Masterplan Study

BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN

BLYTH LINKS

MASTERPLAN STUDY

VOLUME 2 : APPENDIX MARCH 2005

1 2 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Contents

Local Community Groups Friends of the Links – Avril Bell Blyth Local Historical Society – Carol Trinder Blyth Allotment Association – Mr. Allen Blyth Arts & Community Association Blyth Community College – Mrs. P Armstrong Blyth Valley Disabled Forum – R J Simmons Royal Northumberland Yacht Club Silx – Mr Chris Antony The Point – Ritchie Haigh South Beach Residents Association

Adjacent Landowners Links Farm Chip Shop and Bungalow Car Dealership Mr. Barry Elliott Mrs. Hazelhurst

Local Schools and Colleges Wensleydale County Middle School – Mrs. P Kidd South Beach First School – Mrs Chubbs

Other Interested Parties Local Councillors Port of Blyth Blyth Lifeguards Blyth Coastal Warden Greening for Growth – Anna Decker Cassella – Chris Davis REALL (Renewable Energy at Local Level) – Mervyn Antony South East Northumberland Public Art Initiative – Richard Hollingshead

3 4 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 1.0 : List of Consultees

Adjacent Landowners Links Farm Chip Shop and Bungalow Car Dealership Mr. Barry Elliott Mrs. Hazelhurst

Local Schools and Colleges Wensleydale County Middle School – Mrs. P Kidd South Beach First School – Mrs Chubbs

5 6 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 2.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Questionnaire

          

                                                   

                                      

         

           

    

        

       

       

         

        

         

             

                

   

        

                

7 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 2.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Questionnaire

        

        

           

   

                        



            

         

          

           

                                                                                     

            

8 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments bandstand to be retained in its existing location and restored 16% would like it removed • 122 people ﬁlled in questionnaires altogether, and 19% moved to another location • 43% aged 36 –55 8% under 18 and restored. 27% 56 –65 • 89% thought pedestrian access to the links was • 52% from Blyth 29% Northumberland excellent or good facility (25% excellent) rest out of area • 76% thought that the Gateways were good or • 77% visited at least weekly, of those 32% excellent (17% excellent) visited daily • People thought the buildings were excellent • visit morning/afternoon/evenings in more 4%, good 34%, poor 51%, very poor 12% or less equal numbers, slightly fewer in the • Over two thirds of those interviewed thought evenings the planting was poor • a third visit during weekdays, more (40%) • Half thought the prom was good or excellent, visit weekends (rest didn’t answer) half poor or very poor (Make of that what you • Most popular reasons for visiting were will!) Exercise (47%), Dog walking (34%), • 85% found access to the beach adequate, and recreation (30%), and children’s play (20%) 80% rated the children’s play facility good or • 25% found their visit very enjoyable, 63% excellent enjoyable, 14% uplifting, only 4% found • People found it hard to relate to any other it unsafe, 2% unpleasant and a further 2% recreation areas, with 20% not knowing what threatening. else was available. Of the rest half thought • Other things listed were listed by only one them good and half poor person each time, were – bad for children, • Only one third thought that the lighting was beach, could be better, cycles, dogs, drunks, adequate. good meals at café, fun, polluted, not mush • Half and half again on whether or not seats to do, relaxing, rubbish on beach, generally and litter bin provision was adequate, and unkempt personal safety. • 86% of people arrive by private vehicle, 2% • Overall 70% thought the quality of the by public transport and 12 % by foot facilities good or excellent, Only 1% thought • The vast majority of people thought there was the were very poor adequate parking (91%) • What new facilities people would like to see • Attached list of how they would like to see are also attached. buildings utilised (lots of these can be grouped together as similar responses) • The majority of people (64%) would prefer the

9 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

10 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

11 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

12 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

13 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

 14 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Additional Questionnaire Comments

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

15  BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

 Frequency of Responses                                            

   

                                    

      

                                                                                    

16 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                                                                                                                                                                                                                

17 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                                                          

      

                                      

       

                  

       

                           

18 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses        

                           

      

                          

                  

              

                  

              

                                

19 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                

                  

               

                  

              

                  

              

                  

               

                  

20 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses   

                                                                                                                                                       

         

                  

        

           

21 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses       

        

                  

        

                  

        

                  

        

        

                  

        

           

22 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses

      

 

                                                                                                                                              

23 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses        

                                   

          

                           

        

                                                          

                               

24 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                       

                       

                                                                                                                                                         

25 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

  Frequency of Responses                                  

                 

                                                                                                                               

26 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                                        

           

                                               

               

                                      

              

                

27 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                      

           

                                      

           

                                      

           

                                      

              

                

28 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                

             

                                      

             

                                      

           

                                      

             

                     

29 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                 

            

                                      

           

                                      

           

                                                                           

30 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                                                                                                                                                                                           

             

31 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

32 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 3.0 : Consultation Event 1 - Responses

Frequency of Responses          

33 34 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 4.0 : Consultation Event 2 - Questionnaire

Blyth Links Masterplan Second Public Consultation event – Monday 11th/Tuesday 12th October 2004 –Questionnaire

1. Which is your preferred option – option 01/option 02? (Please circle)

2. Are there aspects of both schemes which you prefer – if so, which? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………… ……………………………………………………………………….

3. Is there a need for a bandstand within the links areas – yes/no? (please circle)

4. Would you prefer to see money spent on upgrading the old bandstand or put towards creating a new facility – old bandstand/new facility? (please circle)

5. Where would the toilet block/changing facilities be best situated?......

6. Is there sufﬁcient car parking to support visitors to the links – yes/no? (please circle)

35 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 4.0 : Consultation Event 2 - Questionnaire

7. Is there the need for improved retail/leisure/shop facilities within this area of the links – yes/no? (please circle)

8. Would the extension of the links landscape to the west of Links Road provide a positive enhancement to the southern entrance into Blyth – yes/no? (please circle)

9. What facilities would you like to see within the public open spaces – (please circle)

. Seating

. Lighting

. Play areas

. Shelter

36 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 5.0 : Consultation Event 2 - Responses

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

        

   

     

37 38 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

Blyth Links Masterplan Preliminary ecological impact assessment of plan proposals

Kevin Honour MSc MIEEM Argus Ecological Services Ltd.

Report for Insite Environments

10th December 2004

39 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

Blyth Links Masterplan Preliminary ecological impact assessment of plan proposals Contents Page 1 Introduction 3 2 Summary of existing ecological data 4 3 Identiﬁcation of valued ecological receptors 6 4 Potential ecological impacts 11 5 Conclusions and recommendations 14 6 References 15

40 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

1 Introduction This report provides a preliminary assessment of the potential ecological impacts associated with proposed improvement works at Blyth Links. It aims to identify key features of biodiversity interest (‘valued ecological receptors’), and assess the risk of signiﬁcant impacts upon these features as a consequence of the proposed development. Existing ecological data utilised in the impact assessment is ﬁrst summarised, and utilised in an assessment of valued ecological receptors in the vicinity of the proposed development. The impact assessment is based on the outline landscape design contained in the Masterp- lan, and includes consideration of direct and indirect impacts. The evaluation and impact assessment methodology is based upon current Institute of Ecology and Environmental Man- agement (IEEM) guidelines (IEEM, 2002). Finally, recommendations are made for any further ecological assessment works that may be necessary to accompany a planning application, and for any mitigation works that may be necessary as a consequence of the development proposals.

