HARBOURS ACT 1964 (AS AMENDED) THE POOLE HARBOUR REVISION ... · PDF fileTHE POOLE HARBOUR REVISION (WORKS) ORDER 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ... Port of Poole Marina – Harbour

Intended for

Poole Harbour Commissioners

Report Reference

HCL 054140114v9

Date

May 2014

HARBOURS ACT 1964 (AS AMENDED)

THE POOLE HARBOUR REVISION

(WORKS) ORDER 2014

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

VOLUME 4: NAVIGATION RISK

ASSESSMENT

FINAL

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ................................................................................................... 1

2. Site Information and Proposed Developments ..................................................... 2

3. Methodology ................................................................................................... 4

4. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Developments ................................................ 6

5. Mitigation and Enhancement Measures............................................................. 10

6. Residual Significant Impacts ........................................................................... 15

7. Summary of Potential Impacts ........................................................................ 16

8. Limitations and Assumptions .......................................................................... 18

9. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 18

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN

FIGURE 2 EXISTING SITE LAYOUT

FIGURE 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.0.1 Ramboll has been appointed by Poole Harbour Commissioners, (PHC, the ‘applicant’)

to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the elements identified in

the Port of Poole Master Plan that relate to the development and modernisation of the

commercial Port infrastructure (hereafter referred to as the ‘proposed developments’).

The proposed developments are located in Poole Harbour wholly within the boundary

of the Borough of Poole. The proposed developments are described in Section 2 of the

Environmental Statement (ES) (report reference 19463/ENV/R03).

1.0.2 This Navigation Risk Assessment (hereafter referred to as NRA) forms one in a series

of supporting documents to the EIA and as such should be read in conjunction with

the ES.

2

2. SITE INFORMATION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS

2.0.1 The Port of Poole is a Trust Port established in 1895 and managed by Poole Harbour

Commissioners (PHC). The Port is located at approximately National Grid Reference

SZ010900 on the northern shore of Poole Harbour, a large semi-enclosed water body

on the central south coast of the United Kingdom (UK). The Port occupies the western

side of the shoreline adjacent to the Backwater Channel, which connects Holes Bay

with the main Harbour water body. The main commercial, retail and residential areas

of Poole lie to the north east of the Port, across the Little Channel, whilst the

residential and commercial areas of Hamworthy occupy the peninsula on the western

side of the channel to the north west of the Port. The existing commercial Port is

linked to the town by both Poole Bridge and Twin Sails Bridge, which opened in April

2012.

2.0.2 The Port currently runs commercial operations from approximately 24 hectares of

land, with cross-Channel freight and passenger Ro-Ro ferries as well as conventional

bulk cargo vessels utilising the Port. In addition, PHC run two marinas, one to the

south east of the Port area (Port of Poole Marina), and one off Poole Quay (Poole Quay

Boat Haven). The Port also hosts visiting cruise ships throughout the year. Please see

Figure 1 for a Site Location Plan and Figure 2 for an Existing Site Layout Plan.

2.0.3 A Master Plan for the proposed developments of the Port over the next 25 years was

prepared and adopted by the Poole Harbour Commissioners in March 2013. This

Master Plan includes proposals for a number of new and improved facilities which

would be delivered separately over the period covered by the Master Plan. Consent

for the proposed developments in the Master Plan will be applied for via Harbour

Revisions Orders (HROs) from the Marine Management Organisation (MMO). This

report forms part of the application for consent for all proposals in the Master Plan

attached to the existing commercial Port.

2.0.4 The HRO proposes a series of ‘works’ (works 1 to 10, as set out in the HRO) in five

‘phases’ of development as follows:

Phase 1 (HRO works 1 and 2): The creation of South Quay, a new 180m long deep

water south-facing quay dredged to 9.0m Below Chart Datum (BCD), to be

used by a variety of craft such as cruise ships, small container feeder ships,

bulk cargo vessels, and possibly wind park construction vessels. This

development would require approximately 8,000m2 of reclamation and allow

for the retention of the Port of Poole Marina;

Phase 2 (HRO works 3 and 4): Increase the width of South Quay by a further 20m

and develop 120m of east-facing berth (East Quay) dredged to 7.5m BCD.

