Cray team tackles multiplicity of tasks, looks for Oct 2nd volunteers

Michael Heath writes:

This last week had the team of regular Volunteer River Keepers on the Lower Cray at the Thames21 yard, sorting out the kit in the van, which was woefully untidy (even to by my standards), following a series of events.

On Wednesday 24th we returned the boat to the yard and were able to assess the Cray from Crayford Waterside Gardens to Barnes Cray (collecting Towpath rubbish and cans on the way). There is a disturbing amount of rubbish on the river bed along Footpath 106 downstream of the town centre. This needs attention soon, along with some rubbish trapped in a dipping willow. Ideal for a local community event and possibly the boat (see below).

Thursday was our weekly fixture for the Veolia Environment Trust River Enhancement project at Foots Cray Meadows, where we were joined by a team from the Bexleyheath Job Centre who were rapidly trained in the technique of fixing large wood pieces to the river bed to create marginal bank habitat.

North West Kent Countryside Partnership  and thames21 volunteers work on river habitat enhancements at Foots Cray Meadows.

North West Kent Countryside Partnership and Thames21 volunteers working on river habitat enhancements at Foots Cray Meadows.

The National Citizens Service event takes place at Foots Cray Meadows this Saturday.

Next week

 The Veolia Environmental Trust River Cray Enhancement Project (with NWKCP, who are WWF Funded) continues on Wednesday 1st October at Foots Cray Meadows. Meet Leafield Lane DA14 5EB at 10am to 3pm bring a packed lunch.

On Thursday 2nd October subject to sufficient volunteers (at what is short notice),  there will be a Cray River Project response to the above problem river bed rubbish problem. Meet at the Barnes Cray Depot 1030 (DA1 4NR). Please notify me if you can attend this and/or the Wednesday event. Help will also be wanted to tidy the van again!

Michael Heath, Cray Project Officer

T    020 7248 7171M  /  07968 805 751E    michael.heath@thames21.org.uk

Posted in Cray Riverkeepers, Foots Cray Meadows, River Cray, Rivers, Volunteering | Leave a comment

Friends of the Shuttle clear 20 bags of litter

Mandy Stevens reports:

Friends of the Shuttle carried out another successful litter pick along the Riverdale stretch of the river on Thursday 25th September.  We collected 20 bags of assorted rubbish (including 8 bags of recyclables) and assorted bits of ironware.

The shuttle team relax with some of the rubbish collected. Both the Shuttle and cray river-keepers are now separating  recyclables (clear bags) from other waste before it is taken away by the Council. We would rather be spending time on habitat enhancement work, so appeal to the public to dispose of their litter responsibly in future!

The Shuttle team relax with some of the rubbish collected. Both the Shuttle and Cray river-keepers are now separating recyclables (clear bags) from other waste before it is taken away by the Council. We would rather be spending time on habitat enhancement work, so appeal to the public to dispose of their litter responsibly in future!

We also tackled a small patch of Himalayan Balsam just into the Love Lane stretch (see photo).  We were pleased to see a fair sized shoal of large-ish fish (the fisherman amongst us thought Roach or possibly Rudd) – certainly not the sticklebacks that we see in the river quite often. Good news for the biodiversity of the river and also for the Kingfisher who nests nearby.

A Shuttle volunteer looks for embedded litter, before taking out the patch of Himalayan Balsam (centre) before it seeds.

A Shuttle volunteer looks for embedded litter by Love Lane allotments, before taking out the patch of Himalayan Balsam (centre) before it seeds.

FoTs will be holding a planning meeting next week and we should have dates for forthcoming events up on the BexleyWildlife calendar soon.

Posted in Friends of the Shuttle, River Shuttle, Volunteering | Leave a comment

Bexley RSPB Crayford Marshes bird walk, 23rd September 2014

Ralph and Brenda Todd write:

Twelve members joined us for a 3 hour walk in glorious sunshine and warm conditions. We met in Moat Lane then walked past Howbury Manor and moat where 4 male Chaffinches were busy feeding. Twelve Collared Doves together on the ground then a group of Ring-necked Parakeets feeding on the ground drew our attention.

Whilst looking for the elusive Little Owl a further 22 Collared Doves were noted perched in on Willow. Despite close inspection by many in the group, the Little Owl couldn’t be found until John Turner picked it up (on the branch we’d all investigated) but it immediately flew so a rear end view was the best some of us had.

