DOCSLIB.ORG

Manchester Ship Canal: Summary of Known Data and Relevant Information

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Manchester Ship Canal: Summary of Known Data and Relevant Information Manchester Ship Canal: Summary of Known Data and Relevant Information Final Report Appendix Document United Utilities 413687 February 2015 Dr Keith Hendry, Heather Webb, Dr Michael Dobson, Caitlin Riddick Client: United Utilities Address: Lingley Mere Business Park Lingley Green Avenue Great Sankey Warrington WA5 3LP Project reference: 413687 Date of issue: February 10, 2015 ________________________ Project Director: Dr Keith Hendry Project Manager: Heather Webb ________________________ APEM Ltd Riverview A17 Embankment Business Park Heaton Mersey Stockport SK4 3GN Tel: 0161 442 8938 Fax: 0161 432 6083 Registered in England No. 2530851 Report should be cited as: “APEM (2014). Manchester Ship Canal: Summary of Known Data and Relevant Information. Appendix Document. United Utilities, February 2015 Final” Report Note: This is a technical report only. It does not consider or make any statements in relation to legal liability or legal responsibilities. Any statements on allocation or source apportionment are purely factual following the approach set out Appendix IV of this report. Revision and Amendment Register Version Date Section(s) Page(s) Summary of Changes Approved Number by Preparation of draft report for V01 09/01/2015 All All HW client submission Preparation of final report for All All HW V02 11/02/2015 client submission Contents Appendix I Data Availability and Previous Water Quality Reports............................................ 1 AI.1 Data Availability ............................................................................................................ 1 AI.2 Background to Previous Reports Reviewing the Water Quality of the MSC .................. 9 Appendix II Review of Historic MSC Water Quality Data ....................................................... 11 AII.1 Dissolved Oxygen (DO) ........................................................................................ 11 AII.2 BOD ...................................................................................................................... 19 AII.3 Ammonia............................................................................................................... 32 AII.4 Nutrients (Phosphorus) ......................................................................................... 37 AII.5 Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD) ........................................................................ 38 AII.6 Sediments ............................................................................................................. 40 Appendix III Algal Blooms ..................................................................................................... 43 Appendix IV Source Apportionment for Factors Influencing Water Quality ............................ 47 AIV.1 Method .................................................................................................................. 47 AIV.2 Results .................................................................................................................. 53 AIV.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................ 59 Appendix V Flood Risk .......................................................................................................... 60 AV.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 60 AV.2 Sources of Flooding .................................................................................................. 60 AV.3 Flood Risk Results .................................................................................................... 62 AV.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 66 List of Figures Figure AI 1 APEM and EA Sampling Sites for BOD and Ammonia - Pound 1 ......................... 5 Figure AI 2 APEM and EA Sampling Sites for BOD and Ammonia - Pound 2 ......................... 6 Figure AI 3 APEM and EA Sampling Sites for BOD and Ammonia - Pound 3 ......................... 7 Figure AI 4 APEM and EA Sampling Sites for BOD and Ammonia - Pound 4 ......................... 8 Figure AII 1 Mean annual surface DO (mg/l) in the MSC Pounds. TB = Turning Basin. ........ 12 Figure AII 2 Minimum surface DO (mg/l) recorded each year in the MSC Pounds TB = Turning Basin. ....................................................................................................................... 12 Figure AII 3 Mean annual bottom water DO (mg/l) in the MSC Pounds. TB = Turning Basin. 