This development would produce a further 7,000m2 of reclamation, reducing

the capacity of the Port of Poole Marina;

Phase 3 (HRO works 5 and 6): Deepening of existing conventional quays including

Ballast Quay, Bulwark Quay, New Quay and New Quay extension to 7.5m BCD

(referred to in the adopted Master Plan as ‘Proposal C’), with minor

modifications to the line of the existing quays including raising the coping to

address flood defence considerations and creating 2,600m2 of reclaimed land;

Phase 4 (HRO works 7 and 8): Completion of East Quay, extending northwards to join

New Quay extension, eliminating the Port of Poole Marina and creating a

further 22,000m2 of operating land. (This scheme is referred to as ‘Proposal B’

in the adopted Master Plan);

3

Phase 5 (HRO works 9 and 10): Reconstruction of the existing Ro-Ro berths to

facilitate deeper drafted vessels. This would involve a berthing face of 350m

dredged to 9.0m BCD. The footprint of reclamation for this development would

be 5,000m2.

2.0.5 The proposed developments are shown on Figure 3.

2.0.6 For the purposes of the EIA this Technical Annex has assessed a “worst case” scenario

which assumes that all of the above developments will come forward at some point

during the life of the Master Plan. The HRO that this EIA accompanies, however, will

seek permission for all of the developments described above, with the appropriate

licences and permissions being applied for as and when required. An initial

construction programme has been identified in Table 1 below.

Table 1 Initial Construction Programme

Phase 1

South

Quay

Phase 2

Extension

of South

Quay

Phase 3

Deepening

Conventiona

l Quays

Phase 4

Completion

of East

Quay &

infill Port

of Poole

Marina

Phase 5

Reconstruction

RoRo berths

Total

Contract

Duration

6-9

months

6-9 months 4-6 months 4-6 months 4-6 months

Potential

Project

Start Date

Jan 2015 Jan 2017 Jun 2017 Jan 2018 Jan 2019

2.0.7 For further information on the proposed developments, including construction

principles, please refer to the Environmental Statement (19463/ENV/R03).

4

3. METHODOLOGY

3.0.1 The NRA is based on industry risk assessment standard methodology as follows:

Identify hazards, known here as impacts;

Assess control measures, known here as mitigation and enhancement measures;

Assess the residual significant impacts allowing for the implementation of the

mitigation and enhancement measures.

3.0.2 The potential impacts of the proposed developments (see Section 4) describe the

likely significant impact of the development’s design and construction. These impacts

were developed following consultation with PHC, site visits and review of current

documentation and policies as detailed below.

a) Initial site visit, 11th December 2012, proposed sites were visited with a PHC

authority to guide and explain the proposals. This was conducted on foot and by

PHC launch.

b) Initial meeting with Harbour Master, 24 January 2013, to establish scope of the

NRA and request for supporting documentation.

c) Hazard identification meeting, 3 April 2013 attended by Harbour Master, VTS

manager, Tug Master, Pilot and Assistant Harbour Master.

d) On board inbound ship with Pilot which was manoeuvred off the proposed

development site – 5 July 2013

e) Review of existing PHC documentation, this included:-

Poole Harbour Commissioners Local Notices to Mariners – valid in January

2013

Marine Accidents in Harbour Waters: Results from the Marine Safety Pilot

Study

Annual Marine Safety Reports – 2008 to 2012

Designated Person Report for PHC – 30 March 2012

Designated Person Report for PHC – 28 September 2012

PHC Port Marine Safety Code audit

PHC Bridges Navigational Hazard Meeting – 28 February 2012

Port of Poole Marina – Harbour Masters Safety Notice

PHC Monthly Marine Safety Reports – January 2008 to December 2012

3.0.3 The mitigation and enhancement measures (Section 5) would assist in controlling the

risk of the impact occurring and the severity of the impact if it were to occur. These

measures were assessed during the consultation, site visit and document review stage

and have been categorised as, existing, proposed or recommended.

