GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE … · GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT TERRIERS FARM, ... 0114 255 4554 Fax: 0114 255 4330 Directors: P Richardson

Eastwood & Partners, Principle House, 121-123 Fleet Road, Fleet, Hampshire GU51 3PDTel: 01252 360 580 Fax: 01252 360 581 [email protected] www.eastwoodandpartners.com

GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT

TERRIERS FARM, HIGH WYCOMBE

FOR

PERSIMMON HOMES AND REDROW HOMES

ISSUE 2

38473-002 26 AUGUST 2015

Persimmon Homes and Redrow HomesTerriers Farm, High Wycombe

Also at:- St Andrew’s House, 23 Kingfield Road, Sheffield S11 9AS Tel: 0114 255 4554 Fax: 0114 255 4330

Directors: P Richardson BSc, CEng, MICE, MIStructE S D Preston BEng, CEng, FICE, FIStructE N J Baines BSc, CEng, MICE, MCIWEMM J Yates BSc(Eng), ACGI, CEng, MICE, FIStructE S R Ellis BEng, CEng, MIStructE, AMICE K R Pursall BEng, CEng, MIStructE

C A Topliss BSc, CEnv, CSci, CGeol, SiLC, AMICE, FGS S J English BEng, CEng, MIStructE A R Priest BEngSenior Associates: K Newsome BSc, CEng, MICE, MIStructE S J Mitchell BSc, MSc, CEng, MEI, MCIBSE, MASHRAE A Allison BEng

A Jones BEng, CEng, MICE, MIStructE M Young MA, CEng, MICE, MIStructE C A Wood BSc, CEng, MIStructE, AMICEAssociates: K Edwards MSci, FGS A J Kerslake BEng A G Marshall BEng, CEng, MIStructE C Hodge EngTech, TMICE

P Harrison BEng, CEng, MIStructE M P Chappell BEng, IEng, AMIStructE P H Halberstadt MEng, ACGI, CEng, MICEConsultant: J M Wood BSc, CEng, MICE, FIStructE

Eastwood & Partners (Consulting Engineers) Limited Registered No 1835021

GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT

TERRIERS FARM, HIGH WYCOMBE

FOR

PERSIMMON HOMES AND REDROW HOMES

ISSUE 2

Job No. : 38473

Report Status : Issue 2 - TO BE UPDATED WITH FURTHER GAS MONITORING RESULTS

Document Date : 26 August 2015

Approved :

Catherine Topliss

Persimmon Homes and Redrow Homes Terriers Farm, High Wycombe

CAT/RAN/MM/38473-002 Site Investigation Report

Issue 2

1

26 August 2015

CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 4

2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Terms of Reference ................................................................................................. 6

2.2 Context .................................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Aims and Objectives ................................................................................................ 6

2.4 Scope of Investigation .............................................................................................. 7

2.5 Limitations of Investigation ....................................................................................... 8

3.0 THE SITE .............................................................................................................................. 9

3.1 Description ............................................................................................................... 9

3.2 History...................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Geology ................................................................................................................. 10

3.4 Hydrogeology ......................................................................................................... 11

3.5 Hydrology ............................................................................................................... 11

3.6 Mining .................................................................................................................... 11

3.7 Ground Gas ........................................................................................................... 12

3.8 Pollution Incidents to Controlled Waters ................................................................. 12

3.9 Discharge Consents ............................................................................................... 12

3.10 Flooding ................................................................................................................. 12

4.0 OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL ..................................................................................... 13

5.0 GROUND INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................ 14

5.1 Site Works ............................................................................................................. 14

5.2 Laboratory Testing ................................................................................................. 14

6.0 GROUND CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Surface Covering ................................................................................................... 15

6.2 Made Ground ......................................................................................................... 15

6.3 Natural Ground ...................................................................................................... 15

6.4 Surface Depressions .............................................................................................. 15

6.5 Obstructions ........................................................................................................... 16

6.6 Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 16

6.7 Evidence of Contamination .................................................................................... 16



Issue 2

2

26 August 2015

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL APPRAISAL .......................................................................................... 17

7.1 General .................................................................................................................. 17

7.2 Foundations ........................................................................................................... 18

7.3 Ground Slabs ......................................................................................................... 19

7.4 Superstructure Precautions ................................................................................... 19

7.5 Excavation Problems ............................................................................................. 19

7.6 Roads .................................................................................................................... 19

7.7 Surface Water Drainage ......................................................................................... 20

8.0 REFINEMENT OF OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL ....................................................... 22

8.1 Source Characterisation ......................................................................................... 22

8.2 Gas Precautions .................................................................................................... 22

8.3 Unexpected Contamination .................................................................................... 22

8.4 Chemical Testing ................................................................................................... 22

8.5 Assessment Criteria ............................................................................................... 23

8.6 Chemical Test Results ........................................................................................... 23

9.0 RISK ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 24

9.1 Human Health – Construction Workers .................................................................. 24

9.2 Human Health – Future Residents and Visitors ...................................................... 24

9.3 Plants ..................................................................................................................... 24

9.4 Ground Gas ........................................................................................................... 24

9.5 Concrete ................................................................................................................ 25

9.6 Controlled Waters .................................................................................................. 25

10.0 CONTAMINATION - RECOMMENDATIONS AND APPROVALS ...................................... 26



Issue 2

3

26 August 2015

APPENDICES Appendix 1 Extract from Wycombe District Council’s Local Plan ‘Consultation Document’, dated

January 2014

‘Exploratory Hole Location Plan’, Drawing Number 38473/001B

Photographs

Appendix 2 Envirocheck Report

Appendix 3 Trial Pit Logs TP1 to TP61, SA1 to SA23

Window Sample and Dynamic Probe Logs

Appendix 4 Geotechnical Test Results, PSL15/2949

Infiltration Test Results

Appendix 5 Chemical Test Results, Chemtest Report 15-13898

Table of Assessment Values

Table of Atmospheric Conditions

Gas Monitoring Results



Issue 2

4

26 August 2015

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. This report presents the findings of a geotechnical and geo-environmental site investigation

in order to inform preparation of a subsequent Development Brief for the site.

2. The Allocation Site area is approximately 23 hectares and is located at Kingshill Road, High

Wycombe. It currently comprises open fields. A footpath crosses the site and areas of trees

are present within the site, as well as along the boundaries. A number of surface

depressions are present, mainly towards the eastern half of the site.

3. Historical maps indicate that no development has occurred on the site in the past.

4. The site is shown to be underlain by the Seaford Chalk and Newhaven Chalk Formation.

Superficial deposits of the Clay-with-Flints Formation, which includes clay, silt, sand and

gravel, are shown over the chalk.

5. The bedrock is classified as a Principal Aquifer and the overlying superficial deposits as

Unproductive Strata. The site is located within a Groundwater Source Protection Zone III.

6. No radon precautions are required.

7. No historical or active landfills are recorded within 250 m of the site.

8. A number of small quarries were noted on the historical maps within 200 m of the site. Gas

monitoring wells have been installed and a programme of gas monitoring instigated. Gas

protective measures would not be expected to be required, but at this stage we recommend

that Amber 1 protective measures are assumed for plots within 250 m of the small quarries.

These would comprise a fully lapped and sealed gas membrane system and ventilated void

beneath the floor slab.

9. Topsoil was recorded across the site with thicknesses ranging between 0.25 m and 0.5 m.

The natural ground generally comprised firm, sometimes becoming stiff with depth, brown,

occasionally sandy, gravelly clay. Occasionally, layers of sand were recorded locally at depth

(>2 m). In a small number of trial pits, very weathered clayey chalk was encountered. No

groundwater was encountered within the trial pits.

10. Window sampling and dynamic probing has been undertaken both within and adjacent to the

surface depressions. It is expected that the soft/loose material recorded in these up to

around 4 m deep will need to be stabilised prior to development taking place in these areas.



Issue 2

5

26 August 2015

Vigilance should be maintained throughout construction for further potential solution

features.

11. For a low rise housing scheme, the most suitable foundations across the majority of the site

are considered to be strip or trench fill footings at a minimum depth of 1 m. A safe bearing

capacity of 100 kN/m2 is considered appropriate. The foundations will need to be deepened

in accordance with the NHBC Standards, Chapter 4.2, where existing or proposed trees are

within influencing distance. Heave precautions will be required where the foundations are

more than 1500 mm deep due to existing trees. If the footings span different materials, e.g.

sand and clay, the foundations should be reinforced.

12. Rafts or piled foundations are proposed for plots over the stabilised material in the surface

depressions.

13. Superstructure precautions are likely to be required for plots located over the surface

depressions, if raft foundations are used.

14. No or very low infiltration rates (up to a maximum of 2 x 10-06 m/sec) were recorded in the

superficial deposits, with rates of 1.4 to 20 x 10-06 m/sec recorded in the underlying upper

layers of chalk.

15. None of the contaminants tested exceeded their respective assessment values. Remedial

measures are therefore not considered necessary and the topsoil is considered suitable for

re-use.

