BabtleBrown & Root
RiverLittle Ouse (Brandonto ThetfordNavigation) Pre-FeasibilityStudy Stage2 Report
t:t-) '. :'j ,,...i _t-ji;:1
1,:il !" *# E{-:s- ',.jij
EnvironmentAgency Anglian Region BBR Ref: 0006077/D4l135 EA ProjectRef: LVN 17010
Babtie Brown & Root JV 8 The SquareMartlesham Heath lpswich Suffolk lP5 3SL Tel 01473624326 Fax 01473623021 BabtieBrown & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
Rev Date Purpose Draft 26t6t03 Draftfor Discussion 20t8t03 Stage1 Reportissue A 1611tO4 Stage2 Report(Draft for Discussion) B 16t2t04 Stage2 Reportdraft in preparation C 25t5t04 Stage2 Reportincorporating EA commentsof 2614104 D 17t10t05 Stage2 Report(Final) incorporatinq EA comments
Front Cover Photo Abbey Heath Weir, River Little Ouse, Thetford.
35 Stage 2 Flnal Revo.dc RIVERLITTLE OUSE
(BRANDONto THETFORDNAVIGATION)
Notes
Pagesnot printed (or reprinted)
2: Blank 28: Blank 29: Titlepage only - AppendixA, EnvironmentalReport. 52: Blank 53: Titlepage only - Citations(Appendix 3 - sic) 54: Blank 55 - 67: ThetfordGolf Course And Marsh,Sites of SpecialScientific lnterest, Conservationof Wild Birds. SeePages 35 to 47 in originalreport. 68: Blank 69: Titlepage only - AppendixB, Photographs 70 - 76 14photographs. See pages 50 to 56 of originalreport. 77: Titlepage only - AppendixC, Works Required for Navigation 78 - 79 Scheduleof newworks - Seepages 58 & 59 of originalreport 80: Blank 81: Titlepage only - AppendixD, CostsEstimates 85: Titlepage only - AppendixE, EconomicAssessment 91: Titlepage only - WorkingGroup Consultation 92: Blank 93 - 94: WorkingGroup. See pages 67 & 68 of originalreport 98: Blank 99: Titlepage only - AbstractionLicence Summaries 100:Blank 103-106:River Flow Records 107',Drawings
BabtieBrcwn&Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
Tableof Gontents
|NTRODUCT|ON...... '....".""....'....4 TECHNTCALASSESSMENT...... '...... """".8 swoT ANALYSIS.. .'.....13 PLANN|NG|SSUES...... '.."'..'...16 ENVTRONMENTAL1SSUES...... ,...... "...... '."'18 scHEMECOSTS...... '...... '...... 20 ourLrNE BENEFTTS...... '...... 21 ECONOMTCBENEFITS...... ----.-22 coNcLusroNs...... -...... 2s RECOMMENDATIONS...... -...----".....27
Appendices AppendixA - Environmentallmpact Assessment Report AppendixB - PhotograPhs AppendixC - WorksRequired for Navigation AppendixD - CostEstimates AppendixE - EconomicAssessment AppendixF - WorkingGroup Consultation AppendixG - AbstractionLicence Summaries AppendixH - RiverFlow Records
Drawings 0006077/01/01 - StudYArea 0A06077101102 - SSSI's 0006077/01/03 - SAC's 0006077101104 - CurrentStructures and PreferredLock Locations, Forestry Commission 0006077/01/05 RiverCorridor Habitat, Forestry COmmission 0006077/01/06 - PotentialEnhancement Areas, Forestry Commission 0006077101107 - ScheduledAncient Monuments 00060771D2108 - HistoricStaunches and ExistingWeirs 00060771D2109 - NavigationProposals - Plan& Longsection
Rr\2003v'fir60r7 EA Brandon to 35 Stagc 2 Flml RevD.dc 1 ol 107 BabtieBrcwn&Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
SUMMARY
1.1 This report presentsthe initial environmentaland technicalassessments for providing enhancementsto the environment,and navigationon the Little Ouse betweenBrandon and Thetford.
't.2 The areas of potentialenvironmental enhancement have been identifiedbased on informationprovided from a corelist of consultees,particularly the ForestryCommission.
The key englneeringworks required for the navigationto be reopenedbetween Brandon and Thetfordhave been identified.
1.4 Budgetcosts and benefitsfor theseproposals have been determined; the costsare in the regionof f6.5 to €7.5million.
1.5 An assessmentof the economicbenefits has beencarried out for a rangeof scenarios. The medium(intermediate) case scenarios suggest that the navigationproposals would yiefda positiveNPV after approximate$ 2A b 25 years.
Thereis scopeto restorethe floodplain in the vicinityof Two MileBottom and to a lesser extentSanton Downham. However, the affectof increasedlevels on the flooddefence aspectshas not beenfully examined at this stage.
Investigationswould be neededto determinethe potentialaffects of navigationon river flowsdue to increasedwater levels, and confirmthe technicalfeasibility of the proposals.
1.8 Furtherenvironmental studies are requiredto identifythe presenceof protectedspecies alongthe rivercorridor and considerthe effectsof extendingthe navigationto Thetford.In addition,consideration should be givento the effectsof navigationon riverbank stability fromwave action.These issues would need to be addressedunder the environmental mitigationproposals for the scheme.
R;U0030006077EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\D@uments\IN-'35 Stage 2 Final RevD.d@ 3 of 107 BabtieBrown & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
INTRODUCTION
Background 2.1.1 The river LittleOuse is a gentlysloping river drainingthe low-lyingland of the Brecksin Norfolk,and meandersfrom Thetford,past SantonDownham, Brandon and Hockwold- Cum-Wiltonuntil it flowsinto the riverGreat Ouse at BrandonCreek.
2.1.2 The river befueen Brandonand Thetfordflows throughthe ThetfordForest, part of which is part of the BrecklandForest SSSI and part of in the Thetfordgolf courseand Marsh SSSI.
2.1.3 The river LittleOuse is at presentnavigable by small boats up from its confluencewith the riverGreat Ouse up to Brandonon the NorfolUSuffolkborder. Limitations on the size of boatsthat can navigateto Brandonare as follows: r Limited headroom of approximately2]m at the railway bridge downstreamof Brandonlock. . Thereis limitedwidth, length, depth and headroomat BrandonLock (4m wide,14m long,1.2m deep and 2m headroom).
2.1.4 Boatscurrently have access from the riverLittle Ouse to the riverGreat Ouse, where they can navigatenorth to the DenverSluice complex or south towardsEly. Accessto this watenruaysystem will enable boats using the river Little Ouse to gain access to the proposedFens Waterway Link and Nar OuseNavigation (to King'sLynn).
2.'t.5 The section of the river Little Ouse upstreamof Brandon is not navigabledue to insufficientwater depth in placesand restrictionscaused by existingstructures such as bridgesand gauging weirs.
2.1.6 There is considerableexisting amenity value along the lengthof river betweenBrandon and Thetford,and there are severalenvironmental designations covering this area (see Appendix A). Use is made of the watercoursefor canoeing and there are other recreationaluses of the area.
2.1.7 The ForestryCommission have extensiveresponsibilities for the managementof land adjacentto the river, and are keen to improvethe water level managementso as to improvesome of the existingland uses.
Project Aims 2.2.1 The purposeof this schemeis to enhancethe amenitiesprovided from the river Little Ouse and the adjacent area of the Thetford Forest Nature Reserve. The Forestry Commissionis continuallyworking tro enhance the localarea through the reinstatementof natural habitats associatedwith the flood plain. The boating communityis keen to increasethe currentnavigation on the riverLittle Ouse to Thetford.
R:\20{r3\0mo0z EA Brandon to Thetio.d\Adm\Itcumts\D4-135 Stage 2 Flml Revt .da 4 ot 1O7 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
2.2'2 The project group's aims are to enhance and improve the provisionof navigable waterwaywhilst maintaining/improving the standardof floodprotection curently offeredto the respectivearea. The key membersof the projectgroup are:
r EnvironmentAgency . KeystoneCommunity Partnership . ForestryCommission r EastAnglian Waterways Association . GreatOuse Boating Association . lnlandWaterways Association o BrecksCountryside project o EnglishNature o ForestHeath District Council e BrecklandDistrict Council
2.2'3 The purpose of this prefeasibilitystudy is to examine the issues associatedwith reopeningthe lengthof watercoursebetween Brandon and Thetfordto navigation,and to identifyany potential enhancements to theamenities in thearea.
2'2.4 This study has been prepared by Babtie Brown & Root commissionedunder the EnvironmentAgency's NEECA frameworkagreement. This report identifiesthe key environmentalissues and the scope of work, which would be requiredto reopen the navigation.
Tasks 2.3.1 The purposeof this prefeasibilitystudy is to identify:
r The currentwater level management regime and standardsof floodprotection offeredto the studyarea. . The waterlevel management requirements necessary to enablethe re-openingof the riverLittle Ouse to navigation,between Brandon and Thetford,and the restrictions imposedon its users(i.e minimumdraft, widths and headroometc). . Any potentialfor floodplain restoration within the areaof the NatureReserve. . The scope/extentof futureworks required to implementthe scherne. r Outlineoptions and associatedcosts. o Outlinebenefits. . Associatedinterests; nature conservation, landscape, fisheries, recreation, amenities,local communities, land use,archaeology, planning issues, water resourcesand water quality.
Study Area 2.4.1 The extentof the studyarea is shownin drawing00060Z7101101.
2'4.2 A descriptionof the locationis givenin Section2.2 of the EnvironmentReport under AppendixA" Photographsof the site are shownunder Appendix B.
R:U003\00060n EA Brildon to Thetford\Adm\Dcumsts\D4-l35 Stage2 Final RevD.d@ 5 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
NavigationHistory 2.5.'l Navigationalong the river LittleOuse usedto extendas far as Thetford. The sectionof riverbetween Brandon and Thetford,however, has beendisused in this respectfor many years,although the openingof a lockat Brandonin 1995has allowedsmall boats to pass upstreamof Brandonsluice to a pointimmediately upstream of the 41065road bridge at Brandon.
2.5.2 There is a long historyof navigationon the river LiftleOuse, with recordsfrom the 13h Centuryof bargestravelling to Thetford.An Act of Parliamentpassed in 1670allowed for improvementsto the navigationand includedthe constructionof five stanchesto retain waterat appropriatelevels for navigation.The riverLittle Ouse up to Thetfordcontinued to be navigatedby commercialtraffic for the nexttwo centuries,however by 1900trade had droppedto a bare minimum,and by 1914- with the staunchesfalling into disrepair- commercialtraffic ceased altogether. ln 1925 the upstreamsection of navigationfrom Thetfordto Two Mile Boftomwas abandoned,followed 5 years later by the remaining sectionbetween Two Mile Bottom and Brandon.With the constructionof the Denver Sluice,water levels began to falland navigation eventually became impossible.
2.5.3 Today,only remnantsof the stanchesremain, and no strucfuresexist that can retiainwater levelssufficient to enablenavigation to Thetford.
2.5.4 There will have been a change in the types of boats using these inland waterways. Historically,the boatsusing the riverLittle Ouse would have been mainly shallow draft boats or barges.In recentyears, there has beena growingtrend for morecruising boats, which havegreater depth and air spacerequirements.
Methodology 2.6.1 This study was undertakenby reviewingthe availableliterature, refening to Ordnance Surveymaps, obtaining relevant survey drawings and datafrom the EnvironmentAgency and inspectingthe river corridor.Relevant information was also receivedfrom other membersof the projectgroup, particularly the ForestryCommission who providedlocal informationon environmentaland waterlevel issues.
2.6.2 Historicalsurvey information has been used to look at the engineeringrequirements to allow water depthsto be increasedfor navigation. This includedthe developmentof existingand proposedriver long sections(between Brandon and Thetford)from the existingLittle Ouse cross-sectionsurvey drawings. These changes in water depthwould needto be achievedwith a combinationof raisingwater levels and excavation/dredgingof the existingbed. Detailsof theseworks are givenin the followingsections.
2.6.3 Consultationswith the seven membersof the working group have been undertaken duringthe periodof this study. Theseare reportedon in AppendixF.
2.6.4 Consultationshave been undertakenas part of an environmentalreport and these are detailedin AppendixA.
35 Stage 2 Final RevD.d6 6 of 107 BabtieBrown & Root
River Little ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibility study - stage 2 Report
2.6.5 Discussionshave been heldwith the FlanningOfficers from two DistrictCouncils {Forest Heath and Breckland)who are responsiblefor the sectionsof the river Litfle Ouse coveredin this study.These discussions have soughtto identifypossible synergies w1h other planninginitiatives in the area, and potentialsources of local, nationaland Europeanfunding.
R:\2003{100602 EA BEndon to 35 Stage 2 Final RevD.de 7 ot 107 BabtieBmwn & Root
River Liftle Ouse Brandon to Thetford prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
TECHNICALASSESSMENT
CurrentWater Level ManagementRegime 3.1.1 A Water Level ManagementPlan existsfor the ThetfordGolf Courseand Marsh SSSI. This SSSI containsthe only survivingtrack of BrecklandHeath known as Thetford Wanen.
3.1.2 Muchof the rivercorridor also comprises wetland habitat, although no specificwater level managementplan has beenidentified for theseother areas.
