brackley property developments ltd edgar mobbs way ... · 1.1 bwb consulting (bwb) was instructed...

www.bwbconsulting.com

ENVIRONMENT - LAND

Brackley Property Developments Ltd

Edgar Mobbs Way

Northampton

Remediation Strategy Report

B W B C o n s u l t i n g L t d : R e g i s t e r e d i n E n g l a n d 5 2 6 5 8 6 3

ENVIRONMENT - LAND

Brackley Property

Developments Ltd

Edgar Mobbs Way

Northampton

Remediation Strategy Report

Birmingham

Livery Place, 35 Livery Street, Colmore Business

District, Birmingham, B3 2PB

T: 0121 233 3322

Leeds

Whitehall Waterfront, 2 Riverside Way, Leeds LS1

4EH

T: 0113 233 8000

London

11 Borough High Street, London SE1 9SE

T: 0207 407 3879

Manchester

4th Floor Carvers Warehouse, 77 Dale Street

Manchester, M1 2HG

T: 0161 233 4260

Nottingham

Waterfront House, Station Street, Nottingham

NG2 3DQ

T: 0115 924 1100

Date: October 2018

BWB Project Number: NTH2325

BIM Ref. No.: EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2

EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON

REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT

OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325

EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2

Limitations

This report has been prepared for the sole use of the Client in accordance with the terms of the appointment

under which it was produced. BWB Consulting Limited accepts no responsibility for any use of or reliance on the

contents of this report by any third party. No part of this report shall be copied or reproduced in any form without

the prior written permission of BWB.

i

DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD

Revision Date of

Issue Status Author: Checked: Approved:

P1 July 2017 Final

Laura Westoby

MGeol, FGS

Redmond Parker-

Dunn

BSc (Hons)

Tim Hull

BSc MSc CGeol

FGS

P2 October

2018 Final

Laura Westoby

MGeol, FGS

Redmond Parker-

Dunn

BSc (Hons)

Tim Hull

BSc MSc CGeol

FGS



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Site Address The site is located to the south of Edgar Mobbs Way in Northampton.

Proposed

Development

The proposed development is anticipated to a waste transfer facility, with

associated infrastructure, landscaping and service yards.

Site Setting and

History

The site is set within an industrial estate that was historically quarried for sands

and gravels. In the 1960s the area became a dilute and disperse landfill, which

accepted local household waste, trade waste, council tanker liquid waste and

trade and commercial waste. The landfill ceased operating in 1990.

Ground Conditions The following ground conditions have been recorded at the Site:

Strata Top Depth (m) Base Depth (m) Thickness (m)

Min Max Min Max Min Max

Stockpile 0.00 0.90 4.00 0.90 4.00

Made Ground – General

0.00 2.10 2.30 4.40 0.90 4.40

Made Ground – Landfill

2.30 3.80 3.30 4.80 0.10 1.40

Alluvium 2.30 4.40 3.90 5.70 0.10 1.90

River Terrace Deposits

4.70 5.70 7.90 8.70 3.0 4.0

Glaciolacustrine Deposits

7.90 8.70 >15.00 >15.45 >6.75 >7.10

NR = Not recorded

*Note - some depths have been recorded with the stockpiles surface as ground level.

Significant

Pollutant Linkages

The ground investigation confirmed the presence of chrysotile and amosite fibres

within samples of General Made Ground and Landfill Material and identified

elevated Carbon Dioxide and Methane to be present, with the site to be

classified as Characteristic Situation 3.

Remediation

Requirements

Soft landscaping areas should be capped by a minimum 400mm soil cover

system, which may comprise a combination of topsoil and subsoil. This should be

underlain by a geotextile marker (such as Terram). Both soils re-used on site and

imported topsoil should comply with the assessment criteria provided with this

report.

Any soil materials imported into areas of amenity landscaping should also meet

the specifications as set out in BS 3882:2015 – Specification for topsoil and

requirements for use and BS 8601:2013 - Specification for subsoil and

requirements for use.

Although contaminant concentrations on site were not identified to require

active soil remediation, a ‘Hotspot Protocol’ will need to be implemented at the

site for the duration of the redevelopment to allow ground workers to act upon,

should they suspect any previously unknown soil and/or groundwater

contamination to be present.

The contractor shall be responsible for ensuring the works are compliant with the

Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

Ground gas protection measures are required in the design of new structures at

the site and are applicable to any part of the proposed development which is

in direct contact with the ground surface. Ground gas protection measures will

need to be installed in accordance with CIRIA C665 and BS8485: 2015.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


iii

Prior to building commencement the detailed gas protection design and a

membrane protection implementation and verification plan is required to be

submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

Other

Considerations

The generation of dust should be kept to a minimum, with soils damped during

dry periods to reduce the exposure of asbestos fibres to groundworkers and

construction personnel. Groundworkers should also be trained in the visual

identification of asbestos.

In accordance with recommendations of BRE Special Digest 1 ‘Concrete in

Aggressive Ground’ 2005, Design Sulphate Class DS-2 and ACEC Class AC-2

should be adopted for the Made Ground and Design Sulphate Class DS-1 and

ACEC Class AC-1 should be adopted for the natural deposits.

Verification

Requirements

The cover system will require hand dug pits to validate the thickness of placed

fill. The location of the pits should be recorded, to include a plan and

photographic evidence including depth of inert cover installed, quality of the

material to be used and geographic background features to aid in locating the

photograph. Soil samples will need to be analysed at a MCERTS and UKAS

accredited laboratory for the contaminants listed in the Acceptance Criteria.

The type, design and installation of the ground gas protection measures should

be provided in accordance with current industry guidance, namely BS 8485:

2015 and CIRIA C665. The membrane should be installed by a suitably qualified

person(s) and independently inspected and validated in accordance with CIRIA

Report C735 (2014). The results of the independent inspection, installation and

testing of the membrane will need to be recorded and provided to the

Environmental Consultant for incorporation into the Site Verification report and

submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

This summary should be read in conjunction with BWB’s full report (ref. EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-

0002_RS_P1) and reflects an assessment of the Site based on information received by BWB at the time

of production.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


iv

CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

Instruction 1

Objectives 1

Information Sources 1

2.0 THE SITE 2

Site Location 2

Site Description 2

Site History 2

Ground Conditions 3

3.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 4

Summary of Significant Pollutant Linkages 4

4.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 9

Soil Cover in Landscaping 9

Bulk Fill 9

5.0 PROPOSED REMEDIATION WORKS 10

Risks to Construction and Maintenance Workers 10

Soil Cover System 10

Hazardous Ground Gas Protection Measures 10

Water Supply Pipes 12

Design Concrete Class 12

Procedures for Dealing with Unexpected Contamination 12

6.0 REGULATORY ISSUES 13

Waste Management 13

Third Party Liability 13

7.0 VERIFICATION TESTING AND MONITORING 14

Soft Landscaping Cover System 14

Ground Gas Protection Measures 14

8.0 REPORTING 16

9.0 REFERENCES 19

TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Ground Conditions 3

Table 2 Summary of Significant Pollution Linkages 5

Table 3 Indicative Gas Protection Measures 11



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


v

Table 4 Mitigation and Validation Roles and Responsibilities 16

FIGURES (included in main text)

Figure 1 Site Location Plan

DRAWINGS

Drawing 1 Cut and Fill Isopachytes

Drawing 2 Existing Site Layout Plan

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Proposed Masterplan

Appendix 2 Outline Planning Permission

Appendix 3 Soil Cover and Bulk Fill Assessment Criteria



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Instruction

1.1 BWB Consulting (BWB) was instructed by Brackley Property Developments Ltd (the

Client) to carry out a Remediation Strategy for the site at Edgar Mobbs Way,

Northampton. Details of the project brief are included in BWB proposal reference

RPD/TJH/V1/NTH2325 dated May 2017.

