DOCSLIB.ORG

Highbridge Street - Waltham Abbey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Highbridge Street - Waltham Abbey HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY This Phase 1 Desk Study has been prepared for the additional development of new residential properties in a site located at 31 Highbridge Street, in Waltham Abbey, Essex, EN9 1BZ by Lustre Consulting Limited (Lustre) for Mr. J Blok. The site currently comprises of a residential property with private gardens and disused private garage, located within a mixed commercial and residential land use area. The site was developed by the 1860s, comprising a listed building within north-east corner of the site (a former Courthouse) and a yard area across eastern half of the site. The western section of the site was predominantly occupied by a single structure, which was demolished in the 1980s, prior to the construction of the existing garage. The historical construction and demolition works, particularly over the western section of the site have the potential to have generated Anthropogenic Ground across the site. Although, not evidenced on the historical mapping records, initial information provided to the client by Epping Forest District Council, suggests that historically the yard area to the rear of the Old Courthouse building (now comprising a residential garden) formed part of Abbey Forge, which extended off-site to the east. In addition, the western section of the site, where the proposed new residential dwellings are to be constructed, may also have been used as an engineering works. Both of these land uses also have the potential to generate and impact Anthropogenic Ground across the site. The site is located within a mixed residential and commercial setting, with multiple former industrial buildings within the immediate area, however by the 2010s most of these buildings had been redeveloped for commercial / residential use. Several historic landfill sites are also present within the surrounding area. The site is shown to be directly underlain by superficial deposits of Alluvium comprising soft to firm consolidated, compressible silty clay, but can contain layers of silt, sand, peat and basal gravel. This overlies bedrock geology of the London Clay Formation, comprising poorly laminated, blue-grey or grey- brown, silty to very silty clay. The Alluvium is listed as being a Secondary A aquifer while the London Clay Formation is listed as being unproductive strata. Deeper geology is anticipated to comprise of the Lambeth Group, over Thanet Sand Formation and Upper Chalk Group. Shallow groundwater is anticipated on site at approximately 3m bgl within the Alluvium. This Phase 1 Desk Study has determined that there is a moderate / low potential for contamination to be present on site. The proposed end uses of the site (comprising residential development with soft landscaping and private gardens), where potential exposure pathways between the identified potential sources of contamination and future site users are likely have also been taken into consideration. Based on the findings of this Phase 1 Desk Study, there is now a clear understanding of the potential sources of contamination at the site and the risks posed to identified receptors. The anticipated contaminative status of the site is not considered, in our opinion, to be prohibitive to the proposed redevelopment scheme. A Phase 2 Investigation is recommended to investigate the shallow soils, understand the local hydrogeological conditions/groundwater quality, the potential for hazardous gases/vapours and geotechnical considerations for foundations. © Copyright Lustre Consulting Limited The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in w hole or part without the written consent of Lustre Consulting. HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY PROJECT RECORD PROJECT NAME HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY CLIENT MR J BLOK REPORT DETAILS TYPE PHASE 1 DESK STUDY REFERENCE 2038_FP01.0-2018 ISSUE DATE APRIL 2018 SAMARA HYDE AUTHOR BSc (Hons) MSc FGS CONSULTANT GEMMA HEYWORTH REVIEWER BSc (Hons) SENIOR CONSULTANT Admirals Offices t 01634 757 705 The Historic Dockyard e [email protected] Chatham Kent, ME4 4TZ w lustreconsulting.com RELIANCE AND LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared using published information and information provided by the Client made available at the time of w riting only. Lustre Consulting accepts no liability for any information w hich has become available since this time. Lustre Consulting ow es no duty of care and has no liability to any Third Party w ho is not authorised by Lustre Consulting to use this report. Any unauthorised Third parties using information contained in this report do so at their ow n risk. © Copyright Lustre Consulting Limited The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in w hole or part without the written consent of Lustre Consulting. HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................5 2.0 LAND USE .........................................................................................................................9 3.0 SENSITIVITY & ANTHROPOLOGY ................................................................................... 22 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 29 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................... 32 RISK TABLE APPENDICES APPENDIX A: CONTAMINATED LAND NOTES APPENDIX B: ENVIROCHECK REPORT APPENDIX C: HISTORICAL MAPS APPENDIX D: HISTORIC BOREHOLE LOGS APPENDIX E: NOTES ON LIMITATIONS REGISTRATION OF AMENDMENTS Revision Revision Revision Amendment Details and Date Author Reviewer Lustre Consulting Limited Report Ref: 2038_FP01.0-2018 Page No. 4 HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This Phase 1 Desk Study has been prepared for the additional development of new residential properties at 31 Highbridge Street, in Waltham Abbey, Essex, EN9 1BZ by Lustre Consulting Limited (Lustre) for Mr. J Blok. The assessment has been undertaken in accordance with our fee proposal dated 08/01/2018, which was formally approved by Mr. J Blok on 08/01/2018. 1.2 The site, typically rectangular in plan, is centered at National Grid Reference 537930, 200590, and occupies an approximate area of 0.14ha as shown in Figure 1. The site currently comprises of a residential property with private gardens and disused private garage and is located within a mixed commercial and residential land use area. Mr. J Blok requires this Phase 1 Desk Study to support the proposed development relating to the construction of additional buildings comprising a low rise residential housing development with private gardens and communal soft landscaping. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed development scheme. Figure 1: Site Location Plan Lustre Consulting Limited Report Ref: 2038_FP01.0-2018 Page No. 5 HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY Figure 2: Proposed Site Layout Objective 1.3 The objective of this Phase 1 Desk Study (also known as a Contaminated Land Assessment) is to determine the contaminative status of the site and to provide a general indication of the likely geoenvironmental issues which may be present on site or affect the site, as well as to provide guidance on any resultant liabilities. Information on likely geotechnical conditions and hazards is also to be assessed. Scope of Works 1.4 The scope of works for the desk study is summarised below: Lustre Consulting Limited Report Ref: 2038_FP01.0-2018 Page No. 6 HIGHBRIDGE STREET - WALTHAM ABBEY PHASE 1 DESK STUDY • Review of available historical Ordnance Survey maps (dating back to the mid-1800s) of the site and surrounding areas to identify current or former potential sources of contamination both on-site and within the immediate surrounds; • Review of published geological, hydrogeological and hydrological records to assess the environmental setting of the site and surrounding areas; • Review of available public information and up-to-date regulatory information from relevant authorities to identify any potentially significant environmental issues at the site and surrounding areas; • Review of any existing information and reports relating to the site and surrounding area, including any available plans, development layouts etc; and • Development of a conceptual site model and risk assessment following the source- pathway-receptor pollution linkage. 1.5 The Phase 1 Desk Study has been prepared in keeping with best practice and current planning guidance. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1 advises regulatory consultees to ensure that adequate site investigation information is provided at the initial planning stage, whilst the Environment Agency’s Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (CLR112) requires a phased, risk based approach when dealing with land affected by contamination in the UK. 1.6 This Phase 1 Desk Study forms the first stage of an iterative contaminated land assessment, to identify any potential sources of contamination before undertaking any further intrusive Phase 2 investigation works or remedial action, if required. The methodology adopted in this Phase 1 Desk Study is based on the source-pathway-receptor model as set out in CLR112. More information on Lustre’s approach to such assessments can be found at the following link:
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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]