3.1.3 The EnvironmentAgency carries out dredgingof the river as required,and weed cutting twice a year (in June and September)in orderto maintainchannel size and conditionfor flood dischargepurposes. Further details of the results of the current water level managementare coveredin AppendixA.
3.1.4 The locationof the five historicalstaunches which used to exist on the river between Brandonand Thetfordare shown on drawing 00060771D2108.These stauncheswere used to impoundwater abovethem to allow sufficientdepth for navigation.While there may be traces of the staunchesremaining, they have no practicalaffect on the cunent waterlevels.
3.1.5 The drawing (00O60771D2/08)also shows the locationof the weirs/sluicesalong this stretchof river,which have been built to replacethese historicstaunches. In additionto controllingwater levels, it is understoodthat thesestructures also act as gaugingstations to measureflows.
The Agencyhas advisedthat the currentnormal retention Levels are: . BrandonSluice > upstreamwater level = 3.4 mAOD . AbbeyHeath Weir > upstreamwater level approx = 7.4 mAOD r ThetfordNo1 Sluice> upstreamwater level = 8.6 mAOD
Requirementsfor Navigation 3.2.1 The existingriver bed level (and subsequentwater level)rises by approximately7.5 m alongthe 16 km betweendownstream of BrandonSluice and Thetfordtown centre,which will necessitatethe constructionof locks to enableboats to reach rhetford.
3.2.2 There are essentiallytwo differentnavigation standards that could be adopted;one that would limitthe size of the boatsto the navigationstandard of the currentBrandon Lock; and anotherthat would allow largervessels to reachThetford, but this would necessitate the enlargemenVreconstructionof the BrandonLock. These two standardsare tabulated below:
R:U003{rqFO?rt EA Brandon to Thetfqdltulmu)cuffits\D/t-t 35 Stage 2 Final RcvD.ds 8 of 107 BabtieBrcrnn & Root
River Little ouse Brandon to Thetford prefeasibirity study - stage 2 Report
NavigationStandard Minimum Depth of Water MinimumHeadroom ExistingStandard 1.35m 2.0m HigherStandard** 2.0m 3.0m ** Equivalentto navigationstandard of Denver Retiefchannet Lock
Following discussionswith the EA, it was agreedthat the abovehigher standard would be too onerous,since 90% of the boatsusing this stretchof riveronly had a draftof 1.2mor less. lt was also acceptedthat the minimumheadroom figure of 3.0 m couldbe reducedto 2.7m to avoid raising/reconstructingthe 41065 Brandon(Arch) Road Bridge.Therefore, the two navigationstandards considered by this studyare as follows: tleytgqlgr t!e!qe$ MiUlquqlgpllrylwater - !!4tqgm Headroom ExistingStandard 1.35m 2.0m lmprovedStandard 1.35m 2.7m
3.2.3 The width of the RiverLittle Ouse within the study area generallyvaries between 12 and 15 m for much of its length,with local wideningto approximately20 m at Brandon,and g reducedwidths of and 10 m at Thetfordtown centreand Two Mile Bottomrespectively. Thesewidths would appear to be sufficientfor navigationup to Thetford.
3.2.4 To facilitatenavigation up to Thetfordwill requirea combinationof raisingwater levels and bed excavation/dredging.Raised water levelswill be requiredalong the sectionof river betweenSanton Downham and Abbey HeathWeir - wherethe currentwater depthsare limited.There will also be a requirementto raise some of the existingbridges over the riverto accommodatethe minimumheadroom requirement.
3.2,5 New lock constructionwill need to be in accordancewith the EnvironmentAgency,s AnglianRegion Lock Standard of: Length:26 m, Width:4.3 m, Draft:1.2 m
The BrandonLock has a widthof 4 m, whichis only marginallysmaller than the Agency's standardof 4.3 m. lts lock lengthof 14 m, however,is much more restrictiveand there is an optionto increasethis up to the Agency,sstandard of 26 m.
Outline Prposals/Options 3.3.1 The outlineoptions included in this studyare as follows: R:\2003\0006077EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\D@uments\Ix-t35 Stage2 Finat ReyD.dc 9 of 107 BabtieBrown & Root River Liftle prefeasibility ouse Brandon to Thetford study - stage 2 Report
ExistingBrandon Lock navigation standard retained.New locks to EA standard All locks(including Brandon) to EA standard
3.3.2 The keyworks necessaryto implementthe navigationoptions are tabulatedbelow:
Item Options 1A- ilB t=a T rR New Lock to EA Std 4 4 New Lockto DenverStd BrandonLock gate structure raised BrandonLock rebuilt to EA Std. X X BrandonLock rebuilt to DenverStd. NewWeir/Sluice Structure 2 z 2 2 Footbridge to be raised 2 z 2 2 Roadbridge to be raised 0i 0 0 0
Lengthof riverto be dredged
Lengthof bankto be raised
3.3.3 The existing lock at Brandonwould need to be rebuiltor extendedto meet the Agency,s standard.
The new lockswould be locatedat SantonDownham, Two Mile Bottom,Abbey Heath and at ThetfordNo.1 Sluice. lt has been noted that the ForestryCommission expressed a preference for the lock at rwo Mile Bottom to be located approximately 800 m downstreamof the footbridge at this location(i.e. at chainage 2g.2 km). However,to achievethis wouldreguire the footbridgeto be raisedto permitnavigation.
Where new locks are to be constructed,the proposalwould be to excavatea new channel parallelto the existingriver and adjacentto an existingor new weir/sluicestructure, as appropriate,similar to the anangementat Brandon.
3.3.6 New hydraulic structures(weir/sluice) would be requiredat the lock locationsat Santon Downhamand Two Mile Boftomto retainthe upstreamwater levelsfor navigation,whilst still allowingthe passage of river flows. No investigationshave been undertakenas to what form these should take or whethergauging stations should be includedat these
R:U(Xl3Yt006{trl EA Brmdon to 35 Stage2 Final RevDdc 10 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
RiverLittle Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
locations.However, it is envisagedthat the new hydraulicstructures would be similarto the arrangementat Brandon.
3.3.7 The proposedlimit of navigationfor all optionsis immediatelydownstream of the existing road bridgeat Thetfordtown centre(Bridge Street) at chainage35.9 km. However,should the 2.0 m minimumheadroom option be adopted,navigation could be extendeda further 200 to 300 m upstreamto the confluencewith the RiverThet without needing to raisethe roadbridge.
3.3.8 The existingfootbridge at Two Mile Bottom (Chainage29.98 km) is high enough to accommodatethe 2.7 m minimumheadroom requirement within the centrethird of the river, which equates to a navigablewidth of approximately5.5 m. The headroom, however,falls belowthe 2.7 m requirementnearer the banks.The bridgewill need to be raised or renewedshould the navigablewidth be consideredinsufficient. The existing footbridgesat SantonCountry Park (Chainage27.7 km) and Thetford(Chainage 35.35 km)wilf need to be raisedto facilitatenavigation irrespective of whetherthe 2.0 m or 2.7 m headroomoption is adopted.lt is, therefore,apparent that the 2.0 m headroomoptions (14,2A & 3A) haveno significantfinancial advantage over those for 2.7 m.
The existingA1065 road bridgeat Brandon,which is made up of three consecutivebrick arches, has sufficientheadroom beneath the centre arch to accommodatethe 2.7 m headroomrequirement for navigation.However, with the cunent (and proposed)water level,the minimumheadroom requirement can only be achievedover a 4.5 m widthbefore the archprofile begins to limitthe headroom.
3.3.10 The navigationproposals are detailedunder AppendixC and on Drg 0006077/D2l09. Associatedcosts for the outlineproposals are presentedin Section7 and AppendixD (Costsare providedfor the 2.7 m headroomoptions - 18,28 & 38 - only).
Cunent Standardof Flood Protection 3.4.1 Flood studies were undertakenfor Thetford and Brandon by Posford Duvivier in 1999/2000.The final reportswere issuedin January2000 (Thetford)and March 2000 (Brandon).
3.4.2 It is understoodthat thereare no significantflood issueswithin the studyarea. However, the studiesidentified one propertyat risk in Thetford,near the confluenceof the riverLittle Ouse and river Thet. lt is understoodthat the cellarof this propertywas last floodedin 2002.
The navigationproposals identified under Section 3.3 aboveand on Drg 00060771D2109 showthat the cunentwater levelsupstream of ThetfordNo.1 Sluiceand the currentlevel of floodprotection at SpringHouse would be maintained.
R:\2003$00602 EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\D@umsnt6\D+135 Stage2 Final RevD.dc 11 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn&Root
RiverLittle Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
Flood Plain Restoration 3.5.1 The proposalsto raisethe waterlevel along some lengthsof the river,in orderto achieve navigation,will be desirableat some locationsas part of a water level management strategyfavoured by the ForestryCommission.
3.5.2 On examiningthe proposedwater levelsand existingbank levels,there appearsto be scopeto restorethe flood plainin the vicinityof Two Mile Bottomand to a lesserextent SantonDownham. However, the affectof increasedlevels on the flooddefence aspects has not beenfully examined at this stage. The potentialfor causingflooding of properties wouldneed to be checkedbefore proceeding with suchwork.
Hydrology 3.6.1 Recordsfor riverflows in the LittleOuse have beentaken from the NationalRiver Flow archive(at ). This has provided informationon river flow rates throughoutthe year and the frequencyof low flows. Recordsfrom the Abbey Heathweir (gaugingstation reference 33034) between 1968 and 2003 are presentedunder Appendix G, and suggestthat even duringthe monthsof June to September,there are flows in excessof 0.7 m3isfor gg% of the time. This flow rate is sufficientto fill a standardEA lock (26mx 4.3mx 2m drop)within 6 minutes,which is expectedto be adequate.
3.6.2 While existingriver flow recordsshow that there is sufficientwater flows for navigation, this reliesupon there being no changein the waterlevel regime and potentiallosses from the river to the aquifer.lt is envisagedthat water levels would need to rise between SantonDownham and Abbey Heath by approximately0.6 to 1.9metres depending on the location/lockpositions. An investigationwould be needed to determinethe potential affectson riverflows due to increasedwater levels, and confirmthe technicalfeasibility of the proposals.
R:U003\00000n EA Brandon to 135Stage 2 Final Ravo.d@ 12 of 107 BabtieBrown & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
SWOTANALYSIS Strength,Weakness, Opportunities & Threats
4'1 A SWOTanalysis has beencanied out for all option,including Do-Nothing
Do-Nothing 4.2.1 Strengths o Existingenvironment, wildlife habitat and waterlevels retained . Lowestcapital expenditure
4.2.2 Weaknesses . Navigationto Thetfordnot achieved . Reducedscope for environmentalenhancement along river
4.2.3 Opportunities - Noneidentified
4.2.4 Threats . Reducedpotential for additionalbusiness and tourism
- Option {A 2.0m Headroom,New Locks to EA Standard,Existing Brandon Lock Retained 4.3.1 Strengths . Navigationextended to Thetford r No modificationsrequired to existingBrandon Lock o 2.0m headroomstandard affords greater tolerance beneath bridges o Additionalbusiness and tourismgenerated by navigationup to Thetford
4.3.2 Weaknesses . Retentionof existingBrandon Lock limits size of boatsupstream of Brandon . Potentialhealth and safetyissues conceming restricted headroom r Potentialfor increasedrisk of bankerosion due to waveaction from boats . Riskof excessivedisturbance to wildlife/habitatfrom unregulateduse of river, mooring/accesspoints, dredging and weedcutting
4.3.3 Opportunities ' Navigationcould extend to confluencewith RiverThet without the needto raisetown centreroad bridge o Potentialfor environmentalenhancement along river corridor o Potentialfor floodplain restoration between Santon Downham and Two MileBottom
Threats . Potentialrisk of insufficientriver flow in summermonths to supportnavigation
R:U003\0006077EA Brandon to 35 Stage 2 Fiml RevD.d6 13of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Liftle Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
r Riskof adverseimpact on localarea, environment and ecologydue to increased tourism/visitornu mbers . Schemecosts and environmentalimpact outweigh benefits
Option 18 -2.7m Headroom,New Locks to EA Standard,Existing Brandon Lock Retained 4.4.1 Strengths . Navigationextended to Thetford . lncreasedheadroom . Additionalbusiness and tourismgenerated by navigationup to Thetford
4.4.2 Weaknesses . Retentionof existingBrandon Lock limits size of boatsupstream of Brandon . Existinghead structure on BrandonLock will needto be raisedto accommodate 2.7mminimum headroom . Periodicsmall increases in waterlevels due to rainfall/surfacewater runoff could infringeon headroomtolerance beneath some bridges r Increasedrisk of bankerosion due to waveaction from boats o Riskof excessivedisturbance to wildlife/habitatfrom unregulateduse of river, mooring/accesspoints, dredging and weedcufting
4.4.3 Opportunities o Potentialfor environmentalenhancement along river corridor . Potentialfor floodplain restoration between Santon Downham and Two Mile Bottom . New lockscould be builtto'Denver' standard (Option 38)
4.4.4 Threats . Potentialrisk of insufficientriver flow in summermonths to supportnavigation r Riskof adverseimpact on localarea, environment and ecologydue to increased tourism/visitornu mbers . Schemecosts and environmentalimpact outweigh benefits
Option 28 - 2.0m Headroom,All Locks to EA Standard 4.s.'t Strengths . Navigationextended to Thetford . 2.0m headroomstandard affords greater tolerance beneath bridges o Additionalbusiness and tourismgenerated by navigationup to Thetford
4.5.2 Weaknesses . Substantialconstruction work requiredin riverto renew/upgradeBrandon Lock . Potentialhealth and safetyissues concerning restricted headroom r lncreasedrisk of bankerosion due to wave actionfrom boats . Riskof excessivedisturbance to wildlife/habitatfrom unregulateduse of river, mooring/accesspoints, dredging and weedcutting
R:U003\00060r/ EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\Dcumtr\D/t-'135 Stage2 Final RdD.dm 14 ot 107 BabtieBnrwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
4.5.3 Opportunities . Navigationcould extend to confluencewith RiverThet without the needto raisetown centreroad bridge e Potentialfor environmentalenhancement along river corridor o Potentialfor floodplain restoration between Santon Downham and Two MileBottom
4.s.4 Threats r Potentialrisk of insufficientriver flow in summermonths to supportnavigation . Riskof adverseimpact on localarea, environment and ecologydue to increased tourism/visitornumbers . Schemecosts and environmentalimpact outweigh benefits
Option 28 -2.7m Headroom,All Locks to EA Standard 4.6.1 Strengths e Navigationextended to Thetford o Increasedheadroom . Additionalbusiness and tourismgenerated by navigationup to Thetford
4.6.2 Weaknesses o Substantialconstruction work requiredin riverto renew/upgradeBrandon Lock o Periodicsmall increases in waterlevels due to rainfalVsurfacewater runoff could infringeon headroomtolerance beneath some bridges o Increasedrisk of bankerosion due to waveaction from boats . Riskof excessivedisturbance to wildlife/habitatfrom unregulateduse of river, mooring/accesspoints, dredging and weedcufting
4.6.3 Opportunities r Potentialfor environmentalenhancement along river conidor o Potentialfor floodplain restoration between Santon Downham and Two MileBottom 'Denver' . New locksand replacementBrandon Lock could be builtto standard
4.6.4 Threats . Potentialrisk of insufficientriver flow in summermonths to supportnavigation . Riskof adverseimpact on localarea, environment and ecologydue to increased tourism/visitornumbers . Schemecosts and environmentalimpact outweigh benefits
R:U003{lm60r/ EA Brandon to Thctfqd\Adm\DdtHts\tx-i 35 Stage Z Fimt RevD.dc 15of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
PLANNINGISSUES
Forest HeathDistrict Council 5.1.1 The LocalPlan for the areais out of dateand is beingrevised in conjunctionwith the new planninglegislation. lt is anticipatedthat the publicdeposit will be Summer2004. The mostup to dateStructure Plan for Suffolkis for 2001 (whichcan be viewedon the County Councilwebsite).