1.2 The proposed development is anticipated to comprise a waste transfer facility,

infrastructure and landscaping, covering an area of approximately 1.1 hectares. A

proposed site layout, is presented as Appendix 1.

1.3 Conditional outline planning permission for the redevelopment of the site has been

granted. Condition 7 indicates the requirement for a Remediation Strategy and is

presented as Appendix 2.

Objectives

1.4 The report establishes, taking all the circumstances of the site into account, which

remediation or mitigation options offer the best overall approach. The objectives of the

report are to identify feasible remediation options for each relevant pollutant linkage

and to produce a remediation strategy (this report) that addresses all relevant

pollutant linkages.

1.5 The report has been completed in accordance with CLR11 “Model Procedures for the

Management of Land Contamination” and BS10175: 2011 Investigation of Potentially

Contaminated Sites Code of Practice.

Information Sources

1.6 Previous work has been carried out at this site, for which the following documents have

been produced:

• Applied Geology for Coltham Management Services Ltd; Report on Ground

Investigation at Site 7C; Edgar Mobbs Way; Report Ref: AG2298-15-X28; dated

November 2015; and

• BWB for Brackley Property Developments Ltd; Phase 2 Geo-Environmental

Assessment; Edgar Mobbs Way, Northampton; Report Ref: EMW-BWB-00-XX-RP-

EN-0001_Ph2; dated March 2017.

1.7 This report assumes familiarity and understanding of the contents of the

aforementioned reports.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


2

2.0 THE SITE

Site Location

2.1 The site is located at Edgar Mobbs Way in Northampton, at National Grid Co-ordinates

473990, 260110. The location of the site is shown below in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Site Location Plan

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 scale map with the permission of the controller of Her

Majesty’s Stationery Office Crown Copyright Reserved. OS Licence number HMD-214-1034401.

Site Description

2.2 The layout of the site with the main features is presented as Drawing 2. At the time of

the BWB ground investigation, conducted in January 2017, the site had been cleared

of dense vegetation to allow access to exploratory hole locations. The ground was

noted to be soft, with the site split into three topographical levels.

2.3 All site boundaries were secured with heras fencing, although small scale waste

disposal appeared to have taken place historically. Items included wire fencing, an

exhaust and stripped cables.

Site History

2.4 Information contained within the Report on Ground Investigation by Applied Geology

indicates that the wider site area was historically quarried for sands and gravels in the

mid-20th century, being allowed to fill with water once quarrying was complete.

2.5 In 1962 the area became a dilute and disperse landfill operated by Harvey Reeves. It

initially accepted local household waste, trade waste and council tanker liquid waste,

although in later years this was reduced to trade and commercial waste, including

spoil and building rubble. The landfill ceased operating in 1990.

2.6 During 2005 a number of active and passive groundwater barriers, including pumping

wells and gas/venting trenches, were constructed to remediate the groundwater risks

from landfill deposits. Following a period of monitoring it was concluded that the

proposed easement for the leachate pumping scheme was no longer necessary.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


3

Ground Conditions

2.7 British Geological Survey (BGS) mapping for the site (Sheet 185 ‘Northampton’, dated

1990) and the BGS Geology of Britain viewer indicates the site to be underlain by

Alluvium, overlying bedrock comprising the Whitby Mudstone Formation.

2.8 Ground conditions recorded by BWB during the ground investigation identified the

following:

Table 1 Summary of Ground Conditions

Strata Top Depth (m) Base Depth (m) Thickness (m)

Min Max Min Max Min Max

Stockpile 0.00 0.90 4.00 0.90 4.00

Made Ground – General

0.00 2.10 2.30 4.40 0.90 4.40

Made Ground – Landfill

2.30 3.80 3.30 4.80 0.10 1.40

Alluvium 2.30 4.40 3.90 5.70 0.10 1.90

River Terrace Deposits

4.70 5.70 7.90 8.70 3.0 4.0

Glaciolacustrine Deposits

7.90 8.70 >15.00 >15.45 >6.75 >7.10

NR = Not recorded

*Note - some depths have been recorded with the stockpiles surface as ground level.

2.9 The underlying ground conditions have been classified by the Environment Agency

(EA) as follows:

• Alluvium: Secondary A Aquifer;

• River Terrace Deposits: Secondary A Aquifer;

• Glaciolacustrine Deposits: Unproductive strata; and

• Whitby Mudstone Formation: Unproductive strata.

2.10 A groundwater source protection zone is identified by the EA approximately 1.5km to

the east. The nearest groundwater abstractions is listed approximately 525m west of

site for use within a quarry.

2.11 The closest mapped surface water feature to the site is the River Nene, located

approximately 50m to the south west. The south-eastern half of the site is classified by

the EA as being at low and very low risk of flooding from rivers and the sea, with this

area also indicated to benefit from flood defences.

2.12 A surface water abstraction licence is recorded by the EA approximately 1.2km to the

east of the site, associated with Carlsberg Brewery and utilised for non-evaporative

cooling.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


4

3.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

Summary of Significant Pollutant Linkages

3.1 The results of the investigation at the site identified the following sources and

corresponding pathways and receptors which are also presented as Table 2 overleaf:

Sources

• Asbestos (recorded as amosite and chrysotile fibres) recorded within samples

of Made Ground and Landfill Material;

• Low concentrations of heavy metals within groundwater; and

• Elevated Carbon Dioxide and Methane concentrations.

Pathway

• Dermal contact;

• Ingestion via direct contact with soil;

• Inhalation of particulates;

• Accumulation and inhalation of gases and vapours;

• Vertical leaching of contaminants into underlying natural strata;

• Vertical and lateral migration of contaminated groundwater;

• Direct contact with buried water pipes; and

• Direct contact with concrete.

Receptors

3.2 With these updated sources and pathways, the list of receptors impacted has reduced,

however, the following are still viable receptors which may be influenced by the

aforementioned sources:

• Future site users;

• Groundworkers;

• Buried foundations;

• Buried services;

• Underlying Alluvium (Secondary A Aquifer); and

• River Nene.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


5

Table 2 Summary of Significant Pollution Linkages

Source Pathway Receptor Con Prob Risk Mitigation/Investigation

S1: On site:

General Made Ground

used as capping.

Potential contaminants may

include heavy metals,

sulphate, asbestos and

hazardous ground gases.

P1: Direct contact,

incidental ingestion

and inhalation of

particulates.

R1: Ground Workers

and Construction

Personnel

Md Lw M/L

Chemical testing has indicated asbestos to be

present within soils on site. There is the potential for

other contaminats, including metals and

hydrocarbon compounds to be present in Made

Ground deposits.

Exposure to groundworkers and construction

personnel can be mitigated through the use of

appropriate PPE and by maintaining good personal

hygiene. A clean cover system (minimum 400 mm)

should be implemented in areas of proposed

landscaping.

R2: Future Site Users

(Commercial) Md Ul L

P2: Vertical migration

of contaminants in

the soil leachate.

R3: Underlying

Secondary A Aquifer

(Alluvium)

Md Ul L

Elevated levels of leachable heavy metals were

noted within the general Made Ground on site.

It is possible this might impact the underlying

superficial deposits should a piled foundation solution

be adopted which creates pathways to the

underlying aquifer. A Pilling Risk Assessment is likely to

be required if piles are adopted.

