The Welsh Harp Reservoir Story – Part 1

A new local history series from Philip Grant. 

If you were standing in Kingsbury around 20,000 years ago, you probably would have had cold feet! The area was just at the southern edge of the ice sheets that covered much of Britain during the last Ice Age. The glaciers had left a covering of gravel over the underlying clay, and as they receded, the melt-water formed rivers that flowed south into the Thames. Over the centuries, they cut valleys into the landscape. Two small rivers, the Dollis Brook and Silk Stream, combined to form the River Brent, and that is where our story begins.

1. Looking across the reservoir towards West Hendon, c.2010.

Although some of this series is based on my own research, I could not have written it without the knowledge I gained from my friend and fellow local historian, Geoffrey Hewlett, who sadly died last year. I assisted him, mainly on the illustrations side, with his 2011 book “Welsh Harp Reservoir Through Time”. I learned so much of interest from him about this beautiful area, at the heart of our borough, that I want to share with you during this difficult Covid-19 period. 

We don’t know when people first lived in this part of Brent, but they were definitely here by the late Bronze Age (around 1,000 to 600BC). There are old records of pottery funeral urns, dated by archaeologists to the Deveral Rimbury period, being uncovered during work near the edge of the reservoir. Unfortunately, these have disappeared, and the exact location of the find was not recorded. Geoffrey worked at Brent Council, and when he was asked to suggest a “historical” name for a new road near the reservoir, off of Birchen Grove, he wrote down Rimbury. A typist misread his joined-up writing, so Runbury Circle commemorates the find!

2. C.3rd/4th Oxfordshire red-slipped ware pieces, from Blackbird Farm, 2013. (Archaeology South East)

Moving on into the Iron Age, farmers from Celtic tribes (originally from Central Europe) came to the area, and the Brent is thought to have got its name from their goddess, Brigantia. The Celts were pushed further west by later immigrants, and the next hard evidence we have of people living here is of farms during the Roman period, on the more easily cultivated gravel soils at the top of Dollis Hill and Blackbird Hill. Finds of 3^rd/4^th century Roman pottery have been dug up at both sites, as well as a Roman coin of Constantius II (337-361) in the reservoir.

3. The River Brent valley between Kingsbury and Dollis Hill on the 1745 Rocque map. (Brent Archives)

I covered much of the Kingsbury area’s agricultural history in The Fryent Country Park Story, so I will jump forward to the 18^th century, and developments which would lead to “the Welsh Harp” being created. Britain’s “Industrial Revolution” had begun, with the need for much greater quantities of raw materials and manufactured goods to be moved about. Roads were in a poor state, and a horse could pull much more weight in a boat than on a cart (as well as more safely for fragile items like Staffordshire pottery). It was time for canals.

Many shorter canals had been built since the 1760s, but it was the Grand Junction Canal, from the Midlands to the Thames at Brentford, that provided the main link to London. Even while this was being built (1793-1800), an Act of Parliament in 1795, allowed the construction of a branch from it direct to Paddington, on the outskirts of London itself. A new brickworks at Alperton, using suitable clay from a local field, provided bricks for some of the bridges required, and the branch canal opened to the Paddington Basin in 1801.

 4. The opening of the canal branch to Paddington Basin, 1801. (Image from the London Metropolitan Archive)

Canals need to be topped up with water, and this was especially the case after the canal company started supplying piped water (pumped straight from the Basin!) to homes in the rapidly developing Paddington suburb. The River Brent was soon identified as a likely source, and although a reservoir was considered, the cheaper option of a “feeder” was constructed in 1810/11. This ran from a bend in the river at Kingsbury, through the parish of Willesden, to the canal at Lower Place. You can see its course on a map from that time, and it is still there today. 

5. The Feeder, in light blue, on an 1816 map of Willesden, and by Johnson Road, Stonebridge, c.2010.

Water supply again became a problem when the Regent’s Canal was opened in 1820, joining the Grand Junction branch at what is now known as Little Venice. A drought in 1833 gave the final push to plans for a 61-acre reservoir at Kingsbury, and by late 1834 the canal company had accepted a tender from William Hoof, to build the dam and associated works for the sum of £2,747 (and six shillings!). 

