DOCSLIB.ORG

M4 Junction 3 to 12 Managed Motorway All Lane Running

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
M4 Junction 3 to 12 Managed Motorway All Lane Running M4 Junction 3 to 12 Managed Motorway All Lane Running Preliminary Sources Study Report HA GDMS No. 27280 Report No: 514451-MUH-00-ZZ-RP-GE-200005 Revision / Status 0B October 2013 Highways Agency — M4 J3-12 MM-ALR M4 Junction 3 to 12 Managed Motorway All Lane Running Preliminary Sources Study Report HA GDMS No: 27280 October 2013 REPORT NO: 514451-MUH-00-ZZ-RP-GE-200005 REVISION SCHEDULE Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by 0A 17th June Submitted for Approval CW PCM ALC 2013 1F 18 October Final CW EM ALC 2013 Status Code and Description I Information D Draft R Review and Comment A Submitted for Approval F Final C For Construction Highways Agency URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Ltd Major Projects Royal Court The Cube Basil Close 199 Wharfside Street Chesterfield Birmingham Derbyshire West Midlands S41 7SL B1 1RN Highways Agency — M4 J3-12 MM-ALR Limitations All limitations in line with the Highways Agency Project Support Framework (Consultancy) 2011 – 2015 URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“URS”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of the Highways Agency (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed [PO1149]. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by URS. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed by the Client nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of URS. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by URS has not been independently verified by URS, unless otherwise stated in the Report. The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by URS in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances. Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available. URS disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to URS’ attention after the date of the Report. Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward- looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward-looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. URS specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report. M4 J3-12 MM-ALR PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY REPORT 514451-MUH-00-ZZ-RP-GE-200005 June 2013 1 Highways Agency — M4 J3-12 MM-ALR TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 8 1.1 Scheme Title ........................................................... 8 1.2 Scheme Proposals and Current Studies .............. 8 1.3 Location and Extent of Study Area ..................... 11 1.4 Previous Geotechnical Studies ........................... 12 2 SOURCES OF INFORMATION ............................. 13 2.1 Highways Agency Geotechnical Data Management System (HA GDMS) .............................................. 13 2.2 Connect Plus (DBFO Area 5) ............................... 13 2.3 EnterpriseMouchel (Area 3 Managing Agent) .... 13 2.4 Utility Service Providers ...................................... 14 2.5 British Geological Survey .................................... 14 2.6 Records of Mine and Mineral Deposits ............... 15 2.7 Landmark Information Group .............................. 15 2.8 The Environment Agency .................................... 16 2.9 Archaeological Information ................................. 16 2.10 Aerial Photographs (historical and recent) ........ 17 2.11 MAGIC & Natural England ................................... 17 2.11.1 MAGIC ................................................................... 17 2.11.2 Natural England ................................................... 18 2.12 Other data sources .............................................. 18 3 FIELD STUDIES .................................................... 19 4 SITE DESCRIPTION .............................................. 20 4.1 Location, Description and Topography .............. 20 4.1.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 20 4.1.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 21 4.1.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 23 4.1.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 23 4.2 Historical Development ....................................... 25 4.2.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 25 4.2.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 25 4.2.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 25 M4 J3-12 MM-ALR PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY REPORT 514451-MUH-00-ZZ-RP-GE-200005 June 2013 2 Highways Agency — M4 J3-12 MM-ALR 4.2.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 26 4.3 Hydrology and flood risk ..................................... 26 4.3.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 27 4.3.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 28 4.3.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 28 4.3.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 28 4.4 Man-made Features ............................................. 