A single Song and two Mistle Thrushes were also noted. A Cetti’s Warbler called, a Chiffchaff and Whitethroat gave brief views. Up onto the River Darent path, low tide, little to be seen apart from 3 Little Egrets feeding on the river’s edge and a few Teal and Mallard.

Upon reaching the River Thames with views across to RSPB Rainham we checked out the gulls against fairly difficult light but noted only Lesser Black-backed and Black Headed. Approximately 16 Ringed Plover, a single Dunlin and a few Redshank were feeding on the exposed mud on the Dartford side of the Darent.

Walk attendees look out across the Thames toward Rainham marshes

Walk attendees look out across the Thames towards Rainham marshes

Having already seen a Common (Harbour) Seal making its way up the Darent we were surprised to see another, larger seal loafing on the tideline – despite much discussion and a few photographs taken we still cannot be sure if it was common or grey?

Seal seen hauled out on the mud

Seal seen hauled out on the mud

As we continued our walk alongside the assortment of scrap yards Brenda noted a single wader that was initially and wrongly identified as Grey Plover – it was in fact an odd plumaged Knot. What was probably a family party of Stonechats entertained us as we continued towards Erith Yacht Club. By the time we left the scrap yards behind and were viewing the open grazing marshes the tide had already engulfed the saltmarsh so very few waders were visible (one Dunlin and 22 Redshanks had been seen flying towards the Darent). The Stonechats continued to perch obligingly on surrounding hawthorn bushes and a group of approximately 20 Meadow Pipits also flew up into on bush. Two Kestrels were busy hunting and at least two Wigeon were on the river.

11.15 – time to turn round and further investigate the gulls and waders at Crayfordness: an adult Yellow-legged Gull was easily seen with the Lesser Black-backed. There was no luck with the Little Owl but a Sparrowhawk did make a brief appearance.

Despite there not being the number and variety of birds we’d hoped for (perhaps the recent good weather and calm conditions had effected the autumn movements) it was a most enjoyable walk in lovely conditions.

Species list: Little Egret (3), Grey Heron (2), Mute Swan (pr+4 young), Mallard, Teal, Moorhen, Kestrel (2-4), Sparrowhawk, Little Owl, Lapwing, Ringed Plover (16), Dunlin (2), Redshank (48), Knot (1), Grey Wagtail, Pied Wagtail (6), Meadow Pipit (c20+), Lesser Black-backed gull (6), Yellow-legged Gull (1), Black Headed Gulls,  Collared Dove (34), Wood Pigeons, Ring Necked Parakeets, Stonechat (5),  Cetti’s Warbler, Chiffchaff, Common Whitethroat, Robin, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Mistle Thrush (2), Blue Tit, Great Tit, Jay (2), Carrion Crows, Jackdaws, Starlings, Chaffinch (6) Reed Bunting (1) Linnet (2). 40  species seen

Common Seal (1) plus second seal difficult to ID.

Posted in Bird watching, Crayford Marshes, RSPB | Leave a comment

Thames bridges, traffic pollution and Bexley mortality

Public Health England, in a report published earlier this year, estimates an annual excess death rate in Bexley (based on 2010) caused by airborne particulate pollutants – much of which comes from road traffic – as 122, with 1,255 years of life lost, as a consequence, for each year of the effects.

Transport for London’s own consultation information made it clear that a result of building cross-Thames road bridges into Bexley, of which two are now proposed, would very likely be an increase traffic on our roads. We suggest it is certain to do so. So why is Bexley Council shifting very clearly towards supporting bridges, whereas until recently it had been against on the grounds of more traffic.

Public Health England’s

Estimating local mortality burdens associated with particulate air pollution.

states that ‘current levels of particulate air pollution have a significant impact on public health’, and that ‘Measures to reduce levels of particulate air pollution or to reduce exposure of the population to such pollution, are regarded as an important public health initiative.’

These new bridges are being sold in part on the basis that they are smaller schemes than the previous Thames Gateway Bridge (that was defeated by a major public campaign), and will ‘only’ have 2 lanes of traffic each way, one for private vehicles and one for lorries and public transport. But of course lorries, which are likely to be major users, run on diesel which, as recent press coverage has highlighted, is a greater offender in the particulates problem than petrol.