41 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

2 Summary of existing ecological data mal traps, and detection of field evidence of other species; A number of data sources were reviewed in the • A moth survey of the sand dune system in preparation of this document, including: July 2004 using light trapping, and collation • Descriptions of European and UK desig- of other entomological observations; and nated conservation sites (Ramsar site, Special • A plant survey of the Seaton Sluice to Protection Area (SPA), Site of Special Scien- South Beach area on 2 dates in September tific Interest (SSSI) available from Joint Nature – October 2003, with a comparison of five Conservation Committee (JNCC) and English previous surveys dating from 1932/34 to Nature sources; 1996. • File information obtained from Blyth Valley Council, including: • An undated description of the interest features and conservation issues of South Beach and Blyth Links; • A brief extract from a 1991 published environmental appraisal of the NE coast, with a comparative assessment of 20 Northumber- land sand dune sites, including Blyth Links; • A handwritten description of snail species (Cepaea spp.) on the Northumberland coast; • A Nature Conservation Dunes Project 1992 document, outlining a schedule of dune restoration works; • Descriptions and plant species lists for 3 sections of dunes from Blyth to Seaton Sluice, from survey work undertaken in 1982; • An undated Blyth to Seaton Sluice Dunes Management Plan, reviewing the interest features and proposing a range of management works; and • A survey of dunes from Seaton Sluice to Blyth looking at the effects of trampling upon the dune flora and fauna, carried out by Steve Lowe of Northumberland Wildlife Trust in June 1991. • Recent survey information compiled by Susan Gebbels of Dove Marine Laboratory, including: • Blyth Community Bird Surveys, which include the Seaton Sluice to Blyth sand dune system and foreshore areas, with data included for August 2004; • Mammal survey of the Blyth sand dune system, using Longworth live small mam-

42 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

3 Identification of valued ecological Other features of the site and its surroundings and are also designated as a SSSI; the SSSI receptors are assessed, then evaluated according to their boundaries also include a more extensive area geographical scale of importance, from interna- of coastline. 3.1 Approach to evaluation tional to local (parish-level) importance. The published overview of Northumbria Coast The approach to the valuation of ecological re- 3.2 Protected species SPA describes the site as follows: sources that may be impacted by the development broadly follows currently evolving guide- No legally protected species are listed in any of The Northumbria Coast SPA includes much of the coast- lines being developed by Institute of Ecology the reviewed records for the site and its sur- line between the Tweed and Tees Estuaries in north-east and Environmental Management (IEEM, 2002). roundings. England. The site consists of mainly discrete sections of This splits the function of evaluation within the A number of species listed in Annex 1 of the rocky shore with associated boulder and cobble beaches. ecological assessment process into two catego- European Union Birds Directive (EC 79/409) as The SPA also includes parts of three artificial pier struc- ries: occurring on the Northumbria Coast SPA may tures and a small section of sandy beach. In summer, the occur from time to time in the vicinity of the site. site supports important numbers of breeding Little Tern 1. Demonstration that a proposed develop- These principally include golden plover (Plu- Sterna albifrons, whilst in winter the mixture of rocky and ment will meet the legal requirements relat- vialis apricaria) and Arctic tern (Sterna paradis- sandy shore supports large number of Turnstone Are- ing to species; i.e. the law will not be contra- aea). naria interpres and Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima. vened in relation to protected species. 2. Determining the significance of impacts 3.3 Statutory designated sites (data from JNCC, 2001) affected valued species and habitats; in this category protected species, protected habi- The nearest statutory designated sites are as The features of European ornithological impor- tats, and other species and habitats need to follows: tance of the SPA are defined in the site citation be valued. (JNCC, 2001) as follows: Table 3.1: Statutory designated sites Protected species known or likely to occur on or near to the site are therefore considered first; This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive the impact assessment then determines wheth- (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European er the proposed development will avoid contra- importance of the following species listed on Annex I of vention of legislation in respect of their protec- the Directive: tion. Designated sites are then described, as these have a known value that has already During the breeding season; been assessed by statutory or local agencies. The contribution of the proposed development Little Tern Sterna albifrons, 40 pairs representing at area to maintaining their features of special least 1.7% of the breeding population in Great Britain (5 interest is assessed, while the subsequent year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6) impact assessment will determine whether the This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive proposed development is likely to cause any (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European adverse impacts on those features. Ramsar sites are internationally important wet- importance of the following migratory species: The contribution of the study area to fulfilling lands; Special Protection Areas are of European wider objectives for conservation of biological importance for birds, designated under directive Over winter; diversity is assessed by considering the occur- EC 79/409 on the Conservation of Wild Birds. rence of species and habitats listed under Sec- SSSIs are sites of national importance, and are Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima, 763 individuals tion 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way designated under the 1981 Wildlife and Coun- representing at least 1.5% of the wintering Eastern At- Act, and the occurrence of priority species and tryside Act, with additional protection conferred lantic - wintering population (5 year peak mean 1991/2 key habitats in the UK and local Biodiversity under the 2000 Countryside and Rights of Way - 1995/6) Action Plans. Act. The Ramsar site and SPA are contiguous, Turnstone Arenaria interpres, 1,456 individuals

43 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

representing at least 2.1% of the wintering Western accordance with the 1992 UN Convention on rare in Northumberland (Ellis & Bourn, 2000). Palearctic - wintering population (5 year peak mean Biological Diversity. A list has been published of Plants 1991/2 - 1995/6) habitats and species considered to be of princi- • Sea bindweed (Calystegia soldanella) – re- pal importance for the conservation of biological gional interest, confined to a few coastal sites The Northumberland Shore SSSI includes diversity in England. The government has a in north-east England, rare in Northumberland most of the coastline between the Scottish duty under Section 74 to take or promote the (Swan, 1993); border and the Tyne Estuary. As well as the taking by others of steps to further the conser- • Sand Lucerne (Medicago sativa ssp varia) internationally important populations of purple vation of the listed habitats and species. – local interest, introduced plant, but sub-spe- sandpiper and turnstone, it supports nationally The list is based on, but not equivalent to, Prior- cies rare and characteristic of coastal sites; important numbers of sanderling (Calidris alba), ity Species and Habitats in the UK Biodiversity • Swine-cress (Coronopus squamatus) – re- ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula), redshank Action Plan (UK Steering Group, 1995; UK gional interest, scarce north of Yorkshire and (Tringa totanus) and golden plover (Pluvialis Biodiversity Group, 1999). confined to coastal sites, rare in region (Swan, apricaria). Blyth South Beach is named in the The following ‘section 74’ habitat occurs adja- 1993). SSSI citation as being important for sanderling cent to the site: and ringed plover, while golden plover may • Coastal sand dunes. 3.7 Summary of valued ecological utilise adjacent areas of coastal grassland. The following ‘section 74’ species have been receptors recorded in the vicinity of the site: 3.4 Non-statutory designated sites • Skylark (Alauda arvensis); The valuation of ecological receptors provided • Linnet (Carduelis cannabina). below uses current IEEM guidance (IEEM, South Beach and Blyth Links is part of the It is possible that, given greater survey effort, 2002; table in box 3.3), and is based on the Seaton Sluice Dunes SNCI (Site of Nature Con- other priority bird species may be recorded on preceding identification of features of nature servation Importance). The quality of SNCIs the site, with reed bunting (Emberiza shoeni- conservation interest. are evaluated by Northumberland Wildlife Trust, clus) and grey partridge (Perdix perdix) the and they receive some protection from develop- most likely. All of these species are relatively Table 3.2: Valued ecological receptors ment through local planning policies. common and widespread, but have suffered The key interest feature is the sand dune habi- significant population declines, leading to their tat; the northern dunes, nearest the site, are current priority status. They are therefore of no described as having many patches of very rich more than local interest. flora scattered amongst paths and car parks, The Northumberland Biodiversity Action Plan with species such as bloody crane’s-bill (Ge- (Feige (ed.), 2000) lists the following key habi- ranium sanguineum) and lyme grass (Leymus tats found in the vicinity of the site: arenarius). The southern dunes, south of • Intertidal habitats and Shingle Beaches; Gloucester Lodge, are described as being par- • Sand Dune. ticularly rich, with regionally rare species such as sea bindweed (Calystegia soldanella). 3.6 Other valued ecological receptors Moths and butterflies are also listed as interest features, including the flame (Axylia putris), Previous biological surveys have recorded a Portland (Ochropleura praecox) and lyme grass number of additional species that are of region- moths (Chortodes (=Photedes) elymi). al or local conservation interest. These include the following: 3.5 Section 74 / Biodiversity Action Plan Invertebrates habitats and species • Lyme grass moth (Chortodes elymi) – regional interest, confined to coast where food Section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of plant (lyme grass, Leymus arenarius) occurs; Way Act 2000 places an obligation on the • Dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages) government to conserve biological diversity in – regional interest, medium priority in region,