P3: Direct contact.

R7: Water utility pipes Md Ul L

Barrier pipes are unlikely to be necessary as part of the

development.

R8: Buried structures/

foundations. Md Ul L

Suitable concrete for the Made Ground (DS-2 and

ACEC Class AC-2), and natural deposits (DS-1 and

ACEC Class AC-1) should be used where foundations

are likely to be in contact with soils at the site.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


6


P4: Migration and

accumulation of

ground gases in

enclosed spaces

leading to

asphyxiation (carbon

dioxide) and

explosion (methane).


(Commercial) Md Ul M/L

Ground gas assessment has classified the site as CS3.

To reduce the risk to future site users of a Type D

development a gas protection score of 2.5 will need

to be achieved. Should smaller rooms be constructed

within the proposed structure, this may need to be

revised down to a Type C/ Type B development, with

gas protection scores increased to 3.0 and 4.0

respectively.

S2: On site:

Landfill Materials



petroleum hydrocarbons,

PAHs, BTEX, phenols,



P1: Direct contact,

incidental ingestion

and inhalation of

particulates.

R1: Ground Workers

and Construction

Personnel

Md Ul L

Chemical testing has indicated elevated levels of

heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, SVOCs and

asbestos to be present within soils on site

Landfill materials were encountered at depth and it is

unlikely that Landfill Material will be exposed at the

surface. Should Landfill Materials be exposed the risk

to groundworkers and construction personnel can be

mitigated through the use of appropriate PPE and by

maintaining good personal hygiene.


of contaminants in

the soil leachate.

R3: Underlying

Secondary A Aquifer

(Alluvium)

Md Ul L

Elevated levels of leachable heavy metals were

noted within the general Made Ground on site.

It is possible this might impact the underlying Alluvium

and also the River Terrace Deposits identified by the

ground investigation.

The risk is likely to be reduced by the use of extensive

hardstanding across the site and capping (formed by

the overlying General Made Ground) which will

reduce infiltration.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


7


P5: Lateral migration

of contaminated

groundwater.

R4: Watercourse

associated with the

River Nene,

approximately 50m

to the south west

Md Ul L

Exceedances of the upper screening limit were noted

for Lead and Nickel at BHX.

The potential for groundwater to impact on the River

Nene is limited due to the historical construction of

groundwater barriers along the southern boundary of

the site.

P3: Direct contact. R8: Buried structures/

foundations. Md Ul L

Suitable concrete for the Made Ground (DS-2 and

ACEC Class AC-2), and natural deposits (DS-1 and

ACEC Class AC-1) should be used where foundations

are likely to be in contact with soils at the site.

P4: Migration and

accumulation of

ground gases in

enclosed spaces

leading to

asphyxiation (carbon

dioxide) and

explosion (methane).

R1: Ground Workers

and Construction

Personnel

Md Ul M/L

Ground gas assessment has classified the site as CS3.

To reduce the risk to future site users of a Type D

development a gas protection score of 2.5 will need

to be achieved. Should smaller rooms be constructed

within the proposed structure, this may need to be

revised down to a Type C/ Type B development, with

gas protection scores increased to 3.0 and 4.0

respectively.


(Commercial)

Md Ul M/L

S3: Off site:

Historical Landfill Materials

associated with the former

landfill to the north and west

of the site.



petroleum hydrocarbons,

BTEX, PAHs, phenols,



Md Ul M/L


of contaminants in

the soil leachate. R3: Underlying

Secondary A Aquifer

(Alluvium)

Md Ul L

The historical ‘Report on Ground Investigation at Site

7C Edgar Mobbs Way’ by Applied Geology indicated

that contaminated groundwater was historically

funnelled through the site and also recorded that

remedial action conducted at the site had been

validated and that no further action was required. P5: Lateral migration

of contaminated

groundwater.

Md Ul L

VH = Very High, H = High, M = Moderate, M/L = Moderate/Low, L = Low, VL = Very Low

KEY: Sv = Severe, Md = Medium, Mi = Mild, Mr = Minor Hi = High, Li = Likely, Lw = Low Likelihood, Ul = Unlikely



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


8


Pollutant Linkage Assessment Summary

When considered in the context of the historical activities that have taken place on site and in the surrounding area, and the proposed

development, the site is considered to pose a MODERATE/LOW risk to human health. The main driver for this is the presence of asbestos noted

within samples of Made Ground on site, and is most likely to affect groundworkers as extensive hardstanding associated with the development

will limit exposure to future site users.

The risk posed to controlled waters is considered to be LOW due to the limited levels of contaminants noted within samples of groundwater.

Despite the sensitivity of the River Nene, historical information contained within the ‘Report on Ground Investigation at Site 7C Edgar Mobbs

Way’ by Applied Geology indicated that remedial action relating to groundwater conducted at the site had been validated and that no

further action was required.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


9

4.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

Soil Cover in Landscaping

4.1 The assessment criteria for comparison to soil reuse or importation onto site for use as a

soil cover system in landscaped areas (top 400mm) is presented as Appendix 3. The

concentrations are appropriate for protection of both Human Health and Controlled

Waters associated with the proposed development.

Bulk Fill

4.2 Cut and fill isopachytes, as presented on Drawing 1, show that the site will be subject

to earthworks prior to development, although it is not anticipated that soils, other than

topsoil, will need to be imported, with all soils used in earthworks won on site.

4.3 The assessment criteria for comparison to soil reuse or importation onto site for use as

bulk fill is presented as Appendix 3. The concentrations are appropriate for protection

of both Human Health and Controlled Waters associated with the proposed

development.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


10

5.0 PROPOSED REMEDIATION WORKS

Risks to Construction and Maintenance Workers

5.1 To mitigate the short-term risks to Human Health during construction and groundworks

it is recommended that construction workers and services personnel should follow

guidance stated in ‘CIRIA C670, Site Health Handbook, Second Edition, 2008’ during

development works. Adequate standards of personal protective equipment and the

implementation of basic hygiene measures should be undertaken.

5.2 As a matter of good practice, and to limit the potential risk associated with wind-blown

asbestos fibres which have been identified in Made Ground horizons, the generation

of dust during development earthworks should be kept to a minimum by damping

down work areas during dry periods. Other mitigation measures may also include the

misting at the Site boundaries and the potential for air monitoring at strategic points

around the Site.

5.3 Groundworkers should be suitably trained in identification of asbestos. The contractor

should prepare an asbestos management plan as part of the Construction Phase

health and safety plan. The contractor shall be responsible for ensuring the works are

compliant with the “Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012”.

Soil Cover System

5.4 Soft landscaping areas should be capped by a minimum 400mm soil cover system,

which may comprise a combination of topsoil and subsoil. This should be underlain by

a geotextile marker (such as Terram). The cover system thickness should be maintained

above drainage runs and services, where these intersect landscaped areas.

5.5 Imported materials for use as soil cover should meet the acceptance criteria presented

in Appendix 3. In order to reduce the likelihood of unsuitable materials being imported

onto site, chemical laboratory testing certificates should be obtained and compared

to the acceptance criteria prior to importation to ensure that the material complies

with the strategy.

5.6 Details regarding the location and history of the source site should be obtained along

with delivery tickets (consignment notes), which should state the source and volume of

material, should be retained and provided to the environmental consultant to be

presented in the validation completion report.

5.7 It is noted that any soil materials imported into areas of amenity landscaping should

also meet the specifications as set out in BS 3882:2015 – Specification for topsoil and

requirements for use and BS 8601:2013 - Specification for subsoil and requirements for

use. Advice should also be sought from the appointed landscape architect.