5.1.2 Key organisationsthat couldpotentially input into the proposalsare: . BrecksCountryside Pro.lect . KeystonePartnership . BrecklandDC . BrandonCommunity Project . SuffolkEuropean Funding
5.1.3 It is not anticipatedthat therewould be any significantland use issuesassociated with the navigationproposals, although the proposalswould need a specificreference in the Local Plan. Any marinadevelopment proposal would also need to be identifiedin the LocalPlan. The generaldevelopment areas and areasof housinggrowth in Brandonare not adjacentto the river,and there is sufficientland within the developmentboundary for housinggrowth up b 2421.
5.1.4 The DistrictCouncil does not anticipateany developmentnext to the river,as the existing amenityvalue is watermeadows. lt is alsounlikely that developer contributions would be availablefor the navigationproposals as there is littleopportunity for a mixed riverside development.
5.1.5 The ForestryCommission is investigatingthe re-openingof SantonDownham camp site.
5.1.6 There are also proposalsfor a new marinaat Brandon,which would be controlledby ForestHeath DC.
Breckland District Council 5.2.1 There are no objectionsin principalwith the navigationproposals, although there is nothingspecific in the LocalPlan.
5.2.2 BrecklandDC is keento maintainthe visualappearance of the rivercorridor.
5.2.3 Fundingsources for theseproposals could include:
r KeystoneFartnership (who are funded by tsrecklandDC) o EuropeanCultural Package . CommunityDevelopment Funds
35 Stage 2 Final RevD.d6 16 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little ouse Brandon to Thetford prefeasibirity study - stage 2 Report
. RuralDevelopment Agenda.
Legislation 5.3.1 lf the Brandonto Thetfordnavigation proposals were to proceed,the followingitems, inter alia,would be required:
o Townand Country planning submissions o Preparationof an EnvironmentalStatement o Permissionunder the Water Resources Act 19g1 r Permissionunder the LandDrainage Act 1g91
5'3'2 Permissionswill be requiredunder the Town and CountryPlanning Legislation for new structures(e.9. locks) and possiblyfor alteredstructures (e.g. bridges).
R;12003\OlXb077EA Brandon to Thettord\Admu)cumts\D4-135 Stage 2 FiEl RevD.dc 17 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
ENVIRONMENTALISSUES
6.1 The environmentalissues affecting this schemeare coveredin the EnvironmentalReport underAppendix A. The EnvironmentalReport contains the followingsections:
r Summary . Introduction . ExistingEnvironment e AltemativeOptions r Consultation . Potentiallmpacts, Mitigation Measures & EnhancementOpportunities o NextSteps in the EIA Frocedure . Furtherlnformation . Appendices- EIA ScopingMatrix, Communication Plan and Citations
6.2 The followingaspects relatingto environmentalissues and associatedinterests are coveredin SectionA.3 of the EnvironmentalReport (Appendix A):
. SocialContext (Local Communities, Recreation & Amenities) o NatureConservation and Ecology . Air Qualityand Climate r Landscape6nd VisualAmenity o Watereuality o LandUse r CulturalHeritage, Archaeology and MaterialAssets . Trafficand Transport o Soit,Geology and Hydrography
6.3 Virtuallythe entirestudy area covered by this reportis part of the BrecklandForest SSSI. Thereare alsoother classified environmental areas adiacent to the river.
6.4 The EnvironmentalReport (AppendixA) identifiesthe need for further studies to determinewhether specific species are present in the river conidor (bats, otters and watervoles),and the effectof increasedvisitor numbers on thesespecies and otherfauna and flora.
6.5 There are also concerns,which will have to be addressed,over changingthe flow characteristicsof the river with regardsto wildlifehabitat. In particularthe reductionof areasof shallow,fast flowing water.
6.6 Opportunitieshave been identifiedfor increasingareas of wetlandhabitat, and this is stronglysupported by the ForestryCommission. The formalviews of EnglishNature have yet to be confirmed.
R:\2fl)3vtd)6077 EA Brandon to Thetturd\AdmlDdmts\D+135 Stage 2 Flml RevD.dc 18 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study * Stage2 Report
The re-introductionof navigationbetween Brandon and Thetfordcould be detrimentalto wildlife(disturbance) and to river bank stability(erosion from wave action),particularly if the frequencyof boat movementsis unregulated.These issues would need to be addressedunder the environmentalmitigation proposals for the scheme.
Other Associated Interests 6.8 In additionto the above,there is an existinginigation pumping station on the righthand riverbank betweenTwo MileBoftom and AbbeyHeath at approximatechainage 30.8 km (see AppendixB - Photographs).lt is understoodthat the pumpingstation, which is ownedby BrecklandGrowers Ltd, abstractswater directly from the LittleOuse during the wintermonths and pumpsit (viaa pumpingmain) to storagelagoons near Attleborough for the purposeof irrigation. The pumpingstation, main and storage lagoonswere designedby PlandescilLtd of Attleborough,and were constructedin the mid-1990s.lt is understoodthat these works were commissioned to mitigatethe abstractionof waterfrom the aquifer(borehole) at Attleborough.lt is not consideredthat the navigationproposals and associatedincrease in riverwater level will be detrimentalto this pumpingregime.
Thereare also3 No groundwaterboreholes and a pumpingstation located approximately 80 m from the right hand bank of the river at approximatechainage 31 km, which are ownedby AnglianWater for water supply.Copies of the abstractionlicence summaries for this and the aforementionedirrigation pumping station in 6.3 aboveare includedunder AppendixG.
6.10 There are variousdischarges into the river from outfall pipes betweenBrandon and Thetford.The mostnotable of theseare:
e FinalEffluent Outfallfrom Brandon STW- Ch.21.55km . surfacewater/Highway Drainage outfalls at 411 RoadBridge - ch. 34.25km . FinalEffluenVStorm Outfalls from Thetford STW - Ch. 34.45km . SurfaceWater Outfalls near Thetford at Ch. 34.77& 34.84km o SurfaceWater Outfall at CanterburyWay at Ch. 35.03km r SurfaceWater/Highway Drainage Outfalls at OtdA11 Bridge- Ch. 35.80km
R;tA)03\00060n EA Brardon to Thetftrd\Adm\Dauments\[X-135 Stage2 Final RevD.dc 19of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
SCHEMECOSTS
t.1 Theestimated costs for Options1B,28 aretabulated below:
Option Ref Option Description Cost Estimate (CAPEX) Option1B 2.7mHeadroom Newlocks to EA standard €6.4million Existing.Brandon lock retained
Option28 2.7mHeadroom All locksto EA standard f7.6 million
The breakdownof the above costs is presented in Appendix D. The costs are approximateestimates for the cost of the constructionworks to providenavigation up to Thetford,and includean allowancefor professionalfees, surveys, site investigation,and environmentalmitigation/enhancement (these allowanceswere omitted from previous editionsof this report).The estimatedcosts, however, exclude any otheritems that might be requiredto servicetourism or commercialinterests, e.g. facilitiessuch as moorings, publictoilets and car parkingareas. To coverthese items and the generaluncertainties of the detailat this stagea 20%contingency has beenincluded in the abovecost estimates.
'A' 7.3 For the reasonsgiven in paragraph3.3.8, the cost differencesbetween the options (2.0mheadroom) and'B'options (2.7m headroom)above are negligible.
7.4 The cost of extendingthe proposednavigation from Bridge Street, Thetford to the confluencewith the riverThet (paragraph 3.3.7) would be approximately€100,000.
R:\2qr3Yt0O60Zf EA Brandon to Thetford\Admu)cumb\D4-135 Stage 2 Finat RevD.dG 20 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
OUTLINEBENEFITS
8.1 The outlinebenefits of extendingthe navigationalong the riverLittle Ouse from the current limitat Brandonto Thetford,as describedin the previoussections, are as follows:
a Thetfordwill havedirect access to navigablewaterway. a Proposednavigation will extendinto Thetford town centre. a Accessto riverGreat Ouse and DenverSluice complex enabling navigation to existing Fenlandrivers/canals and proposedFens WaterwayLink and Nar Ouse Navigation (King'sLynn). Potentialfor environmentalenhancement along the river conidorby increasingareas of wetlandhabitat. Potentialfor flood plain restorationbetween Santon Downham and Two Mile Bottom as part of the change in water level managementregime necessaryto facilitate navigation. Additionalbusiness and tourism generatedby navigationto Thetford,and positive effecton Thetford'sstructure plan. Fotentialto open up rivercorridor to recreationactivities such as walking,cycling and horseriding etc. Possibilityof EU Funding.
In additionto the above,the extensionof navigationfrom tsrandonto Thetford,along the river Little Ouse is potentiallyseen as a significantbenefit to the proposedFenland WaterwaysLink, especially if the proposedmarina at Brandon(Ref paragraph5.1.6) was incorporated,as this would provideadditional mooring places to accommodateincreased boattraffic.
8.3 The positionof BrecklandDistrict Council with regardsto financialcontributions towards the navigationproposals is that, in order to attractEuropean funding, the projectwould needto demonstratehigh levelsof economicbenefit to the locality.The costsinvolved in extendingthe navigationup to Thetfrrrdare high and the economicbenefits derived directlyfrom this are unlikelyto be on an equivalentscale. Breckland DC has advisedthat a potentialsource of fundingcould be the EuropeanLife Fund, but applicationsto this would need to demonstrateoverwhelming environmental benefits in order to be successful.
R:\2003\0006077EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\D&uments\D4-l35 Stage 2 Final RevD'dG 21 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Rod
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
ECONOMICBENEFITS
9.1 Economicbenefits have been estimatedfor the proposedre-opening of the LittleOuse to navigationbetween Brandon and Thetford.The benefitshave been derivedfrom the base data and assumptionsset out in the Fens WaterwaysLink - EconomicAnalysis Report (Atkins,Sept 2003).
The calculationsfor the economicbenefits are presentedin AppendixE. Theseinclude an assessmentof probabilityby presentingfigures for a low, mediumand highcase. The low case is essentiallya pessimisticforecast, whereas the high case is an optimisticforecast. The mediumcase is an intermediateassessment.
9.3 ThOfOllOwing aspects/activities haVe been conSidered:
Hire Boats 9.3.1 The British Waterwaysnational average for the number of hire boats that could be expectedalong a stretchof river/canalis one boatfor every2 km of navigation.Cunently, however,there are just 21 boatsfor hire on the 190 km of existingGt Ouse system.This equatesto onlyone boatper 9 km.
9.3.2 The FensWaterways Link reportconcluded that if the full Fens WaterwaysLink scheme was implemented,a ratio of aroundhalf the BritishWaterways national average for hire boatsmight be achieved,i.e. one boatper 4 to 5 km. Thisassumption has also beenused in the mediumcase for the proposedBrandon to Thetfordnavigation.
