DOCSLIB.ORG

Bedrock Geology 32 Quartenary Deposits 51 Fossils and Palaeontology 61

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPEN ENVIRONMENTS: London’s FOUNDATIONS: PROTECTING THE GEODIVERSITY OF THE CAPITAL SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE MARCH 2012 LONDON PLAN, 2011 IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The work to prepare and produce London’s Foundations, published in 2009 was made possible by funding from Natural England via the Defra Aggregates Levy Sustainability fund (ALSF), The Greater London Authority (GLA), British Geological Survey (BGS) and Natural England London Region. In-kind project support was provided by London Borough of Lambeth, Natural England, Hanson UK, British Geological Survey, Harrow and Hillingdon Geological Society, South London RIGS Group and London Biodiversity Partnership. BGS prepared the draft report in 2008 on behalf of the London Geodiversity Partnership, led by the GLA. BGS is a component body of the Natural Environment Research Council. BGS Report authors: H F Barron, J Brayson, D T Aldiss, M A Woods and A M Harrison BGS Editor: D J D Lawrence The 2012 update was prepared by Jane Carlsen and Peter Heath of the Greater London Authority with the assistance of the London Geodiversity Partnership. Mapping updates provided by Julie MacDonald of Greenspace Information for Greater London. Document production by Alex Green (GLA). The Mayor would like to acknowledge the work and extend thanks to the London Geodiversity Partnership who contributed to the revision of London’s Foundations SPG and those who responded to the consultation. Maps and diagrams have been prepared by the authors, except where stated. This report includes mapping data licensed from Ordnance Survey with permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copyright and/or database right 2008. All rights reserved. BGS Licence number 100037272/2008. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPEN ENVIRONMENTS: London’s FOUNDATIONS: PROTECTING THE GEODIVERSITY OF THE CAPITAL SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE MARCH 2012 COPYRIGHT GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN 978-1-84781-503-3 Photograph credits Cover: Riddlesdown Quarry © Diana Clements All other photographs: Diana Clements, Joanna Brayson, Vernon Marks and Bryan Cozens. This publication is printed on recycled paper Copies of this document are available from www.london.gov.uk . CONTENTS MAyor’S FOREWORD V SUMMAry VI 1 INtroDUCTION 1 AIMS 2 2 UNDERSTANDING GEODIVERSITY 7 WHAT IS GEODIVERSITY AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? 8 RELATIONSHIP WITH BIODIVERSITY 10 GEODIVERSITY AND SPATIAL PLANNING 11 3 GEOLOGICAL coNSERVATION 15 STATUTORY DESIGNATIONS 16 4 LONDON’S GEOLOGICAL HERITAGE 23 EVOLUTION 24 BEDROCK GEOLOGY 32 QUARTENARY DEPOSITS 51 FOSSILS AND PALAEONTOLOGY 61 5 GEOLOGICAL RESOUrcES AND BUILT HERITAGE 67 MINERAL RESOURCES 68 WATER RESOURCES 71 6 EVALUATING LONDON’S GEODIVERSITY 75 REVIEW OF GEODIVERSITY GUIDANCE AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 76 GEODIVERSITY AUDITING 78 PROJECT GIS 79 7 GEODIVERSITY AUDIT RESULTS AND REcoMMENDATIONS 83 CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF RIGS AND LIGS 84 AUDITED SSSIS 84 RECOMMENDED AND POTENTIAL RIGS 84 POTENTIAL LIGS 85 8 GEODIVERSITY GUIDANCE to BoroUGHS 95 POLICY 96 GEODIVERSITY AND THE WIDER LANDSCAPE 96 IMPLEMENTATION 98 9 GEODIVERSITY ACTION PLANNING 103 APPENDICES 105 - 250 GLOSSAry 251 REFERENCES AND RESOUrcES 256 v MAyor’S FOREWORD Our city’s development is intimately bound to its geodiversity – to the variety of natural materials and processes that have shaped it over the millenia and continue to do so. When we piece together the geological jigsaw puzzle we gain insights into our past. But crucially this also helps us to understand our present and future. We need this knowledge to safeguard our environment, our heritage, and our wildlife, but also in order to most effectively harness our resources and develop our city’s economy and infrastructure in a sustainable way. When I published London’s Foundations in 2009 it was one of the first comprehensive documents for a major urban area in this country. Now that I have published a new London Plan, it is time to update the guidance to reflect my revised policy. This document also reflects the significant work undertaken by the London Geodiversity Partnership to help us to protect and value geodiversity. Boris Johnson Mayor of London PROTECTING THE GEODIVERSITY OF THE CAPITAL SUMMAry the 36 sites are recommended for designation as Regionally Important Geological/ This guidance is based upon a geodiversity geomorphological Sites (RIGS) in borough Local audit of London commissioned in 2007 by a Development Documents. Of the 33 London partnership led by the Greater London Authority boroughs, RIGS are recommended in eight, (GLA), which include the British Geological with