 6. Hoof's letter to the Regent's Canal Co. of October 1834, agreeing terms for constructing the reservoir.

Work on the reservoir’s construction must have been carried out quickly, because a plaque inside Old St Andrew’s Church, Kingsbury, records the deaths of four Sidebottom brothers ‘who were drowned in the reservoir near this church on the 14^th of August 1835’. The inquest found that Alexander, William and Edward accidentally drowned while bathing, and that Charles died ‘while attempting to save the lives of his three brothers’ - a tragic start to the reservoir’s story.

7. The Sidebottom brothers’ memorial in Old St. Andrew's Church, Kingsbury.

Even before the original work was finished, the canal company was buying more land, so that the dam could be raised and the reservoir extended. Their haste was to have severe consequences. The winter of 1840/41 was so cold that the ground was frozen to a depth of 20-30cm. The six days from 10 to 15 January saw heavy snow and rain, and water was seen overflowing the reservoir’s dam via a “waste weir”. On 16 January there was a rapid thaw, and at around midnight a fracture occurred in the dam wall.

There was already some flooding at Brentford, where the Grand Junction Canal and River Brent met the Thames, but just before 4am on Sunday 17 January 1841 ‘a great body of water’ hit the town, lifting boats out of the canal, which then caused damage to other boats and property as they were flung about by the flood. Three men died, and around twenty barges and their cargos were destroyed or seriously damaged.

 8. A February 1841 newspaper illustration, depicting the flood at Brentford (with some artistic licence!).

Records of the inquest on William Spruce, a 19-year old “barge boy”, show the lengths the coroner went to in order to establish the cause of the flood, and reason for his death. A surveyor representing the Regent’s Canal Company said that the Kingsbury dam ‘was of a proper strength’, and claimed that the water which escaped because of the fracture would not have reached Brentford before 5am, so could not have been responsible. The jurors decided that it was flood water from the reservoir that caused Spruce’s death. The canal company’s directors ordered urgent strengthening of the dam, but continued to resist any claims for compensation!

9. A season ticket for fishing on the reservoir in 1846.

The rebuilding of the dam was completed by early 1843, and a cottage was built near the Kingsbury end of it for a keeper. He would control the flow of any excess water from the reservoir, using sluice gates above the new waste weir, reached along a wooden walkway above the dam. After this, the Brent or Kingsbury Reservoir (both names appear to have been used) settled down to a few quiet years, when fishing and birdwatching were enjoyed there.

10. An 1850 watercolour: 'Reservoir of the Brent, Kingsbury, Middlesex.’ (Brent Archives online image 1710)

Water supply for both the Regent’s Canal from the docks at Limehouse, and the branch through Alperton and Willesden, soon became a problem again. In 1851, Parliament passed an Act allowing them to increase the height of the dam and create a much larger reservoir. More land was purchased, including a public house just north of the Brent Bridge on the Edgware Road. Its tenant was removed, and an embankment had to be built, to protect the pub from flooding.

11. A Regent's Canal Company boundary post from 1854, near the reservoir. (Photo by the late Len Snow)

New boundary posts (bearing the Prince of Wales crest of the former Prince Regent, later King George IV) were put in place around the company’s land, and by 1854 the reservoir had been filled to cover around 400 acres. As the former meadows became flooded, and the habitat changed, the bird life around the reservoir was studied by two keen naturalists living in Kingsbury, Frederick Bond and James Harting. The latter’s 1866 book, “Birds of Middlesex” has a wonderful frontispiece showing the reservoir.

12. The frontispiece to Harting's 1866 book "Birds of Middlesex". (From an original copy at Brent Archives)

Around 1858, a new tenant took over the public house near Brent Bridge, and we will look at his part in the reservoir’s story next weekend. I hope you will join me then.

Philip Grant.