9.3.3 As a resultof the relativelyshort length of proposednavigation, it is reasonableto expect that the numberof hire boats (3 to 4) basedon the above ratio may not be sufficientto supporta local hire boat facility.Therefore, hire boats have been excludedfrom the low case.
9.3.4 An allowancehas been includedfor economicbenefits arising from the dailyexpenditure of holidaymakersusing the hire boats.The bulk of this expenditurewould be on food and drinkfrom shops,public houses and restaurantsin Brandonand Thetford.The samerates as thoseused in the FensWaterways Link Reporthave been used.These were originally derivedfrom the East MidlandsBoating Survey 1991, and it has beenassumed that these were increasedin-line with inflation at the timeof preparingthe aforementionedreport.
Frivate CanalBoats 9.3.5 The BritishWaterways national average is approximately5 boats per km of navigation. Based on this and extendingthe navigation14 km from Brandon to Thetford,the estimatednumber of new privateboats based in the areawould be around70. This figure has been adopted for the medium case and adjusted for the low and high cases accordinglY.
Rr\2003vt0060nEA Brandon to ThetfddAdm\Dcuments\D/t'l35 Stage 2 Final Rev[).dc 22 ot'107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
Allowanceshave been made for economicbenefits ansing from the daily expenditureof boat owners. The commentsunder 9.3.4 above also apply here. The economic assessmenthas beencarried out on the basisof therebeing no marina(long term storage and maintenance)facilities between Brandon and Thetford. lt has, therefore,been assumedthat boatingfacilifies would be limitedto EA and/or GOBA (Gt Ouse Boating Association)riverside moorings. The EA mooringsare normallyfree to all riverusers up to a 48 hour limit. GOBAmoorings are free to membersand hirersof boatsoperated by the Gt ouse Boatbuilders& operatorsAssociation, and carrya 4g hourlimit.
9.3.7 It is estimatedthat should the projectedmarina at Brandoncome to fruition,then an additionalannual benefit of aroundf150,000 could be realisedfrom long term mooring fees,and maintenanceI repair facilities.
Trip Boats, RestaurantBoats and Day Boats It is consideredthat the proposednavigation scheme would be unlikelyto supportthe operationof Trip, Restaurantand Day boats due to the relativelysmall scale of the navigationand the low ratiosfor theseboats intimated in the FensWatenarays Link Report.
Restaurantboats have thereforebeen excludedfrom both the low and mediumcases, whileTrip and Dayboats have been excluded from the low caseonlv.
Towpath/RiversidePath Users 9.3.10 This includeswalking, cycling, horse-riding and sightseeingetc. The levelof attractionwill depend,not only on the re-openingof navigationup to Thetford,but also on the level of improvementsto the existingriverside path network.
9.3.11 The Fens WaterwaysLink (EconomicAnalysis) Report assumed a conservativefigure of 10000visits per mileof navigationand an averagedaily expenditure of f5.00 per visitor basedon the BritishWaterways Survey of the Kennet& Avon Canalin 1991.These same figures have been used for the economic assessmentof the Brandon to Thetford navigation.
EconomicBenefit Summary 9.4 The economicbenefits calculated in AppendixE are tabulatedbelow:
Low Case MediumCase High Case
AnnualBenefit €466,088 €586,213 2741,512 No. of FTEjobs supported, basedon one thirdof revenue spenton salariesand average 10 13 16 FTEsalary of 115000*.. "* Note:same assumption as Fenswaterways Link (Economic Analysis) Repon.
9.5 Net presentvalues are presentedin AppendixE and havebeen calculatedon the basisof the 3.5% discountrate used by ihe EnvironmentAgency in its FloodDefence Schemes,
R:U003v)00mr/ EA Brandon to Thetftrd\Adm\Ddments\Ix-135 Stage2 Fimt RevD.d@ 23 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report
which is derivedfrom the HM Treasury"Green Book" 2003 (Appraisal& Evaluationin CentralGovernment).
9.6 The NPVcalculations include sums for the maintenanceof the new locks(4No.) at Santon Downham,Two MileBottom, Abbey Heath and Thetford,the new sluice/weirstructures (2No.)at SantonDownham and Two MileBottom, and generalmaintenance of the river (weedcutting and dredging).Maintenance costs for Brandonlock/sluice and the weirsat AbbeyHeath and Thetfordhave been excluded, as theseare alreadyincluded in the EA's annualmaintenance budget.
9.7 Basedon the estimatedCAPEX, maintenance costs and annualbenefits, the options consideredwould yield a positiveNPV in the yearsindicated in the tablebelow:
Low Case MediumGase High Case Option1B 26thyear 18thyear 13hyear
Option 28 30tnyear 20* year 14thyear
R:Uql3Vtq!602 EA Erandon to Thetford\AdmtDcumts\Ix-135 St ge 2 Fimt RevD.da 24 of 107 BabtieBrown & Root
River Little ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibirity study - stage 2 Report
CONCLUSIONS
10.1 It is feasibleto extendthe navigationfrom Brandonto Thetford.
10.2 The minimumengineering works necessary to facilitatenavigation to Thetfordwould involvethe following: . Constructionof 4No. new locks o Constructionof 2No. new weir/sluicestructures r Raisingof 2No.footbridges ' Dredgingof somesections of the RiverLitfle ouse (approx11600 m3) . Raisingof riverbanks (approx 1600 m) r Constructionof boattuming area and mooringsat Thetford
10.3 The viablelimit of navigationis cunentlyconsidered to be up to BridgeStreet, Thetford. The navigationcould be extendedif BridgeStreet Road Bridgeis raisedor the headroom requirementbeyond this point is limitedto 2.0 m.
10.4 The estimatedcost for extendingthe navigationup to Thetfordat this stage of the investigationsis f6.4 million,or t7.6 millionif the BrandonLock is rebuiltto meetthe EA's lockstandard.
The localcouncils, the KeystonePartnership and the EuropeanUnion are potentiallythe majorfunding source for this scheme.However, there would need to be a favourablecost benefitrate for EU fundingto be approved.
10.6 The economicbenefits have been identifiedbased upon similarwork undertakenfor the FensWatenrvays Link proposals.The resultsare heavilydependent upon the increasein visitor numbersfor land-basedrecreation. The benefitsfrom navigation(water-based recreation)contribute less to the overall benefit figure, particularlyfor the low case scenarios.
t0.7 On the basis of the assumptionsmade in this report,the re-openingof the navigationto Thetfordwould yietd a positiveNpv after approximately20 to 25 years based on a mediumcase scenario.
10.8 Thereis scopeto restorethe floodplain in the vicinityof Two MileBottom and to a lesser extentSanton Downham. However, the affectof increasedlevels on the flooddefence aspectshas not beenfully examined at this stage.
10.9 lnvestigationswould be neededto determinethe potentialaffects of navigationon river flowsdue to increasedwater levels, and confirmthe technicalfeasibility of the proposals.
10.'t0 Furtherenvironmental studies are requiredto identifythe presenceof protectedspecies alongthe rivercorridor and considerthe effectsof extendingthe navigationto Thetford.In
R:\2(Xl3toqEO7f EA Brandon to 135 Stage 2 Fiml Reylt.de 25 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report
addition,consideration should be givento the effectsof navigationon riverbank stability fromwave action. These issues would need to be addressedunder the environmental mitigationproposals for the scheme.
R:\2003\0{Xl50r/EA Brandon lo ThettddtAdm\D@uments\D+135 Stage 2 Flnal RevO,d@ 26 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
RiverLittle ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibility study - stage 2 Report
RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1 This pre-fuasibilitystudy has suggestedthat a full detaitedstudy and ouflinedesign of the re-openingof the navigationalong the riverLittle Ouse betweenBrandon and Thetford couldbe justified.
11'2 optionshave been included in this reportfor lengtheningthe existingBrandon lock to the EA lockstandard to accommodatelarger boats, and theseoptions should continue to be assessed.
11.3 Clarificationis requiredon the legal proceduresthat will need to be taken for re-openrng the navigation,as the sectionbetween Brandon and Thetfordhad been abandonedbv 1930.
1't.4 Whilethere is alreadysupport from a numberof local groupsand organisationfor these proposals,wider stakeholder consultation is requiredin orderto obtainthe activesupport fromothers including Engllsh Nature and the localCouncils/Planning Authorities.
11.s Fundingsources need to be identified.
R:U003vr(xl6077EA Brandon to ThetfqdAdm\Ddmtsux-i3fi Shge 2 Fimt RevD.dc 27 of 107 BabtieBrcwn&Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report Appendix A - Environmental Report
Appendix A - Table of Contents
SectionA.1 Summary 25
SectionA.2 Introduction 26 4.2.1 Purposeof the document 26 4.2.2 Locationand Sitedescriotion 27 4.2.3 Backgroundto the project 27 4.2.4 Objectivesof the project 28
SectionA.3 ExistingEnvironment 28 A.3.1 SocialContext 28 4.3.2 NatureConservation and Ecology 29 A.3.3 Air Qualityand Climate 30 A.3.4 Landscapeand visualAmenity 31 A.3.5 WaterQuality 31 A.3.6 LandUse 31 4.3.7 CulturalHeritage, Archaeology and MaterialAssets 32 4.3.8 Trafficand Transport JZ 4.3.9 Soil,Geology and Hydro-geology 33 4.3.10 MainConstraints and Opportunities 33
SectionA.4 AltemativeOptions 34
SectionA.5 Consultation 35
SectionA.6 Potentiallmpacts, mitigation measures and enhancement 35 opportunities
SectionA.7 Nextsteps in the EIA procedures 36
SectionA.8 FurtherInformation 36
Appendix1 EIA Scopinglmpact Matrix Appendix2 CommunicationPlan Appendix3 Citations
R;U003\000602 EA Brandon to Thetftrd\Admu)€uments\D4-i35 Stage 2 Final RevD.d@ 30 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto Thetfordprefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA - EnvironmentalReport
SectionA.1- Summary
A1.1 This appendixis part of a pre-fuasibilityreport undertaken for the LiftleOuse navigationlink betweenBrandon and Thetford.The objectiveof the pre-feasibilitystage of the projectis to ensurethat any key environmentalconstraints and opportunitiesare raisedat an early stage in the processso they may influencethe choiceof optionsand the businesscase.
A.1.2 The currentextent of navigationalong the LiftleOuse stops at Brandon,historically however navigationwas possibleto Thetford,however the stanches,which were usedfor this purpose, fell into disrepairand resultedin a loweringof the water levelson this stretchof river,so it is now no longersuitable for navigation.To enable navigationalong the river, lock structures need to be installedalongside existing weirs with the possibilityof more locksand new weirs beingrequired.
A.1.3 The stretchof riverbetween Brandon and Thetbrd is approximately8 milesand flowsthrough BrecklandForest and ThetfordGolf Courseand Marsh,Sites of SpecialScientific Interest, the area is also designatedas Brecklandpotential Special Protection Area and the heathareas are designatedas a candidateSpecial Area of Conservation.Despite these designations some of the areasof interesthave suffereddue to the changeand reductionin water levels, one of the aims of this projectis to aftemptto tie in the need for increasedwater levelsfor navigationand the benefits,which could be affordedfor conservationfrom increasedwater levels.The majorityof the landis ownedand managedby the ForestryCommission.
A.1.4 Consultationwas undertakenwith the working group, which is headed by Keystone CommunityPartnerships and the EnvironmentAgency. The workinggroup consists of,
r The Breck'sCountryside project . EastAnglian Waterways Association . EnglishNature r ForestryCommission . ForestHeath District Council o GreatOuse Boating Association . KeystoneCommunity Partnership
A.1.5 The outcomesfrom consultationindicate that the boatingcommunity feel there is a need and benefitfrom enablingnavigation on the River LiftleOuse from Brandonto Thetford,with the ForestryCommission utilising the requirementsfrom boatingi.e. increasedwater levels,to improvethe conditionof key habitatsalong the nver.
A.1.6 Furthersurveyand consultationwith EnglishNature is requiredto identifywhatimpacts there will be on areas of nature conservationimportance, and national and internationally designatedareas. The main issuesare with regardto how changesin hydrologymay affect theseareas and what impactsthe boatingactivities will have.
A.1.7 The baselineinformation requirements for this studyinclude,
R:\2003\00060nEA Brandon to Thetfqd\Admu)Guments\Ix.t35 Stage2 Ftnal R6vD.d@ 31 of 107 BabtieBnovun & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalReport
. Analysisof the potentialboat use of the riverincludinS, type, frequency and numberof boats a Landscapeimpact assessment and visualimpact assessment a Dataon CountyWildlife sites in Suffolk a Waterquality data for the river a Surveyof the hydrologicalrequirements of the fen systemto determinewhat impactthe changein waterlevels will haveon this and otherdesignated areas. Floodrisk assessment Floraand faunasurvey of ditchsystems Furtherconsultation with a widergroup of consulteessuch as EnglishHeritage and the CrownEstates
A.1.8 The mainimpact from this projectis envisagedto be on the variousnational and intemationally designatedsites through which the riverflows. This is with regardto the hydrologicalsystem of the river and its sunoundingarea and throughdisturbance to these areas from increased visitornumbers. To counterthis the mainarea of mitigationwill be the improvementof habitat in the river corridor, which could be achieved by increasingthe water level. Other enhancementopportunities involve increasing access to the river paths from Brandonand Thetfordand the connectionof these pathsto a greaternetwork of long distancepaths in the area. These issues will be broadenedas the EIA process progressesand options are identified.