44 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

4 Potential ecological impacts the development. Table 4.1: Assessment of impact significance With respect to possible impacts on species, it 4.1 Direct impacts is understood that dingy skipper butterfly, sea bindweed and swine cress populations are As the proposed development footprint does all located in the southern part of the dunes, not encroach either on the foreshore to the and are unlikely to be affected by the current east, or the sand dune habitats to the south, proposals. there is little risk of any direct impacts. Lyme grass moth may conceivably be affected Habitats which will be affected comprise amen- by dune erosion impacting on lyme grass ity grassland of low conservation interest, and populations, although such effects are typically existing built areas. localised. As a dune building species, lyme grass is typically rare or absent in established, 4.2 Indirect impacts undisturbed dune grassland communities, so small scale disturbance may be beneficial. A number of indirect impacts can be postulated on habitats in the vicinity of the site. 4.3 Cumulative impacts Construction works may impinge on adjacent habitats, either through a need to site temporary The impact of increasing visitor numbers and There is some level of uncertainty about the access routes or facilities for storage of plant usage of the site may is likely to act cumulative- level of risk or degree of magnitude of indirect and materials. There is also a risk of off-site ly with existing visitor pressure. It is understood impacts on valued receptors. A ‘worst-case’ as- impacts through accidental spillage of stored that the dune system is already under some sessment of impact significance is provided in materials, including vehicle fuel and oil, onto pressure from a high level of visitor use, which the table overleaf. adjacent sites, including the foreshore SSSI. has necessitated remedial measures to combat When the improvement works are complete, dune erosion. there is the possibility of a net increase in visitors to this section of the coast. Greater public 4.4 Impact significance usage of the northern area of Blyth Links would not create an additional impact on sensitive re- The significance of ecological impacts is a ceptors. Impacts are possible on adjacent habi- product of the magnitude of the impact and the tats, however; greater use of the dunes would sensitivity of the receiving environment (i.e. the result in an increase in trampling pressure and importance of valued ecological receptors). subsequent risk of erosion, while greater use The following decision rules given in IEEM of South Beach (particularly in autumn and (2003) guidelines provide some guidance in as- winter) would increase disturbance impacts on sessing impact significance: birds utilising sandy foreshore habitats. These potential impacts need to be balanced against any displacement of existing visitors from more sensitive habitats further south as a result of the construction of more attractive facilities at Blyth Links. The magnitude of any such impacts is likely to be low, although further data on projected visitor numbers would be useful to confirm this. No indirect impacts are likely on the rocky foreshore habitats that form part of the Ramsar site and SPA, located as they are over 0.5km from

45 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

Table 4.2: Preliminary assessment of impact signiﬁcance

46 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

5 Conclusions and recommendations tion, it is recommended that projected increases in visitor numbers are quantified, including The development area is located adjacent to any likely displacement from other sites in the sites of national importance (South Beach, part Blyth – Seaton Sluice section of coast. The of Northumberland Coast SSSI) and County im- magnitude of any impact can then be better as- portance (Seaton Sluice Dunes SNCI). There sessed, and any additional visitor management are also a number of species of invertebrate measures (if necessary) can be formulated. and plant that are of regional conservation interest, as well as more widespread but declining species listed under section 74 of the 2000 Countryside and Rights of Way Act. Based on available data, there are no issues with regard to species protected under UK or European legislation. The preliminary impact assessment has con- firmed that the proposed development footprint avoids any valued ecological receptors, and there are no over-riding ecological constraints that should impact on the proposed design. There is a potential for indirect impacts, both during the construction phase of the development, and as a consequence of increased visitor pressure on sensitive habitats. Construction phase impacts may be avoided by delineation of sensitive areas, ensuring, for example, that contractors are instructed not to utilise dune grassland areas for storage of plant or materials, or for disposal of any waste materials. Measures to prevent inadvertent pollution of adjacent habitats, including the foreshore, should also be put in place. If the development is successful in attracting significantly increased visitors, additional measures may be necessary to prevent impacts on the adjacent dunes. These may include visitor management through provision of fencing and boardwalks, and / or additional dune rehabilita- tion measures as outlined in the Nature Conser- vation Dunes Project or Seaton Sluice Dunes Management Plan. Additional visitor pressure on the foreshore is more difficult to manage, but is only potentially significant when large numbers of shorebirds are using the beach in autumn and winter, when visitor numbers are lower. At the stage of submitting a planning applica- BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 6.0 : Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment

6 References Ellis, S. & Bourn, N, (2000). Butterﬂy Conserva- tion Regional Action Plan, North East England. Second Edition, Butterﬂy Conservation North East of England and Yorkshire Branches. Feige, D. (ed.) (2000). Working for Wildlife. The Northumberland Biodiversity Action Plan. North- umberland County Council / Northumberland Biodiversity Steering Group. IEEM (2002). Guidelines on Ecological Impact Assessment: Amended Pilot November 2002. Swan, G.A. (1993). Flora of Northumberland. Natural History Society of Northumbria. UK Biodiversity Group (1999). Tranche 2 Action Plans. English Nature UK Steering Group (1995). Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report. Volume 2: Action Plans. HMSO.

48 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

Archaeological Appraisal for Blyth Links, Northumberland

For Insite Environments 3.12.2004

49 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

Contents Summary Background

Sources Archaeological Evidence Prehistoric Potential 17-20th Century Archaeology Planning Policy Recommendations Bibliography

Acknowledgements

Summary This appraisal is a rapid reconnaissance of readily available archaeological information, designed to identify potential areas of archaeological interest at a proposed development site at South Beach, Blyth. It has identiﬁed archaeological remains within and adjacent to the development area dating to prehistoric times, the 17-19th centuries and military remains from both World Wars. It recommends that a desk top assessment is carried out which will seek to identify the extent of the archaeological remains, in particular the cropmark evidence which may date to the 19th century or First World War. Subject to the ﬁndings of the desktop assessment, a programme of pre-deter- mination evaluation is recommended in order to examine the extent, condition and form of the subterranean features. Once both these processes have been passed through, a programme of mitigation can be produced in consultation with the developer.