five in Bromley, three in Croydon and one Survey (BGS), Natural England, Government each in Lewisham, Ealing, Greenwich, Harrow, Office for London, London Biodiversity Hillingdon and Bexley. Partnership, London Borough of Lambeth, Harrow and Hillingdon Geological Society, South Using the criteria set out in this report 15 of the London RIGS Groups, Hanson UK and Queen 36 sites have the potential to be designated as Mary College, University of London. The project Locally Important Geological Sites (LIGS). These was funded by an Aggregates Levy Sustainability sites are located in nine boroughs, three in Fund grant from Natural England plus additional Waltham Forest, two in Bromley, two in Islington support from the GLA, BGS and Natural England and one each in Barnet, Lewisham, Redbridge, London Region. Wandsworth, Southwark and Sutton. The audit began with a review of the available However, the audit was never intended to be geodiversity documentation for London a static document and since its publication including: BGS field maps, databases and in 2009 the London Geodiversity Parnership publications; Regionally Important Geological have continued to undertake a programme of Sites (RIGS) Group information; Natural site audits and has made, and will continue to England Sites of Special Scientific Interest make, recommendations for both additions and (SSSI) and Geological Conservation Review deletions to the list of sites. During 2010 and (GCR) documentation; and documentation and 2011 the London Geodiversity Partnership re- data from the GLA and London Boroughs. An evaluated a number of sites and recommended initial list of around 470 sites with potential the deletion of nine of the 15 potential LIGS in for geodiversity value was compiled from this the 2009 edition of London’s Foundations, and information. This list was then narrowed down their replacement with nine new sites. They are to 100 for further assessment by exporting site also recommending changes to Regional Sites, locations to a GIS and cross-checking against increasing them from 14 to 28. The 14 potential digital aerial photography backed up by BGS RIGS and 15 LIGS are recommended for further staff local geological expertise. consideration and consultation by Boroughs through the LDD process. The GIS audit Using the procedure set out in this report field information on the sites is held by Greenspace auditing was carried out by BGS staff and the Information for Greater London. South London RIGS Group between November 2007 and April 2008. From the list of 100 sites, Planning proposals should have regard to 35 sites were found to be suitable for detailed geodiversity in order to implement strategic auditing. Harrow and Hillingdon Geological and local policies. Sites should be protected, Society audited a further site in November 2008, managed and enhanced and, where appropriate, bringing the total to 36 sites. new development should provide improvements to the geodiversity value of a site. This can Using the criteria set out in this report 14 of include measures that promote public access, vii study, interpretation and appreciation of 7. Sets out the audit results and geodiversity. recommendations; In addition to individual sites of geodiversity 8. Sets out guidance to boroughs; and interest, Greater London has distinctive natural landscapes shaped by geological processes, such 9. Looks at Geodiversity Action Plans. as undulating chalk downlands with dry valleys in south London, and river terraces forming 10. Appendices 1-6 provide more detailed long flat areas separated by steeper areas of information underpinning the text terrace front slopes. This natural topographic above. geodiversity underlying London should be understood, respected and only altered with full knowledge of its origin and form. Planners are encouraged to use authentic contouring in restoration work and new landscaping schemes, maintain the contributions of natural topography, rock outcrops, landscape features, and to maintain soil quality, quantity and function. The guidance in this document replaces London Foundations 2009. The document is divided into 9 sections; 1. The Introduction – sets out the purpose behind the document and its relationship to the London Plan, specifically Policy 7.20; 2. Explains what geodiversity is and why it matters; 3. Explains the three levels of geological conservation designation – national, regional and local; 4. Explains the evolution and development of London’s geological landscape; 5. Looks at London’s geological resources; 6. Takes the reader through the audit process; CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION PROTECTING THE GEODIVERSITY OF THE CAPITAL 1.1 The London Plan published in July 2011, to and understanding of geodiversity. aims to protect
Recommended publications
  • The Effects of Shrinkage and Swelling Were First Recognised by Geotechnical Specialists Following the Dry Summer of 1947