A.1.9 The next stepsin the EIA processare to developfurther the baselineinformation for the study area in a scopingreport which will be usedto aid optionsappraisal, outline design, detailed designand projectimplementation.
SectionA.2. lntroduction
4.2.1 Purposeof the Document A.2.1.1This documentis part of a pre-feasibilitystudy undertakeninto the potentialoptions associatedwith the Brandonto Thetfordnaviqation link.
A.2.1.2Babtie Brown and Root have been appointedto undertakethis pre-feasibilitystudy, and this document was prepared through desktop study and consultationwas undertakenwith specialistsat the EnvironmentAgency, relevantauthorities and the workinggroup for this project.
A.2.1.3The issuesidentified at thisstage will be addressedduring the subsequentfeasibility, options appraisal,design and implementationof the scheme.Relevant interested parties (including environmentalspecialists)will be consultedas the projectprogresses.
A.2.1.4This environmentalappendix has been preparedto identifyareas of potentialimpact from initialoptions and possible mitigation and enhancement measures, which can be carriedout to
35 Stage 2 Final RevD.dc 32 of 107 BabtieBrcwn&Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalReport
counterthese impactsand to enhancethe area. lt also highlightsthe areasin which further informationneeds to be gatheredand recommendationsmade for furtherstudy etc. This reporthas beenbased on the Environmentallmpact Assessment guidelines e0A2)
4.2.2 Location and Site Description A.2.2.1The RiverLittle Ouse is a tributaryin the GreatOuse catchment and togetherwith the River Waveneyforms the boundaryof Norfolkand Suffolkfor muchof theirlength.
A.2.2.2The tsrandonto Thetfordnavigation link will utilisethe RiverLittle Ouse, a gentlysloping river that joins the river Great Ouse at BrandonCreek. The river drainsthe low-lyingland of the Brecks and meandersthrough Hockwoldcum Wilton, Brandon,Santon Downham,and ThetfordForest, continuing beyond Thetford, as shownon Drg 000607710110,|Study Area.
A.2.2.3The studyarea is definedas the river LiftleOuse and its approximatefloodplain between the townsof Brandonand Thetford.The Westemextent of the studyarea is takento be Brandon lock as this is the pointwhere navigationcunently extends, (NGR TL 869 783).The eastem extent is taken to be Thetfordtown centre at the pointwhere the river splits into the River Liftle Ouseand the RiverThet (NGR TL 829 878).This stretchis approximately10 milesin length.
A.2.3 Backgroundto the Project A.2.3.1There is a long historyof navigationon the river LittleOuse, with an Act of parliamentbeing passedin 1670for improvementsto its navigation.There are recordsfrom the 13hCentury of bargestravelling to Thetford,however after the constructionof the DenverSluice, water levels beganto fallandnavigation eventually became impossible.
A.2.3.2As a resultof the 1670Act, five stancheswere builtto hold water at an appropriatelevel for navigation,but there were long delays whilst water levels built up sufficiently.
A.2.3.3 Nowadays,only a remnantof these stanchesremains, and so no structuresexist that can hold the water levelsufiiciently for navigationto be undertakenon the river.This changein water regimehas left the watercourse above Brandon un-navigable due to insufficientdepths.
A.2.3.4 A modemsluice, which is controlledby the EnvironmentAgenry, is installedat Thetfordand this controlsthe water levelthrough the town.
4.2.3.5 There is also a sluiceinstalled at Abbey Heath,which also controlswater levelsimmediately downstreamof Thetford.
4.2.3.6 The proposalis to enable navigationto take place once more along the river Liftle Ouse from Brandonto Thetford;this requiresincreasing tfre depth of water in the river, either by raising levelsor by loweringthe bed in somelocations.
A.2.3.7 The majorityof the river valley is managedby the ForestryCommission. The valley contains nationallyand internationallyimportant wetland habitats. However, due to the decreasein water level,many of the habitatsare in a lessthan favourable condition.
R:U(Xt3{tfln0zf EA Brandon to 3li Stage 2 Flnal RevD.d6 33 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA - EnvironmentalReport
4.2.3.8 A secondelement of this projectis to integratethe need to changewater depthsin the river for navigation,with the beneficialeffect that increasingthe water level could have on many of the habitatsin the riverconidor.
4.2.4 Objectivesof the Project A.2.4.i The mainaims of the prolectare to: -
1) Extendthe navigationfrom Brandonto Thetfordby increasingwater level in the riverfor the benefitof the boatingcommunity and the associatedrecreational opportunities;
2) Taking advantageof the increasedwater level requiredfor navigationto improvethe habitatin the rivercorridor. This can be achievedby increasingwater level and enhancing the wetlandhabitats which have suffered as a consequenceof the water levelin the area falling;
3) Enhancingthe overall amenityvalue of the area and consolidatingthe attractionand amenityvalue of the area whichalready exists, such as ThetfordForest Nature Reserve, BrandonRiverside Park and otherattractions in the surroundingarea.
4) A furtheraim of the projectat this pre-feasibilitystage rs to identifya list of consultees, whichcan be usedfor consultationas the projectprogresses.
A.2,4.2The overall environmentalobjectives are to identifyany possible impacts and mitigation measures,which arise from the workson the riverto enablenavigation. Also to investigatethe possibilityof harnessingthe increasedwater level requiredfor navigationand use it to bring intofavourable condition areas of wetlandhabitat that havesuffered due to waterlevels falling.
SectionA.3. ExistingEnvironment
A.3.1 SocialGontext A.3.1.1The RiverLittle Ouse is a popularlocation for walkersand cyclistswho use the riversidepath for recreation.The wider area of the Brecksis also a popularaftraction for differenttypes of outdooractivities and visitorattractions. The river Great Ouse,and its connectingnavigable waterways,are usedfor recreationalsailing and fishing.
A.3.1.2The re-introductionof navigationon the river Little Ouse would further enhance the recreationalfacilities in the area.These include the forestvillage of SantonDownham, Grimes Graves,which are locatedto the northof the site,Weeting Castle, Brandon Country Park, and ThetfordForest. There is also the benefitto the boatingcommunity, to enjoy this stretchof river.
A.3.1,3By enablingnavigation on the river,there is the benefitof bringingvisitors to the areaas there would be the added attrac*ionof being able to navigateon up the river passedBrandon to Thetfordand visitingboth of thesetowns.
R:U003\000602 EA Brandon to ThetftrdAdm\D6uments\[X-135 Stage 2 Final RevD.ds 34 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
RiverLittle Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA - EnvironmentalReport
A.3.t.4 By increasingvisitor numbers to tsrandonand Thetford,these areas could benefit from a boost in incomeinto the town; this couldalso help them developas touristdestinations. The local authorityat Thetfordhas alreadyinvested in developingthe riversidearea as an attractionfor visitors.
A.3.1.5However, by increasingthe numberof visitorsto an area, which could alreadysuffer from over-usei.e. erosionof footpaths,trampling of plantsetc. Furthersurvey is requiredto identify what negativeimpacts increasing visitor numbers to the rivercould have. Further consultation is requiredto identifywhat affecta changein use of the rivercould have in termsof changing the characterof the areaand its usefor quietrecreational pursuits.
4.3.2 NatureGonservation and Ecology A.3.2.1The section of river included in this study flows through various nature conservation designationsthese include: -
r BrecklandForest Special Site of ScientificInterest, . ThetfordGolf Course and MarshSSSI, . Brecklandcandidate Special Area of Conservation, . Brecklandpotential SpecialProtection Area . CountyWildlife Sites
A.3.2.2Drg 0006077101102shows Sites of SpecialScientific lnterest (SSSI) in the study area, Drg 0006077101103shows the candidateSpecial Area of Conservation(cSAC) and the potential Special ProtectionArea (pSPA), combines both the SSSI and the cSAC. Citationsare includedin Appendix4.
A.3.2.3Thetford Golf Courseand Marsh SSSI was notifiedin 1968 and containsthe only surviving track of Brecklandheath known as ThetfordWanen, within the SSSI there are also good examplesof lichenheath and heatherheath along with fenland plant communities and valley alderwoodland on the wet peatysoils in the low lyingground by the river.
A.3.2.4A WaterLevel Management Flan existsfor the ThetfordMarsh SSSI, an area also knownas Horse Meadow.This plan will be used along with further consultation,to determinethe possibleimpact of increasedwater level in this area. A managementagreement exists between the Forestry Commissionand English Nature as to the managementregime undertakenin this area.Thetford Marsh covers 119.6 hectares and extendsfor approximately 1 km alongthe westernbank of the LitfleOuse.
A.3.2.5Breckland Forest SSSI was notifiedin 2000,and is knownto supportWoodlark, and Nightjar, the area supports5 vascularplants listed in Schedule8 of the Witdlifeand CountrysideAct. The areais also knownto supportRed Squirrel
4.3.2.6 Brecklandpotential Special Protection Area is madeup of 28 SS$l's includingBreckland Farm SSSI,Breckland Forest SSSI and Thetfordgolf courseand MarshSSSI. The pSpA coversan area of 39,987.60ha and is proposedas it supportsbreeding bird populationsof European importance.These species include woodlark, Nightjar and stone curlews.
135 Stage 2 Flnal RevD.dc 35 of 107 BabtieBrcwn&Root
RiverLittle Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalReport
A.3.2.7As the river formsthe divisionof Norfolkand Suffolkfor much of its lengththere are county wildlifesite designationsfrom both Norfolkand Suffolkin the study area. The designations from Norfolkare availablein this reporthowever those designationsfrom Suffolkneed to be obtained.
A.3.2.8Much of the river conidorin the study area comprisesof wetlandhabitat including fen, alder and can woodlandetc. The proposalsfor increasingwater levels could have significant beneficialeffects in theseareas, particularly in the wetlandhabitats/marshes, which are known to be in an unfavourablecondition. However, other sections of the studyarea are madeup of habitatsin whicha changeof waterlevel could have quite significant negative impacts. These habitats include the SSSI designationon Thetford Heath, which require their existing conditionsto be maintainedin orderfor them to remainin a favourablecondition.
A.3.2.9To enhanceareas which have a lessthan favourable status in the riverconidor it is the aim of this projectto utilisethe increasein waterlevels needed for navigation,this couldbe achieved by selectinglock locationswith this in mind,and Drg 0006077/01/04shows the preferredlock locationsof the ForestryCommission.
A.3.2.10lt is not knowwhether any of the ditchesin the studyarea contain notable flora or fauna,if so, these requirementswill need to be considered,and managedaccordingty. lf increasedwater levelslook likely to effectthe drainageditches on site,these areas should be incorporatedinto furtherfloraand faunasurveys ofthe area.
A.3.2.i1The riverhas a moderatefishery, however there is the potentialto improvethis as the habitat improves.Fish populationsbetween Brandon and Thetfordhave shown encouraging signs of improvementsince 1996 due to habitat rehabilitationwork and re-stocking.Further consultationwith EnvironmentAgency staff is required.
A.3.2.12The EnvironmentAgency carries out dredgingof the river as and when required,and weed cuttingis caniedout twiceper yearin June and September'
A.3.3 Air Quality& Climate A.3.3.1The issue of air qualityis addressedby localauthorities, as the riverforms the boundaryof Norfolkand Suffolk,the area will be coveredby their air qualitymanagement plans. Further consultationis requiredwith these authoritieswithin a reviewof planningdocumentation to determinethe cunentbaseline conditions.
A.3.4 Landscape& VisualAmenitY A.3.4.1The area is predominantlyrural with the smalltownsof Brandonand Thetfordat eitherend of the study area, and the small villageand the ForestryCommission Headquarters located at SantonDownham. A landscapeassessment and a visualimpact assessment are requiredto identifypossible constraints and mitigationmeasures required.
A.3.5 Water Quality
R:U003Vtfi16072 EA Brildon to Thetford\A&nu)6u|tHtsux-l3|i Slage 2 Final Rev{t.dc 36 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalReport
A.3.5.'lThe River Liftle Ouse is designatedas a statutorymain river, and is approximately15-20 meterswide and 1-2meters deep and runsover sand, silt and pebblesubstrate.
A.3.5.2The riverquality is affiectedby dischargefrom the Thetfordsewage treatment works, and there is a samplingpoint situated at ThetfordNo 2 Staunchat NGR TL 8500 8400. Datafrom this samplingpoint can be collectedin later consultationexercises as required.The river was classifiedas 1b or unpollutedin December1991; this classificationwill requireconfirmation fromthe EnvironmentAgency.
4.3.5.3 lf the water levelin the Fen area is increasedby the navigationworks, there could be issues relatingto the high nutrientslevel of the riverwater. Consultation would need to be carriedout to determinethe effectson the low nutrientareas and the impacton weland species.
A.3.5.4There is the potentialfor seepageof pollutantsfrom a pollutionlagoon, which adjoins the A11 road which passesover the RiverLittle Ouse nearThetford, if water levelswere to be raised the first water body at risk would be a nearby pond. Further surveys would need to be undertakento determineat what levelthere would be a riskof contamination.
4.3.5.5 Consultationhas indicatedthat if the channelis deepenedto allownavigation it may leadto a disassociationof the river and its floodplain,this has implicationsfor the existingweland areasand the waterbalance of the area.