29 4.4.1 Overbridges .......................................................... 29 4.4.2 Underbridges ........................................................ 31 4.4.3 Cross carriageway ducts (CCDs) ........................ 32 4.4.4 Other man-made features .................................... 34 4.5 Geomorphology ................................................... 35 4.6 Geology ................................................................ 36 4.6.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 36 4.6.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 38 4.6.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 41 4.6.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 44 4.7 Hydrogeology ....................................................... 48 4.7.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 50 4.7.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 50 4.7.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 51 4.7.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 51 4.8 Mining and Quarrying .......................................... 51 4.8.1 Section 1 ............................................................... 52 4.8.2 Section 2 ............................................................... 52 4.8.3 Section 3 ............................................................... 53 4.8.4 Section 4 ............................................................... 53 4.9 Landfills, geo-environmental Issues and possible contamination Issues .......................................... 53 4.10 Natural Cavities .................................................... 55 4.11 Unexploded ordnance ......................................... 55 4.12 Earthworks Instability .......................................... 55 4.13 Environmental Considerations ........................... 56 M4 J3-12 MM-ALR PRELIMINARY SOURCES STUDY REPORT 514451-MUH-00-ZZ-RP-GE-200005 June 2013 3 Highways Agency — M4 J3-12 MM-ALR 5 GROUND CONDITIONS ........................................ 59 5.1 Introduction .......................................................... 59 5.2 Section 1 ............................................................... 59 5.2.1 Made Ground ........................................................ 59 5.2.2 Superficial deposits ............................................. 59 5.2.3 Bedrock ................................................................ 60 5.2.4 Groundwater ......................................................... 61 5.2.5 Summary of predicted engineering properties .. 61 5.3 Section 2 ............................................................... 61 5.3.1 Made Ground ........................................................ 62 5.3.2 Superficial deposits ............................................. 62 5.3.3 Bedrock ................................................................ 63 5.3.4 Groundwater ......................................................... 64 5.3.5 Summary of predicted engineering properties .. 65 5.4 Section 3 ............................................................... 65 5.4.1 Made Ground ........................................................ 65 5.4.2 Superficial deposits ............................................. 66 5.4.3 Bedrock ................................................................ 67 5.4.4 Groundwater
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Local Flood Risk Management Strategy
    Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Published in December 2014 RBWM Local Flood Risk Management Strategy December 2014 2 RBWM Local Flood Risk Management Strategy December 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................8 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................8 1.1 The Purpose of the Strategy ...........................................................................................8 1.2 Overview of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead ................................................9 1.3 Types of flooding ....................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Who is this Strategy aimed at? .....................................................................................12 1.5 The period covered by the Strategy ...............................................................................12 1.6 The Objectives of the Strategy ......................................................................................12 1.7 Scrutiny and Review ...................................................................................................13 2 Legislative Context ..........................................................................................................14 2.1 The Pitt Review .........................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • 15 Road Drainage and the Water Environment