    The Effects of Shrinkage and Swelling Were First Recognised by Geotechnical Specialists Following the Dry Summer of 1947

    C:\Documents and Settings\adixon\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\7NFVY2G5\08-112 revised2.doc Modelling Volume Change Potential in the London Clay L. D. Jones & R. Terrington British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham. NG12 5GG UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract The London Clay Formation is particularly susceptible to shrink–swell behaviour that has resulted in a long history of foundation damage due to ground movement across the outcrop. Damage has cost up to £500 million in a single year. Underlying most of the Greater London area, the London Clay Formation is of major engineering importance as it is on and within this formation that the majority of the city’s infrastructure, buildings and underground services are constructed. The Volume Change Potential of a soil is the relative change in volume to be expected with changes in soil moisture content and the subsequent shrinkage or swelling can cause major damage to structures above or below ground. Detailed statistical and spatial analyses of data across the London Clay outcrop has revealed a significant geographical trend in the volume change potential of this deposit, confirming an overall increase from west to east, but also showing subtle trends with depth. This paper describes how this analysis was carried out and shows how such assessments can yield valuable information about shrink–swell behaviour not only of the London Clay but of similar shrink– swell prone argillaceous formations elsewhere. Introduction The effects of shrinkage and swelling of clay soils, with respect to foundation and building damage, were first recognised by geotechnical specialists following the dry summer of 1947.
  • Colne River Valley

    Colne River Valley

    1. Colne River Valley Key plan Description The Colne River Valley Natural Landscape Area follows the Colne Within the northern Colne Valley, the settlement pattern is relatively River north to south on the western fringe of Greater London, from sparse, although there is a corridor of villages along the Grand Union Stocker’s Lake near Batchworth in the north to Heathrow Airport in Canal. To the south the valley is more densely developed than the the south. Between Batchworth and Uxbridge the valley floor consists north, with industrial towns such as Uxbridge, Yiewsley and West of a series of lakes and reservoirs, edged by ridges and plateaux within Drayton and London’s largest airport, Heathrow. The historic cores the neighbouring Ruislip Plateau (NLA 2) and the Hayes Gravels (NLA which remain within the settlements of Harefield, Uxbridge, West 10). As the River Colne meanders south and the Grand Union Canal Drayton and Harmondsworth suggest how settlement patterns have heads east, the topography gradually levels; historically the River evolved within this area. Despite the intense residential and industrial Colne would have meandered wider here, resulting in an extensive development around Uxbridge, the linear open space corridors area of deep silt soil across an exceptionally wide floodplain. The that follow the River Colne, Grand Union Canal and the lakes that Colne River Valley has been and continues to be important both as a they support are dominant landscape features. The waterways and 1. Colne River Valley River Colne 1. source of water and for trade navigation. lakes are typically bordered by marginal wetland vegetation and wooded areas.
  • Geology of the London Basin

    Geology of the London Basin

    Geology of the London Basin - 100 Million Years in the Making on 16 November 2018 Mr Philip Laurie first showed a geological map of London produced in 1848 by Stanford – the first of its kind. The Earth is 46,000 million years old, so much had happened before the London area made an appearance. The geological history of London started a hundred million years ago. For 60% of that time it has been under ice, causing sea levels to fall. He lives near the Ravensbourne, which rises south of the North Downs, runs through them and north to the Thames, emerging at Deptford Creek. How did it, and other rivers such as the Wandle, Darent and Medway, come to flow through the North Downs? At one time it was thought that there were faults in the chalk which gave them a way through, but this has been discounted. The Weald is now low lying, but when tectonic plate movement, mainly caused by Africa colliding with Europe, raised not only the Alps but buckled strata in northern Europe, a Wealden ridge was formed. An underlying chalk stratum buckled with high ridges at the South and North Downs and a dip under the Weald, squeezing up the soft sedimentary rocks between them to form the Ridge. Fast flowing streams from the ridge soon eroded channels in the chalk on their way to the sea. The ridge has since been eroding away (reducing river flows). They are ancient rivers. London is over a layer of cretaceous chalk about 40m down, which in turn is over gault clay.
  • A CRITICAL EVALUATION of the LOWER-MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD of the CHALK UPLANDS of NORTHWEST EUROPE Lesley