13 Figure AII 4 Minimum bottom water DO (mg/l) recorded each year in the MSC Pounds. TB = Turning Basin. ....................................................................................................................... 13 Figure AII 5 Bottom water DO concentrations in the Turning Basin, 3rd June 2013 ................ 14 Figure AII 6 Bottom water DO concentrations in the Turning Basin, 8th July 2013 ................. 14 Figure AII 7 DO at the EA Sonde at Barton, 2014. ................................................................ 15 Figure AII 8 DO at the EA Sonde at Irlam, 2014. ................................................................... 16 Figure AII 9 DO at the EA Sonde at Caddishead, 2014. ........................................................ 16 Figure AII 10 Diurnal variations in dissolved oxygen (%) from the EA continuous monitoring sonde at Barton, 17th to 18th March 2014............................................................................... 17 Figure AII 11 Diurnal variations in dissolved oxygen (%) from the EA continuous monitoring sonde at at Irlam, 25th May 2014. .......................................................................................... 17 Figure AII 12 Diurnal variations in dissolved oxygen (%) from the EA continuous monitoring sondes between the 13th and 19th of May 2006. .................................................................... 18 Figure AII 13 Diurnal variations in dissolved oxygen (%) from the EA continuous monitoring sondes between the 29th June and 5th of July 2006. ............................................................ 18 Figure AII 14 Diurnal variations in dissolved oxygen (%) from the EA continuous monitoring sondes between the 8th and 13th August 2006. ...................................................................... 19 Figure AII 15 Mean annual and maximum BOD within the MSC Turning Basin. .................... 20 Figure AII 16 Mean annual and maximum BOD within the MSC Turning Basin and upstream to Woden Street. ................................................................................................................... 21 Figure AII 17 Mean annual and maximum BOD within the MSC Turning Basin and upstream to Woden Street during oxygenation/aeration. ...................................................................... 21 Figure AII 18 Maximum BOD concentrations on tributaries into Pound 1. ............................. 22 Figure AII 19 Mean annual and maximum BOD between Mode Wheel and Barton Locks. .... 23 Figure AII 20 Maximum annual BOD sites between Mode Wheel and Barton Locks. Sites upstream of Salford WwTW denoted by dashed lines. .......................................................... 24 Figure AII 21 Mean annual and maximum BOD between Barton and Irlam Locks (EA data). 25 Figure AII 22 Maximum annual BOD sites between Barton and Irlam Locks. ........................ 25 Figure AII 23 Mean annual and maximum BOD between Irlam and Latchford Locks. ........... 26 Figure AII 24 Maximum BOD between up- and downstream of Irlam Locks. ......................... 27 Figure AII 25 Maximum BOD concentrations at EA sites within Pound 4............................... 28 Figure AII 26 Maximum BOD concentrations in the River Mersey and MSC sites up- and downstream of the Mersey confluence .................................................................................. 29 Figure AII 27 Maximum BOD concentrations in the River Glaze and Red Brook compared to the MSC. ............................................................................................................................... 30 Figure AII 28 Maximum BOD concentrations in the River Bollin compared to the MSC. ........ 31 Figure AII 29 Maximum BOD concentrations in the River Mersey compared to the MSC. ..... 31 Figure AII 30 Mean, minimum and maximum ammonia concentrations within Pound 1 ......... 32 Figure AII 31 Mean, minimum and maximum ammonia concentrations within Pound 2 ......... 33 Figure AII 32 Maximum ammonia concentrations .................................................................. 34 Figure AII 33 Mean, minimum and maximum ammonia concentrations within Pound 3 ......... 35 Figure AII 34 Mean, minimum and maximum ammonia concentrations in the MSC within Pound 4 ................................................................................................................................ 36 Figure AII 35 Maximum ammonia concentrations within Pound 4 ......................................... 37 Figure AII 36 Mean annual total phosphorus concentrations within the MSC ........................ 38 Figure AII 37 SOD measurements from the Turning Basin and MSC. Data labelled as MSC are just denoted as MSC in the relevant source reports. ....................................................... 39 Figure AII 38 SOD measured throughout the MSC Pounds in 2007 ...................................... 39 Figure AII 39 SOD