Hazardous Ground Gas Protection Measures

5.8 Elevated concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane have been identified at the

site which would be typical of a Characteristic Situation 3 (CS3), whereby ground gas

protection measures are required to be included in the design of new structures at the

site. This would be applicable to any part of the proposed development which is in

direct contact with the ground surface such as standalone units, lift pits and lobby



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


11

areas. Any ground gas protection measures will need to be installed in accordance

with CIRIA C665 and BS8485: 2015.

5.9 Gas protection measures should be installed in accordance with BS848: 2015. Based

on a Type D development and CS3 classification a gas protection score of 2.5 will need

to be achieved. Should smaller rooms be constructed within the proposed structure,

this may need to be revised down to a Type C/ Type B development, with gas

protection scores increased to 3.0 and 4.0 respectively.

5.10 Additional gas protection comprising a combination of floor slab construction, sub-slab

ventilation and/or gas impermeable membrane is required for new properties

constructed at the Site. An assessment of possible combinations of ground gas

protection measures is presented In Table 3.

Table 3 Indicative Gas Protection Measures

Mitigation

Type

Mitigation Measures Points

Structural

Barrier

Precast suspended segmental subfloor (i.e. beam and block) 0.0

Cast in situ ground slab 0.5

Cast in situ raft or suspended floor slab within minimal penetration 1.5

Ventilation Pressure relief pathways (e.g. geo composite blankets/ strips) 0.5

Passive subfloor venting

layer (e.g. clear void,

no-fines gravel)

Meeting very good performance criteria 2.5

Meeting good performance criteria 1.5

Active dispersal layer (usually comprising fans with active

abstraction)

1.5 – 2.5

Active positive pressurization 1.5 – 2.5

Membrane Gas resistant membrane installed and verified in-accordance with

CIRIA C735

2.0

5.11 Prior to building commencement the detailed gas protection design and a membrane

protection implementation and verification plan is required to be submitted to the

Local Planning Authority for approval. The plan should include (but not necessarily be

limited to):

• The membrane specification details (including product lifespan, permeation

rates);

• The manufacturers installation instructions;

• Details of the installation contractor's experience including qualifications of the

installers to be engaged on the works, and how the use of qualified personnel

will be verified;

• The installation contractor's method statement including measures to protect

the membrane during installation and construction work, how conformance

with this plan will be monitored;

• Construction details (including drawings), how conformance with these details

will be monitored, and how as-constructed details will be recorded;



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


12

• How the membrane will be inspected and integrity tested, including provision

of photographic records;

• Locations of service penetrations and details of how these will be sealed;

• Details of independent sign off arrangements and warranties (eg. third party

inspection, building control, NHBC);

• Arrangements to ensure the protection of the integrity of the membrane in the

long term including long term operation and maintenance requirements.

Water Supply Pipes

5.12 Water supply pipes materials should be agreed with the local utility provider before

installation to prevent tainting of water supplies from residual contamination. It is not

expected that barrier piping will be required at the site.

Design Concrete Class

5.13 In accordance with recommendations of BRE Special Digest 1 ‘Concrete in Aggressive

Ground’ 2005, Design Sulphate Class DS-2 and ACEC Class AC-2 should be adopted

for the Made Ground and Design Sulphate Class DS-1 and ACEC Class AC-1 should be

adopted for the natural deposits when considering the most appropriate type of

concrete to be used at the site in order to resist chemical attack from elevated

sulphate (assuming mobile groundwater in non-pyritic soils).

Procedures for Dealing with Unexpected Contamination

Soil and Groundwater Contamination

5.14 The contaminant concentrations identified within the soils are not considered to require

active soil remediation prior to development.

5.15 For the duration of the redevelopment, a ‘Hotspot Protocol’ will need to be

implemented at the site to allow ground workers to act upon should they suspect any

previously unknown soil and/or groundwater contamination to be present.

5.16 In the event that previously unidentified contamination is identified, the Environmental

Consultant shall be informed immediately, and the Contaminated Land

Officer/Environmental Services at Northampton Borough Council and EA (if necessary)

also informed. Suspected contaminated materials should be stockpiled separately for

subsequent analysis, and if necessary, off-site disposal. Any remedial approach will

require agreement with the regulators prior to implementation.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


13

6.0 REGULATORY ISSUES

Licensing and Permitting

6.1 It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that all required permits and consents are

in place for the duration of the works.

6.2 These may include, but not be limited to:

• HSE notification, authorisation for asbestos works;

• Site waste management plan;

• Environmental Permit for crushing and potentially, waste treatment; and

• Material Management Plan.

Waste Management

6.3 The contractor shall comply with the waste management (duty of care) Regulations.

All waste transfer documentation shall be retained for a minimum of 6 years. Copies of

all waste transfer documentation shall be provided to the environmental consultant for

inclusion in the validation report.

6.4 All suitable, clean, natural and artificial hard material recovered during operations shall

be crushed to a 125mm down grading for re-use at the site as structural fill. Any

unsuitable or deleterious material arising from the activities shall be disposed off-site.

6.5 All hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated from the site that are destined for

landfill must undergo pre-treatment to reduce the volume or hazardous nature of the

waste or facilitate its handling or enhance recovery. Treatment may comprise any

physical, thermal, chemical or biological processes, including sorting, that changes the

characteristics of the waste. There are exemptions to the regulations where treatment

is not technically feasible or where feasible treatment techniques would not reduce

the hazardous nature or volume of material going to landfill.

6.6 A site waste management plan (SWMP) should be produced by the main contractor

prior to the commencement of the project. The SWMP should describe the volumes

and types of waste that are likely to be produced during a project and should set out

the actions for recycling, recovery, re-use and disposal for each waste stream.

6.7 To manage the suitable reuse and/or importation of remediated, excavated or

imported soils, and demonstrate that these materials are not waste, it is recommended

that a Material Management Plan (MMP) under the CLAIRE Definition of Waste Code

of Practice Version 2 is completed.

Third Party Liability

6.8 The contractor shall take all suitable measures to prevent pollution entering drainage

systems or local watercourses and to avoid any nuisance from odours to local

properties. The contractor should have suitable spill kits available to contain any

pollution spills/leaks and have wheel wash facilities in place should this be required.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


14

7.0 VERIFICATION TESTING AND MONITORING

Soft Landscaping Cover System

7.1 The cover system will require validation in the form of hand dug pits to confirm the

thickness (≥400mm) placed. The location of the validation pits should be recorded on

a plan and include photographic evidence comprising:

• Depth of inert cover that has been installed;

• Quality of the material to be used as inert cover; and

• Geographic background features which will aid locating the photograph.

7.2 Soil samples should be taken from the placed material and analysed at a MCERTS and

UKAS accredited laboratory for the contaminants listed in Appendix 3. Other testing

may also be required depending upon the existing and previous uses of the source site.

One sample per 250m3 of material should be tested with a minimum of three per source

(thus six or more samples if separate sub soil and Topsoil layers). The results should be

compared to the criteria set out in Appendix 3 to confirm suitability (or otherwise).

Additionally the material should be:

• A suitable growing medium;

• Free from obvious contamination (i.e. staining / free product etc.);

• Free from Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs)

• Not come from areas where Japanese Knotweed or other invasive or injurious

plants are suspected to have been, or are growing;

• Not odorous (could be considered a statutory nuisance); and

• Free from unsuitable material (e.g. bricks, brick, tiles, metal, timber and glass

etc.).

7.3 The thickness of the subsoil and installation of the marker layer should be verified by

completion of hand pits along with visual inspection and photographic records.