    HIGHWAYS AGENCY – M4 JUNCTIONS 3 TO 12 SMART MOTORWAY 15 ROAD DRAINAGE AND THE WATER ENVIRONMENT 15.1 Introduction 15.1.1 This chapter assesses the impacts of the Scheme on road drainage and the water environment during construction and operation, focussing on the effects of highway drainage on the quality and hydrology of receiving waters. In view of the long design-life of the Scheme (30 years for new gantries, 40 years for new carriageway construction, and 120 years for new bridges), the decommissioning phase of the Scheme has not been considered in this chapter because its effects are not predicted to be worse than the effects assessed during the construction and operational phases. The chapter assesses four principal impacts: a) effects of routine runoff on surface water bodies; b) effects of routine runoff on groundwater; c) pollution impacts from spillages; and d) flood impacts. 15.1.2 Although Interim Advice Note (”IAN”) 161/13 ‘Managed Motorways, All lane running’ (Ref 15-1) has scoped out the assessment of ‘Road Drainage and the Water Environment’ for smart motorway schemes, the assessment is required to ensure the protection of the water environment, to prevent its degradation, and ensure adequate mitigation measures are in place to prevent any adverse impacts. 15.1.3 The road drainage and water environment assessment for the Scheme has been undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice and statutory guidance. 15.1.4 This chapter details the methodology followed for the assessment, and summarises the regulatory and policy framework relating to road drainage and the water environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
    Contents 1.0 FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT 1.1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 1.2 Winter 2012 Floods 1.2.1 Maidenhead Windsor and Eton FAS 1.2.2 Temporary defences in Windsor 1.2.3 Old Windsor 1.2.4 Datchet 1.2.5 Wraysbury 1.3 Recovery Projects 1.3.1 Taplow Washout 1.3.2 Cookham and North Maidenhead Flood Wall Repairs 1.3.3 Black Potts Washout 1.3.4 Eton End School Bund, Datchet 1.3.5 Bund Removal, Datchet 1.4 Community Engagement 1.4.1 Cookham Parish 1.4.2 Bisham Flood Alleviation Scheme 1.4.3 Datchet 1.4.4 Wraysbury 1.4.5 Ham Island 1.4.6 River Level Data and ‘Parishes Live’ 1.4.7 Environment Agency.Gov Website Live 1.5 Insurance Related Information 1.6 River Maintenance 1.7 River Bed levels surveys 1.8 Flooded Land at Little Common Farm, Eton Wick 1.9 Flood and Water Management Act 2.0 PLANNING 2.1 Planning Charge 2.2 Maidenhead Waterways Restoration and Town Centre Regeneration 2.3 Travellers Site - Datchet 2.4 Bray Road Maidenhead – proposed school 2.5 RBWM Borough Local Plan 2014 Preferred options consultation 2.6 Position Statement for replacement dwellings 3.0 WASTE 3.1 Brayfield Farm 3.2 Horton Brook Quarry – Colnbrook 4.0 HYDROPOWER 5.0 WATERWAYS 5.1 Speed and Wash campaign 5.2 Waterways Volunteers 5.3 Magna Carta Celebrations 6.0 WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE 7.0 WATER RESOURCES 1 OFFICIAL 1.0 FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT 1.1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment We recently met to discuss the River Thames Scheme (Datchet to Teddington), which is included in the Royal Borough’s SFRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Loddon Catchment Implementation Plan
    Loddon Catchment Implementation Plan January 2012 – FOR COMMMENT (Version C2) Glossary.....................................................................................................................3 1 Introduction...................................................................................................6 2 Loddon catchment summary.......................................................................9 2.1 General Description .....................................................................................9 2.2 Catchment map........................................................................................... 10 3 Water body information ............................................................................. 11 3.1 Classification.................................................................................................. 11 3.2 Heavily Modified Water Bodies..................................................................... 11 4 Actions ........................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Operational monitoring (2010-12) ............................................................. 12 4.2 Investigations (2010-12)............................................................................. 12 4.3 Improvement actions (in place by 2012)................................................... 12 4.3.1 ‘Day Job’ activities.............................................................................................. 13 4.3.2 Field actions ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Scenarios Report – Grazeley, Twyford/Ruscombe and Barkham