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Beginner's Guide to Boating on Inland Waterways
    Ti r A Beginner’s Guide To Boating On Inland Waterways Take to the water with British Waterways and the National Rivers Authority With well over 4,000 km (2,500 miles) of rivers and canals to explore, from the south west of England up to Scotland, our inland waterways offer plenty of variety for both the casual boater and the dedicated enthusiast. If you have ever experienced the pleasures of 'messing about on boats', you will know what a wealth of scenery and heritage inland waterways open up to us, and the unique perspective they provide. Boating is fun and easy. This pack is designed to help you get afloat if you are thinking about buying a boat. Amongst other useful information, it includes details of: Navigation Authorities British Waterways (BW) and the National Rivers Authority (NRA), which is to become part of the new Environment Agency for England and Wales on 1 April 1996, manage most of our navigable rivers and canals. We are responsible for maintaining the waterways and locks, providing services for boaters and we licence and manage boats. There are more than 20 smaller navigation authorities across the country. We have included information on some of these smaller organisations. Licences and Moorings We tell you everything you need to know from, how to apply for a licence to how to find a permanent mooring or simply a place for «* ^ V.’j provide some useful hints on buying a boat, includi r, ...V; 'r 1 builders, loans, insurance and the Boat Safety Sch:: EKVIRONMENT AGENCY Useful addresses A detailed list of useful organisations and contacts :: : n a t io n a l libra ry'& ■ suggested some books we think will help you get t information service Happy boating! s o u t h e r n r e g i o n Guildbourne House, Chatsworth Road, W orthing, West Sussex BN 11 1LD ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 1 Owning a Boat Buying a Boat With such a vast.range of boats available to suit every price range, .
    [Show full text]
  • INLAND NAVIGATION AUTHORITIES the Following Authorities Are Responsible for Major Inland Waterways Not Under British Waterways Jurisdiction
    INLAND NAVIGATION AUTHORITIES The following authorities are responsible for major inland waterways not under British Waterways jurisdiction: RIVER ANCHOLME BRIDGEWATER CANAL CHELMER & BLACKWATER NAVIGATION The Environment Agency Manchester Ship Canal Co. Essex Waterways Ltd Anglian Region, Kingfisher House Peel Dome, Trafford Centre, Island House Goldhay Way, Orton Manchester M17 8PL Moor Road Peterborough PE2 5ZR T 0161 629 8266 Chesham T 08708 506 506 www.shipcanal.co.uk HP5 1WA www.environment-agency.gov.uk T: 01494 783453 BROADS (NORFOLK & SUFFOLK) www.waterways.org.uk/EssexWaterwaysLtd RIVER ARUN Broads Authority (Littlehampton to Arundel) 18 Colgate, Norwich RIVER COLNE Littlehampton Harbour Board Norfolk NR3 1BQ Colchester Borough Council Pier Road, Littlehampton, BN17 5LR T: 01603 610734 Museum Resource Centre T 01903 721215 www.broads-authority.gov.uk 14 Ryegate Road www.littlehampton.org.uk Colchester, CO1 1YG BUDE CANAL T 01206 282471 RIVER AVON (BRISTOL) (Bude to Marhamchurch) www.colchester.gov.uk (Bristol to Hanham Lock) North Cornwall District Council Bristol Port Company North Cornwall District Council, RIVER DEE St Andrew’s House, St Andrew’s Road, Higher Trenant Road, Avonmouth, Bristol BS11 9DQ (Farndon Bridge to Chester Weir) Wadebridge, T 0117 982 0000 Chester County Council PL27 6TW, www.bristolport.co.uk The Forum Tel: 01208 893333 Chester CH1 2HS http://www.ncdc.gov.uk/ RIVER AVON (WARWICKSHIRE) T 01244 324234 (tub boat canals from Marhamchurch) Avon Navigation Trust (Chester Weir to Point of Air) Bude Canal Trust
    [Show full text]
  • The Manchester Ship Canal and Salford Quays