Ground Gas Protection Measures

7.4 The type, design and installation of the ground gas protection measures should be

provided in accordance with current industry guidance, namely BS 8485: 2015 and

CIRIA C665. The membrane should be installed by a suitably qualified person(s) and

independently inspected and validated in accordance with CIRIA Report C735 (2014).

The overall aim is to ensure that a continuous seal is evident across the base of the

building. The inspection should comprise a written and photographic record of the

area inspected detailing:

• Details of materials used, to include batch numbers;

• Membrane conditions (tears, punctures etc.);

• Defects and correction measures completed;

• Quality and appropriateness of lapped and jointed sections;

• Number, location and type of service penetrations and associated seals within

the membrane;

• Continuation of the membrane through internal walls and external cavity walls;

and

• Presence of appropriate venting.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


15

7.5 The results of the independent inspection, installation and testing of the membrane will

need to be recorded and provided to the Environmental Consultant for incorporation

into the Site Verification report.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


16

8.0 REPORTING

8.1 Table 4 below presents a summary of the roles and responsibilities associated with the

required remediation and mitigation measures.

Table 4 Mitigation and Validation Roles and Responsibilities

Task Requirement Responsibility Validation and

Reporting

Incorporation

of Hazardous

Ground Gas

Protection

Measures

Any new properties

constructed will

require appropriate

levels of ground gas

protection measures

included within their

design in

accordance with

BS8485:2015 for a

CS3 situation for a

Type B/C use for

offices and Type D

for the main

warehouse.

Principal Contractor to

install using suitably

qualified specialist

installers.

Reporting to be

provided in a letter for

agreement with the

local authority.

An as built detail

should be provided

demonstrating that

the ground gas

protection measures

installed have been

installed correctly and

will meet the required

performance together

with photos of its

installation in

accordance with

BS8485:2015.

The membrane should

be independently

inspected and

validated.

Validation of

soils to be

imported onto

site for soil

cover.

Prior to importation,

chemical analysis of

soils should be

undertaken to

confirm suitability

and avoid importing

unsuitable materials.

A minimum of 3

samples is

recommended from

both topsoil and

subsoil.

Principal Contractor/

Environmental Consultant

Confirmation of

material source to be

provided and

chemical laboratory

certificates to be

obtained prior to

importation.

Soil Cover

System

Minimum 400mm

clean soil cover

(topsoil and sub soil,

Section 4) to be

provided in

landscaped areas.

Principal Contractor/

Landscape

Contractor/Environmental

Consultant

Soil cover depth must

be confirmed through

validation inspection

pits. Validation

samples also need to

be obtained and

analysed for the

contaminants of

potential concern to

confirm chemical

suitability. The

Environmental



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


17

Consultant should

validate the thickness

of placed material to

ensure it meets the

minimum required

standard.

Asbestos Adoption of

appropriate control

methods and PPE

including

dampening down of

soils.

Principal Contractor -

Appropriate

Concrete

Class

Concrete design for

shallow foundations

should comply with

the requirements for

a Design Sulphate

Class DS-2 and

Aggressive

Chemical

Environment for

Concrete Class AC-2

for Made Ground,

and DS-1 and AC-1

for natural soils.

Foundation Design

Engineer/ Principal

Contractor

-

Utility Pipe

Materials

Provide chemical

laboratory results to

the utility providers

to ensure that the

most suitable

material is selected.

Principal Contractor -

Waste Transfer Handle waste

generated at the

site in accordance

with Waste

Management (Duty

of Care)

Regulations. All

waste transfer

documentation shall

be retained for a

minimum of 6 years.

Principal Contractor Copies of waste

transfer

documentation shall

be provided to the

appointed

Environmental

Consultant for

inclusion in the final

validation completion

report.

A MMP is

recommended to

manage the reuse

and/or importation of

remediated,

excavated or

imported soils.

8.2 The remediation contractor should maintain records of the works to include the

following:

• Daily record sheets;

• Date and weather conditions;



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


18

• Plant, personnel and visitors present;

• Aspects relating to health and safety, environmental control and variations to

the original strategy/specification; and

• All necessary certification shall be submitted for inclusion in the Health and

Safety File.

8.3 Validation of the works shall be undertaken by an experienced Environmental

Consultant and should include, but not be limited to, the following information:

• Type(s) and volumes(s) of any materials removed from site for disposal;

• Type(s) and volumes(s) of any materials imported to the site;

• Test results;

• Additional site investigation records;

• A description of the works undertaken;

• Records of the works including daily diary sheets;

• Record of ground gas resistant membrane installation and inspection reports;

• Waste transfer and disposal notes; and

• Variations to the remediation strategy and justification for doing so.

8.4 On satisfactory completion of the works, the consultant shall provide a Completion

Statement/ Report, as appropriate. The report shall comprise relevant site records and

remain as certification that the remediation works have been carried out in

accordance with the stated strategy. Copies of the report shall be lodged with

regulatory bodies for approval.



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


19

9.0 REFERENCES

1. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS 8485:2015, Code of Practice for the characterization

and remediation from ground gas in affected developments

2. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS 8576:2013, Guidance on investigations for ground gas

– Permanent gases and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

3. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS 10175:2011+A1:2013, Investigation of Contaminated

Sites – Code of Practice

4. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS5930:2015) Code of practice for ground investigations

5. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS EN 1997-1:2004 Incorporating corrigendum February

2009, Eurocode 7 – Geotechnical Design – Part 1: General rules.

6. British Standards Institute, (BSI), BS EN 1997-2:2007 Incorporating corrigendum June 2010,

Eurocode 7 – Geotechnical Design – Part 2: Ground Investigation and testing.

7. Building Research Establishment Special Digest 1 Third Edition. Concrete in Aggressive

Ground (2005)

8. Building Research Establishment (BRE) BR211, Radon; Guidance on Protective

Measures for New Buildings (2015)

9. Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), Report 132, A

Guide to Safe working on Contaminated Sites (1996).

10. Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA). 2001, C522

Contaminated land risk assessment, A guide to good practice.

11. Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA). 2007, Report C665,

Assessing Risk Posed by on Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings

12. Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA). 2014, Report C735,

Good Practice on the testing and verification of protection systems for buildings

against hazardous ground gases

13. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), 2012, National Planning

Policy Framework.

14. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 2012, Environmental

Protection Act 1990: Part 2A Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance.

15. Environment Agency report CLR11 'Model Procedures for the Management of Land

Contamination'.

16. Environment Agency 2008, Updated technical background to the CLEA model

Science Report – SC050021/SR3

17. Environment Agency 2008, Human health toxicological assessment of contaminants in

soil Science Report – SC050021/SR2



OCTOBER 2018

NTH2325


20

18. Environment Agency 2009, CLEA Software (Version 1.05) Handbook Better Regulation

Science Programme Science report: SC050021/SR4

19. Environment Agency 2008, A review of body weight and height data used within the

Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment model (CLEA) Project SC050021/ Technical

Review 1

20. Environment Agency, 2006, Remedial Targets Methodology, Hydrogeological Risk

Assessment for Land Contamination

21. Environment Agency, 2010, Report SC030114/R1, Verification of remediation of land

contamination.

22. Health and Safety Executive (HSE) 'Protection of workers and the general public during

the Development of Contaminated Land (1991).

NHBC Guidance for the Safe Development of Housing on Land Affected by

Contamination, R&D Publication 66: 2008

DRAWINGS

DRAWING 1

CUT AND FILL ISOPACHYTES

Rdge

Stmp

68.44

Flat

65.93

Eave

66.58

25 car spaces

cycles

bin st.bin st.

cycles

bin st.

shared bin store and cycles

parking for units 1-3

Unit 2

Unit 1

Unit 3

Unit 4

-

1

.