UPDATED WITH COMMENTS The Welsh Harp Reservoir – a warning from Whaley Bridge

Guest post by Philip Grant

The Welsh Harp Reservoir – a warning from Whaley Bridge

We know that Global Warming is causing more frequent extreme weather conditions, such as record heat waves in summer, and more intense storms. In the past few days, we have been watching (from a safe distance) the news about a threatened dam collapse at Whaley Bridge, caused by the volume of water flowing into the reservoir above the town after prolonged torrential rain. I don’t want to cause alarm, but this should be a wake-up call about a reservoir much closer to us.

The Toddbrook Reservoir in Derbyshire was built in the 1830’s, to supply water along a “feeder” to the High Peak Canal. The embankment dam was constructed of earth, around a central core of puddled clay. 

The Kingsbury, or Brent, Reservoir (now better known as the Welsh Harp) was built in 1834/35, to supply water along The Feeder (which still runs through Neasden and Stonebridge) to the Paddington Branch of the Grand Junction Canal. Its dam, using the same method of construction, was the work of a Hammersmith contractor, William Hoof. The price for the work, which he agreed with the Regent’s Canal Company, was £2,747 and six shillings!

William Hoof’s letter of 18^th October 1834, agreeing to build the reservoir and embankment dam at Kingsbury.

            

Heavy rain, and a rapid thaw of snow, caused a partial collapse of the dam in January 1841. 

A newspaper illustration of the flooding in Brentford, 1841.

The water swept down the Brent valley, which was then just open farmland, and caused major flood damage at the canal port of Brentford, where the river met the Thames. Several people were drowned, and more than 100 boats were wrecked.

The dam had been repaired by 1843, and was enlarged ten years later as the Regent’s Canal Company needed more water for its operations. A spillway was added to the dam, allowing excess water to escape into the river below when the reservoir was full. By late Victorian times, this had become a tourist attraction for people visiting the local countryside from the crowded city.

The Kingsbury “waterfall”, in a postcard from c.1900.  [Brent Archives online image 1341]

The land downstream of the reservoir remained as farmland until 1880, when the Metropolitan Railway built a large engineering works at Neasden, on the line they were building out from Baker Street. They also had to build homes for the many people needed to run the works, and the first 100 houses in “A” and “B” (now Quainton and Verney) Streets were occupied by 1882. If you want to learn more about Neasden’s Railway Village, there is an illustrated article on the Brent Archives website LINK .

Across Neasden Lane (North), suburban development in the 1930’s saw new roads such as Braemar Avenue built right up to the foot of the dam, and a new junior school, Wykeham Primary in Aboyne Road, to serve the area’s growing population. Two more schools, Neasden High and St. Margaret Clitherow R.C. Primary, were built in the early 1970’s, on the site of the former Neasden Power Station, between the River Brent and The Feeder. When the High School closed, as part of Brent’s cull of secondary schools in 1989, its site was redeveloped as the Quainton Village housing scheme.

More housing developments were built near the reservoir in the late 20^th century. Runbury Circle nestles under the north-west edge of the dam, while Harp Island Close lies between the river and The Feeder, near to where the Brent emerges below the dam. This estate of 128 flats was built by Laings in the 1980’s, and the view here is from its gardens (in 2009).

What had been the dam’s Victorian spillway was replaced in 1936 by five siphons, designed to take water out of the reservoir if its level becomes too high. These were installed as a safety measure, under changes introduced by the Reservoir (Safety Provisions) Act in 1930. That law was introduced after 16 people were drowned in Dolgarrog, North Wales, in 1925, when floods coming down a valley in the hills caused an embankment dam above the village to collapse.

Toddbrook Reservoir had been inspected, both by its owners and an independent engineer, under the provisions of the current (1975!) Reservoirs Act, as recently as November 2018, and found to be “safe”. In the light of the near collapse of its dam, less than nine months later, and what we know about more extreme weather events, as a result of Global Warming, we need to think again about the safety of all of the country’s Canal Age dams, including the one at the Welsh Harp.

