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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
6
Source Pathway Receptor Con Prob Risk Mitigation/Investigation
P4: Migration and
accumulation of
ground gases in
enclosed spaces
leading to
asphyxiation (carbon
dioxide) and
explosion (methane).
R2: Future Site Users
(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
Potential contaminants may
include heavy metals,
petroleum hydrocarbons,
PAHs, BTEX, phenols,
sulphate, asbestos and
hazardous ground gases.
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.
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 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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
7
Source Pathway Receptor Con Prob Risk Mitigation/Investigation
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.
R2: Future Site Users
(Commercial)
Md Ul M/L
S3: Off site:
Historical Landfill Materials
associated with the former
landfill to the north and west
of the site.
Potential contaminants may
include heavy metals,
petroleum hydrocarbons,
BTEX, PAHs, phenols,
sulphate, asbestos and
hazardous ground gases.
Md Ul M/L
P2: Vertical migration
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
8
Source Pathway Receptor Con Prob Risk Mitigation/Investigation
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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;
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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;
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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.
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
EDGAR MOBBS WAY, NORTHAMPTON
REMEDIATION STRATEGY REPORT
OCTOBER 2018
NTH2325
EMW-BWB-ZZ-XX-RP-YE-0002_RS_P2
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
www.bwbconsulting.com
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
www.bwbconsulting.com
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
www.bwbconsulting.com