    A CRITICAL EVALUATION of the LOWER-MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD of the CHALK UPLANDS of NORTHWEST EUROPE Lesley

    A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE LOWER-MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD OF THE CHALK UPLANDS OF NORTHWEST EUROPE The Chilterns, Pegsdon, Bedfordshire (photograph L. Blundell) Lesley Blundell UCL Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD September 2019 2 I, Lesley Blundell, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed: 3 4 Abstract Our understanding of early human behaviour has always been and continues to be predicated on an archaeological record unevenly distributed in space and time. More than 80% of British Lower-Middle Palaeolithic findspots were discovered during the late 19th/early 20th centuries, the majority from lowland fluvial contexts. Within the British planning process and some academic research, the resultant findspot distributions are taken at face value, with insufficient consideration of possible bias resulting from variables operating on their creation. This leads to areas of landscape outside the river valleys being considered to have only limited archaeological potential. This thesis was conceived as an attempt to analyse the findspot data of the Lower-Middle Palaeolithic record of the Chalk uplands of southeast Britain and northern France within a framework complex enough to allow bias in the formation of findspot distribution patterns and artefact preservation/discovery opportunities to be identified and scrutinised more closely. Taking a dynamic, landscape = record approach, this research explores the potential influence of geomorphology, 19th/early 20th century industrialisation and antiquarian collecting on the creation of the Lower- Middle Palaeolithic record through the opportunities created for artefact preservation and release.
  • Download Bedfords Park Management Plan 2017

    Download Bedfords Park Management Plan 2017

    CONTENTS Introduction 1 1. Site Overview 1.1 Havering 2 1.2 Strategic Framework 3 1.3 Site Description 3 1.4 History 5 1.5 Location and Transport Links 11 2. A Welcoming Place 2.1 Entrance Points 14 2.2 Entrance Signs 16 2.3 Equal Access 17 3. Heathy, Safe and Secure 3.1 Health and Safety Systems 18 3.2 Parks Protection Service 19 3.3 Parks Locking 22 3.4 Infrastructure 22 3.5 Parks Monitoring 23 4. Maintenance of Equipment, Buildings and Landscape 4.1 Grounds Maintenance 25 4.2 Arboricultural Management 28 4.3 Vehicles and Plant Maintenance 28 4.4 Parks Furniture 29 4.5 Parks Buildings 22 4.6 The Walled Garden 26 5. Litter, Cleanliness and Vandalism 5.1 Litter Management 34 5.2 Sweeping 34 5.3 Graffiti 35 5.4 Flytipping 35 5.5 Reporting 35 5.6 Dog Fouling 36 6. Environmental Sustainability 6.1 Energy Sustainability 37 6.2 Peat Use 37 6.3 Waste Minimisation 37 6.4 Pesticide Use 41 7. Biodiversity, Landscape and Heritage 7.1 Management of natural features, wild fauna and flora 42 7.2 Conservation of Landscape features 48 7.3 Woodlands 49 7.4 Biodiversity Action Plan 54 7.5 Havering Local Plan 54 7.6 Natural Ambition Booklet 55 8. Community Involvement 8.1 Council Surveys 57 8.2 User Groups 58 9. Marketing and Promotions 9.1 Parks Brochure 61 9.2 Social Media 61 9.3 Website 61 9.4 Interpretation Boards 62 9.5 Events 63 10.
  • National Park City Proposal