5

3.0.4 The residual significant impacts (Section 6) likely to occur following the effective

implementation of mitigation measures have been identified and summarised.

3.0.5 A summary of the potential impacts of the proposed developments (Section 7)

provides a project specific reference for the NRA. This format is specific to all

technical specialist areas to allow for cross referencing of impact and design of the

project as a whole.

6

4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED

DEVELOPMENTS

4.0.1 The potential impacts of the proposed developments were categorised in accordance

with the incident types identified in Marine Accidents in Harbour Waters: Results from

the Marine Safety Pilot Study.

4.0.2 This Department for Transport pilot study collected incident data covering the period

2005 – 2009 from 13 UK harbour authorities, including Poole Harbour.

4.0.3 The NRA categorised potential impacts of the proposed developments as:-

Collision - Vessel contact with other vessel or floating object whilst underway,

alongside or at anchor;

Contact – Vessel making contact with Harbour infrastructure or fixed structure;

Grounding – Vessel making contact with sea bed or underwater obstruction;

Near Miss – The passing of two or more vessels within an acceptable safe distance;

Fire/Explosion/Flood – Occurring on board a vessel or caused by a vessel due to the

proposed developments;

Pollution – Resulting from any of the above;

Machinery Failure – Failure resulting in loss of control or adequate control;

Capsize/listing;

Other on board incidents.

4.0.4 Each potential impact was categorised using the above titles and entered in a

summary table. The “Potential Impact” column summarises each impact. The

“Potential Effect” column states if any of the proposals, as defined in Section 2, would

potentially be affected.

4.1 Collision

Collision

Potential Impact Potential

Effect

4.1.1

Increased size of commercial vessel operating in the Port.

Maximum sized vessel defined as 185m length over all, 25m

beam and 7m draft – possible specialist vessel for wind farm

with beam 40m.

Yes

4.1.2 Increased frequency of commercial vessels. Yes

4.1.3

New berths of South Quay (including section in Little Channel)

would reduce width of current sea room and require vessels

to pass at closer distance increasing risk of interaction.

Yes

7

Collision


Effect

4.1.4

Vessels and barges during the construction phase would

operate in the current navigable waters restricting other

vessels.

Yes

4.1.5 Large commercial vessels passing in the Main Channel. Yes

4.1.6 Leisure and small commercial craft drawn into the larger

commercial ship due to suction. Yes

4.1.7 Large commercial vessel manoeuvring off the berths and

entering the Little Channel. Yes

4.1.8

Increased tidal current speed to the east of the proposed

developments in the Little Channel and to the south of South

Quay. Possible impact on manoeuvring vessels in this area.

Yes

4.2 Contact

Contact


Effect

4.2.1 Contact with proposed berth while large commercial vessel is

manoeuvring to berth or “backing up” down the Little Channel.

Yes

4.2.2 Increase and/or changes to tidal effect in vicinity of swinging

area and turning basin and Little Channel. The proposed

developments will add berths and breakwaters which may have

the potential to affect the present tidal conditions. These

potential changes will need to be fully understood when

manoeuvring a vessel in the area.

Yes

4.2.3 Proposed new berths and breakwaters contact during hours of

darkness or restricted visibility. All vessels will need to be fully

aware of any new construction which they may not be familiar

with.

Yes

4.2.4 Any vessel may make contact with temporary or semi

completed permanent structures during construction phase.

Yes

4.2.5 Increased tidal current speed to the east of the proposed

developments in the Little Channel and to the south of South

Quay. Possible impact on manoeuvring vessels in this area.