    The Manchester Ship Canal and Salford Quays By Heather Webb, BSc (Hons) MSc, Senior Aquatic Scientist, APEM Limited. Manchester Ship Canal History The Manchester Ship Canal (MSC) was opened in 1894 and at the time, was the largest navigation in the world. The Canal is 58 km long, linking Eastham on the Mersey Estuary to Manchester, terminating upstream at the four docks in Salford (formerly known as Manchester Docks) and four smaller docks at Pomona (1 km upstream). The docks prospered and became one of Britain’s largest ports, reaching a peak in the 1950’s. During the second half of the twentieth century, however, containerisation and changing world trade patterns led to the demise of the docks and they were closed in 1984 leaving an abandoned 60 ha site including a polluted water course. Legacy Problems The industrial history associated with the Mersey Basin, Excessive bubbling encompassing the Rivers Mersey and Irwell and the MSC, left a legacy of poor water quality and sediment contamination. The MSC was one of the most severely polluted waterways in the UK with a one hundred year legacy of industrial, agricultural and sewage pollution. Water quality was very poor, being characterised by low Sediment rafts water column dissolved oxygen, high levels of suspended organic material and elevated nutrient concentrations. There was also excessive gas production from the anoxic sediments which produced foul odours and lifted mats of sediment to the surface, both of which acted as a serious deterrent to waterside development. The structure of the MSC (deep, slow flowing and with steep vertical sides) further exacerbated the water quality problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Screening Opinion on the Impact of the Oldham MBC Air Quality
    HABITAT REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT OF THE ROCHDALE LOCAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Prepared by The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit Council Offices Wellington Road Ashton-under-Lyne Manchester OL6 6DL For Rochdale Council September 2013 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 2 Brief description of the Plan 3 Identification of European designated sites concerned 4 The Nature Conservation Interest of the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA and the Rochdale Canal SAC 5 Screening Opinion 6 Consideration of ‘in combination effects’ 7 Conclusions and Recommendations 8 Changes to Rochdale’s Strategy for Flood Risk Management in response to the recommendations of the Habitats Regulations Assessment References Figure 1: Map Showing Location of European Sites within Rochdale APPENDIX 1: European designated sites within the North West Region and possible effects from development within Rochdale APPENDIX 2: Screening Summary of European designated sites within the North West Region and possible impacts from development within Rochdale APPENDIX 3: List of Other Plans and Projects Considered within the Assessment 1 Introduction 1.1 Article 6(3) of the European Habitats Directive dealing with the conservation of European protected sites states that: ‘Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans and projects, shall be subject to assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. In light
    [Show full text]
  • Waterway Dimensions
    Generated by waterscape.com Dimension Data The data published in this documentis British Waterways’ estimate of the dimensions of our waterways based upon local knowledge and expertise. Whilst British Waterways anticipates that this data is reasonably accurate, we cannot guarantee its precision. Therefore, this data should only be used as a helpful guide and you should always use your own judgement taking into account local circumstances at any particular time. Aire & Calder Navigation Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Bulholme Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 6.3m 2.74m - - 20.67ft 8.99ft - Castleford Lock is limiting due to the curvature of the lock chamber. Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Castleford Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom 61m - - - 200.13ft - - - Heck Road Bridge is now lower than Stubbs Bridge (investigations underway), which was previously limiting. A height of 3.6m at Heck should be seen as maximum at the crown during normal water level. Goole to Leeds Lock tail - Heck Road Bridge Length Beam Draught Headroom - - - 3.71m - - - 12.17ft - 1 - Generated by waterscape.com Leeds Lock tail to River Lock tail - Leeds Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 5.5m 2.68m - - 18.04ft 8.79ft - Pleasure craft dimensions showing small lock being limiting unless by prior arrangement to access full lock giving an extra 43m. Leeds Lock tail to River Lock tail - Crown Point Bridge Length Beam Draught Headroom - - - 3.62m - - - 11.88ft Crown Point Bridge at summer levels Wakefield Branch - Broadreach Lock Length Beam Draught Headroom - 5.55m 2.7m - - 18.21ft 8.86ft - Pleasure craft dimensions showing small lock being limiting unless by prior arrangement to access full lock giving an extra 43m.