50 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

Background grateful thanks are acknowledged to Sara Rush- small denes or brooks, meet the sea. The develop- ton, Karen Derham and Liz Williams for passing on ment area at South Beach is some distance south This appraisal has been commissioned by Insite information obtained from aerial photography cu- of the river, reducing its archaeological potential. Environments on behalf of Blyth Valley Borough rated at County Hall and for discussing the recom- Coastal erosion also produces unexpected discov- Council. An appraisal is defined as being; mendations outlined below. No fieldwork has taken eries, often of prehistoric date, however this stretch place as part of this appraisal. of coastline has not been identified as an area “a rapid reconnaissance of sites and records to Archaeological Evidence of high erosion (Northumberland County Council identify whether a development proposal has a 1994, 24). Therefore the local archaeological po- potential archaeological dimension requiring further Within the development area a number of archaeo- tential for uncovering additional prehistoric remains clarification”. logical sites are already recorded on the County from this site during development is relatively low. Institute of Field Archaeologists. Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk- Sites and Monuments Record (www.keystothepast. A recent (August and September 2004) planning Based Assessments, undated, 10 and Association of County Archaeological Officers info), however none are recorded on the National application at the nearby Links House Garden 1993, 4 Monuments Record (www.pastscape.org). A review Caravan site was required to produce a desk top of these records would suggest that the develop- assessment, but concluded that the risk of identify- This appraisal explores the proposed regeneration ment area has some limited potential for uncov- ing further archaeological evidence was low and no development at Blyth Links, which seeks to create ering further remains from the prehistoric period requirement to produce an evaluation or mitigation a multi functional gateway to the town of Blyth for and a very high potential for uncovering remains was required (Karen Derham pers comm.). There- both local residents and visitors. relating to 19-20th century military archaeology. No fore in isolation, there seems little justification for archaeological sites from the intervening periods further archaeological work based on prehistoric have been identified as part of this appraisal. evidence alone. Sources 17th – 20th Century Archaeology A full list of secondary sources consulted as part of Prehistoric potential this appraisal is given in the bibliography. A variety A number of more recent archaeological sites are of on-line databases available through the Internet It is difficult to assess the risk of unexpected recorded within or close to the development area. were consulted. The County Sites and Monuments discovery of prehistoric remains, as to date, most The entrance to Links House Farm includes a Record (SMR) has been consulted through the finds have been found through accidental discov- gate pier (site C) of late 17th or early 18th century Northumberland and Durham County Councils’ ery and few have detailed locational information. date. The east pier was removed some years ago web site “Keys to the Past” and has been supple- Within the development area a Bronze Age axe to Wallington Hall. The one remaining pier is now mented with additional data provided by the Sites (site A) has been discovered and in the wider area a listed building. Given the date of the gate pier, and Monuments Records Officer and the County some distance to the north, the River Blyth has there is clearly some archaeological potential for Archaeologist in Northumberland. The National produced a number of prehistoric finds including a 17th century and earlier remains in the vicinity of Monuments Record (NMR) was also consulted rare antler hammer from the late Neolithic or early Links House Farm. Links House (site D) was first using “Pastscape”, but no sites were recorded Bronze Age (SMR 11773). In 1890 animal bones, mentioned in historical sources in 1683. It was on the NMR within the development area or the a Bronze Age spearhead and a sword were found subsequently replaced by a later mansion dating immediate vicinity. “Structures in the North East” with two human skulls (SMR 12071) in the River to 1751. The extent of the first house is not known (SINE) produced no images of structures within the Blyth, suggesting that the river had more than an and so developments within this area may reveal immediate development zone, although images are economic importance to past communities. evidence of this first building. The gardens of the available for the wider Blyth area. Listed Building house were in place by 1796 and were still in use information was obtained through English Herit- Regionally, the coastline is an area of high po- by 1887. Links House was also the site of a brew- age’s records. Other sites were identified through tential for prehistoric archaeological remains. The ery and maltings, built in 1743. It had gone by the historic mapping and modern aerial photography coastline offered an additional resource for food time of the publication of the 1st edition Ordnance as reproduced in “Old Maps” and “Keys to the and an alternative means of travel to prehistoric Survey map dating to 1865 (site E). Conveniently Past”. The archaeological potential and the likely and later communities. Clusters of finds tend to close by was the Half Moon Inn (site B) which was planning requirements were discussed with the be at their most dense where rivers, or even quite depicted on the 1865 maps, although the date of County Archaeology Section at County Hall and

51 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

its founding is not known. Future developers may lished secondary sources held by Northumberland become recreational with a bandstand (site K) and wish to revive this name for any proposed new County Council and Blyth Valley Borough Council. gardens, known as Beach Gardens. pubs or restaurants at South Beach. Most recently a Conservation Management Plan of Blyth Battery has been produced by the North East The potential for any development damaging or The majority of sites of archaeological interest in Civic Trust, although to what extent they assess uncovering additional archaeological remains is the area relate to coastal defence. The coastline the signiﬁcance of the subterranean features is not therefore high, particularly in relation to military of much of Northumberland was vulnerable to at- yet clear. The Blyth Battery Feasibility Study by defences and the 19th century settlement of the tack, having long low sandy beaches and so today, Fortress Consultants (1987) is now well used and area. The extant structures are already recognised modern defensive structures can still be found much of the information it contains has been incor- as being of national importance and the possible dating to Napoleonic times, and both World Wars. porated into later reports. The history of the site is subterranean features need to be investigated in The extant structures at South Links are listed given in a document by the Fortress Study Group order to assess whether they too might be na- Grade II because of their relative rarity, being First (1990) and much of the information in it overlaps tionally important. Further work will also need to World War in date. Such structures are now few in with that given in the Feasibility Study (Liz Williams explore the extent of remains associated with Links number in Northumberland and nationwide. Their pers comm.). Surveys of the military remains have House (site D) and its gardens. designated status means that any development also been carried out, but they concentrate on the must not only seek to avoid damage to the struc- extant remains and not the subterranean features tures themselves, but must also consider how they (Blyth Valley Borough Council 2001, Wartime might affect their settings (see below, p8). Structures and Band Stand, Blyth Links, Condition Survey and Fairhursts for BVBC, 2000, Blyth and In the centre of the development area, the build- Hartley Links Report of Survey). ings, which have been public lavatories since 1918, consist of a former engine house (site G), Historic mapping for the area includes Ordnance which provided power for the nearby searchlights Survey mapping from the 1860s. There is a refer- (site H) and the gun battery (site I). At the extreme ence to a map dating to 1813 in Pevsner (1994, southern tip of the development area the coastal 193), but neither this nor any tithe map has been defence battery was built in the late 19th century, consulted as part of this appraisal. The 1st edi- but was much altered during both World Wars. The tion OS map dating to 1865 shows the area as extant remains are of shelters and an ammuni- being agricultural in character with the Half Moon tion store, but a preliminary examination of aerial Inn near Links House Farm. By the time of the photographs held at County Hall would suggest publication of the 3rd edition OS map in the 1920s that below ground remains extend throughout the a military camp (site F) was constructed south of development area (Sara Rushton, pers comm.). Link House Farm and west of the battery. This These below ground remains cannot be dated from may have resulted in the cropmarks seen on the photography but may be Napoleonic or World aerial photographs and the surveyed outline of War One. All the above extant remains are listed the buildings, ideally at 1:2,500 scale needs to be buildings. At the extreme northern tip of the devel- compared to the cropmarks. The camp had not opment area, next to the location of a proposed car been depicted on maps dating to the late 1890s park, there is a rectangular pillbox (site J) partly and it would therefore seem that it was built during built into the sea wall at South Beach. This is Sec- the First World War. The camp was no longer de- ond World War in date and is not listed. Neverthe- picted when the next phase of mapping took place less, any proposed development in this area will between 1938 and 1950 and today, part of the site need to ensure that the pillbox is not inadvertently appears to lie beneath Links Road. damaged. While the area was used for military defence up to Further information on the importance of these and including the Second World War, the historic sites can be obtained from a number of unpub- mapping shows that by the 1950s the area had

52 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

Figure 1. Archaeological sites within the development area and the immediate vicinity.