Yes

8

4.3 Grounding

Grounding


Effect

4.3.1

Increased maximum draft of large commercial ship would

reduce available under keel clearance.

Yes

4.3.2 Increased size of commercial ship would increase the suction

effect surrounding the main channel causing grounding of

leisure and small commercial vessels.

Yes

4.3.3 Grounding by any vessel on underwater obstructions during the

construction phase.

Yes

4.3.4 Reduction in navigable waters at the present location used for

turning large commercial ships. This may result in large

commercial vessels leaving the channel whilst manoeuvring

during strong wind and tidal effect.

Yes

4.3.5 Increased size of commercial ships may exceed current

capability of tugs.

Yes

4.3.6 Pilots currently board visiting commercial ships just outside the

buoyed channel. This position may not allow enough time for

the passing of safety critical information between the pilot and

the vessels master of a large commercial ship due to the

increased size of vessels and increase in safety related

information.

Yes

4.4 Near Miss

Near Miss


Effect

4.4.1 The potential impacts for Near Miss are assessed as the same

as those for Collision.

N/A

4.5 Fire/Explosion

Fire/Explosion


Effect

4.5.1 Potential increase in likelihood of fire or explosion resulting

from increase potential impact of Collision, Contact or

Grounding.

Yes

9

4.6 Pollution

Pollution


Effect

4.6.1 Potential increase in likelihood of pollution resulting from

increase potential impact of Collision, Contact or Grounding.

Yes

4.7 Machinery Failure

Machinery Failure


Effect

4.7.1 A machinery failure may result in the loss of control of the

vessel which may lead to grounding, collision or contact. The

probability of machinery failure impact is increased if existing

tugs not sufficient for increased size of vessels.

Yes

4.8 Capsize/Listing

Capsize/Listing


Effect

4.8.1 Potential increase in likelihood of capsize or listing resulting

from increase potential impact of Collision, Contact or

Grounding.

Yes

4.9 Other on Board Incidents

Other on board incidents


Effect

4.9.1 None noted. NA

10

5. MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES

5.0.1 The potential mitigation and enhancement measures that currently exist, or could be

implemented were compared against each of the potential impacts identified in

Section 4.

5.0.2 The mitigation and enhancement measures were identified as either, existing,

proposed or recommended.

Existing – these mitigation methods were found to be in place during the NRA

process;

Proposed – these mitigation methods were not in place at the time of the NRA but

PHC are committed to their implementation before or during the construction

phase of the proposed developments. These were discussed with PHC during the

NRA process; and

Recommended – these mitigation methods were not in place at the time of the

NRA. They were identified by the NRA process and discussed with PHC. It is

understood these recommended mitigation methods will be adopted by PHC

before the operation of the proposed developments.

5.0.3 The mitigation and enhancement measures were categorised the same way as the

potential impacts (Section 4) to allow for easier reference.

5.1 Collision

Collision

Mitigation and Enhancement Measures Potential

Effect

Existing

5.1.1 Existing policy and procedure for PHC Controlled Vessel would

apply to any maximum sized commercial vessel and special

craft. This includes exclusion zones around the vessel and

navigation warnings broadcast on VHF.

Yes

5.1.2 VTS Port Control provides VHF, Radar and AIS monitoring of

all vessel movements in the Port and advice to embarked

pilots and large commercial vessels.

Yes

5.1.3 Port Control is in communication with Poole Bridge and able to

request a stop of bridge lifts to prevent a high volume of

leisure craft existing the Little Channel when commercial

vessel is manoeuvring.

Yes

Proposed

5.1.4

PHC Enforcement vessels operate in the Port including PWC

and RIBs during summer months when leisure vessel activity

is high.

Yes

11

Collision


Effect

Existing

5.1.5 All vessels and barges involved with the construction phase

would be required to observe the existing Port Control and

Pilotage requirements. Dredgers may be requested by Port

Control to clear their current position to allow for a vessel

manoeuvre.