    WOKINGHAM STRATEGIC GROWTH LOCATIONS Growth Scenarios Report - Grazeley, Twyford/Ruscombe and Barkham Square Prepared on behalf of WBC & WBDC By David Lock Associates & Peter Brett Associates June 2018 Wokingham Strategic Framework : Growth Scenarios Report Prepared on behalf of WBC & WBDC : By David Lock Associates & Peter Brett Associates : June 2018 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 Summary of key considerations 30 Growth Scenario 1: 15,000 Homes 34 1.0 INTRODUCTION 6 Concept Plan 34 Purpose of the Strategic Framework Access & Movement 36 Commission 6 Infrastructure requirements 37 Relationship to Green Belt and agricultural Growth Scenario 2: 10,000 Homes 40 land quality 6 Concept Plan 40 Study Brief and Scope 7 Access & Movement 42 Role and Structure of this Report 8 Infrastructure requirements 42 2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY 10 Alternative 10,000 Home Growth Scenario 43 Growth Scenario 3: 5,000 Homes 44 Stage 1 Project Set-up and Baseline Concept Plan 46 Assessments 10 Access & Movement 46 Site Environmental Studies 10 Infrastructure requirements 46 Baseline Viability 10 Stage 2 Generating Growth Scenarios 10 5.0 BARKHAM SQUARE 48 Technical Workshops 10 Background and Analysis 48 Green and Blue 10 Site Environmental Studies: Summary Transport and Environmental Health 11 Findings 48 Community Wellbeing 11 Flooding & Drainage 48 Utilities 12 Transport & Highways 48 Community Workshops 12 Air Quality 48 Next Stages 13 Noise and Vibration 48 3.0 BASELINE VIABILITY 14 Geotechnical 49 Waste 50 Commercial Property Market 14 Agricultural Land 50 Residential
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 70
    Registered Charity No : 1075175 Issue 70 WYCOMBE Contents and Chairman’s chat 2 SOUTH BUCKS New members E-mail version of newsletter 3 Burnham Beeches walk Above: Jay, seen regularly in members’ gardens W Life in ponds and streams 4 recently (see page 12) Below: Ash - will it survive Fungus walk at Holtspur Bank 5 ash dieback? (see page11) NI The Honey Bee and its relations 6 Recommended bee plants 7 L Successful day with Earthworks 8 EReviving the Wye 9 D Other Revive the Wye news 10 Ash dieback 11 L Member comments W COPY DATE FOR THE Wildlife observations 12 NEXT ISSUE I Contact and membership details Friday 5th April 2013 Wycombe Wildlife Newsis published 3 times a year to promote the S Group and wildlife issues and inform members and the public of its F activities. Produced by: Roger Wilding Photographs:Earthworks (Gomm’s Wood), Penny Cullington (fungi) and Roger Wilding (others) E Drawings: Frances Wilding Printed by : Design & Print, Wycombe District Council. Views expressed in this newsletter are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Group. For the purposes of management of the Group, membership information is held on computer. JANUARY 2013 Chairman’s Chat n the last issue of our newsletter, I referred to the advice I had received that if I couldn’t Ithink of anything else to say, I could always rely on the weather as a talking point. On this occasion, so much is happening that I don’t have time to even think about the weather. First of all, we have been debating the rising costs of posting our newsletter to members to whom we cannot deliver by hand, and we have been experimenting with other methods of distribution, as well as reviewing some of the hand delivery rounds.
    [Show full text]
  • MILL LANE, TAPLOW Otter Survey and River Corridor Survey (RCS) Report
    MILL LANE, TAPLOW Otter Survey and River Corridor Survey (RCS) Report 20/08/2014 Quality Management Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Remarks Final for Comment FINAL – updated figures and camera survey dates Date 20th June 2014 20th August 2014 Prepared by S Foot and E S Foot and E Austin Austin Signature Checked by H Spray H Spray Signature Authorised by T Selwyn T Selwyn Signature Project number 62002667 62002667 Report number File reference Project number: 62002667 Dated: 20/08/2014 2 Revised: Mill Lane, Taplow Otter Survey and River Corridor Survey (RCS) Report 20/08/2014 Client Berkeley Homes (Three Valleys) Ltd Berkeley House Farnham Lane Farnham Royal SL2 3RQ Consultant WSP UK Ltd Mountbatten House Basingstoke RG21 4HJ UK Tel: +44 (0)12 5631 8617 Fax: +44 1256 318 700 www.wspgroup.co.uk Registered Address WSP UK Limited 01383511 WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF WSP Contacts Karen McAllister 3 Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary ............................................................... 5 2 Introduction ............................................................................ 6 2.1 Project Background ............................................................... 6 2.2 Ecological Background .......................................................... 7 2.3 Brief and Objectives............................................................... 8 3 Methods ................................................................................. 8 3.1 Otter Survey .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Impact Anaysis for the Lower Thames Flood Strategy Study