53 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

Planning Policy “Where any part of the site of a planning ap- to be further explored by carrying out a desktop plication falls within a known or potential site of assessment. The assessment should seek to archaeological significance as defined on the examine the aerial photographs held at County Archaeology and Listed Buildings are covered County Sites and Monuments Record or an area of Hall and also any aerial photographs held by the by two Planning Policy Guidance Notes, PPG 16 archaeological potential, or affects the setting of a Museum of Antiquities of Newcastle upon Tyne. (1990) and PPG 15 (1994) respectively. PPG 16 site of archaeological significance, the application Cropmark evidence should be plotted on to mod- states that: will be determined only once an archaeological as- ern mapping so that their extent can be compared sessment (to determine the archaeological impact to the proposed development and the layout of “Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite of the proposal) has been carried out and the the camp at Links House. It should re-examine and non-renewable resource, in many cases highly results submitted to the Local Planning Authority”. archaeological records at source, rather than using fragile and vulnerable to damage and destruction. online sources and should assess whether the Appropriate management is therefore essential to Policy E12 then goes on to state that in some Conservation Management Plan has assessed the ensure that they survive in good condition. In par- cases an evaluation will be requested prior to de- significance of the below ground remains. Subject ticular, care must be taken to ensure that archaeo- termination of the planning application. to the work already carried out by the North East logical remains are not needlessly or thoughtlessly Civic Trust it may also be necessary for the as- destroyed”. Policy E13 of the Local Plan relates to Listed sessment to include an examination of the National Buildings and carries with it a presumption against Archives at Kew. War Office Records are held The guidance goes on to note that “the desirability development, which would have an adverse affect there covering Blyth Battery and may throw light of preserving an ancient monument and its setting on the buildings character or setting. There are on the nature of the buried remains (WO 78/4968 is a material consideration in determining planning currently 4 listed buildings within or adjacent to the (18 maps covering 1917-18); WO78/4969 (plan applications whether that monument is scheduled proposed development area. and charts dating to 1922); WO192/243; dating to or unscheduled. Developers and local authorities 1939-51)). The assessment should also review the should take into account archaeological considera- Advice on the general historic environment is desktop assessment carried out by Tyne and Wear tions and deal with them from the beginning of the outlined in PPG 15 which states that the presence Archaeology at Links House Garden Caravan Park development control process”. Where an initial ap- of the historic environment “adds to the quality of and other strategic and management documents praisal has identified that archaeological remains our lives, by enhancing the familiar and cherished produced for Blyth Valley Borough Council on the may exist, prospective developers are advised to local scene and sustaining the sense of local dis- future use of the Links, the condition of the band- commission their own archaeological desk based tinctiveness which is so important an aspect of the stand and wartime structures and the reports on assessment, which will conduct a more detailed character and appearance of our towns, villages the extant remains of the battery. Historic mapping search of readily available sources. In cases where and countryside. The historic environment is also (to the, 1st, 2nd, 3rd edition and wartime map- important archaeological remains are still thought of immense importance for leisure and recreation”. ping) from the County Records Office should be to exist, the developer should go on to commis- This is particularly important for the current propos- obtained in order to identify what was extant in the sion an archaeological evaluation of the remains in als, which seek to provide recreation facilities at 19th century. This should include a map referred order to establish how well they survive, what their South Beach. to in Pevsner (1992, 193) dating to 1813 showing extent is and to obtain a clearer idea of how the land to the south of the River Blyth. proposed development might affect the remains. Where these remains are considered to be nation- Recommendations A specification for the assessment can be pro- ally important, potential developers may need to duced by the County Archaeologist or an archaeo- look for creative solutions in order to preserve the The proposed development area is of high ar- logical consultant and should be approved by the remains in situ, or alternatively to archaeologically chaeological potential. The above ground remains County Archaeologist and Blyth Valley Borough record them before their destruction. This advice is within the development area are already recog- Council before going out to tender. followed in spirit by both the County Structure Plan nised as being nationally important, but the recent for Northumberland (1996) and Blyth Valley’s Local identification of buried archaeological deposits Subject to the findings of the desktop assessment, Plan (1999, 20-26). Policy E12 in the Local Plan visible as cropmarks, suggests that further re- an archaeological evaluation is likely to be re- states that: mains, possibly also nationally important, may also quired. This will seek to examine the extent, condi- lie below ground. The potential of this site needs tion and form of the cropmarks around the military

54 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 7.0 : Archaeological Appraisal

remains. Trial trenching is likely to be the main tool used to establish this, but geophysical survey may provide information, which will help to locate the trenches in the most productive location. Subject to the ﬁndings of the evaluation, a programme of mitigation may be developed in consultation with Blyth Valley Borough Council and the County Archaeologist. This will need to balance the needs of preserving archaeological remains in-situ and by excavation against the need for development. Archaeological excavation can contribute towards any future interpretation proposals and can trigger considerable local interest in the heritage. This can lead to local community projects such as oral history, recording for example, wartime experiences in Blyth. The Local Heritage Initiative can fund such projects. The heritage can also be included in modern development, not least by reviving the name of the Half Moon Inn in the proposed new themed pub.

55 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 1.0 List of Consultees: 5

2.0 Consultation Event 1 – Questionnaire: 7 Bibliography Association of County Archaeological Ofﬁcers, 1993 Model Briefs and Speciﬁcations for Archaeological Assessments and Field Evaluations. Blyth Valley Borough Council 1999, Local Plan Blyth Valley Borough Council 2004 A Whole New Blyth. The Links Area Action Plan, Blyth. Brief for Consultants. Institute of Field Archaeologists, undated, Standard Guidance for Archaeological Desk Based Assessments. Department of the Environment 1990, Planning Policy Guidance Note 16 Archaeology and Planning. Department of the Environment 1994, Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 Planning and the Historic Environment Northumberland County Council 1994, A Strategy for Coastal Archae- ology, Pevsner, N 1992, The Buildings of England. Northumberland.

Internet Sources www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk www.keystothepast.info www.old-maps.co.uk www.pastscape.org http://sine.ncl.ac.uk

Acknowledgements Grateful thanks are due to Karen Derham, Sara Rushton and Liz Williams from Northumberland County Archaeology Section for additional archaeological information, discussions on the archaeological potential and ﬂagging up new information recently obtained from aerial photographs. Thanks also to Wendy from Blyth Valley Strategic Planning and Economic Development Department for promptly deliv- ering the relevant parts of the Local Plan.

56 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 8.0 : Development Site Valuation Statement

I would conﬁrm that I would anticipate the value of the Blyth Valley BC’s site at Blyth Link, which I understand comprises some 2.956 hectares, is in the region of £400,000 to £600,000 per acre for residential development. This ﬁgure assumes no site abnormal’s, that access can be gained via Rotary Way and that there are no other constraints on the site by way of public rights of way etc.

I would conﬁrm that the higher end values above would be more likely to be achieved if Blyth Valley BC’s site was developed in conjunction with part of the Wellesley Nautical School site and the Blagdon Estate site to the south.

57 58 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN

for BLYTH VALLEY BOROUHGH COUNCIL

INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATES

8 December 2004

59 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 08/12/2004 Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : 19342 SUMMARY Job No. : 19342 EXCLUSIONS & ASSUMPTIONS

CLIENT: Blyth Valley Borough Council INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE £

PROMENADE 1,026,302.00 1. No cost allowance is made for the following : 2. Costs have been estimated without any Structural or ARCHITECT: Insite Environments M & E Services information CENTRAL PAVING AREA 893,069.00 1.1 Professional fees, site supervision and prescribed fees STRUCTURAL ENGINEER : N/A 3. The following assumptions were made during the preparation GENERAL FOOTPATHS 423,865.00 1.2 Local Authority and Statutory Fees of this estimate : SERVICES ENGINEER : N/A CAR PARKING (AREA 3A) 142,958.00 1.3 Finance cost and site purchase (a) Tender will be procured on a traditional competitive basis BASIS OF ESTIMATE : Insite Environments 1.4 Value Added Tax (b) The Works will be carried out as a single contract - no allowance for Masterplan-OS CAR PARKING (AREA 3B) 103,987.00 Masterplan phased construction programme 1.5 Inflation beyond December 2004 Information provided under cover CAR PARKING (AREA 3C) 233,823.00 (c) Contingencies have been included at 5% of Insite letter dated 25 Nov. 04 1.6 Possible disposal / treatment of contaminated land and fax dated 24 Nov. 04 and NORTH CAR PARK 61,960.00 2 Dec. 04. 1.7 Work outside the site boundary (except for relocating bus lay-byes) PLAYGROUNDS 83,905.00

1.8 Costs in relation to relocation of existing public telephone kiosks - SOFT LANDSCAPING 234,006.00 assume carried out by BT STATUS OF ESTIMATE : Indicatice cost estimate PROGRAMME : To be advised 1.9 Possible service diversion works

GROSS SITE AREA 80,000 m2 3,203,875.00 1.10 Work to existing public toilets and various WW2 structures

PRELIMINARIES - allow 52 weeks at £5000 per week 250,000.00

CONTINGENCIES 172,125.00

TOTAL £ 3,626,000.00

60 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

CLIENT: Blyth Valley Borough Council INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE £

GROSS SITE AREA 80,000 m2 3,203,875.00 1.10 Work to existing public toilets and various WW2 structures