16. Gas monitoring is ongoing. However, the initial results indicate that the gassing regime

should be classified as Green under the NHBC traffic light system and no gas precautions

will be required.

17. DS-1 AC-2z sulphate precautions are required for below ground concrete.

18. The conclusions made in this report in relation to contamination are subject to agreement by

the approving bodies such as the Local Authority and warranty provider.



Issue 2

6

26 August 2015

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Terms of Reference

This report presents the findings of a geotechnical and geo-environmental site investigation carried

out by Eastwood & Partners (Consulting Engineers) Ltd for, and on the behalf of, Persimmon

Homes and Redrow Homes in order to inform preparation of a subsequent Development Brief for

the site. Any other parties using the information in this report do so at their own risk and any duty of

care is excluded.

2.2 Context

The following reports have been reviewed:

Geotechnical Engineering’s ‘Ground Investigation’ reference 21259, dated 27 February 2008; and

Geotechnical Engineering’s ‘Soakaway Testing’ reference 17756, dated 28 July 2005.

In addition to the above reports, Wycombe District Council’s Local Plan ‘Consultation Document’,

dated January 2014, contains a section on the proposals for the Terriers Farm Allocation Site.

2.3 Aims and Objectives

The aims and objectives of this investigation were as follows:

• Assimilate phase 1 data to derive an outline conceptual model identifying potential

contaminants, pathways and receptors, as well as possible linkages between these;

• Obtain information enabling refinement and subsequent testing of the conceptual model;

• Carry out tiered risk assessment to establish the likely risks to future receptors, involving the

use of generic assessment criteria and where unacceptable risks are identified, site specific

assessment criteria within a detailed quantitative risk assessment;

• Identify feasible remediation options if unacceptable risks are highlighted;

• Develop an appropriate remediation strategy where remediation is required; and

• Detail the ground conditions and their geotechnical properties enabling outline foundation

proposals to be made.



Issue 2

7

26 August 2015

2.4 Scope of Investigation

This document is split into two sections. These constitute the findings of the Phase 1 and Phase 2

investigations, consecutively.

2.4.1 Phase 1

The Phase 1 investigation involved a review of information extracted from published documentation

as well as that obtained from a site reconnaissance. Information regarding the current and former

land uses both on and surrounding the site, as well as the environmental sensitivity of the site

location as determined by factors including geology, hydrogeology and hydrology have been

examined.

Information analysed in this section of the report has been obtained from a variety of sources and

included the following:

• A Landmark Envirocheck report. This includes historical Ordnance Survey maps, as well as

information regarding environmental issues such as abstraction licences, pollution

incidences and waste facilities;

• The British Geological Survey map;

• A site walkover, as part of the intrusive works; and

• The previous reports.

The results of the Phase 1 investigation were used to derive an outline conceptual model from

which a preliminary risk assessment was made.

2.4.2 Phase 2

This part of the investigation consisted of intrusive works and laboratory analysis. The findings were

used to test the conceptual model and produce a final risk assessment.

The intrusive works comprised trial pits which were excavated to enable:

• Examination of the upper few metres of ground;

• In situ description of soils, enabling any localised lateral and vertical changes in soil

conditions to be logged;

• Assessment of any contamination identified using visual and olfactory methods;



Issue 2

8

26 August 2015

• Collection of soil samples for geotechnical and chemical testing; and

• Infiltration tests to be undertaken.

2.5 Limitations of Investigation

This report is based on the assumption that the site will be developed with residential units, up to

three storeys in height, which will be of conventional construction, and that existing ground levels

will not alter significantly. If this is not the case, then the advice given in this report may not be

appropriate.

Where assessments of site areas affected in particular ways are given, these are approximate. All

information, comments and opinions given in this report are based on the ground conditions

encountered during the site work, on the results of laboratory testing carried out as part of the

investigation and information gained from a historical, geological and environmental desk study.

However, there may be conditions at the site that have not been taken into account, such as

unpredictable soil strata and water conditions between or below investigation points. It should be

noted that groundwater and gas levels vary due to seasonal or other effects, and may at times differ

from those measured during the investigation.



Issue 2

9

26 August 2015

3.0 THE SITE

3.1 Description

The Allocation Site has an area of approximately 23 hectares and is located at Kingshill Road, High

Wycombe. The site is centred around grid reference 487810, 195100.

The site currently comprises open fields, which are separated by fences as well as hedge and tree

lined field boundaries. A footpath is located in the eastern part of the site, trending north/south. A

water main crosses the site from the south-eastern corner, across the centre of the site before

bending around to the south west and exiting through the south-west site boundary. A gas main

crosses the central part of the site from south to north.

Areas of trees are present within the site and along the boundaries, especially in the south-western

corner.

A number of surface depressions were identified on site, three of which are within the proposed

area of development as shown within Wycombe District Council’s Local Plan ‘Consultation

Document’, dated January 2014, an extract of which is in Appendix 1. Geotechnical Engineering Ltd

also identified a further depression within the proposed development area, making four in total. A

further five surface depressions were also identified by Eastwood & Partners within the proposed

areas of public open space. These are discussed further in section 6.4.

The site is a bowl shape with sides sloping down to the central southern part of the site at varying

angles, but at around 3° or 1 in 20 at its steepest. The high point at the site is in the north-east

corner which lies at 178 m AOD, the lowest part of the site is along the southern boundary which

has an elevation of 161 m AOD.

The site is bordered by Hazlemere recreation ground to the east, Terriers House and Lodge (subject

of planning applications 15/06859/FUL, 15/06860/FUL and 15/06862/LBC) to the south, a former

college site, re-developed by Taylor Wimpey, to the west and to the north by Lady’s Mile, an Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and adopted Green Belt.

The ‘Exploratory Hole Location Plan’, drawing 38473/001B in Appendix 1, shows the features

described. Some photographs are also provided in Appendix 1.

3.2 History

Historical maps, obtained as part of the Envirocheck report, have been reviewed to assess the

previous use of the site and surrounding area. Copies of the maps are presented in Appendix 2.



Issue 2

10

26 August 2015

3.2.1 The Site

The earliest map reviewed dates between 1874 and 1875. This shows the site to comprise a

number of fields. Trees are present along some of the field boundaries, as well as a small number

within the site. A footpath is located in the eastern part of the site, trending north/south. Another

footpath is present in the western part of the site, which trends north-west/south-east, both of which

remain on site today. From 1898 some small copses or stands of trees are present in the south-

western area of the site and a section of the site appears to have been planted with an orchard. The

copses of trees remain until circa 1970 and the orchard remains until circa 1991. The site has

remained undeveloped to the present day.

3.2.2 The Surrounding Area

The earliest map dated 1874-1875, shows the surrounding area to predominately comprise

agricultural land with scattered farms. The area south-east of the site comprises woodland.

Brickworks are present about 20 m south-east of the site. A small ‘Old Quarry’ is located

approximately 80 m east of the south-east corner of the site and a further small quarry is located

approximately 80 m north of the north-eastern corner of the site. In addition, a small pond/basin

appears to be located approximately centrally on the site’s south-eastern boundary. A small portion

of the pond/basin is within the site and the remainder lies outside the site boundary. Two additional

possible small quarries, or maybe sinkholes, are located adjacent to the site’s south and south-

eastern boundary. These are not however, labelled as such and are not visible by the following

map, dated 1898. A further quarry is located about 200 m south of the site. All of the quarries

appear to have been disused since the 1900’s. The quarry to the north of the site does not appear

to have been backfilled and its outline remains visible on recent mapping. The quarries 80 m east of

the site and 200 m south of the site disappear from the map between 1961 and 1969. It is not clear

whether or not these have been backfilled. By 1900, Terriers Farm has been built outside the south-

western corner of the site and residential development has commenced to the south of the site.

During the 1920’s and 1930’s, residential development of the south-eastern area has started. In the

subsequent years, developments have expanded, with the surrounding area remaining mainly

residential to the present day.

3.3 Geology

According to the British Geological Survey online map, the solid geology beneath the site is shown

to be the Seaford Chalk and Newhaven Chalk Formation. Superficial deposits shown across the

whole site are the Clay-with-Flints Formation, which includes clay, silt, sand and gravel.



Issue 2

11

26 August 2015

The British Geological Survey holds records of trial pits and boreholes in the local area. A borehole

located about 9 m east of the site has recorded firm to stiff slightly sandy clay to at least five metres

below ground level (bgl). A second borehole located just off the south-west boundary of the site

records made ground of flint gravel and clay to 0.7 m bgl, overlying soft to firm silty clay with chalk

and flint gravel to 1.9 m. This was found to overlie weathered chalk to the base of the borehole at

5 m bgl.

3.4 Hydrogeology

3.4.1 Groundwater Vulnerability

The Envirocheck report shows the bedrock to comprise a Principal Aquifer. These are layers of rock

that have high fracture permeability - meaning they usually provide a high level of water storage.

The overlying superficial deposits have been classified as Unproductive Strata.

