29.10.2014 Views

12/00218/FUL - Armscroft Park PDF 393 KB - Democracy ...

12/00218/FUL - Armscroft Park PDF 393 KB - Democracy ...

12/00218/FUL - Armscroft Park PDF 393 KB - Democracy ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Members had explicitly expressed their desire to see the effects of the<br />

proposal on drainage in the area addressed comprehensively when they were<br />

considering the planning brief.<br />

6.4 The proposals would deliver a replacement bridge at a higher level at<br />

Blinkhorns Bridge Lane (to assist the current ‘bottleneck’ effect that can occur<br />

here in times of heavy rainfall), two temporary storage areas adjacent to the<br />

brook for times of high flow, and localised channel widening.<br />

6.5 Development on the Triangle would also have effects on the ecological<br />

interest of the site. The application proposals involve the provision of<br />

enhanced grassland habitat, wetland habitat, tree planting, provision of<br />

different microclimates in the earth mounds, a range of habitats suitable for<br />

invertebrates, and the erection of bird and bat boxes. A new bridge is also<br />

proposed in the park.<br />

6.6 The works are partially on County Council land. The County has no objections<br />

but has mentioned that the works will need to preserve the swale from the<br />

redeveloped St Peter’s School site adjacent (the spoil mounds do not affect<br />

the swale location).<br />

Flooding issues<br />

6.7 The brook and its immediate environs within the park are in Floodzones 2 and<br />

3. The area of Blinkhorns Bridge Lane immediately north of the rail lines is<br />

also Floodzone 2/3. Clearly the flood mitigation works need to take place at<br />

the Brook and ‘flood control infrastructure’ is defined as ‘water compatible<br />

development’ in the NPPF Technical Guidance.<br />

6.8 The proposed works involve the provision of detention areas with a combined<br />

capacity of 5,000 cubic metres. This capacity should be easily sufficient to<br />

cater for the 30l/s additional discharge from the triangle site (detention volume<br />

of 2,592 cubic metres required). It is also understood that the railway culvert<br />

acts as a control on this stretch of the watercourse.<br />

6.9 The flood detention areas are not proposed as permanent water bodies, and it<br />

is anticipated that they would take around 24 hours to drain following a flood<br />

event that fills them.<br />

6.10 The bridge replacement at Blinkhorns Bridge Lane would provide a higher and<br />

more lightweight bridge which, as well as lifting the structure away from the<br />

water and reducing the ‘bottleneck’ effect, also assists in limiting the build up<br />

of debris – which itself can exacerbate flood problems.<br />

6.11 The Environment Agency considers the works to provide benefits that may<br />

reduce the risk of flooding to residents, especially with the removal of the<br />

existing access bridge which is the primary restriction to flow in the locality of<br />

<strong>Armscroft</strong> Gardens.<br />

6.<strong>12</strong> A local resident has raised several issues relating to flood risk. On the issue of<br />

the ‘missing’ part of the project brief – the modelling work was done by Atkins<br />

PT

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!