Yes

5.1.6

Port Control upgrades to include re-location of radar scanner

plus additional scanner on South Haven to improve radar

coverage. Plus additional AIS reception.

Yes

5.1.7

Exclusion zones would be established around working vessels

during the construction phase. VHF navigation warning would

be issued and PHC Notice to Mariners issued.

Yes

Recommended

5.1.8

Review of the passing positions for large vessels in the Main

Channel. Consider no passing procedure close to the

proposed designs especially during construction.

Yes

5.1.9

Review PHC Controlled Vessel procedure for manoeuvring

larger vessels in the vicinity of South Quay. This should allow

for the reduction in navigable waters and changes in tidal

flow. Consideration should be given to maximum allowable

wind speeds and tidal strength and clear guidance available to

visiting ships, Pilots and VTS.

Yes

5.1.10

Review and publish Notice to Mariners regarding increased

effect of suction from large vessels in the Main Channel on

leisure craft. Review speed reduction policy for estimated

maximum sized vessel.

Yes

5.2 Contact

Contact


Effect

Existing

5.2.1

VTS Port Control provides VHF, Radar and AIS monitoring of all

vessel movements in the Port and advice to embarked pilots

and large commercial vessels.

Yes

5.2.2

Port Control is in communication with Poole Bridge and able to

request a stop of bridge lifts to prevent high volume of leisure

craft existing the Little Channel when commercial vessel is

manoeuvring.

Yes

12

Contact


Effect

Existing

5.2.3 All vessels and barges involved with the construction phase

would be required to observe the existing Port Control and

Pilotage requirements. Dredgers may be requested by Port

Control to clear their current position to allow for a vessel

manoeuvre.

Yes

Proposed

5.2.4

Review of the passing positions for large vessels in the Main

Channel. Consider no passing procedure close to the proposed

designs especially during construction.

Yes

5.2.5

Review PHC Controlled Vessel procedure for manoeuvring


for the reduction in navigable waters and changes in tidal flow.

Consideration should be given to maximum allowable wind

speeds and tidal strength and clear guidance available to


Yes

Recommended

5.2.7

New berths require adequate fender arrangements. This

should be reviewed by PHC at design stage.

Yes

5.2.8

New berth South Quay corner to be well illuminated to ensure

adequate visibility during hours of darkness and restricted

visibility.

Yes

5.2.9

The changes in tidal strength and/or direction due to the

developments should be incorporated into a full mission bridge

simulator. This would allow PHC to simulate manoeuvring

large commercial vessels with other ships alongside the new

berths.

Yes

5.2.10

Revise the Port Passage plan allowing for changes in margins of

safety due to the new developments and changes in tidal

conditions.

Yes

5.2.11

Portable Pilotage Units should be considered for embarked

Pilots to assist in situational awareness and monitoring of

safety margins.

Yes

5.2.12

Pre-arrival checklist for visiting commercial ships and to assist

with the Master-Pilot exchange. This should include allowance

for the navigational considerations for the new developments.

Yes

13

5.3 Grounding

Grounding


Effect

Existing

5.3.1 Under Keel Clearance (UKC) policy enforced, 1.0m in main

channel and 0.5m at Ro Ro berth.

Yes

5.3.2 VTS Port Control provides VHF, Radar and AIS monitoring of

all vessel movements in the Port and advice to embarked

pilots and large commercial vessels.

Yes

5.3.3 Visiting commercial ships advised of UKC policy by

publications and at Master-Pilot exchange.

Yes

5.3.4 VTS monitor commercial ships dynamic UKC using 3D system

with own ship data from AIS.

Yes

5.3.5 PHC tug assistance available on request. A memorandum of

understanding (MOU) is in place for a third party to provide

extra tugs if required. Contractors responsible for providing

tugs for their work barges during construction phase.

Yes

Proposed

5.3.6 Review of the published notice advising of the dangers of

suction from large commercial ships in the Main Channel.

Yes

5.3.7 The Pilot Boarding position would be moved to allow more

time for the Master-Pilot exchange.