According to the Envirocheck report, the site is located within a Groundwater Source Protection

Zone III.

3.4.2 Water Abstractions

The Envirocheck report does not record any water abstractions within 500 m of the site.

3.5 Hydrology

The Envirocheck report states that the nearest surface water feature is located on the site. This is

presumed to be the pond/basin located adjacent to the site’s southern boundary. This area is

covered with trees and bushes. However, the basin is known to be dry throughout most of the year,

only holding water after periods of heavy rainfall.

The next nearest surface water feature is a small pond located around 50 m west of the site. There

are no surface watercourses noted within the surrounding area.

3.6 Mining

There are no coal measures strata at workable depth beneath the site.

Within the historical maps, there are no indications of workings having taken place within the clay

anticipated on site. However, brickworks used to be present about 20 m south-east of the site and

several associated small quarries are shown in the early historical maps (1875), adjacent to the

site’s south-eastern boundary and in the wider area east and south-east of the site.



Issue 2

12

26 August 2015

3.7 Ground Gas

Information obtained from the Envirocheck report indicates that no radon precautions are required.

There are no historical or active landfills within 500 m of the site.

Made ground is anticipated to potentially be locally present on site. This is not expected to be of

significant thickness at this stage.

Two possible very small historical quarries are shown on the 1875 map adjacent to the site’s south

and south-eastern boundary, within the woodland area west of the brickworks. Three further small

quarries were identified on the historical maps within 200 m of the site. The quarries generally

appear to have been disused since the 1900’s and it appears that at least one of these hasn’t been

backfilled. Due to the proximity to the site and the unknown nature of any backfilling materials,

ground gas monitoring wells have been installed in the eastern and southern parts of the site and a

programme of gas monitoring has been instigated.

3.8 Pollution Incidents to Controlled Waters

The Envirocheck report records one pollution incident to controlled waters, 27 m south of the site.

This relates to a pollution incident involving oils with the receptor being unknown and occurred in

1991. It was categorised as a minor incident. This is not expected to have significantly affected the

groundwater below the site.

No other pollution incidents to controlled waters are indicated within 250 m of the site.

3.9 Discharge Consents

The Envirocheck report records one discharge consent located 20 m east of the site, which relates

to sewage discharges of final or treated effluent to a soakaway. The permit has been active since

2012. This is not expected to adversely affect the site.

No other discharge consents are indicated within 250 m of the site.

3.10 Flooding

The Envirocheck report indicates that the site is not within 250 m of a flood plain.



Issue 2

13

26 August 2015

4.0 OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL

The site has comprised fields since at least 1880. Significant contamination is not anticipated to be

present.

The following table details the possible sources and associated contaminants of concern, pathways

and receptors, highlighted by the Phase 1 investigation as potentially present.

Potential Contaminants Pathway Receptor

Heavy metals/metalloids and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in topsoil and any made ground

Ingestion, inhalation, direct contact Migration through ground

Site workers, future residents, plants Principal Aquifer

Naturally elevated levels of heavy metals/metalloids in the natural ground

Ingestion, inhalation, direct contact Migration through ground

Site workers, future residents, plants Principal Aquifer

Sulphates in any made ground and the natural ground

Direct contact

Below ground concrete

PAHs in any made ground Direct contact Water supply pipes



Issue 2

14

26 August 2015

5.0 GROUND INVESTIGATION

5.1 Site Works

We visited site between 8 June and 12 June 2015 and excavated 61 trial pits, TP1 to TP61. These

reached depths of between 2.1 and 3.6 m below ground level (bgl). Infiltration tests were carried out

within a number of these and an additional 23 pits.

Following the initial investigation further window sampling and dynamic probing was considered

necessary. Ten window sample holes and nine dynamic probes were completed on 16 and 17 July

2015. The window sample holes each reached a depth of 4 m bgl and the dynamic probes were

taken to refusal. Six of the window sample holes were installed as gas and groundwater monitoring

wells.

Copies of the trial pit, dynamic probe and window sample logs are presented in Appendix 3, and

their positions are plotted on the Exploratory Hole Location Plan, Drawing number 38473/001,

revision B, in Appendix 1.

5.2 Laboratory Testing

Fifty one samples of topsoil and twenty samples of natural ground were dispatched for chemical

testing. Soil samples were taken in 500 g plastic tubs and amber glass jars. All samples were

analysed at Chemtech Laboratories, using MCERTs accredited methodologies where available.

Fifteen samples of the cohesive soils encountered were sent to Professional Soils Laboratory for

geotechnical testing.

The geotechnical test results are presented in Appendix 4 and discussed further in Section 7. The

chemical test results are presented in Appendix 5 and discussed further in Sections 8 and 9.



Issue 2

15

26 August 2015

6.0 GROUND CONDITIONS

6.1 Surface Covering

The vast majority of the site comprises fields covered with grass over topsoil. There is a small

section in the south-western corner of the site which is covered with grass, trees and bushes.

The thickness of the topsoil was found to be between 0.25 m and 0.5 m.

6.2 Made Ground

Made ground was not recorded within any of the trial pits.

6.3 Natural Ground

The natural ground across the site generally comprised firm brown, occasionally sandy, gravelly

clay. The clay was occasionally recorded as locally stiff with depth. The gravel was fine to coarse,

sub-angular of mixed lithology with occasional cobbles. Occasionally, layers of sand were recorded

locally at deeper depths (>2 m bgl).

In a small number of trial pits, very weathered clayey chalk was encountered. In the south-western

corner of the site chalk was recorded at depths of between 1.6 m and 2.5 m bgl, in two trial pits. In

the southern part of the site (Field F), chalk was encountered at 2.1 m bgl. However, it should be

mentioned that in a trial pit excavated 3 m away from this pit, chalk was not encountered to a depth

of 3.7 m bgl, where the pit was terminated.

6.4 Surface Depressions

Excavations carried out within a number of the surface depressions generally recorded a thin layer

of topsoil over the natural ground of firm sandy gravelly clay, sometimes overlain by a band of

clayey, often gravelly, sand. The clay often became firmer and less sandy with depth, with

penetrometer readings of 100 kN/m² or 125 kN/m² unconfined compressive strength from around

1.5 m bgl. In three of these, very weak, very weathered, very clayey gravel of chalk was

encountered at about 3 m bgl.

Geotechnical Engineering Ltd also excavated a trial pit within a surface depression. They describe

the following:

‘Made ground was only encountered in the vicinity of TP13 sunk at the location of a possible

subsidence sink hole. The made ground encountered at this location comprised 0.1 m of topsoil,

which overlay a firm brown, slightly sandy, locally sandy, clay, which contained some, locally much,

flint gravel, together with fragments of brick, and a thin layer of ash at a depth of 1.2 m. The made



Issue 2

16

26 August 2015

ground encountered at this location suggests that some attempt at upfilling the depression has

occurred in the past.’

Eastwood & Partners subsequently undertook four window sample holes within two of the surface

depressions. The findings of the window sample holes within the surface depressions were

consistent with those of Eastwood & Partners’ trial pits. Soft to firm clay which was often sandy

and/or gravelly was generally encountered to the base of the holes at 4 m bgl. The only exception to

this was WSG which encountered chalk at 3.1 m bgl.

Four dynamic probes were undertaken within two of the surface depressions and a further five were

undertaken just outside of the depressions. Each of the dynamic probes was taken to refusal, and

therefore up to 12.1 m deep. The results of the dynamic probes indicate that soft/loose ground was

encountered to a depth of around 2.5 m to 4 m within the surface depressions whereas outside of

these the soft ground generally only reached 2 m or less. The stiff ground was also reached at

greater depths within the surface depressions compared to those outside.

It is therefore concluded that these could be solution features within the chalk. The loose/soft

material in these is expected will need to be stabilised prior to development taking place in these

areas. Vigilance should be maintained throughout construction for further similar features.

6.5 Obstructions

No significant obstructions were encountered. It should be mentioned that a water main and a gas

pipe are crossing the site.

6.6 Groundwater

No groundwater was encountered within any of the trial pits.

6.7 Evidence of Contamination

No visual or olfactory evidence of significant contamination was identified in any of the exploratory

holes.



Issue 2

17

26 August 2015

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL APPRAISAL

7.1 General

The natural ground across the site generally comprised firm, occasionally sandy, gravelly clay. The

clay was occasionally recorded as locally stiff with depth. Occasionally, layers of sand were

recorded locally at depth.

It is expected that the soft/loose material recorded in the surface depressions up to around 4 m

deep will need to be stabilised prior to development taking place in these areas.