5

0

0

-

1

.

0

0

0

-

0

.

5

0

0

0

.

0

0

0

0

.

0

0

0

0

.

5

0

0

0

.

5

0

0

1

.0

0

0

1

.

0

0

0

1.500

1

.

5

0

0

2

.

0

0

0

2

.

0

0

0

2

.

5

0

0

2

.

5

0

0

1

.

1

0

0

1

.

2

0

0

1

.

3

0

0

1

.

4

0

0

1

.

5

0

0

1

.

6

0

0

1

.

7

0

0

1

.

8

0

0

1

.

9

0

0

-1.200

-1.100

-1.000

-0.900

-0.800

-0.700

-0.600

-0.500

-0.400

-0.300

-0.200

-0.100

0.000

0.100

0.200

1

.

3

0

0

1

.

4

0

0

1

.

5

0

0

1

.

6

0

0

1

.

7

0

0

1

.

8

0

0

1

.

9

0

0

2

.

0

0

0

2

.

1

0

0

2

.

2

0

0

2

.

3

0

0

2.400

2.500

2.600

0

.

4

0

0

0

.

5

0

0

0

.

6

0

0

0

.

7

0

0

0

.

8

0

0

0

.

9

0

0

1

.

0

0

0

1

.

7

0

0

1

.

8

0

0

1

.

9

0

0

2

.

0

0

0

2

.

1

0

0

2

.

2

0

0

2

.

3

0

0

2

.

4

0

0

-1.900-1.800

-1.700

-1.6

00

-1.500

-1

.5

0

0

-0.300

-0.200

-0

.1

0

0

0

.0

0

0

0

.1

0

0

0

.2

0

0

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0

.

9

0

01

.

0

0

0

1

.

1

0

0

1

.

2

0

0

1

.

3

0

0

-

1

.

1

0

0

-

1

.

0

0

0

-

0

.

9

0

0

-

0

.

8

0

0

-

0

.

7

0

0

-

0

.

6

0

0

-

1

.

4

0

0

-1

.4

0

0

-1

.3

0

0

-1

.2

0

0

-

1

.1

0

0

-

1

.0

0

0

-

0

.9

0

0

-

2

.

2

0

0

-

2

.

1

0

0

-

2

.

0

0

0

-1.100

-

1

.

0

0

0

-

0

.

9

0

0

-

0

.

8

0

0

-

0

.

7

0

0

-

0

.

6

0

0

-

0

.

5

0

0

-

0

.

4

0

0

0

.

7

0

0

0

.

8

0

0

0

.

9

0

0

1

.

0

0

0

1

.2

0

0

-

1

.

2

0

0

-

1

.

1

0

0

-

1

.

0

0

0

-

0

.

9

0

0

-

0

.

8

0

0

-

0

.

7

0

0

-

0

.

6

0

0

-0.500

-0.400

-0.300

-0.200

-

0

.

1

0

0

0

.

0

0

0

0

.

1

0

0

0

.

2

0

0

0

.

3

0

0

0

.

4

0

0

2

.

5

0

0

2

.

6

0

0

2

.

7

0

0

2

.7

0

0

FFL 62.900m

FFL 62.600m

FFL 62.450m

A

A

Le

ve

l

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

Retaining Structure

Existing Ground

Service yardUnit 4 Building

Finished Level

Formation level

Site Boundary

Issues & Revisions

Rev Date Details of issue / revision RevDrw

CONSULTANCY | ENVIRONMENTINFRASTRUCTURE | BUILDINGS

Birmingham | 0121 233 3322

Leeds | 0113 233 8000

Manchester | 0161 233 4260

London | 020 7407 3879

Nottingham | 0115 924 1100


BWB Ref: Date: Scale@A1:

Drawn: Reviewed:

Drawing Status

Project - Originator - Zone - Level - Type - Role - Number Status

Drawing Title

Project Title

Client

Rev

© Copyright BWB Consulting Ltd

S1EMW-BWB-XX-XX-DR-C-620

PRELIMINARY

G.Jones S.Carter

NTH 2325

CUT AND FILL

ISOPACHYTE CONTOUR

LAYOUT

EDGAR MOBBS WAY

NORTHAMPTON

1:25005.07.17

P1

P1 05.07.17 Preliminary issue SCGDJ

Notes

1. Do not scale this drawing. All dimensions must be checked/ verified

on site. If in doubt ask.

2. This drawing is to be read in conjunction with all relevant architects,

engineers and specialists drawings and specifications.

3. All dimensions in millimetres unless noted otherwise. All levels in

metres unless noted otherwise.

4. Any discrepancies noted on site are to be reported to the engineer

immediately.

Plan Drawing Key

Y:\NTH\NTH2325_Edgar Mobbs Way, Northampton\02. Project Delivery\01. WIP\Drawings\EMW-BWB-XX-XX-DR-C-620_Cut & Fill Isopachytes.dwg

Major Cut Contour 0.5m intervals

APPROX

Development Boundary

Preliminary Earthworks Strategy

Key Assumptions

The existing ground model used in the calculations below is based on the removal of the

stockpiled material from site in accordance with BWB drawing

EMW-BWB-XX-XX-DR-D-610_Bund Excavation Sections

The existing ground model used is also based on the understanding that the existing

ground level at the boundary to the neighbouring plot to the west is to be reduced to

63.500m AOD prior to works commencing.

Approximate site area ≈ 10,000m²

Site Strip

It has been assumed that circa 100mm site strip will be required across the site. The

contractor is to determine exact extent of required site strip, including the removal of all

existing vegetation.

Assumed topsoil strip ≈ 10,000m² x 0.10 = 1000m³

It is anticipated that approximately 520m³ of the topsoil strip material could be used

within the landscaped areas of the proposed site. Allowance should be made to remove

the remaining 480m³ of material from site.

Construction Buildups

In order to minimise construction thicknesses, it has been assumed that the external

works areas will be lime/cement stabilised to a minimum CBR of 30%. Building

footprints are to be subject to improvement by vibro stone columns. Based on these

assumptions, the following construction thicknesses have been taken:

300mm - Landscape construction

320mm - Car park construction

325mm - Building Concrete slab construction

340mm - Service yard construction

Bulk Earthworks

In order to reach proposed formation levels the bulk earthworks are shown below:

Cut Fill

Plot gross 6101m³ 6099m³

Net 2m³

Construction Arisings

Arisings from foundations and drainage have been estimated as follows:

10,000m² x 0.15 = 1,500m³

This volume is based on the site area and should be accurately calculated by both the

engineer and the contractor during the tender process.

Earthworks Totals

Total bulk earthworks to formation - 2m³ surplus

Total Arisings = 1500m³

Surplus topsoil to be removed offsite = 480m³

Total Material Surplus = 1982m³

BWB Models used:

EMW-BWB-XX-XX-M3-C-001_Existing Ground Model

EMW-BWB-XX-XX-M3-C-002_FFL Model

111305-SK-13-01-15_01 TOPO SURVEY

Architects masterplan: 14-137 P003

Earthworks Notes and Assumptions

1. No bulking factors have been allowed for in the volume calculations.

2. It is assumed existing ground is topped by 100mm topsoil.

3. All excavated material is suitable for reuse (excluding stockpiled material to be

removed from site prior to construction works)

4. Volumes stated for hard surfaced areas are to formation level and are based on

30% CBR.