Brent Council needs to work with the Canal and River Trust, and the Environment Agency, to review all aspects of our local dam’s safety, both to minimise the risk of a similar event to Whaley Bridge happening here, and to ensure that plans are in place on how any such emergency would be dealt with. 

If a similar spell of very wet weather hit North West London, as it did North West England last week, the wide catchment areas of the Dollis Brook / River Brent and the Silk Stream would bring huge volumes of water into the Welsh Harp. Not only the safety of the dam structure in such conditions needs to be properly assessed, but also the ability of the siphons to cope with such volumes.

If the reservoir had to shed large volumes of water, could the river below the dam take that water away safely, without flooding low lying residential areas and roads for several miles downstream. There have been times, in living memory, when debris restricting the culvert which channels the river under the Harrow Road has caused flooding in the Monks Park and St Raphael’s Estate areas.

Are Brent’s own maps of areas at risk from flooding, if there were to be a partial (or worse) failure of the dam up to date? Does the Council know how many people currently live, work or go to school in these areas, and how it would manage their evacuation if there were to be an emergency of the type experienced at Whaley Bridge. The recent events there have been a warning which must not be ignored.

Despite this warning, the Welsh Harp Reservoir is still a place to be treasured and enjoyed, rather than to be feared, as long as its potential dangers are properly considered, and the necessary action taken. If you want to discover more about its history there is an article online LINK t, or for more of its fascinating story, beautifully illustrated, borrow a copy of Geoffrey Hewlett’s “Welsh Harp Reservoir Through Time” from one of Brent’s libraries. Better still, take a stroll beside it yourself!

Philip Grant.

Note from Editor:  I am awaiting a response from the Canals and River Trust to a request made for a comment on the above piece.

Carolyn Downs, Brent Council CEO, has sent thos response to Philip Grant:

Dear Mr Grant,

Thank you for your email and attachment, on behalf of Carolyn Downs I acknowledge receipt.

Please be assured that the matter is being discussed by the relevant teams internally and we will seek to engage with the relevant external partners on this to provide you with a further response.

In the meantime, the council’s Flood Risk Management Strategy is publically available on the website*.

Kind regards,

Tom Welsh
Head of the Chief Executive’s Office'

* THIS IS A LINK TO BRENT'S FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY document:

https://www.brent.gov.uk/media/16406897/flood-risk-strategy-sept-2015.pdf

Roger Wilson has sent in this comment:

Phil, I support your proposal to Brent Council that it take heed of the 'warning from Whaley Bridge' and review its emergency flood planning and the maintenance schedules of the Welsh Harp/ Brent reservoir Dam Wall and spillways have not slipped.

But as a regular user of this leisure facility, both as a sailor and for the enjoyment its wildlife, I'd be more than upset to see an overly cautious kneejerk response to your blog, such as dropping water levels in the reservoir. Your Blog would be a more worthy if it reported some of the some of the measures that HAVE been carried out in the more recent past along side the sensationalist historic events of the past.

So to redress the balance ...

A quick online search 'Brent Reservoir repairs/ upgrades' reveals that:

i) that the spillway was redesigned in the 1930's (at the same time as the expansion of Housing below the reservoir) and is of a more sophisticated design than that of Toddbrook Reservoir impacting Whaley Bridge.

ii) That Brent's residents are fortunate that the Brent reservoir Dam and Brent River rainfall catchment basin have been the subject of a number of academic specific case studies (published between 1990 and 2000. These case studies included reviews of mathematical modelling methods used to predict floods, and of the capacity and design of the of the Brent Reservoir spillways to safely disperse flood water.

iii) Possibly as a result of these studies, between 2005 and 2007, e.g. only 12 years ago, the height of the Brent reservoir Dam Wall was raised with a new Concrete Cap and earth bunds and concrete walls added to the north and south side of the Dam wall. This I believe was to meet revised estimates of flood water levels in the event of a 1 in 10,000 year extreme rainfall.