Plasticity tests were carried out on 15 samples of the natural clay across the site. The modified

plasticity indices recorded are in the table below:

Position Modified Plasticity Index (%) TP3, 1.1 m 37.6

TP6, 1.5 m 43.2

TP10, 1.6 m 22.8

TP14, 1.5 m 34.4

TP16, 2 m 29.4

TP24, 1.3 m 48

TP25, 1.5 m 16.6

TP26, 1.9 m 25

TP31, 1 m 27

TP35, 1.1 m 29

TP39, 1.3 m 45.1

TP40, 1.3 m 26.8

TP43, 1.2 m 36.9

TP45, 1.5 m 54.5

TP48, 2 m 36

Four of the samples recorded plasticity indices which equate to a high volume change potential in

accordance with NHBC Standards, Chapter 4.2. These samples were found across the site and not

in a concentrated area. Ten samples recorded plasticity indices which equate to a medium volume

change potential and one sample indicated a low volume change potential. This trial pit recorded

sandy patches. The clay on site is considered should be treated as being of high volume change

potential in accordance with NHBC Standards, Chapter 4.2.



Issue 2

18

26 August 2015

Six of the samples are shown to be potentially desiccated based on the rule that if 0.4 x liquid limit is

greater than the moisture content then the sample is potentially significantly desiccated. The results

are shown in the table overleaf.

Sample Liquid Limit (%) 40% of Liquid Limit Moisture Content (%) TP14, 1.5 m 64 25.6 24

TP24, 1.3 m 74 29.6 29

TP25, 1.5 m 45 18 12

TP40, 1.3 m 54 21.6 21

TP43, 1.2 m 71 28.4 16

TP48, 2 m 70 28 27

There was no pattern observed with regards to the location of desiccated samples, some pits were

located near to vegetated field boundaries, however others were not. Vigilance will therefore be

required during foundation excavations.

7.2 Foundations

For a low rise housing scheme, the most suitable foundations across the majority of the site are

considered to be strip or trench fill footings at a minimum depth of 1 m below existing or proposed

ground level, whichever is the lowest. For plots located over the stabilised ground within an existing

surface depression an alternative foundation solution, such as rafts or piles, will be necessary.

Vigilance will also be required during excavations for foundations for further areas of loose ground

which could indicate solution features within the chalk.

For foundations outside the surface depressions, based on visual assessment and in situ testing

carried out on the firm clay soils, a safe bearing capacity of 100 kN/m2 should be achieved.

Foundations need to be extended through any made ground, desiccated ground or soft material to

appropriate ground below.

The foundations will need to be deepened in accordance with NHBC Standards, Chapter 4.2, where

existing or proposed trees are within influencing distance. Where existing or proposed trees will

have an influence, the footings should be deepened and constructed in accordance with the NHBC

Standards, Chapter 4.2. These may need to be deepened to up to 3.5 m and the NHBC may require

footings deeper than 2.5 m to be piled. Consideration of the tree influence at any early stage in the

design of the layout would be hoped could avoid the need for piled foundations.



Issue 2

19

26 August 2015

Precautions against soil heave will be required for all trench-fill footings with a calculated founding

depth greater than 1.5 m due to the past or present trees. For trenchfill footings, allowance should

be made for placing a 75 mm thickness of low density polystyrene from the top of the footing down

to a depth of 500 mm above formation level against the inside face of the perimeter footings. The

trenches will need to be dug wider to accommodate this. A smooth vertical face is required for the

external side of the footings.

If the footings are to span between different materials, e.g. sand and clay, it is considered prudent to

allow for the foundations to be reinforced.

Due to the slope of the site, regrading, tanking, underbuild and retaining may be required.

7.3 Ground Slabs

It is assumed that a precast concrete floor, with a ventilated void beneath, will be used. This void

should be a minimum of 300 mm high where heave precautions are required. A programme of gas

monitoring is being completed to assess the need for protective measures which would be expected

to comprise the addition of a fully lapped and sealed gas membrane for some plots.

7.4 Superstructure Precautions

Additional superstructure precautions are not considered to be required for the majority of the

proposed development as a result of the ground conditions encountered within the trial pits.

However, superstructure precautions are likely to be required for plots if raft foundations are

adopted.

7.5 Excavation Problems

A water main and a gas main are currently crossing the site. These will either need to be

decommissioned and re-routed prior to the development, or an easement will need to be provided.

Excavations at the site were generally found to be stable, however where excavations which

workers are required to enter are over 1.2 m deep, or less where there is a risk of harm from

collapse of the sides of the excavation, the sides should be supported or battered back to make

them safe.

7.6 Roads

A CBR value of at least 2% may be appropriate for road design. The ground should be assumed to

be frost susceptible and a minimum capping thickness of 450 mm will therefore apply.



Issue 2

20

26 August 2015

It is recommended that CBR tests are undertaken along any proposed roads prior to construction so

that more accurate CBR values can be obtained.

7.7 Surface Water Drainage

Twenty three soakaway tests were conducted in the natural slightly sandy clayey ground at depths

of between 1.15 m and 3.5 m bgl. A copy of the results is provided in Appendix 5. Low infiltration

rates were recorded and the following table summarises the change in water level over the test. The

maximum average infiltration rate recorded was 2 x 10-6 m/s for the test in SA18, where the drop

was only 90 mm over 3.5 hours. Due to the poor changes in water level, infiltration rates were not

calculated for the remaining tests undertaken within the superficial sandy clay deposits.

Soakaway Monitoring Period (Minutes)

Change in Water Level (mm)

SA1 225 -80

SA2 205 -30

SA3 210 -10

SA4 190 -20

SA5 218 -35

SA6 205 -10

SA7 186 -40

SA8 190 -10

SA9 210 0

SA10 170 -10

SA11 170 -30

SA12 170 -40

SA13 145 0

SA14 150 -50

SA18 210 -90

SA19 170 0

SA20 160 0

SA21 100 0

SA22 147 0

SA23 135 0

Chalk was rarely encountered across the site at reasonable depth to conduct infiltration tests and

when that was the case, it was mainly found to be very weathered and clayey. In the southern part

of the site (Field F), chalk was encountered at 2.1 m bgl. However, a trial pit was excavated 3 m

away from this pit and chalk was not encountered within 3.7 m of the surface, at which depth the pit

was terminated.



Issue 2

21

26 August 2015

Soakaway tests within the weathered chalk were conducted in five positions, three of which were in

surface depressions. The table overleaf summarises the infiltration rates calculated.

Position BRE365 Infiltration Rate (x10-6 m/s)

Average Infiltration Rate (x10-6 m/s)

SA15 (TP39) 16 16

SA16 (TP51) - 1.4

SA24 (TP52) - 7.2

SA25 (TP53) - 3.8

SA17 TEST1 TEST2 TEST1 TEST2

19 15 20 17

Traditional shallow soakaways are considered unlikely to be viable. It is however, possible that

deeper, possibly borehole, soakaways within the un-weathered chalk would be viable.

Consideration would need to be given to not only the infiltration rates but also the site’s location over

a Principal Aquifer and Zone 3 Groundwater Source Protection Zone.



Issue 2

22

26 August 2015

8.0 REFINEMENT OF OUTLINE CONCEPTUAL MODEL

8.1 Source Characterisation

An outline conceptual model, detailing the possible sources and associated contaminants of

concern, potential pathways and receptors identified in the Phase 1 study, is set out in Section 4.

This section of the report documents the works undertaken to obtain information to test and refine

this model enabling a risk assessment to be produced and, where significant risks are expected,

remediation recommendations.

8.2 Gas Precautions

No radon precautions are required.

No historical or active landfills are recorded within 250 m of the site.

Two possible very small historical quarries, or maybe sinkholes, are shown on the maps adjacent to

the site’s south and south-eastern boundary, within the woodland area west of the brickworks.

Three further small quarries are located within 200 m of the site. The quarries generally appear to

have been disused since the 1900’s and it is not clear whether they have been backfilled. Due to the

proximity to the site and the unknown nature of any backfilling materials, ground gas monitoring in

the eastern and southern parts of the proposed development area has been instigated.

The ground found to be present in the locations of the surface depressions is not expected to

comprise a source of ground gas.

8.3 Unexpected Contamination

No visual or olfactory evidence of potentially significant contamination was identified during the site

investigation.

8.4 Chemical Testing

Fifty one samples of topsoil and twenty samples of natural ground, including soils collected from the

surface depressions, were dispatched for chemical testing. Each of the samples was analysed for

the suite of contaminants listed in the table overleaf:



Issue 2

23

26 August 2015

Contaminant Type Actual Contaminants

Metals/Metalloids Arsenic, cadmium, chromium (III and VI), lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, copper and zinc

pH pH

PAHs Speciated PAH

Sulphates* Water soluble sulphate, acid soluble sulphate and sulphur * Natural ground only

8.5 Assessment Criteria

The proposed development of the site is for residential properties with private gardens. Therefore

the assessment criteria relating to a residential end use have been used. Tables detailing the

relevant assessment concentrations used are included in Appendix 5.

8.6 Chemical Test Results

8.6.1 Topsoil

None of the tested determinants exceeded their respective assessment values.

8.6.2. Natural Ground

None of the tested determinants exceeded their respective assessment values.

8.6.3 Sulphates

The site has been taken as a Greenfield location in relation to the Aggressive Chemical

Environment for Concrete classifications.