PRELIMINARIES - allow 52 weeks at £5000 per week 250,000.00

CONTINGENCIES 172,125.00

TOTAL £ 3,626,000.00

61 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

PROMENADE Demolitions and alterations 10 Demolish access ramps down to beach; size 18.00 x 5.00 m; making good 1 Item 6000.00 6,000.00

15 Demolish access stairs down to beach; making good face of retaining wall 3 Nr 750.00 2,250.00

20 Remove sundry posts, bollards and the like 1 Item 800.00 800.00

25 Remove concrete balustrade 1.20 m high 75 m 40.00 3,000.00

30 Remove concrete balustrade base course 0.30 m high 592 m 16.00 9,472.00

35 Relocate information boards and the like; 2 Nr 1 Item 500.00 500.00

40 General repairs to promenade retaining wall 1 Item 15000.00 15,000.00

New construction - allowance for providing:-

45 Access ramps down to beach; size 32 x 2.5 m on plan (Central) 2 Nr 25000.00 50,000.00

50 Access ramps down to beach; size 32 x 2.5 m on plan (North) 2 Nr 20000.00 40,000.00

55 Replica bandstand; foundations; reinforced concrete structure; copper clad domed roof; 4.50 m diameter on plan 1 Item 55000.00 55,000.00 Carried Forward 182,022.00

62 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ £

PROMENADE PROMENADE (CONT'D.) brought forward 182,022.00 Demolitions and alterations New construction - allowance for providing (Cont'd) 10 Demolish access ramps down to beach; size 18.00 x 5.00 m; 60 Extend promenade at ramp; curved on length; size making good 1 Item 6000.00 6,000.00 19 x 4.5 m (projection) on plan 1 Item 24000.00 24,000.00

15 Demolish access stairs down to beach; making good Pavings face of retaining wall 3 Nr 750.00 2,250.00 65 Take up concrete slab paving; disposal 5,857 m2 4.00 23,428.00

20 Remove sundry posts, bollards and the like 1 Item 800.00 800.00 70 Take up asphalt paving; disposal 447 m2 2.00 894.00

25 Remove concrete balustrade 1.20 m high 75 m 40.00 3,000.00 75 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; make good to existing bed 5,329 m2 49.00 261,121.00 30 Remove concrete balustrade base course 0.30 m high 592 m 16.00 9,472.00 80 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; make good 35 Relocate information boards and the like; 2 Nr 1 Item 500.00 500.00 to existing bed (Ramps) 242 m2 49.00 11,858.00

40 General repairs to promenade retaining wall 1 Item 15000.00 15,000.00 85 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; hardcore, etc. (Ramps) 340 m2 53.00 18,020.00 New construction - allowance for providing:- 90 Copings to edge of promenade; curved 20 m 150.00 3,000.00 45 Access ramps down to beach; size 32 x 2.5 m on plan (Central) 2 Nr 25000.00 50,000.00 95 Copings to edge of ramp 141 m 125.00 17,625.00 50 Access ramps down to beach; size 32 x 2.5 m on plan (North) 2 Nr 20000.00 40,000.00 100 Marshalls Tegular block pavings; make good to existing bed 156 m2 45.00 7,020.00 55 Replica bandstand; foundations; reinforced concrete structure; copper clad domed roof; 4.50 m diameter on plan 1 Item 55000.00 55,000.00 105 Marshalls Tegular block pavings; hardcore bed 93 m2 49.00 4,557.00 Carried Forward 182,022.00 Carried Forward 553,545.00

63 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 3

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ PROMENADE (CONT'D.) Pavings (Cont'd) brought forward 553,545.00 110 Marshalls Tegular block pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. 254 m2 50.00 12,700.00

115 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc. 2,033 m 19.00 38,627.00

120 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc.; curved 100 m 19.00 1,900.00

125 Existing promenade concrete edge units; making good 654 m 25.00 16,350.00

130 Existing promenade concrete edge units; re use of existing or new units to match existing where damaged / ramps removed etc 11 m 150.00 1,650.00

135 Wearing course; to existing road areas (Beachway); making good 640 m2 12.00 7,680.00

140 Wearing course; to path (Beachway); making good 110 m2 9.00 990.00

145 Concrete access road; to beach; excavation, etc. 170 m2 54.00 9,180.00

150 Edge retainment 88 m 85.00 7,480.00 155 Toe 4 m 250.00 1,000.00

160 Concrete hardstanding; to beach; excavation, etc. 135 m2 54.00 7,290.00 165 Edge retainment 38 m 85.00 3,230.00 Total Carried to Summary 661,622.00

64 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 4

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ PROMENADE (CONT'D.) Steet furniture / equipment brought forward 661,622.00

170 Seats including foundations; 2 m long; Woodscape Type 1 25 Nr 900.00 22,500.00

175 Litter bins including foundations; Woodscape LBS 112 25 Nr 800.00 20,000.00

180 Bollards including foundations 30 Nr 400.00 12,000.00

185 Ornamental balustrade similar to existing; to ramps 141 m 720.00 101,520.00

190 Ornamental balustrade similar to existing; curved on plan 37 m 750.00 27,750.00

195 Allowance for life saving equipment 1 Item 3000.00 3,000.00

200 Allowance for road markings (Beachway road) 1 Item 200.00 200.00

Drainage

210 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 5,832 m2 5.00 29,160.00

Street lighting

215 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 21500.00 21,500.00

220 Street lighting; flush mounted uplighters; 330 Nr 385.00 127,050.00 Woodhouse Footlight G-FL Single 35 W Total Carried to Summary £ 1,026,302.00

65 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

CENTRAL PAVING AREA Demolitions and alterations 10 Remove timber railings; one rail 268 m 4.00 1,072.00

15 Remove sundry signs and street furniture 1 Item 250.00 250.00

Pavings 20 Take up concrete slab / crazy paving; disposal 389 m2 6.00 2,334.00

25 Take up asphalt paving; disposal - paths 138 m2 5.00 690.00

30 Take up coated macadam / asphalt paving; disposal - access road 241 m2 10.00 2,410.00

35 Take up coated macadam / asphalt paving; disposal - car park 1,703 m2 10.00 17,030.00

40 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs 275 m 7.00 1,925.00

45 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; to existing surfacing 1,596 m2 49.00 78,204.00

50 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. 3,681 m2 53.00 195,093.00

55 Extra for Tegular block dividing strips 1,191 m 9.00 10,719.00

60 Stone slabs; slate; bedding; to existing surfaces 228 m2 120.00 27,360.00 Carried Forward 337,087.00

66 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CENTRAL PAVING AREA (CONT'D.) brought forward 337,087.00 Pavings (Cont'd.) 65 Stone slabs; granite; excavation;disposal; hardcore bed feature paving with engraved brass plate and light (refer st lighting and "Artist" work); size 2000 x 2000 mm 8 Nr 1200.00 9,600.00

70 Metal / glass dividing strip between slate and Marshalls flag paving; curved 111 m 400.00 44,400.00

75 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc. 16 m 19.00 304.00

80 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc.; curved 87 m 19.00 1,653.00

Steet furniture / equipment - Allowance for providing 85 Hardwood groins 600 mm high 107 m 120.00 12,840.00

90 Hardwood groins 600-2500/3000 mm high 96 m 360.00 34,560.00

95 Hardwood amphitheatre 497 m2 410.00 203,770.00

100 Extra for; central steps 5 Nr 800.00 4,000.00

105 Hardwood seats with glass lid to top & lighting (refer st lighting and "Artist" work); foundation; size 2000 x 2000 x 600 mm high 10 Nr 2000.00 20,000.00

110 Sundry street furniture 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00

Carried Forward 673,214.00

67 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 3

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CENTRAL PAVING AREA (CONT'D.) brought forward 673,214.00 Drainage

120 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 5,743 m2 5.00 28,715.00