Yes

5.3.8 Review procedures for readiness. Yes

5.3.9 Review the day marks and transit marks following the

proposed dredging and to ensure adequate visual references

from Little Channel.

Yes

Recommended

5.3.10 Review PHC Controlled Vessel procedure for manoeuvring


for the reduction in navigable waters and changes in tidal

flow. Consideration should be given to maximum allowable

wind speeds and tidal strength and clear guidance available to


Yes

5.3.11 Review current capacity of the Port tugs in consideration of

the increase in size of vessels and possible changes to tidal

effect.

Yes

14

5.4 Other Categories

5.4.1 Navigational mitigation and enhancement measures for the following categories have

been included in Collision, Grounding and Contact:-

Near Miss;

Fire/Explosion;

Pollution;

Machinery Failure;

Capsize/Listing; and

Other on board incidents.

15

6. RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

6.0.1 For the purpose of this NRA, a residual significant impact is defined as an impact likely

to occur following adoption of the identified mitigation and enhancement measures.

6.0.2 The significance of the impact is assessed based on a combination of severity of the

impact occurring and the likelihood of the occurrence.

6.0.3 The proposed developments would not result in any residual significant impact for

vessel collision, contact or grounding provided the identified mitigation and

enhancement measures are successfully implemented.

6.1 Collision

6.1.1 The increased number of larger commercial ships and construction craft may slightly

increase the severity and likelihood of collision. The effective implementation of the

identified proposed and recommended mitigation and enhancement measures of the

proposed developments would make the occurrence of a collision highly unlikely. This

would include PHC management controls in addition to the proposed design and

construction of mitigation measures.

6.2 Contact

6.2.1 The severity and likelihood of contact may increase with the proposed developments

as there would be structures in place which at present do not exist. The effective

implementation of the identified proposed and recommended mitigation and

enhancement measures of the proposed developments would make the occurrence of

contact highly unlikely. This would include PHC management controls in addition to

the proposed design and construction of mitigation measures.

6.3 Grounding

6.3.1 The severity and likelihood of grounding may increase with the proposed

developments as there would be deeper draft commercial vessels operating in the Port

than at present. The effective implementation of the identified proposed and

recommended mitigation and enhancement measures of the proposed developments

would make the occurrence of grounding highly unlikely. PHC management controls

in addition to the proposed design and construction of mitigation measures.

16

7. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS

Receptor Impact Nature of

impact

Impact

before

mitigation

significant?

Explanation of significance Mitigation and

enhancement measures

Is the residual

impact

significant

D/I P/

T

+/- Yes No Yes

(+/-)

No

Construction Phase

All craft Collision

D T - Yes Increased size and frequency

of commercial vessels

Reduced passing room

Construction barges

Harbour Control – VTS

Pilotage

Exclusion zones

Escort vessels

Regulatory Speed limits

Enforcement patrol

No

All craft Contact

D T - Yes Contact with new structures

during manoeuvring

Contact with temporary

structure


Pilotage

Review manoeuvring

Fendering and

illumination

Port information and pilot

support

No

All craft Groundin

g

D T - Yes Increased size of vessels

would reduce under keel

clearance

Increased size of vessels

would increase suction effect

Grounding on underwater

obstructions during

construction


Under Keel Clearance

(UKC) policy enforced

VTS monitor dynamic UKC

Pilotage, boarding

position moved

Review manoeuvring

Day marks

No

17

Receptor Impact Nature of

impact

Impact

before

mitigation

significant?