Tests for total sulphur indicate that the total potential sulphates for the natural ground are 0.03% or

below, compared with upper class limit of 0.24% for class DS-1.

The concentrations of water soluble sulphate in the natural ground are between 10 mg/l and

15 mg/l, compared with the upper limit for Design Sulphate Class 1 of 500 mg/l.

pH values for the natural ground ranged between 5.2 and 8, with the lower values indicating an

ACEC Class of AC-2z.



Issue 2

24

26 August 2015

9.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

9.1 Human Health – Construction Workers

Significant contamination was generally not encountered. Normal precautions, such as washing

hands before eating, should be sufficient to mitigate any risk posed to construction workers. Any

unusual, brightly coloured or odorous material encountered during construction should be brought to

the attention of the site staff and investigated.

9.2 Human Health – Future Residents and Visitors

The results of the chemical testing undertaken as part of this ground investigation indicate that the

topsoil and natural ground on the site are not considered to pose a significant risk to the health of

future residents, visitors or other site users.

The topsoil is therefore considered to be suitable for re-use in the proposed development.

9.3 Plants

Significantly elevated concentrations of phytotoxic elements were not recorded. Therefore, no

significant risk to plants is anticipated from the soils on site.

9.4 Ground Gas

A program of gas monitoring is currently ongoing and three rounds have been undertaken to date.

These were completed between 27 July and 24 August 2015 predominantly during periods of low or

falling atmospheric pressure. A copy of the results and atmospheric conditions is provided in

Appendix 5.

Methane was not detected. Carbon dioxide was recorded at concentrations of up to 3.3% by volume

with normal oxygen levels of between 16.6% and 20.1%. No positive flow rates were recorded in

any of the wells during the monitoring visits, with the maximum recorded flow being 0.0 l/hr.

Gas screening values cannot be calculated as no positive gas flows were recorded. However,

based on the total concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide recorded, the site would be placed

in Characteristic Situation 1 under the modified Wilson and Card classification system and Green

under the NHBC Traffic light system, as outlined in CIRIA C665. No ground gas precautions would

therefore be required.

The gas monitoring program is ongoing and these classifications will be confirmed on completion of

the program.



Issue 2

25

26 August 2015

9.5 Concrete

The chemical test results indicate DS-1 with ACEC class of AC-2z is required for below ground

concrete.

9.6 Controlled Waters

No significant risks are expected to be posed to controlled waters.



Issue 2

26

26 August 2015

10.0 CONTAMINATION - RECOMMENDATIONS AND APPROVALS

1. None of the contaminants tested exceeded their respective assessment values. Remedial

measures are therefore not considered necessary and the topsoil is considered suitable for

re-use.

2. DS-1 AC-2z sulphate precautions are required for below ground concrete.

3. Ground gas monitoring is ongoing. However, the early results indicate that the site will be

classified as Green under the NHBC traffic light system, and no gas precautions will be

required.

4. The conclusions made in this report in relation to contamination are subject to agreement by

the approving bodies such as the Local Authority and warranty provider.

5. It is recommended that the test results are forwarded to the water company who will

determine what type of water supply pipes need to be installed at the site.


CAT/MM/KS/38473-001 Site Investigation Report

Issue 2

26 August 2015

Appendix 1 Extract from Wycombe District Council’s Local Plan ‘Consultation Document’, dated January 2014

‘Exploratory Hole Location Plan’, Drawing Number 38473/001B

Wycombe District Local Plan: Options

Consultation DocumentJanuary 2014

Thriving places: cherishing our environment; nurturing our growth

A new Local Plan for Wycombe District to 2031• Environment• Infrastructure• Homes• Jobs

New Local Plan - Options Consultation Document

Contents

Foreword........................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction.................................................................................. 4

2. The ‘Big Challenge’ Plan.............................................................. 13

3. Wycombe District in 2031............................................................ 18

4. How much and where? – the Big Choices: Homes and Jobs....... 20

5. What Sites Are Being Considered in your Area?........................... 41

Area 1 - High Wycombe town...................................... 43

Area 2 - Chepping Wye Valley...................................... 60

Area 3 - Marlow........................................................... 66

Area 4 – South West Chiltern....................................... 69

Area 5 – North West Chiltern........................................ 71

Area 6 – Princes Risborough........................................ 74

6. Managing Development............................................................... 85

Appendices........................................................................................ 93

Appendix 1 Glossary.......................................................................... 94

Appendix 2 Studies and Background Papers...................................... 98

Appendix 3 Assessing the Main Housing Options............................... 100

Appendix 4 - Area proposals – site details and site plans.................... 116

5.5 HW4 Terriers Farm (23ha)

This site is located on the northern side of High Wycombe occupying a sensitive area between the town and Hazlemere. It contains pasture land and adjoins both the Chilterns AONB and the Terriers Conservation Area. It is a visually enclosed site but contains high quality hedgerow features which form a strong landscape structure. It is located close to an important public transport corridor on the northern approach into High Wycombe.

Option 1: Terriers Farm could provide for approximately 310- 410 homes, and a Park and Ride facility

Under this option, a park and ride facility would be provided to be located close to the junction with Kingshill Road. This could provide a shuttle link with the southern Park and Ride site, or an upgraded existing interurban service.

Option 2: Terriers Farm could provide for approximately 380-490 homes (up to a maximum of 490 homes) with no Park and Ride facility provided

Under this option, no park and ride facility would be provided and the site would be developed for residential development only.

HW4 Terriers Farm - Indicative development areas:

OS Mapping: © Crown Copyright and database rights 2014 Ordnance Survey 100023306.

55

Key development principles

• Provision for improvement in movement across the wider area around the Terriers double-roundabout, in particular providing for an improved environment for pedestrians and cyclists;

• Retention of sensitive hedgerows and existing trees on the site;

• Respect the adjacent Terriers Conservation Area;

• Provision of the eastern fields as the on-site open space to link with the sports facilities at the adjacent Hazlemere Recreation Ground;

• Integration with adjacent development at Terriers House;

• Provision of full walking and cycling connectivity to and through the site, and direct and safe walking connections to local services and bus stops. These should be integrated into any local junction improvements needed;

• Provision of vehicle access points from Kingshill Road;

• Provision of any local junction improvements/signalisation/optimisation needed – including:

Double-roundabout between Amersham Road, Totteridge Lane and Kingshill Road; and Amersham Road with Hamilton Road;

• Provision of local school travel planning as well as a travel plan for the development;

• Contribution to the enhancement of the Green Infrastructure Network;

• Retention of strong separation between High Wycombe and Hazlemere;

• Provision of other aspects of community infrastructure. Specific infrastructure issues identified to date include capacity of local schools and doctors surgeries. Development will be expected to address these issues which may include on-site provision or through specific financial contributions to enable the expansion of local facilities (e.g. Kingswood Surgery, Totteridge);

• Collaboration with the water authorities to demonstrate that there is adequate water and waste water capacity both on and off site to serve the development.

Q27a – Should a Park and Ride facility and service be provided from this site? If not, what public transport measures should be provided?

Q27b – Should development link in with Terriers House?

Q27c – Are wider transport measures required to improve movement around Terriers double-roundabout, in particular to improve the environment for pedestrians and cyclists?

56

[email protected]

www.eastwoodandpartners.com

St. Andrew's House

23 Kingfield Road

Sheffield

S11 9AS

0114 255 4554

0114 255 4330Fax

Tel


CAT/MM/KS/38473-001 Site Investigation Report

Issue 2

26 August 2015

Appendix 2 Envirocheck Report

Order Number: 67922248_1_1 Date: 27-May-2015 rpr_ec_datasheet v49.0 A Landmark Information Group Service

Datasheet

Order Details:Order Number:

Customer Reference:

National Grid Reference:

Slice:

Site Area (Ha):

Search Buffer (m):

Site Details:

Client Details:

67922248_1_1

38473 Terriers Farm

489020, 195290

B

21.9

1000

Terriers FarmHigh Wycombe

Miss K Daddo-LangloisEastwood & Partners LtdSt Andrews House23 Kingfield RoadSheffieldS11 9AS

Report:®Envirocheck


Summary

Agency & Hydrological

Waste

Hazardous Substances

Geological

Industrial Land Use

Sensitive Land Use

Data Currency

Data Suppliers

Useful Contacts

Introduction

Copyright Notice

Natural England Copyright Notice

Ove Arup Copyright Notice

Peter Brett Associates Copyright Notice

Radon Potential dataset Copyright Notice

The Environment Act 1995 has made site sensitivity a key issue, as the legislation pays as much attention to the pathways by which contamination could spread, and to the vulnerable targets of contamination, as it does the potential sources of contamination. For this reason, Landmark's Site Sensitivity maps and Datasheet(s) place great emphasis on statutory data provided by the Environment Agency/Natural Resources Wales and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency; it also incorporates data from Natural England (and the Scottish and Welsh equivalents) and Local Authorities; and highlights hydrogeological features required by environmental and geotechnical consultants. It does not include any information concerning past uses of land. The datasheet is produced by querying the Landmark database to a distance defined by the client from a site boundary provided by the client.