A.3.5.6Little is knownabout the hydrologyof the fun area and the functionsof the drainson the site. Thereforefurther consultationand possiblesurvey work is requiredto identifythe current hydrology.
A.3.5.7 There are no flood defenceimprovement works determinedfor the river, howerrera study is to be undertakenby the Agency on the river Little Ouse and Thet at Thetfordto determine whetherany flooddefence improvements are justified.
A.3.58 Any worksaffecting the flow of a watercourserequires the priorwritten consent of the Agency underthe LandDrainage Act 1991.
4.3.6 Land Use 4.3.6.1 The Crown Estateowns the land betweenThetford and Two Mile Boftom,and the Forestry Commissionleases this fromthe CrownEstate.
A.3.6.2The majorityof the area has been afforestedand now the land is managedby the Forestry Commission,in agreementwith English Nature, to enhancethe conservationvalue it holds. Mostof the historicforestry planting took placeon higher,drier ground. poplar plantation took place in the wetterareas of the study area and this is now being managedfor conservation objectives.Drg 00060771Un5shows the types of vegetationwithin the river corridor.Data collectedby the ForestryCommission @.
R:U003\0006077EA Brandon to Thetftrd\Adm\Deuments\D+135 Stage2 Ftnal RevD.d@ 37 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalReport
A.3.6.3Apart from the townsof tsrandonand Thetford,there is the villageof SantonDownham, in the study area, which is the headquartersof the ForestryCommission. Various public footpaths run throughthe study area, these includeHarling Drove which is a long distancefootpath whichruns to the northof the railwayline boundary of the studyarea, and the LittleOuse path which runs next to the riverwithin the studyarea and that runs from Brandonto Thetford.In the localarea there is alsothe St EdmundsWay and the HerewardWay.
A.3.6.4There are various land uses in the area, there is a sewage treatmentworks at Santon Downham(NGR 818 875) and one on the outskirtsof Thetford(NGR 835855). A golf course comprisespart of the ThetfordGolf courseand MarshSSSI (NGR836 844).The area to the south of Brandonis BrandonCountry Park, which providedvisitor facilities; there are also variousparking and picnicpoints along the LittleOuse path.
A.3.7 Cultural Heritage,Archaeology & MaterialAssets A.3.7.1Since prehistoric times, the LittleOuse has beenused as a routefrom the Fensinto the area knownas the Brecks. The localtopography comprising of also smallsandy ridges and peaty flood meadowsindicates that it has high archaeologicalpotential. Occupation throughout all periodsof historyis knownin the area.
A.3.7.2Drg 0006077101107shows detailsof ScheduledAncient Monuments located near the study area, howeverconsultation is requiredwith EnglishHeritage and local archaeologicalgroups to identifyfurther areas which maybesubject to archaeologicalfinds etc. the currentSAM's in the areaare:
. RomanBuildings East of Fengate Farm r PepperHillBowl Banow . Santonmoated site and associatesmedieval seftlement . St Helen'sChurch, earthworks and HolyWell r BloodHill o ThetfordWarren Lodge o ThetfordCluniac Priory . Red Castlemedieval ringworks, church and Saxonsettlement o Site of a Saxontown near Thetford o Blackfriars in Thetford.
A.3.8 Traffic & Transport A.3.8.1The riverLittle Ouse is crossedby the A1065at Brandon(GDR 869 784) and the A11 at Thetford(GRD 834 856). The river is also crossedby a narrowroad at Santon Downham (GDR878 818)this is usedas accessto FieldBam (GDR889 825).The southemlimits of the studyarea in placesin the 81107 Brandonroad, which links Brandon to Thetford.
A 3 8.2 The Ronhcmlimits of the studyarea are definedby the iailwdyline, whieh runs from Brandon to Thetford,and links the area to Cambridgeand Norwich.There are variouscycle-ways, whichcross the areahowever none follow the lineof the LittleOuse.
R:\AXl3{tqr6OZ EA Brildon to ThetfqdtAdmu)rurents\D+135 Stage 2 Final RevD-dc 38 of 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report AppendixA - EnvironmentalReport
A.3.9 Soil, Geology& Hydrogeotogy A.3.9.1The RiverLiftle Ouse is incorporatedinto the Ely Ousecatchment, which is a combinationof 17 sub-catchmentsthat cover2,510 km2. The principleaquifer is chalkand in areasof higher ground,Bolder Clay and Sandscover the chalk.Additional sand and graveldeposits occur within the upland river valleys and form small isolatedaquifers. Water flows from these aquifersfrom springs, and this is the sourceof the riverLiftle Ouse.
A.3.9.2In the LittleOuse catchment,there is an unconfinedChalk aquifer exposed in the rivervalley, with southem areas being comprisedof fluvial gravel's and northernpart comprisingof alluviumdeposits. Middle chalk lies further up the valleysides and this is coveredby a variety of drift materials.Consultation is requiredat the next stage of this projectto identifysoil type and the geologyof the area, and to identifyany hydro-geologicalfeatures, which may affect the proposedproject.
A.3.9.3Sedge swamp in the area suggeststhat groundwateris responsiblefor water-loggingof the rootzone, with the watersupplied by the chalkaquifer, this suggeststhat seepageof the river intothese areas has limitedeffect on the hydrology.
A.3.10 Maln Constralntsand Opportuntiles A.3.10.1At this early pre-feasibilitystage of the project,the main environmentalconstraints appear to be as follows,
r The variousnature designations that are foundthroughout the studyarea;
o The impacton the riverand sunoundingarea by the boatingactivities, this requiresfurther investigationand analysis;
o The possiblenegative impact of alteringthe waterlevel on thosehabitats which need their cunentwater level maintained, such as SSSIand heathland: and.
o The areas high archaeologicalpotential is a possibleconstraint to the prolectas there is the possibilitythat finds of archaeologicalimportance could be affectedor uncoveredbv worksundertaken for the project.
A.3.10.2The mainopportunities that will be gainedfrom this prqect are:
. The abilityfor navigationalong the riverLiftle Ouse up to the town of Thetford;
I tsy generating this navigable link there is the possibility of creating significant environmentalenhancement along the river corridor.There is possibleenhancement opportunityby raisingthe water level in wetland areas, which are not in a favourable condition due to a decrease in water levels. Drg 0006077101106shows the areas suggestedby the ForestryCommission as those,which would receivethe most benefit from enhancement;this map also shows their prefened lock locationsto enable this enhancement.
R:\2lXl3U&E{rr/ EA B.andon to Thetford\Adm\Dd|1Htsux-i35 Stage Z Final RcyD.dc 39 of 107 BabtieBrottun & Root
- River Litile ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility study stage 2 Report Appendix A - Environmental Report
A.3.10.3Other potential enhancements that couldbe madein the areainclude,
o lmprovingthe accessfrom Brandonand Thetfordtown centres to the riverLittle Ouse;
'access . promotionof for all' along the river,which would requirechanges to the hard coveringof the Paths;
. Linkingthe LitfleOuse path to the largernetwork of long distancepaths in the area and encouragingvisitors to the townsof Brandonand Thetford;and'
. Thereare issuesof illegalaccess to the forestvia the 411 roadbridge at Thetfordand the put dumpingof cars etc. Possibleenhancement works could enablemeasures to be in placeto preventaccess to the riverfrom this site'
Section A.4. AlternativeOPtions A.4.1 Optionsfor providinga solutionincluding:
Do nothing(abandonment); Maintenance(cunent levels); lmprovement; Other.
of A.4.2 For this projectthe optionsof do nothingand maintenancewould not enablethe objective allowingnavigation to Brandonon the riverLittle Ouse. This would only be possibleif the optionof lmprovementwere caniedout.
lockson the A.4.3 The proposedworks to improvethe riverto enablenavigation would entrail the use of river to ensure water levels were sufficientto allow navigation.The proposedlocations of the lockswould be at the existingweir locationson the riverwith the possiblerequirement of locksat otherlocations.
material A.4.4 At this pre-feasibilitystiage the exact locationsof the locks are unknownas is the size, and likely design. Due to the shallow nature of some parts of the river it is envisagedthat dredgingwill be requiredto enablenavigation. lt cannotbe determinedthe exactlocations which requiredredging untilthe locationof lockstructures'
SectionA.5. Gonsultation the A.5.1 A preliminaryCommunication Plan outlining important requirements for consultationduring projectis includedin the EIA CommunicationPlan (Appendix2). The Plan will be revised appropriatelyas the projectprogresses.
via the customer A.5.2 Consultationwas canied out intemallywithin the EnvironmentAgency serviceteam. The followingenvironmental specialists within the Environmentagency were alsocontacted with initialdetails of the proposals: 40 of 107 R:U003\OOO60TTEABrandontoThetfordlAdm\Dcurents\D+l35Stage2FinalRevD'dG BabtieBrown & Root
River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report AppendixA - EnvironmentalReport
r DavidSmith
A.5.3 Consultationwas canied out with the followingextemal stakeholders who form the working party for this project:
. BrandonCommunity partnership * o BrecksCountryside prolect + o EastAnglian Waterways Association + . EnglishNature + r ForestUCommission + o ForestHeath District Council * . GreatOuse Boating Association + r lnlandWaterways Association + . KeystoneCommunity partnership o NorfolkCounty Council* . RoyalYachtingAssociation * . SuffolkCounty Council +
* indicatesno response + indicatesrequest to be consultedduring project design; x indicatesrequest to approvethe EnvironmentalReporustatement; # indicatesrequest to sign-offfinal design.
A.5.4 As this project progressesfurther consultationwill be carried out to include all statutory consultees,consultees required for FEPA licensing,and other interestedparties, which were identifiedfrom this initialround of consultation.
section A.6. Potentialimpacts, baseline information, mitigation measuresand enhancementopportunities A.6.1 FollowingScoping consultations with stakeholders,as listed above,the key environmental effectsraised focused upon the issuesidentified in the Scopinglmpacts Table (Appendix 1). Opportunitiesfor enhancementhave also been identified.The Scoping lmpads Table providesa list of potentialenvironmental effects, along with what baselineinformation is availableand what additionalsurveys are requiredand what will be undertaken.However due to the pre-feasibilitystage of this reportfurther survey is requiredto determinethe exactlevel of impacts,extend baseline information and considermitigation measures and enhancement opportunitiesin greaterdetail.
SectionA.7. NextSteps in the EIAProcedures
R:\2m3Vr(DO0Zl EA Brndon to Thetturd\Adm\D@umts\D+135 Stags 2 Ftnat RevD.dc 41 of 107 BabtieBrown& Root
River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report AppendixA- EnvironmentalRePort
A.7.1 Appropriateconsultation in relationto the issuesidentified will continuethrough fuasibility' design and construction.As the feasibilitystudy progresses,the need for and scope of baselineenvironmental surveys can be refined.
A,7.2 To meet statutoryrequirements, external consultation will be maintainedas the scheme progresses,including liaison with the followingorganisations'
e BrecklandsDistrict Council . NorfolkCountY Council . SuffolkCounty Council r EnglishNature . EnglishHeritage o CountrysideAgency (as part of Sl 99/1783)
A.7.3 The Environmentallmpact Assessment Officer will anangethis consultationon behalfof the projectmanager if required. The ProjectManager, in consultationwith the EIA Officerand Agency'slegal department,will need to confirmwith the LocalPlanning Authority if planning permissionis needed.