Yes Brent Council , the Canal and Riverboat Trust who manage the reservoir , and the Environment Agency should review, publicly report and act on any short comings in their Flood prevention and Emergency planning provisions but in the meantime I hope this response lets anyone concerned sleep a little more easily in their bed!

Roger Wilson

Help clean up the Welsh Harp tomorrow

Saturday February 24th 11am-2pm

Help us clean up this special reservoir in north-west London, for the benefit of nature and wildlife.
Join Thames21, London Wildlife Trust, Friends of the Welsh Harp, Canal & River Trust and the Phoenix Canoe Club as we come together to tackle litter on the Brent Reservoir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

Meet us at the builders’ lot by Cool Oak Lane Bridge (closest postcode is NW9 7BH). All safety equipment and refreshments are provided. Please dress appropriately.

Ths is a free event but please let us know that you intend to join – email ccullen@wildlondon.org.uk

Welsh Harp, also known as Brent Reservoir, is a SSSI noted for its breeding pairs of great crested grebe, overwintering waterfowl, and marginal vegetation. So you will be making a difference to wildlife by volunteering.

Welsh Harp Spring Clean February 28th

From London Wildlife Trust

Event details

Sat, 24/02/2018 - 11:00am - 2:00pm

Help us clean up this special reservoir in north-west London, for the benefit of nature and wildlife.
Join London Wildlife Trust, Canal & River Trust, Phoenix Canoe Club and Thames21 as we come together to tackle litter on the Brent Reservoir SSSI.

Meet us at the builders’ lot by Cool Oak Lane Bridge (closest postcode is NW9 7BH). All safety equipment and refreshments are provided. Please dress appropriately.

Ths is a free event but please let us know that you intend to join - email ccullen@wildlondon.org.uk

Welsh Harp, also known as Brent Reservoir, is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) notified for its breeding pairs of great crested grebe, overwintering waterfowl, and marginal vegetation. Read more here.

 Elsewere on the Welsh Harp a ramp has now been fitted to the bird hide

Still time to comment on the 'devastating' Welsh Harp 25 metre phone mast

The various notices from Brent Council give different dates for the closure of consultation on the Welsh Harp Phone Mast ranging from November 23rd on the site notice, November 27th on some consultation letters to December 12th on the website (see above).

The website gives November 6th as the date of the consultation letter but it was not sent out until November 21st.

Residents have also had difficulty in getting their queries answered by Brent Planning department as this comment on their website shows:

I have been frustrated in my attempts to speak to someone in Planning North regarding PA 17/4597.
The case officer assigned on original documents Kieran Amery (x2144)- unsure if messages are picked up - no reply.
The case officer on the recent letter to Freda, Elliot Brown (x 6204) is away till27 Nov last day for the comments!
The general no. on the Council site and Planning North does not lead to a human person!

There has been some confusion about where the mast will actually be erected. It is not on the sailing club site itself at Birchen Grove as some supposed but close to the opposite bank:

Click on images to enlarge

'The proposed telecommunication tower and equipment would be sited within the South-Western far corner of the Brent Reservoir site. This is a considerable distance from the Sailing Club Grounds, however it is within close proximity to the Neasden Recreation Ground and the rear boundary of residential properties sited along Braemar Avenue and Aboyne Road'

The applicant states that they pre-consulted with ward councillors and Dawn Butler MP but got no response. They rejected Brent Council's pre-application proposed modification on the grounds that lowering the mast would reduce the signal and landscaping was not possible because the base of the mast would be a servicing area:

Pre - application consultation was carried out with the Local Planning Authority, Councillors Agha, Farah and Mashari, and Dawn Butler MP.

We received a formal pre - application response from the Local Planning Authority, stating that the application would be acceptable in principle but amendment s, including reducing the height of the proposed tower and providing landscaping, would be required to mitigate the potential detrimental impact on the surrounding area.

We received no responses from the Ward Councillors or the MP.

Cllr Agha is chair of both the Welsh Harp Joint Consultative Committee and Brent Planning Committee.