In the attached datasheet the National Grid References (NGRs) are rounded to the nearest 10m in accordance with Landmark's agreements with a number of Data Suppliers.

© Landmark Information Group Limited 2015. The Copyright on the information and data and its format as contained in this Envirocheck® Report ("Report") is the property of Landmark Information Group Limited ("Landmark") and several other Data Providers, including (but not limited to) Ordnance Survey, British Geological Survey, the Environment Agency/Natural Resources Wales and Natural England, and must not be reproduced in whole or in part by photocopying or any other method. The Report is supplied under Landmark's Terms and Conditions accepted by the Customer. A copy of Landmark's Terms and Conditions can be found with the Index Map for this report. Additional copies of the Report may be obtained from Landmark, subject to Landmark's charges in force from time to time. The Copyright, design rights and any other intellectual rights shall remain the exclusive property of Landmark and /or other Data providers, whose Copyright material has been included in this Report.

Site of Special Scientific Interest, National Nature Reserve, Ramsar, Special Protection Area, Special Conservation Area, Marine Nature Reserve data (derived from Ordnance Survey 1:10000 raster) is provided by, and used with the permission of, Natural England who retain the copyright and Intellectual Property Rights for the data.

The Data provided in this report was obtained on Licence from Ove Arup & Partners Limited (for further information, contact [email protected]). No reproduction or further use of such Data is to be made without the prior written consent of Ove Arup & Partners Limited. The information and data supplied in the product are derived from publicly available records and other third party sources and neither Ove Arup & Partners nor Landmark warrant the accuracy or completeness of such information or data.

The cavity data presented has been extracted from the PBA enhanced version of the original DEFRA national cavity databases. PBA/DEFRA retain the copyright & intellectual property rights in the data. Whilst all reasonable efforts are made to check that the information contained in the cavity databases is accurate we do not warrant that the data is complete or error free. The information is based upon our own researches and those collated from a number of external sources and is continually being augmented and updated by PBA. In no event shall PBA/DEFRA or Landmark be liable for any loss or damage including, without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage arising from the use of this data.

Information supplied from a joint dataset compiled by The British Geological Survey and Public Health England.

Report Section Page Number

Contents

Report Version v49.0

-

1

3

-

4

9

10

11

15

16


Summary

Data Type PageNumber On Site 0 to 250m 251 to 500m


501 to 1000m

Contaminated Land Register Entries and Notices

Discharge Consents

Enforcement and Prohibition Notices

Integrated Pollution Controls

Integrated Pollution Prevention And Control

Local Authority Integrated Pollution Prevention And Control

Local Authority Pollution Prevention and Controls

Local Authority Pollution Prevention and Control Enforcements

Nearest Surface Water Feature

Pollution Incidents to Controlled Waters

Prosecutions Relating to Authorised Processes

Prosecutions Relating to Controlled Waters

Registered Radioactive Substances

River Quality

River Quality Biology Sampling Points

River Quality Chemistry Sampling Points

Substantiated Pollution Incident Register

Water Abstractions

Water Industry Act Referrals

Groundwater Vulnerability

Bedrock Aquifer Designations

Superficial Aquifer Designations

Source Protection Zones

Extreme Flooding from Rivers or Sea without Defences

Flooding from Rivers or Sea without Defences

Areas Benefiting from Flood Defences

Flood Water Storage Areas

Flood Defences

Detailed River Network Lines

Detailed River Network Offline Drainage

Yes

Yes

Yes

1

n/a

n/a

n/a

1

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2

2

1

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

(*up to 2000m)

pg 1

pg 1

pg 1

pg 1

pg 2

pg 2

pg 2


Summary


Waste


Geological

501 to 1000m

BGS Recorded Landfill Sites

Historical Landfill Sites

Integrated Pollution Control Registered Waste Sites

Licensed Waste Management Facilities (Landfill Boundaries)

Licensed Waste Management Facilities (Locations)

Local Authority Recorded Landfill Sites

Registered Landfill Sites

Registered Waste Transfer Sites

Registered Waste Treatment or Disposal Sites

Control of Major Accident Hazards Sites (COMAH)

Explosive Sites

Notification of Installations Handling Hazardous Substances (NIHHS)

Planning Hazardous Substance Consents

Planning Hazardous Substance Enforcements

BGS 1:625,000 Solid Geology

BGS Estimated Soil Chemistry

BGS Recorded Mineral Sites

BGS Urban Soil Chemistry

BGS Urban Soil Chemistry Averages

Brine Compensation Area

Coal Mining Affected Areas

Mining Instability

Man-Made Mining Cavities

Natural Cavities

Non Coal Mining Areas of Great Britain

Potential for Collapsible Ground Stability Hazards

Potential for Compressible Ground Stability Hazards

Potential for Ground Dissolution Stability Hazards

Potential for Landslide Ground Stability Hazards

Potential for Running Sand Ground Stability Hazards

Potential for Shrinking or Swelling Clay Ground Stability Hazards

Radon Potential - Radon Affected Areas

Radon Potential - Radon Protection Measures

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

n/a

Yes

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Yes

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Yes

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

(*up to 2000m)

pg 4

pg 4

pg 7

pg 8

pg 8

pg 8

pg 8


Summary


Industrial Land Use

Sensitive Land Use

501 to 1000m

Contemporary Trade Directory Entries

Fuel Station Entries

Areas of Adopted Green Belt

Areas of Unadopted Green Belt

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Environmentally Sensitive Areas

Forest Parks

Local Nature Reserves

Marine Nature Reserves

National Nature Reserves

National Parks

Nitrate Sensitive Areas

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones

Ramsar Sites

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Special Areas of Conservation

Special Protection Areas

1

1

1 n/a

2

(*up to 2000m)

pg 9

pg 9

pg 10

pg 10

Order Number: 67922248_1_1 Date: 27-May-2015 rpr_ec_datasheet v49.0 A Landmark Information Group Service Page 1 of 16


MapID Details

QuadrantReference (Compass Direction)

EstimatedDistanceFrom Site

Contact NGR

1

2

3

4

5

Discharge Consents

Discharge Consents






B9NE(NE)

B5SE(S)

B9NE(NE)

B9NE(NE)

B5NW(S)

(NW)

839

909

803

855

596

0

2

2

3

3

2

2

Operator:Property Type:Location:Authority:Catchment Area:Reference:Permit Version:Effective Date:Issued Date:Revocation Date:Discharge Type:Discharge Environment:Receiving Water:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Operator:Property Type:Location:Authority:Catchment Area:Reference:Permit Version:Effective Date:Issued Date:Revocation Date:Discharge Type:Discharge Environment:Receiving Water:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Name:Location:Authority:Permit Reference:Dated:Process Type:Description:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Name:Location:

Authority:Permit Reference:Dated:Process Type:Description:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Property Type:Location:Authority:Pollutant:Note:Incident Date:Incident Reference:Catchment Area:Receiving Water:Cause of Incident:Incident Severity:Positional Accuracy:

Soil Classification:

Map Sheet:Scale:

Watson & Ewen Ltd.Undefined Or OtherOrchard Works, Amersham Rd, Haslemere, BucksEnvironment Agency, Thames RegionNot GivenCTWC.0464110th December 198510th December 1985Not SuppliedSewage Discharges - Final/Treated Effluent - Not Water CompanyInto Land

Upper ChalkTransferred from COPA 1974Located by supplier to within 100m

Mr. C.P. AperghisDomestic Property (Single)Beacon Hill, Manor Road, Tylersgreen, Penn, BucksEnvironment Agency, Thames RegionNot GivenCTWC.1619119th May 198719th May 1987Not SuppliedSewage Discharges - Final/Treated Effluent - Not Water CompanyIrrigation Area

ChalkTransferred from COPA 1974Located by supplier to within 100m

Esso Hazlemere Crossroads331 Amersham Road, HIGH WYCOMBE, Buckinghamshire, HP15 7HLWycombe District Council, Environmental ServicesX1322nd September 1999Local Authority Air Pollution ControlPG1/14 Petrol filling stationAuthorisedAutomatically positioned to the address

Shell HazlemereHazlemere Crossroads, Hazlemere, HIGH WYCOMBE, Buckinghamshire, HP15 7LGWycombe District Council, Environmental ServicesX188th July 1999Local Authority Air Pollution ControlPG1/14 Petrol filling stationAuthorisedAutomatically positioned to the address

Not GivenSt Johns Road, TYLERS GREENEnvironment Agency, Thames RegionChemicals - UnknownNot Supplied25th February 1996N1960081Not GivenNot GivenNot GivenCategory 2 - Significant IncidentLocated by supplier to within 100m

Soils of Intermediate Leaching Potential (I1) - Soils which can possibly transmit a wide range of pollutantsSheet 39 West London1:100,000

None

489200195650

489180194660

489175195593

489233195565

489001195001

488719195470



MapID Details



Contact NGR

6

7


Drift Deposits











Flood Defences



B9SW(SW)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(SW)

(SW)

B9SW(SW)

B9SW(W)

B5SE(S)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

218

2

2

4

4

4

4

2

2

Soil Classification:

Map Sheet:Scale:

Drift Deposit:

Map Sheet:Scale:

Aquifer Designation:




Name:Source:Reference:Type:

Name:Source:Reference:Type:

Soils of High Leaching Potential (U) - Soil information for restored mineral workings and urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere. A worst case vulnerability classification (H) assumed, until proved otherwiseSheet 39 West London1:100,000

Low permeability drift deposits occuring at the surface and overlying Major andMinor Aquifers are head, clay-with-flints, brickearth, peat, river terrace depositsand marine and estuarine alluviumSheet 39 West London1:100,000

Principal Aquifer

Principal Aquifer

Unproductive Strata

Unproductive Strata

VariousEnvironment Agency, Head OfficeNot SuppliedZone III (Total Catchment): The total area needed to support the discharge from the protected groundwater source.