SectionA.8. FurtherInformation This ScopingReport has been preparedon behalfof the ProjectManager. Further information can be obtainedfrom the ProjectManager at the addressbelow:
AndyBennison KingfisherHouse GoldhayWay OrtonGoldhay PeterboroughPE2 sZR Telephone:01 733 37 181 1
42 ol 107 R:U003{tfit60z EA Brandon to Thetfqd\Adm\Dcumts\tx'135 St4e 2 Final RevD'dc -tt >EMT o tr :!o J O q, 3 di'(, < o 0) o o ='o !,= = 6=99 CL cLct=o P4 .Tt I! 1t o E;A ? A) = o Eq tr = CL L. { 5 =go x= t: g r x ?3 6'-'Q z< z< o rfl6 o -{o oo) o! o) ='E a = 5(D o <- 2F \x o :t-o) - FgE P m -s. g o r-t ro 5' rlJf f ;iool, -(r=.o 9d 0 E(o P(o -ffir o =0) !a+ !aF -6. trtYj od od f a -o9 o s o 09 o ^-=' c< 4. 4 4 xf J o 9a AE 'JE 3 E. oo) o J rl - il 6t E4 o gj I - f EA r9 o. t = 5 o o5 6- 6- aR' E' ! il(o \va !t o c c o o (t a a 6- 0, o 6 o l- = q q o o, =. qw o-{ goro u, Ol g9Q P; c ftos x FE <.o d_=g ^ic) o *:.t'o o g oro;( o lr 'o d= fdi =o ..dtr .oo f :L,x s6 = oo x=' (J-a) -_oo 9an =o -:J Lg =- JY=. Ei' EL=' =. 8d 0 O|_ g;d rrr =' J $(o cl?. 'o -c =* =.o HE -:- -(h - of NJ .xc):t oo =g o '<- ,-. 1*o -- 4no $Xr :'io -e. o o-Y d = /rO o oA Hfr= 4a _y =t E3-g @.o J (o o J (o= Eg6- 6'o =o J oo Io (/) JO :l 0) a- = E€ *fc OQ mo m e aa YAK ^.u 3 o_- g=; a f @ €ID o @ = ==Fg e* 9q8t1y=c_ox tE46Sfgq o s Fi ..E ff. c g 3=xq "'.Q 7ic O a 8i =. o 5E-rE- s=fiqq9Fa F:1 LE , 9 il;E H 3 o o 9- 4 6 oo so f q! q. q. FE ir ra,E F Xl = 9< d 4.O, s€ I =. EfiFE *sFO- :qj.3*o'-6' o= NJ :t sq$ 3 if=l=' Edo,a=R6'I =O v9o € R=='o.l ;6'i;x;=0 ail €n 0) gsq 5;dqEE5: :., * 9c'*o o +0,q6= o 33i4=x oo 6' 1o$i* =.: a !?, 3F3m*ov- *=ooPi6':' ml c - Joi o_+.0) qg==i6'Fe a O)lf -l o0ro -Jpo; - o - :E o o fr G cLl 6' s. 6i =o0) r.E'lf- 3 tx= lii o x X XI? 3 x xrog o -Tl = 18 Jl q =? 5,BI - 4qgrs#l E er; 4l d(6'= 3H - J -- - -l n: lql L Vt =eBPqgl5 r g8l r:sggflEefi 3Ea.Fd f c q qot;l 3p"5 68' g; -(DaC d --.-+ g e-g i3 o: xi o ='+. = 3 P 8.8 = 3 RRtr 9=. 4€:gE 4-+A-,XE € dER?F 6='*a =4[ 5 E d S.a A J s.n o d_a 1tEltgaffi*iHLq. 0 = ='ir d E. r < =l t ; +FE;- 6 g.a x o $ a,)l 9qr 9a d $q'i K< =.- o dd *i t *E$;a = d"4 1t 4q AEE;=aa Eo oI I (o rq qd 6t : tr5:.Ea ="==$3 +t a=' +-= ;3 iE eB -6 nr0l +f =l € H;at Ho' o-o ,Sgsa $c:5 = Eftu=' B- alBgailr; O r>ol EI Fi F HX9 o6'+* a d go !a ai6e : a$. = d{ g 8_ -A €E-- o o !D >vmn qt€ o l tofo .ri'o < o o CL 0o c)O='o t'! o 7 o g d=99 !, cLri = o >7 t' 3 o q, E;A Ea 0o = a !P { =F xr! os s tr ?3 :l =.> g {=' =omt s oo iio -=oc g o -€ ;EE i.s o ='(/, ti o- xooo 0, :J a. =' -@o;+(/)=.o 9g o (o o €; o- $o id !P o :1, =8 o ;; o6' = =5 { '= o ;{ .' Ia 0t o oNlt o (o$6 ioPf - a ! - =. ='a- - 6* f a9 o CL o_ 6 = ko ! l - \va o o a 6'- o ]- "" = q o €tn tnEl l+ oou< 9q 90 ao0 tct a i€ JIYL- .r.: o o P=-(nQilgg dE d x P = eF' ; lo (OcDO 6'sP6 a8 o i- ood LE o 5F* :i' ro a6'oP *qB rrf. l< =-{ Yoo Y --9=9o+ o rD;q 6 =i. o €g lo 0)--L +x o= NJ - qd= 6 - A =9 vQo l0l {r I efi ?o €n x-^' +r r -.. + so EQa. 39o1[ -a *g =' :$< o6QO; F'=a oo - 3;0 a- o oQ6 0l 8€F -vr- r m a qP+ JO f € H H f o UA €='o=_0) CL I +d9 t6 p---- ltt ; oJ .v- 6'6+o'6 :t = *o o- !, Xu F=66 o d o =o x x Fegi q R -EIHAi ; l: E=. lx= lfio x x r "lF H o lu) (,0) E3qd mFO O IDI A= q9dq ?a6 o !rl io,e (na 5554 :o0) t< AO = ai '-. dggn" oo\v e =i 1A 3U!', 5 (!l 6E (Dla :t re d5+ o':Z io € m: fPti fF0) a lo or6 -6: 90 ri ro- :(n i'i. c aix0) 6' io rvo O3c,- V- a(/, id= c.0) o (D 6$s oo Ch o-o -' -of q=4 o'f ilfo- OE =.o dqd 5 €.o -3_0,5_id E o= =o 5 o_ ^- =€ o.^ 5= gl p 964 m0) q6 o l{ ,*, a =? o.= d F3 s-a ato lo xl < o C" EA6 a,'-o { ;r c olr- (,: 6'l ](o -fr- z2 = rO -o)s di- o lo = Eq = ffo C^ a-' -p,a1 -= nrO iE ox JaYi. go) d_d o- 0) '- a3 o€p +o- I I6 v - ^ f OJ f d o >TMT no = o di'(, < c) It:g >v E;A TE3- f s:' o s_F xE! ?3 r oo {m =.o =- ='! a o ;E of ;oo !, ^i9 +J 5A= xC)g) c qd rHa g, oqiis o su=. o 5= 6-{ d-.-E v(/| u _c €6-o oo o :8 dg o(, -3 <.o i(cl FC qd (ol a+ 3' o !2. J oI Iso0t T' 0) nr ql v= > -.= cc o 9d gd_ ,-+ o) >x o @ q F4fr8 *d5 I d -1? 5'S =o o = f 5E d o q.". q ('|ac o H = (/)f:!) 'oo4 !a q ss3 9; --O 9a.6 d* -or5'vo) dqF- no$ alDa o=utrr +x o_ qB6 corooo oHe < o-o ='l ^ o-O =--- 6'oc < J+ o-.' 8Rr 9=. o< x ==_6' - O_X od & 1a s - J o,^5I { =d-p q o'€ =Y q 6 0 oo= d_< + = < cLl Y =- o EA6 de E-r,' )*nK { a U= 6' 1j lXn -\9! { =d o: d dt o +o 7i JYc a-' nr (D +i (/, o i< .eoo Fo o 6_d (/)or€ x >P U)==. -r= F C/)A; -6 --X 0): ^in4 o- o- BabtieBrcwn & Rost River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report Appendix A - Environmental Report Appendix 2: Gommunication Plan 1. lntroduction This EIA CommunicationPlan sets out the arrangementsfor internaland externalconsultation with respectto the Brandonto ThetfordNavigation Link. The EIA CommunicationPlan aims to: . Clarifythe rolesand responsibilitiesof the projectteam for specificaspects of internaland external communication(using a singlenamed contact as far as possible); . ldentifykey consultees with a likelyinterest in the scheme;and . Establisha consultationprogramme to providea detailedlist of futureconsultation rounds. This is version1 of the EIA CommunicationPlan and has been reviewedand updatedas the scheme has progressedin line with adjustmentsto the projecttimetable and evolutionof issuesand ideas. The EIA CommunicationPlan will again be amendedas necessaryafter significant phases of the project. The Environmentallmpact AssessmentOfficer is responsiblefor updating the EIA CommunicationPlan on behalfof the ProjectManager. 2. ProjectTeam MemberRoles and Responslbilltles ProjectExecutive John Adams - EnvironmentAgency ProjectManager Andy Bennison - EnvironmentAgency ProjectManager Richard Beck - BabtieBrown and Root 3. ExtemalConsultees Externalconsultation has beenundertaken to thoseparties who form the workingparty with the aim of improvingthe navigationon the LittleOuse, enhancing the habitatsthe rivercorridor and enhancing theexisting amenities found in thearea. One statedaim from this initialround of consultationwas to identifyother interested parties that should be consultedas the projectprogresses. 4. ConsultationProgramme Table 1 showsa proposedprogramme for internaland externalconsultation. Members of the project teamare nominatedresponsibility for preparingmaterial and undertakingeach roundof consultation' This is basedon the cunentprogramme for the scheme. A namedcontact is alsogiven in each case. As far as possiblea singlepoint of contactwithin the EnvironmentAgency (i.e. the ProjectManager) shouldbe establishedfor the schemefor all publicconsultation to avoidunnecessary confusion. The projectis cunentlyat the pre-feasibilitystage, and will progressthrough further stages of the EIA process.As the schemeprogresses further consultation requirements may be identifiedand the consulteelist may be expanded R:\2003\s06077 EA Bmndon to Th6ffordlAdmu)cmnts\D4-135 stags 2 Fiml Revo'dc 48 ot 107 EG A l!, mm o C" o o m >v ci;" e !, o o -'r I 5 F O - o o EA ** o 5F o €i # c) I 3 3 o tL :- o aa. f la8 8a 0l o o x!t lrd = SO Hg El- !q z z m 15c s !, = 10 == q a 0 c @ =-< cl l=d 3 mt :v 5(D o o z o 3 H-F5' F b *o q;E = B$E$ o o esse sg8 9) d 3.q (n Ao 8*a f o* tg; o s gd -.=qr=a 0 ;dg 6' Ror (r, 33F Qod ", q) $E$ = s5id a) g.{ 3E Bsi il o 5*a (o= +g ,*,sF *q 45. I $$$ { o ut F" H g gr $$E ; g=eE o Qo (/,s)=o o E HF =. e: g s' o {E o PC. o cr qa S =. q) +5 o q EP Ss -5dg d *o oo € (h g9 = lo oT g rnm o >xt rE{ tt =' o -o EA o 3*1 S si # s='F 8d. XE { 5 Dd sO SdP E$F$s;E as. lo ; F5 mE !rY 5(D !or- $ HF $;E i<. @ DJ 5 SF ed CL no5 :l o. *$$E oO iggEgggt= I $t EA o !{ o ai5 riO gB:*$g 3 5* 1$s 3 f9 c RE.d ! -Oo =. K#$ rSi o o q, o s tl o 9. 5 s @ $sF$$ :!$ r$ $: at, I $..= 8n9 cl E h-Al I n ]SS 0l;fiF o gil-i $ o +-' AI b 5oa) ao o tsq3 o N [+$. '$ v 8*B $afi o !1 f F<=.>Y=. 3.;. p- o sslui f F€€ ES xqQ o_ ;xoX?r S o : o- i'( a) Qri- 0);Q d*g $Ji FBd $ xo\ iF]$qB ,B 5-ra TJ* =' d: d f *$:d8; o PF5'F RdS *F $ aq=t ='l dd- $ggil E;*t RQ F'r+'i a- agq-aO $x^;8s = lxi" s$'+-g giA I3l q, =r; o dX=3ilq 4Ed p +Q -><(t s:d r$ g $ ** s$l i i sEed \-a) E.E3E Y5-saT g,E d'dr S +4 3d8 $€s5=. ? 3 d= E€-_ i;*gi;dg =o+3 E3F RiverLittle Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report Appendix D - Cost Estimates Budget Cost Estimatesfor NavigationProposals (BaseCosts for Construction only, based on Option 1B) Item Description Estimate(E) 1 Existinghead gate structure at BrandonLock to be raised 30000 3 Constructionof 22mL x 4.3mW x 3m D Lockat SantonDownham 700000 4 Constructionof 10mwide Weir/Sluicestructure at SantonDownham, 200000 incorporatinqseoarate weir and sluicegate. Raisinoof existinqSanton Country Park Footbridqe 40000 7 Constructionof 22m L x 4.3mW x 3m D Lockat Two MileBottom 700000 8 Constructionof 10mwide Weir/Sluicestructure at Two MileBottom, 200000 incorporatinqseparate weir and sluicegate. o Excavationand constructionof new 80m L x BmW x 1.5mD navigation 150000 bvoasschannel around Abbev Heath Weir 10 Constructionof 22m L x 4.3mW x 3m D Lockat AbbeyHeath 700000 11 Modifuexistino SW outfallheadwall to incorporateenergy dissipation 10000 '150000 12 Excavationand constructionof new80m L x 8m W x 1.5mD navigation bvpasschannelaround Thetford No.1 Sluice 13 Constructionof 22mL x 4.3mW x 3m D Lockat Thetford 700000 14 Raisinoof existinqFootbridqe at Thetford 40000 15 Dredqinqof LittleOuse river (11600 m3) 200000 16 Raisinsof riverbanks (1600 m) by approx0.5 - 1.0m 100000 17 Constructionof boattuminq and mooringfacility at Thetford 600000 Total(Option1B): 4520000 Additional/OptionalWorks : Item Description Estimate(f) 18 Additionalcost to rebuildBrandon Lock to EA standard 900000 19 Additionalcost to rebuildBrandon Lock to Denverstandard 1000000 20 Additionalcost to provide30m long Locksat SantonDownham, Two Mile 400000 Boftom,Abbey Heath and Thetford. 21 Additionalcost of raisinq/renewinqfootbridqe at Two MileBottom 40000 22 Additionaldredging costs of extendingnavigation to confluencewith River 30000 Thet(900 m3). 