Street lighting

130 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 9400.00 9,400.00

135 Street lighting; flush mounted uplighters; amphitheatre & glass "strip" 124 Nr 385.00 47,740.00

140 Feature lighting; seats 10 Nr 1000.00 10,000.00

145 Feature lighting; to slate / granite paving 8 Nr 500.00 4,000.00

Artist work - indicative allowances

150 engraved brass plates to granite paving feature 1 Item 40000.00 40,000.00

155 engraved glass panels to timber seats 1 Item 40000.00 40,000.00

160 groins 1 Item 20000.00 20,000.00

165 glass / metal strip paving feature 1 Item 20000.00 20,000.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 893,069.00

68 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CAR PARK (AREA 3A) Demolitions and alterations 10 Remove timber railings and the like 1 Item 250.00 250.00

15 Remove sundry signs and street furniture 1 Item 250.00 250.00

Pavings

20 Take up macadam road construction; disposal 85 m2 10.00 850.00

25 Take up asphalt paving; disposal - paths 162 m2 5.00 810.00

30 Take up concrete paving; disposal - cycle track 405 m2 6.00 2,430.00

35 Take up concrete flag pavings; disposal - footpath 25 m2 5.00 125.00

40 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to road 643 m 7.00 4,501.00

45 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 30 m 6.00 180.00

50 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. - Paths 187 m2 53.00 9,911.00

55 Concrete blocks; Marshalls Tegular pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. - Car park bays 1,259 m2 50.00 62,950.00

60 Extra for Tegular block dividing strips in differing colour 733 m 1.00 733.00 Carried Forward 82,990.00

69 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

CAR PARK (AREA 3A) (CONT'D) brought forward 82,990.00 Pavings (Cont'd.) 65 Macadam circulation road construction; excavation;disposal; granular bed 49 m2 35.00 1,715.00

70 Macadam circulation road construction; to existing road areas; making good 593 m2 19.00 11,267.00

75 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc. 12 m 19.00 228.00

80 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 317 m 22.00 6,974.00

85 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc.; curved 61 m 27.00 1,647.00

90 "Speed bump"; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 32 m 50.00 1,600.00

95 Allowance for road markings 1 Item 250.00 250.00

100 Allowance for traffic signs 1 Item 1500.00 1,500.00 Soft landscaping

110 Grass seeding; topsoil; excavation & removal 191 m2 7.00 1,337.00

Steet furniture / equipment

115 Allowance for sundry street furniture 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00 Carried Forward 114,508.00

70 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

ELEMENT ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ £ CAR PARK (AREA 3A) (CONT'D) brought forward 114,508.00 CAR PARK (AREA 3A) (CONT'D) brought forward 82,990.00 Drainage Pavings (Cont'd.) 65 Macadam circulation road construction; excavation;disposal; 120 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 1 Item 10500.00 10,500.00 granular bed 49 m2 35.00 1,715.00 125 Allowance for work to existing drainage installation 1 Item 1000.00 1,000.00 70 Macadam circulation road construction; to existing road areas; making good 593 m2 19.00 11,267.00 Street lighting

75 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc. 12 m 19.00 228.00 130 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 3400.00 3,400.00

80 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 317 m 22.00 6,974.00 140 Street lighting - allowance for uplighting 1 Item 4000.00 4,000.00

85 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc.; curved 61 m 27.00 1,647.00 145 Remove concrete lamp posts and foundations 3 Nr 100.00 300.00

90 "Speed bump"; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 32 m 50.00 1,600.00 150 Lamp posts and foundation; Woodhouse Geo double headed 5 Nr 1850.00 9,250.00

95 Allowance for road markings 1 Item 250.00 250.00

100 Allowance for traffic signs 1 Item 1500.00 1,500.00 Soft landscaping

110 Grass seeding; topsoil; excavation & removal 191 m2 7.00 1,337.00

Steet furniture / equipment

115 Allowance for sundry street furniture 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00 Carried Forward 114,508.00 Total Carried to Summary £ 142,958.00

71 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CAR PARK (AREA 3B) Demolitions and alterations 10 Remove timber railings and the like 1 Item 250.00 250.00

15 Remove sundry signs and street furniture 1 Item 250.00 250.00

Pavings

20 Take up macadam road construction; disposal 574 m2 10.00 5,740.00

25 Take up asphalt paving; disposal - paths 119 m2 5.00 595.00

30 Take up concrete paving; disposal - cycle track 277 m2 6.00 1,662.00

35 Take up concrete flag pavings; disposal - footpath 19 m2 5.00 95.00

40 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to road 371 m 7.00 2,597.00

45 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 15 m 6.00 90.00

55 Concrete blocks; Marshalls Tegular pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. - Car park bays 855 m2 50.00 42,750.00

60 Extra for Tegular block dividing strips in differing colour 360 m 1.00 360.00

Carried Forward 54,389.00

72 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

CAR PARK (AREA 3B) (CONT'D) brought forward 54,389.00 Pavings (Cont'd.) 65 Macadam circulation road construction; excavation; disposal; granular bed 226 m2 35.00 7,910.00

70 Macadam circulation road construction; to existing road areas; making good 480 m2 19.00 9,120.00

75 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 197 m 22.00 4,334.00

80 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc.; curved 57 m 27.00 1,539.00

85 Allowance for road markings 1 Item 250.00 250.00

90 Allowance for road signs 1 Item 1500.00 1,500.00

Soft landscaping

95 Grass seeding; topsoil; excavation & removal 185 m2 7.00 1,295.00

Steet furniture / equipment

100 Allowance for sundry street furniture 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00

Carried Forward 85,337.00

73 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 3

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CAR PARK (AREA 3B) (CONT'D) brought forward 85,337.00 Drainage

110 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 1 Item 8000.00 8,000.00

120 Allowance for work to existing drainage installation 1 Item 1000.00 1,000.00

Street lighting

130 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 1750.00 1,750.00

140 Street lighting - allowance for some uplighting 1 Item 4000.00 4,000.00

145 Remove concrete lamp posts and foundations 2 Nr 100.00 200.00

150 Lamp posts and foundation; Woodhouse Geo double headed 2 Nr 1850.00 3,700.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 103,987.00

74 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CAR PARK (AREA 3C) Demolitions and alterations 10 Remove timber railings and the like 1 Item 500.00 500.00

15 Remove sundry signs and street furniture 1 Item 500.00 500.00

Pavings

20 Take up macadam road construction; disposal 778 m2 10.00 7,780.00

25 Take up asphalt paving; disposal - paths 260 m2 5.00 1,300.00

30 Take up concrete paving; disposal - cycle track 660 m2 6.00 3,960.00

35 Take up concrete flag pavings; disposal - footpath 60 m2 5.00 300.00

40 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to road 590 m 7.00 4,130.00

45 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 30 m 6.00 180.00

55 Concrete blocks; Marshalls Tegular pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. - Car park bays 2,083 m2 50.00 104,150.00

60 Extra for Tegular block dividing strips in differing colour 1,350 m 1.00 1,350.00

Carried Forward 124,150.00

75 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

CAR PARK (AREA 3C) (CONT'D) brought forward 124,150.00 Pavings (Cont'd.) 65 Macadam circulation road construction; excavation;disposal; granular bed 551 m2 35.00 19,285.00

70 Macadam circulation road construction; to existing road areas; making good 1,309 m2 19.00 24,871.00

75 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 366 m 22.00 8,052.00

80 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc.; curved 45 m 27.00 1,215.00

85 Allowance for road markings 1 Item 750.00 750.00

90 Allowance for road signs 1 Item 2000.00 2,000.00

Soft landscaping

95 Grass seeding; topsoil; excavation & removal 150 m2 7.00 1,050.00

Steet furniture / equipment

100 Allowance for sundry street furniture 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00

Carried Forward 186,373.00

76 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 3

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ CAR PARK (AREA 3C) (CONT'D) brought forward 186,373.00 Drainage

110 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 1 Item 20000.00 20,000.00

120 Allowance for work to existing drainage installation 1 Item 2000.00 2,000.00

Street lighting

130 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 4000.00 4,000.00

140 Street lighting 1 Item 8000.00 8,000.00

145 Remove concrete lamp posts and foundations 5 Nr 100.00 500.00

150 Lamp posts and foundation; Woodhouse Geo double headed 7 Nr 1850.00 12,950.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 233,823.00

