfolio by raising our first Green Bond. We’ve also brought together three years’ worth of key financial data, data sources, policy references and performance data in one place for all stakeholders by producing an environmental, social and governance (ESG) statement.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Program Files\Adobe\Acrobat 4.0\Acrobat\Plug Ins\Openall
    NBER Summer Institute - Development of the American Economy Private Water Supply in Nineteenth Century London: Re-assessing the Externalities Nicola Tynan Department of Economics George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030 703-359-8876 (tel) 703-993-1133 (fax) [email protected] 25 June 2000 JEL Classification: D62, L95, N73, N83, R11 NBER Summer Institute - Development of the American Economy 2 Abstract Externalities played a major role in nineteenth century debates over private versus government ownership of water works in Britain and the US. Public health reformers argued that private water companies failed to internalize positive health externalities from filtration, wastewater removal, continuous supply and new connections. Evidence from London's experience with privately owned waterworks suggests that public health externalities from a pipe network were lower than critics assumed and were largely internalized by the companies. Negative externality shocks can be traced to rapid population growth, scientific uncertainty, and the institutional difficulties in moving from one sanitation technology to another. NBER Summer Institute - Development of the American Economy 1 1. Introduction Externalities played a primary role in nineteenth century debates over municipal versus private ownership of water works. Critics of private ownership argued that joint-stock companies failed to internalize a number of externalities, particularly the public health benefits of water supply. In many British and U.S. cities, this debate resulted in a switch from private to municipal ownership and control.1 Public health improvements in cities switching from private to public ownership provided ex post support for market failure. London's experience with private water companies throughout the nineteenth century suggests that the relationship between public health and ownership may be more complex than often assumed.
    [Show full text]
  • Sanitary Reform of London: the Working Collection of Sir Joseph Bazalgette, Ca
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/ft3x0nb131 No online items Guide to the Sanitary Reform of London: The Working Collection of Sir Joseph Bazalgette, ca. 1785-1969 Processed by Special Collections staff. Department of Special Collections Green Library Stanford University Libraries Stanford, CA 94305-6004 Phone: (650) 725-1022 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www-sul.stanford.edu/depts/spc/ © 2002 The Board of Trustees of Stanford University. All rights reserved. DA676 .S26 1785 1 Guide to the Sanitary Reform of London: The Working Collection of Sir Joseph Bazalgette, ca. 1785-1969 Collection number: DA676 .S26 1785 Department of Special Collections and University Archives Rare Book Division Stanford University Libraries Stanford, California Contact Information Department of Special Collections Green Library Stanford University Libraries Stanford, CA 94305-6004 Phone: (650) 725-1022 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www-sul.stanford.edu/depts/spc/ Processed by: Special Collections staff Encoded by: Steven Mandeville-Gamble © 2002 The Board of Trustees of Stanford University. All rights reserved. Descriptive Summary Title: Sanitary Reform of London: the working collection of Sir Joseph Bazalgette, Date (inclusive): ca. 1785-1969 Collection number: DA676 .S26 1785 Creator: Bazalgette, Joseph Extent: 455 items Repository: Stanford University. Libraries. Dept. of Special Collections and University Archives. Abstract: The collection documents the history of the sanitary evolution of London from the 1840s to the early twentieth century. Some 4500 separate printed, typescript, and manuscript items trace the stages by which the drainage and fresh water supply for London was introduced-- in its time perhaps the greatest feat of urban civil engineering that had ever been undertaken.