    [Show full text]
  • Source 12 AW.Indd
    Words Deborah Mulhearn Photographs Ian Lawson, Walter Menzies and courtesy British Waterways Cheshire’s beautiful and fascinating canals are at the forefront of the nation’s canal renaissance. Cheshire’s canals are perhaps the most diverse in the ago – to young and distinctly urban The Peak Forest Canal touches country. From the fascinating industrial heritage of the landlubbers are negotiating the locks. Boating Cheshire only briefl y, but has one of mighty Manchester Ship Canal, which cuts across the holiday companies are doing great business. its most spectacular features: the Northern edge of the county, to the dramatic Pennine The Cheshire Ring, a 97 mile long circular Marple Aqueduct and the fl ight of 16 scenery of the Macclesfi eld Canal in the east, and the route which is made up from parts of the locks that lift the canal 46m above serene beauty of the Llangollen Canal in the south-west Macclesfi eld Canal, the Peak Forest Canal, the Goyt Valley. The Trent & Mersey corner, they not only cover most of the county but also the Bridgewater Canal and the Trent & Mersey Canal, built to link the River Trent span the history of British canal building. Canal, has never been busier. and the River Mersey, was one of the Cheshire’s proximity to Liverpool and Manchester, “There’s a weird and wonderful mix of earliest canals to be completed, in the hub and heart of the industrial revolution, and to the features specifi c to Cheshire’s canals,” 1777. It runs for 92 miles and has River Mersey, meant that it was quickly criss-crossed explains Peter Birch of British Waterways even more locks – one section with by canals in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment – Thematic Policies and Strategic Sites
    Habitats Regulations Assessment (draft) of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework Consultation Report – Thematic Policies and Strategic Sites December 2018 3 Prepared by The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit Clarence Arcade Stamford Street Clarence Arcade Ashton-under-Lyne OL6 6DL [email protected] For: GM Combined Authority December 2018 4 [Type text] TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 2 Brief Description of the Plan 3 Identification of European designated sites concerned 4 The Nature Conservation Interests of the “Screened In” European Sites 5 Initial Screening Opinion – Policies and Strategic Sites 6 Assessment of Impacts and Available Mitigation – Policies 7 Assessment of Impacts and Available Mitigation – Strategic Sites 8 Consideration of ‘In Combination’ Effects with Other Plans and Proposals 9 Overall Conclusions and Recommendations For Further Screening / Appropriate Assessment References APPENDIX 1: Other Plans considered in this Assessment as part of in-combination Assessment HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT OF THE GREATER MANCHESTER SPATIAL FRAMEWORK – THEMATIC POLICIES AND STRATEGIC SITES 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Paragraph 6(3) of the European Habitats Directive dealing with the conservation of European protected sites states that: 6(3).—(1) A competent authority, before deciding to undertake, or give any consent, permission or other authorisation for, a plan or project which— (a) is likely to have a significant effect on a European site or a European offshore marine site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects), and (b) is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of that site, must make an appropriate assessment of the implications of the plan or project for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • PART 3 Scale 1: Publication Edition Scale 1: Publication Edition Scale 1: Publication Edition 44 W Nose of Howth to Ballyquintin Point 100,000 Oct