We should think also of the unquantified toll on all those creatures around us that have with smaller lungs and other breathing systems, and may suffer relatively greater effects. There are also problems arising from nitrogen deposition, which increases soil nutrient levels and favours commoner, faster growing plant species over those adapted to nutrient-poor habitats

The report makes clear that Local Authorities have a     responsibility to implement actions to reduce the risk to local     populations of exposure to particulate air pollution. So will Bexley do that, or press on regardless with what we can see it actually believes when you read the relevant documents, which is that more traffic is inevitable = economic growth and therefore = indisputably good anyway?

Download the PDF file .

Report downloadable from our cloud site at https://app.box.com/s/jmlqpvagoxkjk2l4yd13

or from the Government’s own site at:

 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/332854/PHE_CRCE_010.pdf
Posted in Bexley Council, Planning, Thames bridges | Leave a comment

National House Martin Survey in 2015 – could you help locally?

The British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) will be conducting a national survey of House Martin nests next year in a bid to help understand their national decline.

House Martin

House Martin

The BTO say “Volunteers have helped us to collect information about breeding House Martins on their houses via a small-scale survey during 2009–13, and we’ve been encouraging ringers to carry out project work. During the summer of 2014 we tested methods for surveying House Martins and their breeding colonies on a larger scale and we hope that this work will lead to a national survey in 2015 and 2016. We hope to establish a reliable population estimate, investigate how the population is distributed in the built environment and look at the position of nests, timing of nesting and number of broods from a wide geographic area.”

We will be taking part in this survey and the Greener Bexley charity hopes to be encouraging householders near the small colony in Bexley Village to put up nests too. There are only a very few known nesting sites for House Martins in the Borough – others are Shearwood Crescent in Crayford, Chandlers Drive in Erith (both of which suffer from nest destruction by residents) and a road in Slade Green, but we suspect there are more. Perhaps one/some of the several hundreds of RSPB members in Bexley would like to lead a co-ordinated effort on this locally? If so, please get in touch with Jonathan Rooks at <jonathanrooks@virginmedia.com>

You can read more on them at http://www.bto.org/about-birds/bird-of-month/house-martin?dm_i=IG4,2SA62,H7T58M,A4NRY,1

photo by:
Posted in Bird watching, Recording, Volunteering | Leave a comment

Cray project maintains momentum as sun shines

Michael Heath writes:

The river Cray project continued to bask in the autumn sunshine this week with two clean up events for the lower Cray on Tuesday 16th and Thursday 18th September. They involved a number of officer workers enjoying a day out but contributing with a haul of general rubbish and bags of recyclables (drinks cans and bottles) from Waterside Gardens in Crayford and Byway 105 by Barnes Cray respectively. The Thursday event delivered around 21 person- hours of riverbank work and environmental education, as well as 7 person-hours of wildlife recording and management activity at Thames Road Wetland.

Wednesday was our day at the Foots Cray Meadows River habitat enhancement working with our partners from NWKCP, where we worked on another section of riverbank.

Thames21 volunteer and Shuttle Riverkeeper Duncan Devine fixes logs on the riverbed at Footscray Meadows to help vary flow rates, trap silt and allow marginal plants to establish along an otherwise shaded and eroded bank, in order to benefit wildlife.

Thames21 volunteer and Shuttle Riverkeeper Duncan Devine fixes logs on the riverbed at Footscray Meadows to help vary flow rates, trap silt and allow marginal plants to establish along an otherwise shaded and eroded bank, in order to benefit wildlife.

We were very well represented at Thames21’s AGM in the City of London’s Guildhall, also on the 18th, my thanks to those who attended.

This coming week’s schedule has a time change and a new activity, as follows:

Tuesday 23rd – we shall be at the T21 depot at Barnes Cray from 12noon. This is a later time to that previously advertised.

Wednesday 24th – I would appreciate some help moving our boat from Hall Place to the depot. Please contact me. We shall be meeting at Hall Place at 1030 where we will also be assessing a project to improve the wildlife habitat along the river bank which we tackled in June.

Thursday 25th – we have six volunteers already lined up for the in Stream Enhancements at Foots Cray Meadows (see calendar page on this website for details).

Saturday 27th – your support is very much needed for the Big Challenge Day for the National Citizens Service when we again lead in a variety of environmental work with a large group of young people at Foots Cray Meadows. Please contact me for details.