Explanation of significance Mitigation and

enhancement measures

Is the residual

impact

significant

D/I P/

T

+/- Yes No Yes

(+/-)

No

Size of vessel exceed

tug/towing capability

Review of tug capacity

Operational Phase

All craft Collision

D P - Yes Increased size and frequency

of commercial vessels

Reduced passing room


Pilotage

Exclusion zones

Escort vessels

Regulatory Speed limits

Enforcement patrol

No

All craft Contact

D P - Yes Contact with new structures

during manoeuvring


Pilotage

Review manoeuvring

Fendering and

illumination

Port information and pilot

support

No

All craft Grounding

D P - Yes Increased size of vessels

would reduce under keel

clearance

Increased size of vessels

would increase suction effect

Size of vessel exceed

tug/towing capability


Under Keel Clearance

(UKC) policy enforced

VTS monitor dynamic UKC

Pilotage, boarding

position moved

Day marks

Review of tug capacity

No

D = Direct, I = Indirect, P = Permanent, T = Temporary, + = Beneficial, - = Adverse

18

8. LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

8.0.1 The NRA is based on the information gained from consultation with PHC, site visits

and review of documents as listed in Section 3. This information was made readily

available by PHC and all requests for assistance were positively received. Any further

information made available after the date of writing the NRA report has not been

included.

8.0.2 All assumptions have been avoided by basing statements on facts gained during

consultation with PHC, site visits and review of documents as listed in Section 3.

9. CONCLUSION

9.0.1 The NRA assessed the navigational impacts of the proposed developments. This was

achieved through consultation with PHC, site visits and review of documentation. The

process identified potential impacts and mitigation measures including proposed and

recommend measures.

9.0.2 The successful implementation of the proposed and recommended mitigation

measures would reduce the probability of the identified impacts to highly unlikely.

This level of probability would result in no residual significant impact for the safety of

navigation during the construction or operational phase of the proposed

developments.

HCL Report Number 054140114v9

FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN

FIGURE 2 EXISTING SITE LAYOUT FIGURE 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS

Site Location Plan

Prepared ByCL

Client

Project Title

Figure Title

Figure No.

Tel: 023 8081 7500Fax: 023 8081 7600

[email protected]

Revision2

Harbours Act 1964 (as amended) The Poole Harbour Revision (Works) Order 2014

61019463Project Number

1

Date 11/02/14

¯


Reproduced from OS map data by permission of the Ordnance Survey. Licence No: 1000487490 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

m

© Crown copyright and database rights 2014 Ordnance Survey 0100031673

0 0.85 1.70.425Kilometers

Ü

LegendExtent of Proposed WorksArea Shown in Main Map

Existing Site Layout

Prepared ByCL

Client

Project Title

Figure Title

Figure No.

Tel: 023 8081 7500Fax: 023 8081 7600

[email protected]

Revision3



2

Date 31/03/13

¯


Reproduced from OS map data by permission of the Ordnance Survey. Licence No: 1000487490 120 240 360 480

m

LegendExtent of Proposed WorksPort Estate Boundary

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2014

0 80 160 24040Meters

Ü

Cargo Handling

Ro-Ro Freight

Cargo Handling

Ferry CarLanes Car Park

Poole YachtClub

Port of Poole Marina

BulwarkQuay

Poole Quay Boat Haven

Ro-Ro Berths

Jetty

NoteDetails of the Proposed Works are shown in Figure 3

Proposed Developments

Prepared ByMJC/CL

Client

Project Title

Figure Title

Figure No.

Tel: 023 8081 7500Fax: 023 8081 7600

[email protected]

Revision2



3

Date 12/02/14

¯


LegendPort Estate BoundaryLimit of Dredge AssessedExtent of Proposed WorksExtent of Proposed Quay

HRO Development Phases1 Construction1 Dredge2 Construction2 Dredge3 Construction3 Dredge4 Construction5 Construction5 Dredge

Ü0 50 100 15025

MetersContains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2014

Port of PooleMarina

New Quay

Bulwark Quay

Ballast Quay

Poole QuayBoat Haven

Documents

HARBOURS ACT 1964 (AS AMENDED) THE POOLE HARBOUR REVISION ... · PDF fileTHE POOLE HARBOUR REVISION (WORKS) ORDER 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ... Port of Poole Marina – Harbour