    [Show full text]
  • Water and the Search for Public Health in London in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries
    Medical History, 1984, 28: 250-282 WATER AND THE SEARCH FOR PUBLIC HEALTH IN LONDON IN THE EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH CENTURIES by ANNE HARDY* THE history of water supplies in England is a poorly documented subject. Although various accounts of the history of water technology, and learned articles on the political and administrative aspects of water supply have been written, the history of water in relation to public health remains largely unexplored. As this is, especially concerning the nineteenth century, a voluminous subject, the present paper attempts no more than a broad survey of the process by which water came to be recognized as a vital element in public health, of the gradual discovery and application of criteria for water purity, and of the means by which supplies satisfactory in quantity and quality were obtained. The roots of the modern concern with environment and its effect on health lie in the eighteenth century, and in this period the first indications of interest in the quality and physical effects of water are found. Health and cleanliness were treated as personal matters in the eighteenth and earlier nineteenth centuries: in the first parliamentary inquiry into water quality in 1828 there is little evidence of any wider concern with the health of the general population. It was only in the later 1 830s and 1840s that the idea of public health in its widest, or modern, sense began to gain currency, and only in the second half of the nineteenth century that the term came to have, for certain social elements, a further dimension of public morality as well.
    [Show full text]
  • New Urban Demands in Early Modern London
    Medical History, Supplement No. 11, 1991: 2940. NEW URBAN DEMANDS IN EARLY MODERN LONDON Rosemary Weinstein From 1550 onwards, London grew and changed enormously, with the attendant problems of disease and disorder. The combined impact of "rapid immigration, recurrent mortality crises and population growth applied critical pressures to the social and administrative structures" ofthe metropolis.' This paper gives an overview ofhow local authorities endeavoured to deal with problems of drainage, water supply, and street cleaning between 1500 and 1700. Despite London's growth in area and population, it continued to have two separate administrative centres-the Court of Common Council in the City, and from 1585 the Court of Burgesses at Westminster. Outside the City liberties and Westminster, the Middlesex Justices of the Peace (the royal representatives) were responsible, either collectively or as individuals, for law and order. This division led to conflict over public responsibilities. The City, for example, could not compel the Middlesex Justices to clear the Fleet River above Holborn Bridge ofthe filth which polluted the downstream City ward of Farringdon Without. No single authority ran hospitals and almshouses, organized street cleaning or policed streets in the new suburbs east and west of the City-Stepney, Soho, and St James's. "Many problems of drainage and flood prevention, safe building, welfare, fire prevention, medical care and education were outside the powers of the Justices of the Peace and the parish vestries to control. Various ad hoc bodies were set up to deal with these problems",2 as we shall see. The Corporation of London has a tradition extending back to the Middle Ages of care for the health ofthe citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • Slow Sand Filtration
    From London Soup to clear and palatable v1.0 From London Soup and “chimera dire” to clear, bright, agreeable and palatable By Simon Tyrrell Slow sand filtration – a quest for cleaner water How two enterprising water companies extended and improved the public supply of clean water Why they chose to move to Seething Wells to do it What’s known about what happened, and when What everything did, and why … … and the physical legacy it all left behind Slow sand filtration 1804: First known instance of water filtration John Gibbs‟ bleachery in Paisley, Scotland experimental slow sand filter surplus treated water sold to the public at halfpenny a gallon Greenock 1827 (Quest for pure water, Baker, 1949) 1 From London Soup to clear and palatable v1.0 Existence of pathogenic bacteria was unknown. Slow sand filtration considered a mechanical means of removing suspended solids. James Simpson also tramped 2000 miles in 1827 to inspect existing filters (in Scotland and North and East England) and experimented with a small scale plant in 1828. 1829: slow sand filtration first adopted for public water supply by James Simpson at the Chelsea Water Company in Pimlico and subsequently used by both Lambeth and Chelsea at Seething Wells. The materies morbi that Snow suggested transmitted infection from previous cholera cases through water could be removed, with other solids, through filtration avoided by drawing supply upstream of sewer discharge 1858: Regular examination of water supplies started in London and included chemical analysis. 1885
    [Show full text]
  • Water and the Search for Public Health in London in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries
    Medical History, 1984, 28: 250-282 WATER AND THE SEARCH FOR PUBLIC HEALTH IN LONDON IN THE EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH CENTURIES by ANNE HARDY* THE history of water supplies in England is a poorly documented subject. Although various accounts of the history of water technology, and learned articles on the political and administrative aspects of water supply have been written, the history of water in relation to public health remains largely unexplored. As this is, especially concerning the nineteenth century, a voluminous subject, the present paper attempts no more than a broad survey of the process by which water came to be recognized as a vital element in public health, of the gradual discovery and application of criteria for water purity, and of the means by which supplies satisfactory in quantity and quality were obtained. The roots of the modern concern with environment and its effect on health lie in the eighteenth century, and in this period the first indications of interest in the quality and physical effects of water are found. Health and cleanliness were treated as personal matters in the eighteenth and earlier nineteenth centuries: in the first parliamentary inquiry into water quality in 1828 there is little evidence of any wider concern with the health of the general population. It was only in the later 1 830s and 1840s that the idea of public health in its widest, or modern, sense began to gain currency, and only in the second half of the nineteenth century that the term came to have, for certain social elements, a further dimension of public morality as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Notes on Railways in the Molesey and Walton Area
    Some Notes on Railways in the Molesey and Walton Area By Greg Martin Introduction Many of us are likely to be surprised that temporary railways were once used in the Molesey area, as virtually no sign of them remains. Temporary railways were used across Surrey during construction of the Kingston Bypass, the Brooklands Motor Racing Track, the Guildford Bypass and the River Wey Improvement Scheme. However, the notes below concentrate on those industrial railways that once existed in Molesey and Walton. John Aird & Sons, Knight & Bessborough Reservoirs John Aird & Sons used two standard gauge steam locomotives when they constructed the Knight and Bessborough Reservoirs in Molesey for the Southwark & Vauxhall Water Company. The locomotives were both made by Manning Wardle & Co Ltd of Leeds. Work on the reservoirs commenced in April 1901 and finished in April 1907, the water company having become the Metropolitan Water Board during the construction period in June 1904. Thomas Docwra, Enlargement of Molesey Reservoirs Thomas Docwra used five standard gauge steam locomotives when enlarging existing reservoirs in Molesey. The enlargement work was carried out from May 1898 to April 1904. The locomotives were by Black Hawthorn (one acquired second-hand), Hudswell Clarke (one acquired second-hand) and Manning Wardle (one acquired second-hand and two new from the makers). One of the locos later moved to Brentford, where Thomas Docwra had a contract to construct the main road between Brentford and Osterley. Dick Kerr & Co, Walton Pumping Station Dick Kerr & Co Ltd constructed the Walton Pumping Station for the Metropolitan Water Board using an unidentified standard gauge steam locomotive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of British Hydrogeology in the Nineteenth Century
    Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 30, 2021 From William Smith to William Whitaker: the development of British hydrogeology in the nineteenth century JOHN MATHER Lyell Professor, Department of Geology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 OEX, UK Abstract: Some of the earliest applications of the principles of geology to the solution of hydrologic problems were made by William Smith, who used his knowledge of strata succession to locate groundwater resources to feed the summit levels of canals and supply individual houses and towns. The industrial revolution led to a huge demand for water resources to supply new towns and cities. Nottingham, Liverpool, Sunderland and parts of London all relied on groundwater. By the middle of the nineteenth century James Clutterbuck had already recognized that groundwater was a finite resource and that if abstraction was more rapid than replenishment by rain, water levels would decline and quality would be affected by saline intrusion. In 1851 Prestwich produced the first British geological map that included groundwater information. Before 1870 the Geological Survey had shown little concern for groundwater, perhaps because its Director, Murchison, had little interest in the economic applications of geology. After his retirement in 1871 there was an explosion of activity. Lucas introduced the term 'hydrogeology' in 1874 and produced the first real hydrogeological map in 1877 after leaving the Survey to work as a consultant water engineer. De Rance was for 20 years the secretary of a British Association Committee set up in 1874 to inquire into the underground circulation of water and in 1882 produced a 600 page volume on the water supply of England and Wales.
    [Show full text]