77 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ NORTH CAR PARK

Demolitions and alterations

5 Remove section of retaining wall (10 x 0.75 m high); make good 1 Item 750.00 750.00

New construction - Allowance for providing

10 Reinforced concrete retaining wall 10 m 225.00 2,250.00

15 Reinforced concrete retaining wall; curved on plan to 2.50 m radius 8 m 350.00 2,800.00

20 Junction with existing retaining wall 2 Nr 100.00 200.00

25 Allow for steps or ramp to end of promenade 1 Item 1500.00 1,500.00

Site preparation

30 Excavate to reduce levels; store for re-use 690 m2 5.00 3,450.00

35 Clearing site vegetation; bushes, undergrowth, etc. 690 m2 1.00 690.00

Carried Forward 11,640.00

78 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ NORTH CAR PARK (CONT'D) brought forward 11,640.00 Pavings 40 Take up asphalt paving; disposal - paths 28 m2 5.00 140.00

45 Take up concrete flag pavings; disposal - footpath 49 m2 5.00 245.00

50 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 27 m 6.00 162.00

55 Concrete blocks; Marshalls Tegular pavings; excavation; disposal; hardcore, etc. - Car park bays 290 m2 50.00 14,500.00

60 Extra for Tegular block dividing strips in differing colour 168 m 1.00 168.00

65 Macadam circulation road construction; excavation;disposal; granular bed 417 m2 35.00 14,595.00

70 Kerbs; Marshalls; foundation, etc. 144 m 22.00 3,168.00 75 Allowance for road markings 1 Item 200.00 200.00 Soft landscaping

80 Grass seeding; topsoil; excavation & removal 56 m2 7.00 392.00

Steet furniture / equipment

100 Allowance for sundry street furniture 1 Item 1000.00 1,000.00

105 Allowance for signage 1 Item 1000.00 1,000.00 Carried Forward 47,210.00

79 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 3

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ NORTH CAR PARK (CONT'D) brought forward 47,210.00 Drainage

110 Allowance for surface water drainage installation 1 Item 3600.00 3,600.00

Street lighting

130 Allowance for BWIC - trenches, ducts, etc. 1 Item 3750.00 3,750.00

140 Lamp posts and foundation; Woodhouse Geo double headed 4 Nr 1850.00 7,400.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 61,960.00

80 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

GENERAL FOOTPATHS Demolitions and alterations

10 Remove concrete balustrade 1.20 m high 114 m 40.00 4,560.00

15 Remove concrete balustrade base course 0.30 m high 151 m 16.00 2,416.00

20 Remove sundry posts, bollards and the like 1 Item 250.00 250.00

30 Remove sundry street furniture 1 Item 250.00 250.00

Pavings

Asphalt wearing course; to existing path areas; 35 making good existing 323 m2 8.00 2,584.00

40 Edging to existing path; straight 183 m 10.00 1,830.00

45 Edging to existing path; curved 60 m 13.00 780.00

50 Relocate bus stop to Link Road 2 Nr 5750.00 11,500.00

55 Allowance for making good / surfacing pavings around central toilets 1 Item 1000.00 1,000.00

Carried Forward 25,170.00

81 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ GENERAL FOOTPATHS (CONT'D) brought forward 25,170.00 Pavings (Cont'd.)

60 Take up concrete pavings; disposal 942 m2 6.00 5,652.00

65 Take up asphalt paving; disposal 2,028 m2 5.00 10,140.00

70 Take up concrete slab pavings; disposal 1,985 m2 5.00 9,925.00

75 Take up concrete slab pavings; disposal; bed retained 195 m2 4.00 780.00

85 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 606 m 6.00 3,636.00

95 400 x 400 Charcon Appalachian grey pavings; excavation; disposal, etc. 6,147 m2 53.00 325,791.00

100 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc. 2,136 m 19.00 40,584.00

105 Edge trims; Marshalls Tegular block; foundation, etc.; curved 30 m 19.00 570.00

110 Additional excavation and disposal on site to new paths south of bandstand area 1,078 m2 1.50 1,617.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 423,865.00

82 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

PLAYGROUNDS Demolitions and alterations

10 Carefully take up timber fence; grub up foundations; store for re-use 235 m 8.00 1,880.00

15 Remove "ship" play equipment 1 Item 2000.00 2,000.00

20 Remove all play equipment; disposal off site 1 Item 1500.00 1,500.00

Pavings

25 Allow for reshaping play area; excavation; filling disposal, etc. 1 Item 5000.00 5,000.00

Steet furniture / equipment

30 Allowance for new play equipment 1 Item 70000.00 70,000.00 Equipment 2 Nr. (set of 4) large swings 2 Nr. Climbing deck and chute 2 Nr. Large climbing frame 1 Nr. (set of 4) small swings 1 Nr. Small climbing frame (inc. covered area and chute)

Carried Forward 80,380.00

83 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

PLAYGROUNDS (CONT'D.) brought forward 80,380.00 Fencing

35 Timber fencing and gates; take from store and re fix; concrete post foundations, etc. 235 m 15.00 3,525.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 83,905.00

84 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 1

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

INFORMAL GRASS AREAS Demolitions and alterations

10 Demolish bandstand structure 1 Item 3000.00 3,000.00

15 Remove concrete balustrade 1.20 m high 99 m 40.00 3,960.00

20 Remove timber railings and the like 1 Item 250.00 250.00

Site preparation

25 Take up 100 thick concrete paving and bed under; disposal off site 135 m2 6.00 810.00

30 Take up 150 thick concrete paving and bed under; disposal off site 50 m2 8.00 400.00

35 Take up 150 thick (stepped) concrete paving and bed under; disposal off site 1,217 m2 8.00 9,736.00

40 Take up concrete flag pavings and bed under; disposal 238 m2 5.00 1,190.00

45 Take up asphalt paving and bed under; disposal - paths 1,864 m2 5.00 9,320.00

50 Take up macadam road construction; disposal 2,273 m2 10.00 22,730.00

Carried Forward 51,396.00

85 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ INFORMAL GRASS AREAS (CONT'D) brought forward 51,396.00 Site preparation (Cont'd)

55 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to road 392 m 7.00 2,744.00

60 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to road; store; relay to new line; concrete foundation, etc. 55 m 20.00 1,100.00

65 Taking up concrete / stone kerbs to paths 260 m 6.00 1,560.00

Filling, grass seeding, etc.

70 Lifting grass; store and relay 7,901 m2 5.00 39,505.00

80 Reinstate grass areas adjactent new hard surfacing 2,754 m2 2.00 5,508.00

85 imported subsoil; filling to make up levels where hard surfacing removed 1,878 m3 14.00 26,292.00

90 imported subsoil; filling to make up levels in landform areas 3,944 m3 14.00 55,216.00

95 imported topsoil; filling to make up levels where hard surfacing removed 800 m3 16.00 12,800.00

100 imported topsoil; filling to make up levels to landform areas 790 m3 16.00 12,640.00

Carried Forward 208,761.00

86 BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN 9.0 : Costs Estimates

Issued : 12/14/2004 GARDINER & THEOBALD BLYTH LINKS MASTERPLAN Base Date : December 2004 Job No. : INDICATIVE COST ESTIMATE 19342 Page No: 2

ELEMENT NO. ELEMENT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST ESTIMATED TOTAL COST

£ INFORMAL GRASS AREAS (CONT'D) brought forward 208,761.00 Filling, grass seeding, etc. (Cont'd)

105 imported topsoil; filling to make up levels to "planting" areas; grass seeding 535 m2 7.00 3,745.00

110 Contouring work around perimeter of "Blyth Links" area; lifting grass; excavation; filling; topsoil; relay grass; additional seeding as required 1 Item 20000.00 20,000.00

115 subsoil / topsoil obtained on site; general filling 500 m3 3.00 1,500.00

Total Carried to Summary £ 234,006.00