    Natural Date of New Natural Date of New Natural Date of New Chart No. Title of Chart or Plan Chart No. Title of Chart or Plan Chart No. Title of Chart or Plan PART 3 Scale 1: Publication Edition Scale 1: Publication Edition Scale 1: Publication Edition 44 w Nose of Howth to Ballyquintin Point 100,000 Oct. 1978 Feb. 2001 1468w Arklow to the Skerries Islands 100,000 Aug. 1978 June 1999 1977w Holyhead to Great Ormes Head 75,000 Feb. 1977 Oct. 2001 105 w Cromer Knoll and the Outer Banks 75,000 Apr. 1974 Jan. 2010 1484w Plans in Cardigan Bay - Mar. 1985 Jan. 2002 1978w Great Ormes Head to Liverpool 75,000 Jan. 1977 May 2009 106 w Cromer to Smiths Knoll 75,000 Oct. 1974 Sept. 2010 A Aberystwyth 18,000 1981w Liverpool to Fleetwood including Approaches to Preston 75,000 Feb. 1977 May 2009 107 w Approaches to the River Humber 75,000 July 1975 May 2009 B Aberdovey 25,000 Preston Riversway Docklands 10,000 108 w Approaches to the Wash 75,000 June 1975 Apr. 2011 C Barmouth 25,000 2010wI Morecambe Bay and Approaches 50,000 Feb. 1988 July 2006 Wells-Next-The-Sea 30,000 D Fishguard Bay 15,000 2011w Holyhead Harbour 6,250 May 1975 Aug. 2005 109 wI River Humber and the Rivers Ouse and Trent 50,000 Dec. 1990 May 2009 E New Quay 12,500 2013w Saint Bees Head to Silloth 50,000 Feb. 1987 July 2010 A Humber Bridge to Whitton Ness 50,000 F Aberaeron 18,000 A Silloth Docks and Approaches 10,000 B3 B Whitton Ness to Goole and Keadby 50,000 G Newport Bay 37,500 B Maryport Harbour 10,000 C Keadby to Gainsborough 100,000 H Approaches to Cardigan 37,500 C Workington Harbour 7,500 D Goole 5,000 J Aberporth 30,000 D Harrington Harbour 10,000 111 w Berwick-upon-Tweed to the Farne Islands 35,000 July 1975 July 2009 1503wI Outer Dowsing to Smiths Knoll including Indefatigable Banks 150,000 Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • Cadishead Viaduct and the Cheshire Lines Rail Line
    Proposal to re-open Cadishead Viaduct and the Cheshire Lines rail line The art of the possible! This document has been produced by Hamilton Davies Trust (HDT) to provide background and scope for the Cadishead Viaduct potential re-opening debate. HDT has been heavily involved in the regeneration of Irlam and Cadishead since 2008, working with key local, regional and national stakeholders to make Irlam and Cadishead an even better place to live, work and enjoy. As part of our regeneration agenda, the poor state and appearance of Cadishead Viaduct has been a topic of conversation for some time. Two years ago we started to investigate the possibility of improving its appearance and putting the bridge back into use. This document summarises the history of the bridge and the compelling opportunities re-opening the viaduct would bring. HDT has now adopted the project and is championing the reopening of the viaduct for multi modal use including a new section of the national cycleway, footpath and heritage railway amongst other options. Cadishead Viaduct Built in 1893, Cadishead Viaduct is a magnificent structure which dominates the landscape across the Manchester Ship Canal. Originally constructed to run the Cheshire Lines railway over the newly built canal, the viaduct helped to service the busy factories in the area, transporting raw materials and finished goods, as well as some passenger services. Due to the decline in industry, the rail line closed to passengers in 1965 and eventually to freight in 1984 when coal exports ceased. With the line no longer in use and the high cost of maintenance, the bridge was eventually closed and industrial containers positioned at either side to prevent access to the structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Mersey Estuary Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report December 2009 Managing Flood Risk We Are the Environment Agency
    Mersey Estuary Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report December 2009 managing flood risk We are the Environment Agency. It’s our job to look after your environment and make it a better place – for you, and for future generations. Your environment is the air you breathe, the water you drink and the ground you walk on. Working with business, Government and society as a whole, we are making your environment cleaner and healthier. The Environment Agency. Out there, making your environment a better place. Published by: Environment Agency Richard Fairclough House Knutsford Road Warrington WA4 1HT Tel: 0870 8506506 Email: [email protected] www.environment-agency.gov.uk © Environment Agency All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. December 2009 Introduction I am pleased to introduce our summary of the Mersey Estuary Catchment Flood Management Plan (CFMP). This CFMP gives an overview of the flood risk in the Mersey Estuary catchment and sets out our preferred plan for sustainable flood risk management over the next 50 to 100 years. The Mersey Estuary CFMP is one of 77 CFMPs for have a 1% chance of flooding in any one year from rivers England and Wales. Through the CFMPs, we have (i.e. a 1% annual probability). We estimate that by 2100 assessed inland flood risk across all of England and approximately 25,000 properties will be at risk of river Wales for the first time. The CFMP considers all types of flooding. This is a 30% increase compared to the current inland flooding, from rivers, groundwater, surface water number at risk across the catchment.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Manchester Ship Canal, from Its Inception to Its Completion