Michael Heath, River Cray Project Officer

020 7248 7171 / 07968 805 751 / michael.heath@thames21.org.uk

Thames21 – bringing London’s waterways to life

http://thames21.us2.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=50c47f481f16fbb80c0f514cb&id=a17ce4c1e4

to subscribe to our monthly e-newsletter and follow us on

Twitter http://www.twitter.com/thames21> and

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/London-United-Kingdom/Thames21/75089226096?ref=ts

Posted in Cray Riverkeepers, Foots Cray Meadows, River Cray, Rivers, Thames Road Wetland, Thames21, Volunteering | Leave a comment

FoCNR pressure improves Norman Road outlook – but major battles lie ahead

We have previously provided a partial report on the result of the Norman Road planning application. The following update has been written for the upcoming Friends of Crossness Nature Reserve newsletter, and contains the news that the developer has now agreed to the condition that a ‘green wall’ be made part of the construction, which will be immediately adjacent to what is left of Erith Marshes.

By Chris Rose, Vice-chair, Bexley Natural Environment Forum.

The outcome of the May Council planning committee’s decision on the Norman Road ‘Site 3’ application, at the former electricity sub-station location, was two ‘gains’ over what would have happened had we not intervened, as can be seen from a comparison with the previous ‘Site 4’ application, which we unfortunately missed the boat on. These were a ‘green wall’ (‘To ensure the development provides areas for biodiversity in accordance with London Plan and Core Strategy Policies and to minimise the visual impact on the adjoining Metropolitan Open Land’) and the agreement that some of the Section 106 money to be paid by the developer should be directed to the Marsh Dykes Catchment Project, thereby benefiting biodiversity in the immediate vicinity.

These ‘positives’ are in no small part due to the nineteen letters of objection – mostly from FoCNR members – made to the application for the industrial/distribution building on this former electricity sub-station site, which added valuable weight to BNEF’s own substantive submission. They also helped to ensure that our calls for expansion of marshland habitat, or at least the the incorporation of a brown roof, minimisation of hard surfacing and avoidance of light pollution, were the major arguments against put in front of councillors for their consideration in the agenda papers. As ‘we’ were the only objectors, we also got the full 5 minutes worth of speaking time, where these demands were emphasised again.

The developer said that because forklifts would be used within the building, there could not be sufficient support pillars to take the weight of a brown roof. Cllr. Colin Tandy distinguished himself by saying that if the Council was serious about advancing its policy of having brown roofs on industrial buildings near the Thames, it should simply refuse applications for types of building that couldn’t incorporate them in the first place. Cllr. Michael Slaughter claimed that there were examples of green roof planting slipping downwards in the rain, which missed the point that in any case a brown roof aggregate would pack together like hoggin so this shouldn’t happen. Unfortunately objectors don’t get the chance to come back in and challenge misleading statements by Councillors! The most revealing and shocking interjection was by Cllr. Brian Bishop who thought too much time was being spent on all this biodiversity talk, one industrial building was simply being replaced with another, and ‘There is more than enough space for all the biodiversity down there already’ (which rather ignores the simple fact that there are not infinite numbers of individuals of rare species smothering Crossness, and there is obviously some reason – lack of sufficient habitat perhaps !!!!  – why they are indeed rare in the first place …….).

Sensing there was support for the argument about a brown roof, and given that it could not be legally imposed, Planning Chief Susan Clark drew attention to a similar scenario that had arisen over an application by Pirelli, where a green (planted) wall had been agreed upon instead. In the circumstances, she invited Councillors to vote on making this a condition of approval, in the knowledge that the applicant could appeal against it, and Cllr. Bishop partially redeemed himself by supporting that proposal, even if it was just to get onto next business ASAP. Councillors then voted in favour of the application with this and other conditions.

To give the Council its due, those other conditions, which included a 5m buffer along the Norman Road ditch, to allow for Water Vole colonisation (which is a useful stick to wave elsewhere given this width is nowhere near adhered to in public open spaces along the Cray and Shuttle), and controls over lighting to prevent negative impacts on the marshes (which we will have to keep our eyes on, and report instances of inadequate compliance) were also imposed on Site 4, which we had no involvement with. But the statement of the Ecology and Sustainability Officer that ‘Brown Roofs would be ideal for the Site 3 development’ fell short of the degree of advocacy one would have expected for the Council’s clear public policy objective regarding such features in this geographical area, which might help explain why none appear to have been constructed to date. That aspiration appears not to have been voiced at all over Site 4, although the developer had voluntarily proposed photovoltaic or solar thermal installations on the roof.