    PROCEEDINGS of the Eighth Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference (8thFISC), April2-6, 2006, Reno, NV, USA SEDIMENT IMPACT ANAYSIS FOR THE LOWER THAMES FLOOD STRATEGY STUDY Ian M Tomes, SE Area Flood Risk Manager, Environment Agency (Thames Region), Frimley, Surrey, UK, [email protected]; Oliver P. Harmar, Consultant Geomorphologist, Halcrow Group, Leeds, UK, [email protected]; Colin R. Thorne, Professor of Physical Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK, [email protected], INTRODUCTION Sediment impact assessment was performed during the Lower Thames Flood Strategy Study to assess the geomorphological sustainability of river-bed re-profiling to reduce flood risk in the reach between Datchet and Teddington. The specific objectives of the sediment study were to: i. estimate how much sediment is likely to be deposited in, or eroded from, the study reach by flows up to and including long return interval flood events for ‘do minimum’ and ‘bed reprofiling’ options that would lower the bed by 0.5 to 1 m; ii. estimate an average annual rate of sedimentation for the ‘do minimum’ and ‘bed reprofiling’ options. MORPHOLOGY OF THE RIVER THAMES The study reach of the River Thames has the characteristics of a mature, lowland river with well developed meanders and reaches divided by stable, mid-channel islands. The movement of water and sediment along the river has been controlled by locks and weirs for over a century. These structures present obstructions to the natural movement of sediment and dredging was, historically, required to maintain a navigable channel. The banks along much of the navigable river have been stabilised by revetment and, therefore, the river is unable to adjust its planform.
    [Show full text]
  • Paranoia on the Nile
    The politics of flood insecurity Framing contested river management projects Jeroen F. Warner Promotoren: Prof. Dr. Ir. D.J.M. Hilhorst Hoogleraar Humanitaire Hulp en Wederopbouw Prof. Dr. Ir. C. Leeuwis Hoogleraar Communicatie en Innovatie Studies Promotiecommissie Prof. Dr. J.A. Allan King‟s College, London Prof. Dr. H.J.M. Goverde Wageningen Universiteit / Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen Prof. Dr. Mr. B.J.M. van der Meulen Wageningen Universiteit Prof. Dr. J.H. de Wilde Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Dit onderzoek is uitgevoerd binnen de onderzoeksschool CERES – Research School for Resource Studies for Development. The politics of flood insecurity Framing contested river management projects Jeroen F. Warner Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor op gezag van de rector magnificus van Wageningen Universiteit, prof. dr. M.J. Kropff, in het openbaar te verdedigen op dinsdag 18 maart 2008 des namiddags om 16.00 uur in de Aula. Jeroen F. Warner The politics of flood insecurity Framing contested river management projects ISBN 978-80-8504-897-8 Table of Contents List of Figures, Tables and Boxes List of Abbreviations 1. Introduction: The politics of floods and fear 1 2. Midnight at Noon? The dispute over Toshka, Egypt 31 3. Resisting the Turkish pax aquarum? The Ilısu Dam dispute as a multi-level struggle 57 4. Turkey and Egypt – tales of war, peace and hegemony 83 5. Death of the mega-projects? The controversy over Flood Action Plan 20, Bangladesh 111 6. The Maaswerken project: Fixing a hole? 145 7. Public Participation in emergency flood storage in the Ooij polder – a bridge too far? 173 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Organising REMS Visits
    Guidelines for organising REMS visits 1. Look at the previous visit lists, which are printed below, both for ideas and to check that your suggested visit hasn’t been done within the last year. 2. Discuss your proposal with the Events Coordinator and agree a provisional date. 3. Sort out the visit logistics. 4. Create a draft flyer using the standard form, which the Events Coordinator will send you. 5. Include in the flyer the following points: a. Meeting point and start time suggestions i. try to avoid rush hour travel; ii. if possible, find a place to meet half an hour before the start for coffee and toilets; iii. if possible, don’t start the actual visit before 11 am in London; b. Description of the visit and any constraints (e.g. lots of walking, steep ascents, stairs, etc.); c. Host point of contact, if appropriate; d. Recommended travel arrangements, possibility of public transport and meeting at station; e. Instructions for late comers to join the visit; f. Lunch arrangements, if morning and afternoon visit; g. Toilet facilities during the visit; h. Cost and any limit on numbers; i. Request any information required from attendees (e.g. security arrangements, lunch booking, menu choice, etc.) 6. Make a provisional booking (REMS will pay for any deposit). 7. Tell the Events Coordinator whether the host needs paying prior to the visit or on the day and agree how REMS will pay for this cost. 8. The Events Coordinator will send the organiser a list of attendees at least a week before the visit and inform of any cancellations after that.