The Joint (Barnet and Brent) Welsh Harp Consultative Committee will be meeting on Tuesday November 28th. There is an item on the agenda for any planning issues, although this particular application is not specifically mentioned. The deadline for booking to make representations to the Committee has gone.

This objection sums up the issues:

I object to the above proposal:

1) Biodiversity and Wildlife

- The Welsh Harp is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI- the only one in Barnet and Brent) is a haven for migratory birds, bees, bats, butterflies and frogs.

There are 153 peer-viewed studies or articles reporting significant effects from EMF exposures on wildlife. http://www.emfresearch.com/emf-wildlife/

A six-year study of trees around wireless cell towers reveals the 'invisible' damage of exposure to RF radiation. Halgamuge, M.N. "Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants."Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, vol. 36, no. 2, 2017, pp. 213-235

A mobile telephone mast in the Welsh Harp /Brent Reservoir will have devastating impact wild life and plants, which in turn will affect human wellbeing via the ecological chain.

2) Metropolitan Open Space (MOL)

- The London Plan which Brent Council follows closely, states Regarding Planning decisions, "the strongest protection should be given to London's Metropolitan Open Land and inappropriate development refused.... and to ...maintain the openness of MOL.

A mobile telephone mast will affect this openness in and around the proposed site.

- Brent's Core Policy (CP18) -Protection and Enhancement of Open Space, Sports and Biodiversity

Open space (including waterways) of local value will be protected from inappropriate development and will be preserved for the benefit, enjoyment, health and well being of Brent's residents, visitors and wildlife. Support (given) ...for the improvement of both open space and the built environment for biodiversity and nature conservation.

I am not against technological progress but we cannot afford to do it at the expense of our precious nature reserve so near central London which is so appreciated by an ever increasing population in the area.

The Brent Reservoir SSSI site is the largest in Barnet and Brent status and is also the largest Local Nature Reserve in Greater London and should therefore be given the strongest protection.

3) 3G Cover

The diagrams for 3G - now and after the proposed installation, do not reflect much of a change, according to the colour coding, with regards to the stated improved coverage. The improvement affects a very small area and is disproportionate to the greater disruption of land and surrounding wildlife.

I am therefore strongly objecting to the approval of this site for the construction of a Mobile Telephone Mast.

To comment on the application go to LINK. Remember to state either that you Object or you Support the application.

Upcoming Welsh Harp events starting on Sunday

Sunday October 23rd Conservation Day

 

Sunday November 20th Canoe clean up on the Welsh Harp.

This is going ahead. A detail in the last notice LINK  was incorrect. Only if you have a ‘one star level’ award and bring it with you on the day, will you be able to collect little from a canoe. Apologies for this. A team of volunteers will be needed on the bank as well  if you are not of a ‘one star level’.  Final infromation next week.

London Wildlife Trust Brent Reservoir walk, 6th November

LWT are hosting a Bird walk on the Brent Reservoir on Sunday 6th of November. Attendees will have an informative walk led by WHCG officer Roy Beddard and also get to visit the hides on the eastern marsh. After the walk there will be a tea/snack break followed by an arranged litter pick to help conserve the area.

We will be meeting by the Barnet information board by the Cool Oak Lane Bridge entrance at 11am, running to approx 2pm,  limited to 12 people due to space in the hides/equipment. More information on where/what to bring will be provided on booking.
              
Please direct any bookings/queries to myself on welshharp@wildlondon.org.uk  or to Rosie on rchambers@wildlondon.org.uk.


LINK
 

New threat to Welsh Harp - time to act quickly

The view today from the west bank of the Welsh Harp

The view in the future if the development goes ahead

Four years  ago a united campaign of local political activists and environmentalists saw off proposals for housing developments in both Barnet and Brent areas of Brent Reservoir, popularly known as the Welsh Harp.

Those proposals are dwarfed by the enormous West Hendon development proposed by Barratts which is soon to be considered by Barnet Council.