VariousEnvironment Agency, Head OfficeNot SuppliedZone II (Outer Protection Zone): Either 25% of the source area or a 400 day travel time whichever is greater.

None

None

None

None

None

None

None

489021195292

489021195292

489021195000

489021195292

488680195000

489021195292

489017195293

489150194502


Waste

MapID Details



Contact NGR

Local Authority Landfill Coverage


0

0

3

9

Name:

Name:

Wycombe District Council - Has supplied landfill data

Buckinghamshire County Council - Has supplied landfill data

489021195292

489021195292


Geological

MapID Details



Contact NGR








B9SW(SW)

B9SW(W)

(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(S)

B5NW(S)

B13SW(N)

0

0

28

251

302

544

544

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Description:

Source:Soil Sample Type:Arsenic Concentration:Cadmium Concentration:Chromium Concentration:Lead Concentration:Nickel Concentration:






White Chalk Subgroup

British Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information ServiceRural Soil<15 mg/kg

<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg

489021195292

489000195292

488679195000

488950195000

489000195207

489000195099

489000196000


Geological

MapID Details



Contact NGR







B5NW(S)

B9NW(N)

B9SW(S)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B5NW(S)

547

565

568

569

595

676

4

4

4

4

4

4








<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg

489000195000

488933195804

489017195207

489021195292

489021195000

489000194810


Geological

MapID Details



Contact NGR







B13SW(N)

B13SW(N)

B13SW(N)

B1SW(S)

B13SW(N)

B5SE(S)

719

792

805

815

822

838

4

4

4

4

4

4








<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg

489000195827

489039195919

489000195975

488824194000

489021196000

489070194619


Geological

MapID Details



Contact NGR






BGS Measured Urban Soil Chemistry

BGS Urban Soil Chemistry Averages




B13SW(N)

B13SE(N)

B13NW(N)

B5SE(S)

B13SE(N)

B9SW(SW)

(SW)

856

897

962

973

991

0

0

4

4

4

4

4

4

4






Risk:Source:

Risk:Source:


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg<15 mg/kg


<1.8 mg/kg

60 - 90 mg/kg

<150 mg/kg15 - 30 mg/kg

UnlikelyBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

UnlikelyBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

No data available

No data available

In an area that might not be affected by coal mining

489045196000

489097196000

489000196233

489256194660

489204196113

489021195292

488679195000


Geological

MapID Details



Contact NGR



















B9SW(NW)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(NW)

B9SW(SW)

(SW)

B9SW(SW)

(SW)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(SW)

(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(SW)

B5NW(S)

B9SW(SW)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Risk:Source:

Hazard Potential:Source:













Protection Measure:

Source:

Protection Measure:

Source:

Affected Area:

Source:

Affected Area:

Source:

Highly UnlikelyBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

Very LowBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service


No HazardBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service


LowBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

ModerateBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

ModerateBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service







No radon protective measures are necessary in the construction of new dwellings or extensionsBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

No radon protective measures are necessary in the construction of new dwellings or extensionsBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

The property is in a lower probability radon area, as less than 1% of homes are above the action levelBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

The property is in a lower probability radon area, as less than 1% of homes are above the action levelBritish Geological Survey, National Geoscience Information Service

488925195375

489021195292

489021195000

489021195292

489021195000

488910195395

489021195292

488679195000

489021195292

488679195000

489021195292

489021195000

489021195292

488679195000

489021195000

489021195292

489021195000

489021195292


Industrial Land Use

MapID Details



Contact NGR

8

9

10




B5NW(SW)

B9NE(NE)

B9NE(NE)

496

802

855

-

-

-

Name:Location:

Classification:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Name:Location:

Brand:Premises Type:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Name:Location:

Brand:Premises Type:Status:Positional Accuracy:

Liz LambornKingswood, St. Johns Road, Hazlemere, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP15 7QRWallpapers & Wall CoveringsInactiveAutomatically positioned to the address

Hazlemere Cross Roads Otr Service Station331, Amersham Road, Hazlemere, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP15 7HLESSOPetrol StationOpenManually positioned to the address or location

Shell HazlemereHazlemere Cross Roads, Hazlemere, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP15 7LGSHELLPetrol StationOpenAutomatically positioned to the address

488822194870

489174195594

489233195565


Sensitive Land Use

MapID Details



Contact NGR

11

12



(W)

(NW)

99

1

5

7

Authority:Plan Name:Status:Plan Date:

Name:Multiple Areas:Total Area (m2):Designation Date:Source:

Wycombe District Council, Development ControlWycombe District Local Plan To 2011Adopted31st January 2004

ChilternsY838304032.4430th March 1990Natural England

487686195158

488703195557


Data Currency

Agency & Hydrological Version Update CycleContaminated Land Register Entries and Notices

Discharge Consents

Enforcement and Prohibition Notices

Integrated Pollution Controls

Integrated Pollution Prevention And Control

Local Authority Integrated Pollution Prevention And Control


Local Authority Pollution Prevention and Control Enforcements



Prosecutions Relating to Authorised Processes

Prosecutions Relating to Controlled Waters

River Quality

River Quality Biology Sampling Points

River Quality Chemistry Sampling Points

Substantiated Pollution Incident Register

Water Abstractions

Water Industry Act Referrals


Drift Deposits


April 2014January 2015October 2014

January 2015

March 2013

October 2008

January 2015

October 2014September 2014September 2014



July 2012

September 1999

March 2013

March 2013

November 2001

July 2012

July 2012

January 2015January 2015

January 2015

January 2015

April 2015

January 1999

October 2012

Annual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling Update

Quarterly

As notified

Not Applicable

Quarterly




Quarterly

Not Applicable

As notified

As notified

Not Applicable

Annually

Annually

QuarterlyQuarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

As notified

Chiltern District Council - Environmental HealthWycombe District Council - Environmental ServicesSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Environmental Health Department

Environment Agency - Thames Region




Chiltern District Council - Environmental HealthSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Environmental Health DepartmentWycombe District Council - Environmental Services



Ordnance Survey




Environment Agency - Head Office



Environment Agency - Thames Region - North East AreaEnvironment Agency - Thames Region - West Area





British Geological Survey - National Geoscience Information Service


Data Currency


Waste

Version

Version

Update Cycle

Update Cycle







Flood Defences



BGS Recorded Landfill Sites

Historical Landfill Sites

Integrated Pollution Control Registered Waste Sites

Licensed Waste Management Facilities (Landfill Boundaries)

Licensed Waste Management Facilities (Locations)


Local Authority Recorded Landfill Sites

Registered Landfill Sites

Registered Waste Transfer Sites

Registered Waste Treatment or Disposal Sites

January 2015

April 2015

May 2015

May 2015

May 2015

May 2015

May 2015

March 2012

March 2012

June 1996

February 2015February 2015

October 2008

August 2014August 2014

August 2014August 2014

May 2000May 2000May 2000May 2000

August 2006May 2000May 2000May 2000

March 2003March 2003



As notified

Quarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Quarterly

Annually

Annually

Not Applicable

QuarterlyQuarterly

Not Applicable

QuarterlyQuarterly

QuarterlyQuarterly

Not ApplicableNot ApplicableNot ApplicableNot Applicable

Not ApplicableNot ApplicableNot ApplicableNot Applicable

Not ApplicableNot Applicable

















Buckinghamshire County CouncilChiltern District Council - Environmental HealthSouth Buckinghamshire District CouncilWycombe District Council - Environmental Services

South Buckinghamshire District CouncilBuckinghamshire County CouncilChiltern District Council - Environmental HealthWycombe District Council - Environmental Services





Data Currency


Geological

Version

Version

Update Cycle

Update Cycle

Control of Major Accident Hazards Sites (COMAH)

Explosive Sites

Notification of Installations Handling Hazardous Substances (NIHHS)