    National Park City Proposal

    National Park City Greater London NationalA proposal Park City Initiative to make @LondonNPC Greater #NationalParkCity London the world’s first National Park City !1 This version has been adapted from its original design for easy download. Let’s make London the world’s first National Park City. A city where people and nature are better connected. A city that is rich with wildlife and every child benefits from exploring, playing and learning outdoors. A city where we all enjoy high-quality green spaces, the air is clean to breathe, it’s a pleasure to swim in its rivers and green homes are affordable. Together we can make London a greener, healthier and fairer place to live. Together we can make London a National Park City. Why not? Greater London National Park City Initiative @LondonNPC #NationalParkCity !2 Greater London National Park City Initiative @LondonNPC #NationalParkCity !3 Help make it happen What’s the aim? For Londoners to declare Greater London the world’s first National Park City. Over the last 18 months, a movement has been growing, drawing together Londoners who want to make our city greener, healthier, fairer Turning our capital into a National Park City will help: and even more beautiful. • Ensure 100% of Londoners have free and easy access to high-quality Who’s involved? All kinds of people – cyclists, scientists, tree climbers, green space teachers, students, pensioners, unemployed, under-employed, doctors, swimmers, gardeners, artists, walkers, kayakers, activists, wildlife • Connect 100% of London’s children to nature watchers, politicians, children, parents and grandparents. • Make the majority of London physically green We are a group of people who believe we have the potential to benefit Improve London’s air and water quality, year on year more from our incredible city and that, in turn, our city has the potential • to benefit more from us, too.
  • Biodiversity Action Plan

    Biodiversity Action Plan

    Biodiversity Action Plan 2015-2018 Public March 2015 Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................... 3 About Us .......................................................................................................... 3 What is biodiversity? ........................................................................................... 3 Drivers for the Biodiversity Action Plan ................................................................... 3 Focus on Special Sites of Scientific Interest (SSSIs) .................................................... 4 Objectives ......................................................................................................... 6 Biodiversity Achievements and Measures to Date .................................................. 7 Environmental Management System (EMS) ............................................................. 7 Partnership ....................................................................................................... 7 Operational Response at Designated Sites............................................................... 7 Waste and Recycling Sites.................................................................................... 8 Procurement ..................................................................................................... 9 Estate Management ............................................................................................ 9 New Builds and Major Refurbishments ................................................................
  • Brickearth Soils in the South-East New Forest Are Well Drained

    Brickearth Soils in the South-East New Forest Are Well Drained

    BRIGKEARTH, AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE CHARACTER OF SOILS, IN THE SOUTH-EAST NEW FOREST By G. C. FISHER I. INTRODUCTION BRICKEARTH is an indefinite geological term applied to loamy, superficial deposits of Quaternary age. Structureless deposits of brickearth are common in Southern and Eastern England and in most, particles in the size range iojxm to 200(j.m are dominant. The Geological Survey maps a number of patches of brickearth in the south­ western New Forest, most notably at Barton-on-Sea. Additional deposits of brickearth have been described from the New Forest (White 1915, Everard 1952, Lewin 1966a) and the author records several more in this paper for the south-east of the area. The first aim of the work here recorded was to determine the extent of brickearth deposits in the south-east corner of the New Forest. Everard (1952) provides a very general map of brickearth distribution around Southampton Water which shows a large deposit at Fawley not recorded by the Geological Survey. As well as adding to the map of Everard an attempt was made to locate shallow deposits of brickearth, not mappable by the geologist, but which may make an important contribution to soils. A further aim of the work was to try and determine the origin of the brickearth. Some brickearths have been described, especially from Kent (Pitcher et al 1954, Dines et al 1954), which have a particle size distribution which shows them to be true loesses, i.e. 50 per cent of the particles have diameters in the range 10 |un to 50 (im (Russell 1944, Pecsi 1968).
  • Traffic Noise Maps of Public Parks in Haringey May 2018

    Traffic Noise Maps of Public Parks in Haringey May 2018

    Traffic noise maps of public parks in Haringey May 2018 This document shows traffic noise maps for parks in the borough. The noise maps are taken from http://www.extrium.co.uk/noiseviewer.html. Occasionally, google earth or google map images are included to help the reader identify where the park is located. Similar documents are available for all London Boroughs. These were created as part of research into the impact of traffic noise in London’s parks. They should be read in conjunction with the main report and data analysis which are available at http://www.cprelondon.org.uk/resources/item/2390-noiseinparks. The key to the traffic noise maps is shown here to the right. Orange denotes noise of 55 decibels (dB). Louder noises are denoted by reds and blues with dark blue showing the loudest. Where the maps appear with no colour and are just grey, this means there is no traffic noise of 55dB or above. London Borough of Haringey 1 1. Albert Road Recreation Ground 2. Alexandra Palace Park 3. Belmont Recreation Ground 2 4. Bluebell Wood 5. Bruce Castle Park 6. Chapmans Green 3 7. Chestnuts Park 8. Coldfall Wood, Muswell Playing Field (Excluding cemetery) 9. Downhills Park, 10. Lordship Recreation Ground 4 11. Down Lane Recreation Ground 12. Ducketts Common . 13. Fairland Park 5 14. Finsbury Park 15. Hartington Park 16. Markfield Park 6 17. Priory Park 18. Russell Park 19. Stationers Park 7 20. Wood Green Common 21. Paigton Road Open Space 22. Highgate Wood, 23. Queen’s Wood, Crouch End Playing Fields 8 24.
  • LBR 2007 Front Matter V5.1