5. This earthworks drawing should be read in conjunction with the levels strategy,

drawing number: EMW-BWB-XX-XX-DR-D-620

6. Stockpiled materials often deteriorate due to water infiltration and they may

become unsuitable for incorporation in the works; further testing and

re-assessment should be made prior to the finalisation and implementation of

the earthworks design.

7. The construction depths assumed are as shown within the Earthworks Strategy

calculation above. These thicknesses may vary based on the ground conditions

encountered and should be verified by means of CBR tests at formation level.

8. The earthworks quantities have been provided by BWB for guidance only. The

contractor shall be responsible for, and take the risk for, estimating the bulk

earthworks on which his tender is based. The contractor's estimated volumes

shall be confirmed with his tender.

9. It should be noted that the earthwork volumes provided by BWB are accurate

to ±}5%. This margin takes account of the variations that may result through the

use of modelling software.

10. On completion, the contractor shall confirm to BWB the actual volume of

earthworks materials left in any temporary stockpiles required by the contract.

11. The contractor shall be responsible for disposing of any unacceptable

earthworks materials encountered during or generated by the works in licensed

tips off site unless otherwise agreed with BWB.

12. The contractor shall be responsible for all material sampling, testing and

earthworks validation reporting in order to comply with the requirements of the

project-specific BWB earthworks specification [and the BWB technical

specification for earthworks strategies].

13. Earthworks will be subject to detailed design

Minor Cut Contour 0.1m intervals

Balanced contour

Major Fill Contour 0.5m intervals

Minor Fill Contour 0.1m intervals

Section Key

Finished level

Existing ground level

Formation level

Section A - A (Scale 1:250)

DRAWING 2

EXISTING SITE LAYOUT

62

.0

6

2

.0

6

2

.

0

6

3

.0

6

3

.

0

63

.0

6

0

.

0

6

0

.

0

61.0

6

1

.

0

6

1

.

0

6

1

.

0

6

4

.

0

6

4

.

0

6

4

.

0

6

4

.0

6

5

.

0

6

5

.

0

6

5

.0

6

6

.

0

6

6

.

0

66.0

67.0

67.0

67.0

6

8

.

0

68.0

68.0

6

9

.

0

6

9

.0

6

2

.0

6

3

.

0

IC

Rdge

PT

LP

LP

SP

SP

SP

Stmp

68.44

CL 62.86

6

3

.

9

2

63

.9

2

6

4

.

1

8

6

3

.9

4

6

4

.1

9

6

3

.8

2

63.80

6

3

.

7

7

6

3

.8

2

6

3

.9

1

6

3

.

8

0

63.67

6

3

.8

9

63.61

63.54

63.67

63.80

63.85

63.92

6

0

.

4

7

6

0

.

0

6

5

9

.7

6

59.37

5

9

.

2

5

5

9

.

5

2

5

9

.

6

3

59.73

6

0

.

0

7

6

0

.

7

5

6

1

.

0

7

6

1

.

1

4

6

1

.

2

7

6

1

.

2

4

6

1

.

1

5

6

0

.8

8

61.0

6

61.1

5

6

1

.2

3

6

1

.1

5 6

1

.

0

8

6

1

.

1

6

5

9

.

9

4

5

9

.

4

2

5

9

.

3

1

5

9

.

2

9

59.97

59.64

5

9

.

9

4

6

0

.

1

6

6

0

.

1

1

6

0

.

2

7

6

0

.

5

4

6

0

.

5

9

60.79

60.9

8

6

0

.8

0

6

1

.

0

3

6

0

.7

5

6

0

.

3

6

61.56

6

1

.

9

0

6

2

.

2

1

61.95

62.52

6

2

.

4

6

6

3

.

7

6

6

3

.4

4

63.07

6

3

.2

0

62.53

6

1

.

4

2

6

1

.

2

5

6

2

.

8

7

6

3

.

1

7

6

3

.

3

0

6

3

.

3

1

6

3

.

3

0

6

2

.

9

5

62.75

6

2

.6

2

63.71

6

3

.

8

5

69

.2

5

68

.6

5

62.03

6

8

.8

6

67.0

0

6

7

.

9

0

6

2

.

1

6

62.0

1

6

2

.

7

6

6

2

.

3

1

6

2

.

2

7

62.41

6

1

.

1

1

60.41

60.56

60.92

61.81

6

2

.0

1

61.99

61.75

6

1

.

5

6

6

1

.

3

6

60.92

60.6

7

62

.0

3

61.86

6

1

.

7

9

62.27

62.51

62.96

63.85

63.27

62.77

6

2

.

3

3

61

.8

7

61

.7

1

61

.7

3

T

e

m

p

o

r

a

r

y

H

e

r

a

s

F

e

n

c

in

g

H

t 2

.0

Bra

mble

s

FW

M H

t 2.0

F

S

P

H

t

2

.

3

F

S

P

H

t

1

.

6

T

e

m

p

o

ra

ry H

e

ra

s F

e

n

cin

g

H

t 2

.0

Temporary Heras Fencing Ht 2.0

Ora

nge M

esh

F

IR

H

t 1

.0

G

rass

A

sphalt

Ta

c-T

ile

Tem

porary H

eras F

encing H

t 2.0

F

W

M

H

t 2

.0

F

S

P

H

t

1

.

6

F

S

P

H

t

1

.

6

Ta

c-T

ile

Sig

n

S

i

g

n

S

i

g

n

Sign

FIR Ht 1.0

Asphalt

A

sphalt

Grass

Grass

G

rass

Vegetated

mound

Vegetated

mound

Vegetated

mound

J

a

p

a

n

e

s

e

K

n

o

t

w

e

e

d

E

x

c

l

u

s

i

o

n

A

r

e

a

s

F

O

B

H

t

1

.

0

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

Loose

earth

bank

Loose

earth

bank

Loose

earth

bank

Gy

61.15

Gy

60.78

CL 60.80

Gy

60.54

J

a

p

a

n

e

s

e

K

n

o

t

w

e

e

d

E

x

c

l

u

s

i

o

n

A

r

e

a

s

F

O

B

H

t

1

.

0

J

a

p

a

n

e

s

e

K

n

o

t

w

e

e

d

E

x

c

l

u

s

i

o

n

A

r

e

a

s

F

O

B

H

t

1

.

0

Temporary Heras Fencing Ht 2.0

1

2

1

1

Construction

site

Construction

site

Flat

65.93

Eave

66.58

Stockpile of 2A/2B

material

Stockpile of

construction waste

material

Area of previously

treated Japanese

Knotweed

Edgar Mobbs Way

Site Boundary

Issues & Revisions

Rev Date Details of issue / revision RevDrw

CONSULTANCY | ENVIRONMENTINFRASTRUCTURE | BUILDINGS

Birmingham | 0121 233 3322

Leeds | 0113 233 8000

Manchester | 0161 233 4260

London | 020 7407 3879

Nottingham | 0115 924 1100


BWB Ref: Date: Scale@A1:

Drawn: Reviewed:

Drawing Status

Project - Originator - Zone - Level - Type - Role - Number Status

Drawing Title

Project Title

Client

Rev

© Copyright BWB Consulting Ltd

PEMW-BWB-XX-00-EN-DR-0001

FINAL

L. Westoby R. Parker-Dunn

NTH2325

SITE LAYOUT

EDGAR MOBBS WAY,

NORTHAMPTON

BRACKLEY PROPERTY

DEVELOPMENTS

1:25016.02.17

1

Notes

1. Do not scale this drawing. All dimensions must be checked/ verified

on site. If in doubt ask.