23 Additionalcost of raisingtimber footbridge in Thetfordtown centreto 50000 facilitatenaviqation to confluencewith RiverThet. R:\2003vtdt60n EA Brandon to Thetford\Adm\Docurents\Ix't35 Stage 2 Flnal Rev[)'da 82 ot 107 BabtieBrcwn & Root River Little Ouse Brandonto ThetfordPrefeasibility Study - Stage2 Report Appendix D - Cost Estimates SummaryTotals: Option Calculation Estimate (€) Option18 (as calculatedabove) 4520000 2.7mHeadroom New locksto EA standard ExistingBrandon lock retained Option 28 As Option1B (-30000 + 900000) 5390000 2.7mHeadroom All locksto EA standard Notes: 'A' 'B' 1. The maincost difference between the options(2.0m headroom) and the options(2.7m headroom)is the raisingof the headstructure at the existingBrandon lock to accommodate the increasedheadroom standard (€30000). 2. Thecost of Option1A (2.0mHeadroom, New locks to EA standardand existing Brandon lock retained- but withoutmodifications to headstructure) would be t4520000- €30000= e4490000. 3. The costsfor Options2A and 3A (2.0mheadroom) would be the sameas Options28 and 38 respectively- as all theseoptions would necessitate the reconstructionof Brandonlock irrespectiveof headroom. Calculationof CAPEX Option1B Option 28 EstimatedConstruction Cost (t) 4520000 5390000 Surveys/ Gl (t) 50000 60000 Design,Supervision, CDM @ 15%of 678000 808000 constructioncost (f) EIA/EnvironmentalMitigation (f ) 80000 80000 Continoencv(aoorox 20o/ol E\ 1065000 1267000 Total GAPEX(€) 6393000 7605000 35 Stage 2 Fidal RevD.dc 83 of 107 . BabtieBrcwn&Root River Little Ouse Brandon to Thetford Prefeasibility Study - Stage 2 Report Appendix D - Cost Estimates Maintenance/OPEXCosts Description Annual Cost (€) Annualmaintenance of 4No.locks. 20000 Basedon EA annualbudget of f120k for 23 locks Annualmaintenance of 2No.additional sluices/weirs (estimate) 10000 Annualmaintenance for 14kmof river- weedcutting and dredging 30000 Total 60000 R12003\0006077EA Brandon to Thstford\AdmtDocumsnB\tx-135Stage 2 Final RevD.dn 84 ot 1OT F n r- o."J - Q' F= mr =.!o nr= F o= ',a <='a m o= =' 'c ooi.x R+ :,o io x.}i :q E o m :3\/ trE E'r6Ii 5; O lc o f^df {:i --lo A \..FJ .\q { :'o =v -o ut >6 0) a- o) t' l- )a o€ \Yr't='C o.. 8E '-a !-^-@@ >tl oot o:--o'-l):oi(Q OJ !x o |,cL uc*O 30 uF",, o) 8-;e Of i\ t6 II "hYitl {-a x ff\9 \l All o * ^) :, o e 1,.\ z s.0t GI q, ai o l"l lJi l=1l^l n : l-l n ILJ u = eo tr 3 q,o iE o EiEE E o *E EiEE E E t st; $ r € $*$flil s s sFi s # I il$$E$ F QgS F F .gS:S o dab 6' 6' 3ilrsb E qt; E E $iHs$ ; €$ i i Jge;[ s [$ s s gdqs$ : $E r r "[$[T ili ;is$ ss Biii *3 Es'i o, ()a n D lr a an ^ ni f F( U BZ ! MF 9. e.r= $c7) o= .\Y E3 o= cFot .' q) o.H 3(D x {\f(o o={ qo m ro\ .\, € >v l f,om =tr )r5 o-Jo ;'6 :l o :-(D tr='t -a 19\ 3 ,-b s;-:rE 4- airC. $B EP ,rv= orrl- * oq, i\' ' X( ::-= of X.,\r0) l/,cL -t]# Gi A ir {o R. ! 6l OJ lA; x\f\o P-r, td i \# 6')- ^Y l3e t :I il'9 o F) o l\ ; g I z s.s, GI ql * o 3 J o c0 c{ EE EE e f(ru 14 r il tj\, EE EE ( cr. \s of EE EE h s5t E 3$[, ff;SS q) E $=EI E BF: BSsa * EFqs gsi$ilfrF F :HS dnH *l3s $ $R*-:i E:s =*e*!E q e$i. i5* 7 Hd' *il' {*; {ed t; uqF + 8*. n ggss Qft qa .i; $5€ s€ :3 ?: Silts iiHil $tus;t ds 6. =.qs -,d*S '-n G \ .en t;\ ll. ie* loz-rz{ o MF o lY.=: en *! o- i : Or! ;E+31rr\odHdF e-);I :to t' o € X :v m €a;s;e !r Jtr ttf o ;'o ,\- g E t ."i6= ; J 'l.* -o l,\ = $ 1 [ o -1 u -c.-3I]6 F{ -c = N o 4 g I ,\ f. -t-. o I 0, tt EE EE EEo NJ 6' 5 o !) -f.. o EH EE EEo H E"= R}I o gild \ gs SdE o R $d $d F 3 3 c= il€r'+ EEs.^", q o ] R PIA = =Eq$Iilgil$S F* + o o-' .06a ' Ova!P Nrl ?, OY 5$ € f {f -})(^)i' E o-s P.'5 $F s s $ o k+Y6i ?,d xa_3 g o ax $$ $ $ a se o ml i: s = $!. s fi - 6J x +* ;* 3 > \" SSFr d g5 rS b{ bt \\n :5 6' 6' ^rd\ s-. o @ i- F rzo ozn MF =c> b( = JCm o;t xJ< Ft-{ q3f, oE! hi-Btp *tt tAJ :to x' L\a.O b0t o r10 N.6: -o^L -v =C m l.v= irgP -l o:aF ,2 ?! i'E H6s) dR1 *,a(t9 \E o={ E-6 1(O o-?o EE -ll j'3 o0, G"o to: -- g'cL |l{ -lo c -\? f; (n 3 0! oJ l+,q 1d h'Fx :i[ { I ; o tl d e- z !,s. GI o, oo {f q,o {= o EE E HE o = o * c a 3 t o o EE HEE o (-\,, + 6' J q,o tj o EE HE! o o FII SI O qsd o E dd *E 3 *t I F; 3 o s$s t.l$ = ?, gEa N) cA ilk i ;* to 6\ Ir P ep eng 5d 5 d I :J a-o a Hi Hl" 6 q8s d, *a{ =S$ Sst i B E; ^{ 3- { s€ E' o \'od 5 :so* € E$ * >-.o YFtt, hH' I n [$ i i: d. P:Q a i i€ $ H; g d{ a-> g qil 05 h 5 H L=E q E* T: q ag d' xi l B\ sd. = O -\ 4 - o\ f l !. 6\\fF m { A.O mr = o- El*\A o kTo!. =c 3 € o= (o T irxsjR fo * .r. bi :) -\dioa o ; :, i;\ o { \ \A : 3H {l 'e x v; = c 6'n ^o( o x= i = \ 9=. >3 --\ t\ n AE q ^ d ! EE -\ ;. = -o ?.*o oql i-n I * - ({' r.=+tt)-= o5 r,h a'cHo tn cL ! .r- 4.diX^ .o v\ 't vIr, \e A - = t.c!a o5 \JF ootl gr = <4 o oC qs 3 F.i o (r{ qt S o {#EH EEE o - (o + , vl oq, e F {#EHi EEH o o E Ssd dd o T RR$dE$d .f,o:$'b> :l o i $*;*it* o €ls u E:d' iiE3R$ S:&; .i R; Hg €s 4(, * 3t$$$fi$ Ha' OS gF ed : HsTE5I qj <(/) S. =. FS * C)H:\ =r* l$*$ Eu $s $ EDSE EA ;: S i ei d: $* i {85 FS Eu* $ $E] $sf,d' Notes of Meeting €) Babtie Client EA/WorkingGroup Babtie Group technicaland Job title Brandonto Thetfordnavigation link management consultants Purposeof meeting review of stage one report Dateof meeting 08 September2003 15 SturtonStreet Cambridge Placeof meeting Thetford CB12SN Tel 01223365731/ 006077t1t2t3432 01223355890 Fax 01223 3613321 Dateof distribution 15/9/03 01223355058 Present Copies TonyJones KeystonePrgect VickyStone Breck'sCountryside Project NickGibbons ForestEnterprise RichardRadcliff ForestHeath District Council DerekBradley Inland Waterways Association BobWells GOBA RogerValentine EA MiriamByron EA RichardBeck BBR Kay Siddall BBR All presentplus AndyBennison ( EA) file Action Apologiesfor absencefrom Andy Bennison Sincethe last meetingthe draftstage 1 reporthad beenissued to all teammembers. This included the mainengineering proposals but does not includethe full assessmentof benefits,which were still being worked on. A presentationwas made whichidentified the affectof the cunent proposalson the speciesin the Biodiversity/ Habitat Action plan. Referencewas also madeto the currentlocal plan for Thetford,which at the momentdid notgive any specific scope to the reopeningof the navigation. NG wouldlike to see furtherincrease in waterlevel rather than dredging of materialto gainsufficient depth. This would have a beneficialeffect on the wetlandin the studyarea, and removethe needto find a locationfor the dredgedmaterial. RB to look at This may havea smallaffect on the bridgesoffit levels, and a potentially engineering aspects Qsl,'7 greateraffect on the waterflow requirements of this NG alsocommented that in the stageone report,no accounthas been takenof the cost of the environmentalenhancemenU mitigation KS/RB measuresto be implementedas partof the project.This could be substantialif soil strippingetc was carriedout. EnglishNature have not to date commentedon the stageone reportand did not attendthe meeting(08/09/03. More detail needs to be obtained regardingtheir opinions on the projectand any reservationsthey may KS to contact NG to hold. discuss. NG to contact Sarah The groupwas keenfor EnglishNature to be drawnmore closely Anthony of EN to working dlscuss intothe projectgroup and encouragedto havemore input into the design process RV commentedthat moredetail needs to be soughtto makethe navigationa strongerbusiness case by, a) Reviewof otherprojects such as SleafordNavigation Trust b) Presentthe projectin termsof the ongoingFens Waterways link, (20 yearprogramme) a nationaltrunk route for navigationfrom the Washto the Bedford-MiltonKeynes canal. British Waterways Association(James Clifton) has maininput to this scheme.The LittleOuse could be seenas an addedbonus to this scheme, especiallyif the marinaat Brandonwas incorporated,as this wouldprovide an increasednumber of mooringplaces to accommodateincreased boat traffic. c) ConsiderKings Lynn Link d) BrandonMarina. Plans were discussed regarding a proposed marinain Brandon,which would be controlledby ForestHeath DC. lt was proposedthat if this was broughtinto the schemeand a water front improvementproject was incorporatedin Thetford thena linkfor navigationcould be developedat a laterstage. e) In the futurethe scopeof the workinggroup will needto be increasesto includeall localauthorities, English Nature and otherpartners i.e. Keystonesvision statement. f) ls the existingwater level sufficient to facilitatethe navigational needson the riverand the environmentalrequirements of the wetlandareas?. While the modellingof the aquiferis not partof the currentbrief, this informationwill needto be in placeto confirmthe feasibilityof the project.lf sufficientinformation is not availableihen the needfor a researchand monitoringproject ( possiblycanied out with EnglishNature and others)needs to be identifiedin the report.Such a study couldof benefitto several parties,and couldhelp address the concernof EN regardingthe SSSI(Thetford Golf Course and Marsh)and the effecton the waterlevel from this aouiferfed siie, if waterlevels on the river wereraised. 3432lhes of bam mtg 8 I 03.tu '1 (, lla') / 6 Planning RB A meetingneeds to be set up withthe forwardplanners fromForest HeathDC (JohnSmerdon 01638 719000) and Breckland DC (Andrea Bolton)to identifyany potentialopportunities, or howthe localplan can incorporatethe proposedproject; any proposalsto be includedin the stage2 report. 7 RV suggesteda reviewof figuresfor costsas he thoughthe estimates RB werevery light 8 RV requiredthe reportto includemore detail of environmentalbenefits KS further i.e. extentOf wetland which would be created.RV eonsideredthat disc0ssion with environmentalbenefits could be consideredas secondarybenefits if the NG/SA projectcould be shownto generatesufficient employment and economic gain. 9 Dateof nextmeeting to be fixedafter discussion with Andy Bennison.RB RB to coordinate.Meeting room is availablesubject to booking.Monday is preferredday. 3432Notes of bam mtg 8 I 03.d6 hlt.7 Fs.F PH F Flil E tE' ts F F{fiU}r ts E ts(J|H. o t O 3rr 6 50trF tt F \]{rr(] a E o oo .Jo(} rt -l*tG C i ..'. zicz'dE.*t ar uJdru r0 (!iio o 6i i'l fJ ltt Cl rtt u ftFtFd U o P t-{Fl '! o o lJ H :+! t |o\{PoE oE Hlr r .. N.. L, zf?t{]rtE z r+tsd" rd =Fr Fmn A' io=o "g * 88=8 o o 6=99 o cL.i o >v N g F = ET o a Eed ro !, = t 4E o =gg 0o E m o ;fiis o CL +XC:- + $ - g o o 3X = F ;EE o I oii('Y xooU, d =(r=.o = a orQ.9i -aq ;s o o --anP f 9_ tPo :i a o i6o xE ;€ ;. g6as a c)0)Tt t-{ J ai^.Or ,;;' t eil sE** <' q. '+ 5* { lfl_Ea o=' a9 a^' + - ? 9ea rva ts o o o fl; 6 H 6'F d = tt foa o = q €ro @ (,o= a!, G0r-6'> ^D 0t ao0 FET rdoQ ;6d .:-:, o o - a J Hd 4 2o -d fr' iri -- o -om6"6 oo T =6of 3eS o Ls ^i O o)o i3 8d I r€ m40- oo dt o \