Planning Hazardous Substance Enforcements

Planning Hazardous Substance Consents



BGS Recorded Mineral Sites

Brine Compensation Area


Mining Instability










January 2015

October 2014

November 2000

March 2014November 2014September 2013September 2014

March 2014November 2014September 2013September 2014

January 2009

January 2010

May 2015

August 2011

March 2014

October 2000

July 2014

June 2014

June 2014

June 2014

June 2014

June 2014

June 2014

July 2011

July 2011

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Not Applicable

Annual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling Update

Annual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling UpdateAnnual Rolling Update

Not Applicable

Annually

Bi-Annually

Not Applicable

As notified

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Annually

Annually

Annually

Annually

Annually

Annually

As notified

As notified

Health and Safety Executive



Chiltern District Council - Planning DepartmentSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Development Control DepartmentBuckinghamshire County CouncilWycombe District Council - Development Control

Chiltern District Council - Planning DepartmentSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Development Control DepartmentBuckinghamshire County CouncilWycombe District Council - Development Control




Cheshire Brine Subsidence Compensation Board

The Coal Authority - Mining Report Service

Ove Arup & Partners











Data Currency

Industrial Land Use

Sensitive Land Use

Version

Version

Update Cycle

Update Cycle




Areas of Unadopted Green Belt


Environmentally Sensitive Areas

Forest Parks

Local Nature Reserves

Marine Nature Reserves

National Nature Reserves

National Parks

Nitrate Sensitive Areas

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones

Ramsar Sites

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Special Areas of Conservation

Special Protection Areas

February 2015

November 2014

May 2015May 2015May 2015

May 2015May 2015May 2015

February 2015

August 2014

April 1997

April 2015

July 2013

March 2015

February 2015

February 2012

July 2014

March 2014

April 2015

March 2014

April 2015

Quarterly

Quarterly

As notifiedAs notifiedAs notified

As notifiedAs notifiedAs notified

Bi-Annually

Annually

Not Applicable

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Not Applicable

Annually

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Bi-Annually

Thomson Directories

Catalist Ltd - Experian

Chiltern District Council - Planning DepartmentSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Development Control DepartmentWycombe District Council - Development Control

Chiltern District Council - Planning DepartmentSouth Buckinghamshire District Council - Development Control DepartmentWycombe District Council - Development Control

Natural England

Natural England

Forestry Commission

Natural England

Natural England

Natural England

Natural England

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA - formerly FRCA)


Natural England

Natural England

Natural England

Natural England


Data Suppliers

Ordnance Survey

Environment Agency

Scottish Environment Protection Agency

The Coal Authority

British Geological Survey

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

Natural Resources Wales

Scottish Natural Heritage

Natural England

Public Health England

Ove Arup

Peter Brett Associates

Data Supplier Data Supplier Logo

A selection of organisations who provide data within this report


Useful Contacts

Contact Name and Address Contact Details

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

-

-

Environment Agency - National Customer Contact Centre (NCCC)

Wycombe District Council - Environmental Services

British Geological Survey - Enquiry Service

Wycombe District Council - Development Control

Chiltern District Council - Planning Department

Natural England


Buckinghamshire County Council

Public Health England - Radon Survey, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards

Landmark Information Group Limited

PO Box 544, Templeborough, Rotherham, S60 1BY

District Council Offices, Queen Victoria Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1BB

British Geological Survey, Kingsley Dunham Centre, Keyworth, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG12 5GG

District Council Offices, Queen Victoria Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1BB

Council Offices, King George V Road, Amersham, Buckinghamshire, HP65AW

Suite D, Unex House, Bourges Boulevard, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, PE1 1NG

Government Buildings, Otley Road, Lawnswood, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS16 5QT

County Hall, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, HP20 1UA

Chilton, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RQ

Imperium, Imperial Way, Reading, Berkshire, RG2 0TD

Telephone: 08708 506 506Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 01494 461000Fax: 01494 461292Website: www.wycombe.gov.uk

Telephone: 0115 936 3143Fax: 0115 936 3276Email: [email protected]: www.bgs.ac.uk

Telephone: 01494 461000Fax: 01494 421108Website: www.wycombe.gov.uk

Telephone: 01494 729000Fax: 01494 729332Website: www.chiltern.gov.uk

Telephone: 0845 600 3078Email: [email protected]: www.naturalengland.org.uk

Telephone: 0113 2613333Fax: 0113 230 0879

Telephone: 01296 395900Fax: 01296 88887Website: www.buckscc.gov.uk

Telephone: 01235 822622Fax: 01235 833891Email: [email protected]: www.ukradon.org

Telephone: 0844 844 9952Fax: 0844 844 9951Email: [email protected]: www.landmarkinfo.co.uk

Please note that the Environment Agency / Natural Resources Wales / SEPA have a charging policy in place for enquiries.

Order Details

Site DetailsTerriers Farm, High Wycombe

Order Number:Customer Ref:National Grid Reference:Slice:Site Area (Ha):Search Buffer (m):

67922248_1_138473 Terriers Farm489020, 195290B21.91000

Tel:Fax:Web:

0844 844 99520844 844 9951www.envirocheck.co.uk

Page 1 of 5A Landmark Information Group Service v15.0 27-May-2015

Site Sensitivity Context Map - Slice B


Order Details



67922248_1_138473 Terriers Farm489020, 195290B21.91000

Tel:Fax:Web:




Bedrock Aquifer Designation

Order Details



67922248_1_138473 Terriers Farm489020, 195290B21.91000

Tel:Fax:Web:




Superficial Aquifer Designation

Order Details



67922248_1_138473 Terriers Farm489020, 195290B21.91000

Tel:Fax:Web:





Order Details



67922248_1_138473 Terriers Farm489020, 195290B21.91000

Tel:Fax:Web:




Sensitive Land Uses


BGS Boreholes Datasheet

Order Details:Order Number:

Customer Reference:

National Grid Reference:

Slice:

Site Area (Ha):

Borehole Search Buffer (m):

Site Details:

Client Details:

67922248_1_1

38473 Terriers Farm

489020, 195290

B

21.9

500

Terriers FarmHigh Wycombe

Miss K Daddo-LangloisEastwood & Partners LtdSt Andrews House23 Kingfield RoadSheffieldS11 9AS

Report:®Envirocheck


BGS Boreholes Summary


BGS Boreholes None None 1pg 1

Introduction

Copyright Notice

The Environment Act 1995 has made site sensitivity a key issue, as the legislation pays as much attention to the pathways by which contamination could spread, and to the vulnerable targets of contamination, as it does the potential sources of contamination. For this reason, Landmark's Site Sensitivity maps and Datasheet(s) place great emphasis on statutory data provided by the Environment Agency and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency; it also incorporates data from Natural England (and the Scottish and Welsh equivalents) and Local Authorities; and highlights hydrogeological features required by environmental and geotechnical consultants. It does not include any information concerning past uses of land. The datasheet is produced by querying the Landmark database to a distance defined by the client from a site boundary provided by the client.

In the attached datasheet the National Grid References (NGRs) are rounded to the nearest 10m in accordance with Landmark's agreements with a number of Data Suppliers.

© Landmark Information Group Limited 2015. The Copyright on the information and data and its format as contained in this Envirocheck® Report ("Report") is the property ofLandmark Information Group Limited ("Landmark") and several other Data Providers, including (but not limited to) Ordnance Survey, British Geological Survey, the Environment Agency and Natural England, and must not be reproduced in whole or in part by photocopying or any other method. The Report is supplied under Landmark's Terms and Conditions accepted by the Customer. A copy of Landmark's Terms and Conditions can be found with the index Map for this report. Additional copies of the Report may be obtained from Landmark, subject to Landmark's charges in force from time to time. The Copyright, design rights and any other intellectual rights shall remain the exclusive property of Landmark and /or other Data providers, whose Copyright material has been included in this Report. A copy of the BGS Borehole Ordering Form is available to download from the Support section of www.envirocheck.co.uk.

Report Version v49.0


BGS Boreholes Detail

MapID Details



Contact NGR

13BGS Boreholes

B9SW(W)

351 4BGS Reference:Drilled Length (m):Borehole Name:Link to Borehole Scan:

Su89ne501.6The Crown Hazlemere 1http://scans.bgs.ac.uk/sobi_scans/boreholes/15948501/

488768195290


Data Currency and Contact Details

BGS Boreholes Version Update CycleBGS Boreholes

April 2015 QuarterlyBritish Geological Survey - National Geoscience Information Service

Contact Details Contact Logo

4

-

British Geological Survey - Enquiry Service

Landmark Information Group Limited

British Geological Survey, Kingsley Dunham Centre, Keyworth, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG12 5GG

Imperium, Imperial Way, Reading, Berkshire, RG2 0TD

Telephone: 0115 936 3143Fax: 0115 936 3276Email: [email protected]: www.bgs.ac.uk

Telephone: 0844 844 9952Fax: 0844 844 9951Email: [email protected]: www.landmarkinfo.co.uk

Documents

GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE … · GEOTECHNICAL AND GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT TERRIERS FARM, ... 0114 255 4554 Fax: 0114 255 4330 Directors: P Richardson