    [Show full text]
  • Wokingham Borough Landscape Character Assessment
    H Wokingham Borough Landscape Character Assessment Prepared by LUC for Wokingham Borough Council November 2019 Project Title: Wokingham Borough Landscape Character Assessment Client: Wokingham Borough Council Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1 30.10.18 Draft Report Alice Knight Katrina Davies Kate Ahern Katrina Davies 2 04.03.19 Draft Report for consultation Alice Knight Katrina Davies Kate Ahern Katrina Davies 3 19.03.19 Final draft for consultation Alice Knight Katrina Davies Katrina Davies 4 25.11.19 Final Report Alice Knight Katrina Davies Katrina Davies Wokingham Borough Landscape Character Assessment Last saved: 26/11/2019 16:43 Wokingham Borough Landscape Character Assessment Prepared by LUC for Wokingham Borough Council November 2019 Planning & EIA LUC LONDON Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 250 Waterloo Road Bristol Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning London Edinburgh Registered Office: Landscape Management SE1 8RD Glasgow 43 Chalton Street Ecology T +44 (0)20 7383 5784 Lancaster London NW1 1JD GIS & Visualisation [email protected] Manchester FS 566056 EMS 566057 LUC uses 100% recycled paper Contents Introduction 1 Context 1 The purpose of Landscape Character Assessment 4 Policy Context 5 Relationship to Published Landscape Studies 5 Background of the Wokingham Landscape Character Assessment 6 Summary of Method 6 Structure of this report 8 The Landscape of Wokingham Borough 9 Introduction 9 Physical Influences 9 Cultural Influences 23 Perceptual
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 3 the Stakeholder Workshop
    Appendix 3 The Stakeholder Workshop Land Use Consultants Wycombe, South Bucks and Chiltern District Landscape Character Assessment Stakeholder Workshop Report Prepared for Buckinghamshire County Council by Land Use Consultants February 2011 www.landuse.co.uk LUC SERVICES Environmental Planning Landscape Design Landscape Management Masterplanning Landscape Planning Ecology Environmental Assessment Rural Futures Digital Design Urban Regeneration Urban Design 43 Chalton Street 37 Otago Street London NW1 1JD Glasgow G1 (15.1)2 8JJ Tel: 020 7383 5784 Tel: 0141 334 9595 Fax: 020 7383 4798 Fax: 0141 334 7789 [email protected] [email protected] 14 Great George Street 28 Stafford Street Bristol BS1 5RH Edinburgh EH3 (16.1) 7BD Tel: 0117 929 1997 Tel: 0131 202 1616 Fax: 0117 929 1998 [email protected] [email protected] DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET Version Issued by: Approved by: Final Kate Milner Kate Ahern Landscape Architect Principal-in-Charge 16/14/11 16/14/11 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 EXERCISE 1: WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT THE WYCOMBE, SOUTH BUCKS AND CHILTERN LANDSCAPE AND WHY? 3 3 EXERCISE 2: TESTING THE CHARACTER MAPS AND DESCRIPTIONS 21 4 EVALUATION AND NEXT STEPS 43 i i 1 Introduction 1.1 Buckinghamshire County Council and Wycombe, South Bucks and Chiltern District Councils are currently working with Land Use Consultants to complete a Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) for Buckinghamshire. This study will tie in with existing Aylesbury Vale Landscape Character Assessment to provide a complete assessment for the County. The results of the study will help to guide future landscape management and planning decisions.
    [Show full text]