    LBR 2007 Front Matter V5.1

    1 London Bird Report No.72 for the year 2007 Accounts of birds recorded within a 20-mile radius of St Paul's Cathedral A London Natural History Society Publication Published April 2011 2 LONDON BIRD REPORT NO. 72 FOR 2007 3 London Bird Report for 2007 produced by the LBR Editorial Board Contents Introduction and Acknowledgements – Pete Lambert 5 Rarities Committee, Recorders and LBR Editors 7 Recording Arrangements 8 Map of the Area and Gazetteer of Sites 9 Review of the Year 2007 – Pete Lambert 16 Contributors to the Systematic List 22 Birds of the London Area 2007 30 Swans to Shelduck – Des McKenzie Dabbling Ducks – David Callahan Diving Ducks – Roy Beddard Gamebirds – Richard Arnold and Rebecca Harmsworth Divers to Shag – Ian Woodward Herons – Gareth Richards Raptors – Andrew Moon Rails – Richard Arnold and Rebecca Harmsworth Waders – Roy Woodward and Tim Harris Skuas to Gulls – Andrew Gardener Terns to Cuckoo – Surender Sharma Owls to Woodpeckers – Mark Pearson Larks to Waxwing – Sean Huggins Wren to Thrushes – Martin Shepherd Warblers – Alan Lewis Crests to Treecreeper – Jonathan Lethbridge Penduline Tit to Sparrows – Jan Hewlett Finches – Angela Linnell Buntings – Bob Watts Appendix I & II: Escapes & Hybrids – Martin Grounds Appendix III: Non-proven and Non-submitted Records First and Last Dates of Regular Migrants, 2007 170 Ringing Report for 2007 – Roger Taylor 171 Breeding Bird Survey in London, 2007 – Ian Woodward 181 Cannon Hill Common Update – Ron Kettle 183 The establishment of breeding Common Buzzards – Peter Oliver 199
  • Riverside Energy Park Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Air Quality

    Riverside Energy Park Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Air Quality

    Riverside Energy Park Environmental Statement Chapter 7: Air Quality VOLUME NUMBER: PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE NUMBER: EN010093 DOCUMENT REFERENCE: 06 6.1 November 2018 Revision 0 APFP Regulation 5(2)(a) Planning Act 2008 | Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Riverside Energy Park: Environmental Statement (ES) Chapter 7 – Air Quality Contents 7 Air Quality ......................................................................................................... 1 7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 7.2 Legislation, Policy, Guidance and Standards ........................................ 1 7.3 Consultation ........................................................................................ 14 7.4 Reasonable Worst Case Parameters Used for Assessment ............... 37 7.5 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria ........................... 39 7.6 Assumptions and Limitations............................................................... 57 7.7 Baseline Conditions and Receptors .................................................... 58 7.8 Embedded Mitigation .......................................................................... 71 7.9 Assessment of Likely Effects............................................................... 72 7.10 Cumulative Assessment ...................................................................... 86 7.11 Further Mitigation and Enhancement .................................................
  • Environmental Permit Appendices

    Environmental Permit Appendices

    Riverside Energy Park Environmental Permit Appendices APPENDIX: AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT D DISPERSION MODELLING REPORT December 2018 Revision 0 Riverside Energy Park Dispersion Modelling Report i Riverside Energy Park Dispersion Modelling Report Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................ 1 1.3 The Objective ................................................................................................................ 1 2 Legislation ................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 European Air Quality Legislation ................................................................................... 2 2.2 UK Air Quality Legislation and Strategy ........................................................................ 2 2.3 Industrial Pollution Regulation ....................................................................................... 3 3 Air Quality Standards, Objectives and Guidelines .................................................................. 7 3.1 Nitrogen dioxide ............................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Sulphur dioxide .............................................................................................................