We were informed in late August that the developer has agreed to adhere to the green wall condition, which sets a useful minimum fall-back benchmark for arguments about brown roofs on any further developments in this part of the Borough.

Looking west from Crossness nature reserve to the Norman Road development sites whetre the electricity sub-station once stood. If we couldn't get a return to marshland, at the very least we didn't want yet another grey box dominating the view ....

Looking west from Crossness nature reserve to the Norman Road development sites where the electricity sub-station once stood. If we couldn’t get a return to marshland, at the very least we didn’t want yet another grey box dominating the view ….

In the circumstances, and given the very ‘just-in-time’ nature of the appeal for more letters of objection, and the circulation of the crib sheet to facilitate that, it’s a reasonable result, and with better organisation we should be able to stir up more trouble in future. But we will have to. Bexley is now proposing to astronomically increase its housing allocation from 4,545 by 2026, with 438 of these in Belvedere, to 22,000, with 11,000 of these in Belvedere by 2030, despite the previous figure having been agreed after public consultation, accepted as adequate by HM Inspectorate, and published by the Council in its Local Development Framework only 2.5 years ago. In addition the government has been claiming that Councils with approved LDFs in place would not be hit with whopping demands to take even more houses. This is a severe breach of public trust, currently being compounded by Bexley Council Officers giving evasive answers to both BNEF and to FoCNR member Ralph Todd about where these figures have come from, and exactly where they are all supposedly going to go. And then there is Transport for London that has come back with schemes for not one but two Thames road bridges into the Borough, one either side of Crossness ……………..

To help with what are likely to be fast-moving and critical battles ahead, please follow

http://www.bexleywildlife.org/  and  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bexley-Wildlife/177977672396633

Posted in Bexley Council, BNEF, Crossness Nature Reserve, Planning | Leave a comment

Autumn wildflower gardening

Tips from the National Wildflower Centre for autumn activities for your wildflower garden.

DSC01139

Not all wildflowers, but an interesting mix in a neighbours front garden which is alive with insects in the summer. this shows how you don’t need a big area for an interesting display.

Collect Your Own Seed

Look for the seed in your wildflowers going brown and dry (dessicated). Simply collect this ripe seed and either drop it straight back down into an open space nearby, or put into containers.

On light soils rake off dead material under the plants, allow the seed to fall itself into the soil, and simply rake the area over.

Or keep some of your collected wildflower seed to sow next year. Dry out your seed on absorbent paper in a warm spot. Then store in a dry cool place over winter and sow again in spring.

Caring For Your Wildflower Patch in Autumn

First, see Collecting Your Own Seed above. Then, towards the end of August or in September, cut back hard. Take off the cuttings if they are thick and will block light, air and moisture reaching new seedlings. Sometimes in large areas, this is not possible or cost effective, so try to shred the cuttings as finely as you can – two passes of the mower or strimmer. If you do have a large area, don’t cut it all at once. Cut in sections at different times, to allow small mammals, insects, and other wildlife to move out and find another patch (Just like farmers should do when combining!)

Cut a few times again, if the autumn and winter are mild and grass and weeds keep growing. Put the mower away then, be ready to cut hard in late winter/early spring.
Looking for a selection of wildflower seeds to create the perfect wildflower habitat?

Did you know about our ranges of wild flower seeds found in the wild flower mixes section of the website? As well as single species wild flower seeds, we also offer a range of ready-made wild flower mixes. Alternatively you can also create your own wild flower meadow mixes. These packs offer great value for money and can create a colourful wildflower habitat in any garden or outdoor space.

http://www.wildflower.org.uk/index.php?dispatch=news.view&news_id=121&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Landlife+Wildflowers&utm_campaign=4676977_Autumn+News&utm_content=caringforyourwildflowerpatch&dm_i=1RZP,2S8S1,AA21BP,A4J67,1

We plan to change part of the small lawn at Bexley Community Library to a wildflower garden. We’ve left it to grow long grass the last two years in case there was anything very interesting in the sward. We got a few grasshoppers and bees and butterflies have liked our additional plantings, but now’s the time to get the boring grass out.