2. This drawing is to be read in conjunction with all relevant architects,

engineers and specialists drawings and specifications.

3. All dimensions in millimetres unless noted otherwise. All levels in

metres unless noted otherwise.

4. Any discrepancies noted on site are to be reported to the engineer

immediately.

Y:\NTH\NTH2325_Edgar Mobbs Way, Northampton\02. Project Delivery\01. WIP\Drawings\EMZ-BWB-00-XX-DR-EN-0001_SL\EMW-BWB-00-XX-DR-EN-0001_SL.dwg

APPROX

Legend

1 16.02.17 FINAL RPDLJW

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Car Parking - 44 spaces

RCV Parking6 spaces R

etai

nin

g W

all

RetainingWall

Reta

inin

g W

all

Retaining Wall

Waste Transfer Building

WaterTank

PumpHouse

Office/Welfare Building(Supplied and installed by Veolia)

WashbayW

eig

hbridge

RCV Parking - 15 spaces

Weig

hbridge

Cycles

Tan

ks

Fuel

bay

RCV Parking3 spaces

MK

60.05GV

60.17BT

59.96BT

59.99BT

63.80BT

63.70BT

EBEB

60.03FH

60.02FH

FS

P

60.27TP

63

.57

63

.59

60.17

60.09

61

.40

61

.55

61

.91

62

.20

61.94

61.48

63.7763.77

65.4365.26 65.08 64.67 64.55

63.90 63.5963.72

62.35

64.61

63.90

64.60

64.02

64.65

61.8661.87

60.07

60.38

60.52

60.7

0

63.66 63.72

63

.63

63.23 62.99 62.46 61.80 61.51

61

.87

65.66 65.43 65.2264.91 64.44 64.17 64.07

63

.82

63.77 63.71

64.16

64.47

64.37

63.8

4

63.9064.16

60.36

59.97

60.04

60.14

60.12

60.41

59.30

59.95

59.90

59.7759.77

60.13

60.30

60.13

60.42

60.40

60.39

60.33

60.37

60.41

60.69

60.86

61.0661.2061.3361.6062.1062.4962.8163.10

63.29

63.51

63.7

6

63.92

64.1464.56

64.9165.0965.2665.52

63.7763.60

63.25 62.92 62.48 62.24 61.64 61.36 61.28

60.9460.83

60.7465.65 65.39 65.22 65.05 64.81

64.2663.93

59.97 59.95

60.0360.05

60.08

59.91

59.8359.77

59.91

59.82

60.29

60.28

60.24

60

.33

60.25 60.29

60.26

59.89

61.4361.39 61.29

61.29

63.64

63

.57

63

.64

63

.59

59.91

60.08

60.13

63

.64

63.7

1

63.88

64.1064.52

64.8965.0765.2465.4965.55

60.30

60.42

60.55

60.67

60.79

61.0161.1761.3461.6162.1162.7963.08

63.24

63.47

63.64

61.83

WV

63

.63

63

.65

This drawing, the works and concepts depicted are copyright of Stephen George & Partners and may not be reproduced or made use of, either directly or indirectly without express written consent. Do not scale off this drawing. All heights, levels, sizes and dimensions to be checked on site before any work is put to hand.

Notes:

To be read in conjunction with relevant consultantsdrawings.

Revision:

A CD 13/09/2018Layout revised to accommodate gates at siteentrance, wheel stops added

Ref:

Edgar Mobbs WayNorthampton

Waste Transfer FacilitySite Layout

Contract

14-137-001 C001

CD

CD

September 2018

1:500 @ A2

14-137-001 C001 A

Drawing status:

Cad reference:

Drawn:

Team:

Date:

Scale:

Project no: Dwg no: Rev:

170 London Road

Leicester LE2 1ND

t: 0116 247 0557 f: 0116 254 1095

www.stephengeorge.co.uk

APPENDIX 2

OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION

APPENDIX 3

SOIL COVER AND BULK FILL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Generic Assessment Criteria

Job Name CommercialJob No mg/kg SourceArsenic 6.40E+02 BWB_GSACBarium 2.21E+04 BWB_GSACBeryllium 1.24E+01 BWB_GSACBoron 2.36E+05 BWB_GSACCadmium 2.30E+02 BWB_GSACChromium VI 3.41E+01 BWB_GSACChromium III 9.09E+03 BWB_GSACCopper 6.33E+04 BWB_GSACLead* 2.33E+03 DEFRA_C4SLInorganic Mercury 3.60E+03 BWB_GSACNickel 1.04E+03 BWB_GSACSelenium 1.30E+04 BWB_GSACVanadium 6.63E+03 BWB_GSACZinc 7.33E+05 BWB_GSACCyanide (Free) 4.30E+01 BWB_GSACCyanide (Complex) 2.13E+02 BWB_GSACPhenols (Total) 2.65E+04 BWB_GSACBenzene 2.81E+01 BWB_GSACToluene 5.92E+04 BWB_GSACEthyl benzene 6.05E+03 BWB_GSACTotal Xylene 6.28E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (EC5-6) aliphatic 3.31E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC6-8) aliphatic 8.04E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC8-10) aliphatic 2.04E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC10-12) aliphatic 9.33E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC12-16) aliphatic 4.51E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC16-21) aliphatic 1.59E+06 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC21-35) aliphatic 1.59E+06 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC35-44) aliphatic 1.59E+06 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC6-7) aromatic (benzene) 4.36E+01 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC7-8) aromatic (toluene) 5.90E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC8-10) aromatic 3.35E+03 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC10-12) aromatic 1.31E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC12-16) aromatic 3.22E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC16-21) aromatic 2.82E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC21-35) aromatic 2.84E+04 BWB_GSACTPH (>EC35-44) aromatic 2.84E+04 BWB_GSACTotal TPH 5.00E+02 BWB_GSACNaphthalene 2.04E+02 BWB_GSACAcenaphthylene 8.45E+04 BWB_GSACAcenaphthene 8.50E+04 BWB_GSACFluorene 6.35E+04 BWB_GSACPhenanthrene 2.19E+04 BWB_GSACAnthracene 5.25E+05 BWB_GSACFluoranthene 2.26E+04 BWB_GSACPyrene 5.43E+04 BWB_GSACBenzo(a)anthracene 1.71E+02 BWB_GSACChrysene 3.54E+02 BWB_GSACBenzo(b)fluoranthene 4.52E+01 BWB_GSACBenzo(k)fluoranthene 1.20E+03 BWB_GSACBenzo(a)pyrene 3.60E+01 BWB_GSACIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 5.12E+02 BWB_GSAC

Generic Assessment Criteria

Job Name CommercialJob No mg/kg SourceDibenzo(a,h)anthracene 3.60E+00 BWB_GSACBenzo(g,hi)perylene 4.02E+03 BWB_GSACCoal Tar (B(a)P as surrogate marker 1.54E+01 BWB_GSACTetrachloroethene (PCE) 1.97E+01 BWB_GSACTrichloroethene (TCE) 1.30E+00 BWB_GSACcis -1,2-Dichloroethene 1.45E+01 BWB_GSACVinyl Chloride (VC) 6.29E-02 BWB_GSAC1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (PCA) 2.90E+02 BWB_GSAC1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA) 7.00E+02 BWB_GSAC1,2-Dichloroethane 7.11E-01 BWB_GSACCarbon Tetrachloride 3.04E+00 BWB_GSACCarbon disulphide 1.16E+01 BWB_GSAC

brackley property developments ltd edgar mobbs way ... · 1.1 bwb consulting (bwb) was instructed...

Documents