    HISTORY OF THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL SIR BOSDIN LEECH to of tbe of Toronto lo. C . -CT : HISTORY OF THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL " Floreat Semper Mancunium DANIEL ADAMSON, FIRST CHAIRMAN OF THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL COMPANY. Elliott & Fry. Frontispiece. HISTORY OF THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL FROM ITS INCEPTION TO ITS COMPLETION WITH PERSONAL REMINISCENCES BY SIR BOSDIN LEECH NUMEROUS PLANS, PORTRAITS AND ILLUSTRATIONS IN TWO VOLUMES VOL I. 1*1 a s MANCHESTER AND LONDON: SHERRATT & HUGHES 1907 THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS LIMITED THESE VOLUMES ARE DEDICATED TO THE LORD MAYOR AND CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF MANCHESTER IN COMMEMORATION OF THE PUBLIC SPIRIT DISPLAYED BY THAT CITY IN COMING TO THE ASSISTANCE OF THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL AT A CRITICAL STATE OF ITS AFFAIRS, AND IN THE HOPE THAT THEIR EXAMPLE MAY STIMULATE FUTURE GENERATIONS TO SIMILAR LOCAL PATRIOTISM PREFACE. early struggles and ultimate triumph of the Manchester Ship Canal consti- THEtute a subject of absorbing interest. In the history of Manchester, and indeed of South Lancashire as a whole, no other event or enterprise can compare with it in its far-reaching effects. The story, too, in many respects contains all the elements of a romance. It is the relation of a desperate and almost hopeless fight against opposi- tion of the most powerful and uncompromising character, and it is meet that the names and qualities of the men engaged in the strife, and the nature of the difficulties which they encountered and overcame, should find a permanent record. To rescue both individuals and incidents from oblivion, and to give a connected narrative of the course of events from the conception to the completion of the canal, is the object of the present work.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Greater Manchester
    Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Greater Manchester Sub-Regional Assessment “Living Document” – August 2008 Association of Greater Manchester Authorities Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Sub-Regional Assessment Revision Schedule Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Greater Manchester – Sub-Regional Report August 2008 Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by 01 August 2007 DRAFT Michael Timmins Jon Robinson David Dales Principal Flood Risk Associate Director Specialist Peter Morgan Alan Houghton Planner Head of Planning North West 02 November DRAFT FINAL Michael Timmins Jon Robinson David Dales 2007 Principal Flood Risk Associate Director Specialist Peter Morgan Alan Houghton Planner Head of Planning North West 03 June 2008 ISSUE Gemma Costin Michael Timmins David Dales Flood Risk Specialist Principal Flood Risk Director Specialist Fay Tivey Flood Risk Specialist Peter Richards Anita Longworth Planner Principal Planner 04 August 2008 FINAL Fay Tivey Michael Timmins David Dales Flood Risk Specialist Principal Flood Risk Director Specialist Scott Wilson St James's Buildings, Oxford Street, Manchester, This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of Scott Wilson's M1 6EF, appointment with its client and is subject to the terms of that appointment. It is addressed United Kingdom to and for the sole and confidential use and reliance of Scott Wilson's client. Scott Wilson accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared and provided. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior Tel: +44 (0)161 236 8655 written permission of the Company Secretary of Scott Wilson Ltd.
    [Show full text]