Here the Marjoram has been very popular with bees and butterflies.

P1060498

Posted in Gardening for wildlife | Leave a comment

Analysis of this year’s Big Butterfly count

Butterfly Conservation do an annual summer survey of butterflies. here is their analysis of the over 44,000 returns they received.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

BNEF Comments on the initial Erith Quarry development proposals

700 homes planned for a Grade 1 Site of Importance for Nature conservation

Here is Bexley Natural Environment Forum’s general submission on the initial proposals from the developers, presented at a public exhibition in July.  BNEF is the umbrella body for Friends of Parks and Open Spaces groups, local wildlife experts and conservationists and sustainability campaigners  in the Borough.

It has been difficult to be more precise given the flimsiness of the detail available at that point. When quizzed, for example, about the sustainability features of the buildings in terms of energy and water, the proponent’s said they didn’t know yet. How can you know whether a certain number of buildings will turn the required profit without knowing what standards you are going to build them to? We will be able to put forward a more detailed response once some of these questions are answered properly.

It will be noted that the former owners (DHL Ltd) bulldozed the site’s important scrub, with their security outfit claiming this was for ‘Japanese Knotweed control’, and that the new ones have sought to get the SINC status thrown out. Having failed in that, they have sought to present a negative view of the site, implying that it can only be ‘improved’ by building on 70% of it. The developers have also claimed that they are proposing less houses than the Council wanted, whilst a Council officer has claimed that opposite.

Erith Quarry – BNEF’s view of presentation on the initial development proposals 

The presentation of the redevelopment was very stereotypical in that it opened by showing photographs of what could be seen to be negative features.  There was no acknowledgement that habitats of scrub, e.g. brambles can be very good for birds and insects.  From this point of view it was very disappointing.

I believe that the number of units proposed is too great and will lead to an overdevelopment of the site and diminish the sites value to the borough.  Within this scheme therefore the design approach is very clinical which will lead to a sanitisation of the site and a loss of character, and not adding anything to the area.  The BNEF would hope that the areas assigned to green space do not just turn out to be amenity grassland and a few ‘pretty pretty shrubs’.  Planting specification must be for native species with a full management plan and one that is not just ignored once the development is commenced as so often happens.

What is a pedestrian green corridor?  Does this refer to areas that appear to be concrete steps with holes for trees, which doesn’t appear to be very practical or viable?  Would say in winter, theses areas be salted to prevent icy surfaces?  In this instance we know from experience that the salt would be washed into the soil and into the tree systems resulting in the death of the trees.  BNEF would like to see further details of these proposals.

No matter what ecological proposals are made, it would be very unlikely that the site can maintain its Grade 1 SINC designation with this level of development and sanitisation.  The site would therefore become of less value for biodiversity and fail to meet the borough’s wildlife status.

It is unclear how every unit will have a view of the Thames.

BNEF would like to see a reduction in hardstandings, in particular in relation to car parking.  The opportunity should be taken to encourage greater use of public transport and less reliance on the car.  Use of geomaterials must be considered for residential parking to reduce the hard standing areas and allow better drainage.  In a low lying area such as Erith Quarry, drainage will be an important issue in the development.  BNEF would like to see a full flood assessment of the site carried out.

As a former landfill site, BNEF trusts that a full site examination will be carried out to ascertain methane levels both in the soil and any escaping to the atmosphere.

From the design scheme as it currently stands, BNEF thinks that improvements can be made by the developer using green rooves and allowing for the provision of swift boxes, bird nesting boxes and bat boxes.

Traffic and access to site – although other groups will cover these issues, BNEF feels that as usual with these developments the increase in traffic will undoubtedly exceed all projections.  The plans as they stand show inadequate allowance for access at current levels.  The low level of public transport in the area will again undoubtedly lead to a greater increase in the use of private transport, i.e. cars than anticipated.  It is time for these developments to be designed to be car free.

From a site specific viewpoint, BNEF would like to see this site remain undeveloped.  However, practically we can see that this may be wishful thinking.  But the proposals as they stand look to turn a Grade 1 SINC into an overdeveloped sanitised space with little room for biodiversity.

I look forward to hearing from you on updates and fuller details of your proposals, particularly in respect of ‘wildlife areas’ so that we may comment more fully.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Ray Gray (Chair BNEF)

Posted in Erith Quarry, Planning, SINC | Leave a comment