The development is adjacent to an SSSI (site of Special Scientific Interest) on the Welsh Harp which is home to nesting birds and used by over-wintering birds.  It draws visitors from all over London and beyond. The footpath is well used by many Brent residents who start their walk at the Birchen Grove end of the Welsh Harp.

The development will include tower blocks of up to 26 storeys high - double the height of the one in the photograph.The existing 597 homes will be demolished and replaced by 2,000 houses and flats including 4 tower blocks. There are proposals to build footbridges over the Silk Stream and beside Cool Oak Bridge which are likely to cause water pollution during construction. The area is already one designated as having poor air quality and the development is likely to increase traffic in the area.

Barratts have already built a 12 storey block next to Cool Oak Bridge which gives an indication of the overbearing nature of such blocks and the extent to which they rise above tree height. The new blocks will be twice as high.

There is some confusion about the date by which letters have to be received by Barnet Planning Officers, the safest assumption is that the deadline is April 30th. The Planning Reference is H/01054/13 and the Barnet Planing contacts is: Thomas.Wyld@barnet.gov.uk 

Full documentation can be found HERE

I reproduce below a submission on the development that sums up the issues very well:

Comments on West Hendon re-development Proposals

Significance of Northern Reservoir/Refuge/Marsh and associated woodland.

The Northern reservoir is an important refuge used by wildfowl when there is disturbance on the main reservoir from sailing. It functions this way throughout the year but especially during the winter months when the normal numbers of birds increase by several hundred displaced ducks and other wildfowl. The area most used by these birds is along the bank next to the estate. It is a SSSI which should afford a high level of protection under wildlife legislation. An important screen of trees currently separates the water from the estate. The marshy northern end of the water is also important for breeding wildfowl in the sheltered pools and channels. Finally at the northern end is a quiet area of wet woodland in which a number of shy woodland birds breed (owls, woodpeckers, warblers). The area of the re-development abuts the whole of the edge of the waterway, marsh and woodland.

Proposed re-development- key features

The proposal involves a huge increase in the density of housing and greatly exceeds the GLA recommended level for a site of this size increasing from 7-800 housing units to over 2000. A key feature of the proposal is the construction of a number of extremely high tower blocks, up to 26 stories in height; these are sited immediately adjacent to the Water and the SSSI boundary. The excessive height of these towers seems more appropriate for a central financial district than a North London suburb. The development will have a major impact on the surrounding area and put a huge strain on local health, education and road infrastructure.

Impact on the SSSI, reservoir and local area

• There will be a major increase in disturbance of the wildfowl refuge both during construction and when occupied, both due to the excessive height of the buildings and the tripling of the number of occupants
• The developers would like to remove tree screening to open up sight lines. This will make matters worse and increase disturbance. We can expect that this will have a major impact on roosting and nesting birds. The existing tree buffer hides all but the single 15 storey tower that currently exists and in addition to increased disturbance any reduction in the tree cover will have a major and detrimental landscape effect when viewed from the bridge or the footpath to the west of the north reservoir. The tree screen needs to be effectively managed and maintained.
• There will be a large increase in the amount of night-time light pollution in what is currently a dark area. This will affect birds and mammals such as bats. External night-time lighting of the towers must be kept to a minimum. Brightly lit towers have been shown to have a detrimental effect on night flying and migrating birds
• The extreme height of the tower blocks will interfere with flight lines for birds trying to get away from sailing disturbance on the main reservoir. There could also be an increased risk of bird strikes made worse by the large number of high level glass windows.
•  A proposed bridge and circular route crossing the river further upstream will disturb and damage the wet woodland where shy woodland birds such as woodpeckers, owls and warblers breed. This woodland forms part of the SSSI buffer and Local Nature Reserve.
• This proposed bridge will also disturb scarce breeding wildfowl such as Gadwall, Pochard and others which breed in the pools and reed-beds at the end of the reservoir next to the woodland.
• The proposed location of the towers next to the SSSI boundary appears to be mainly for commercial and marketing reasons and has little regard for the nature reserve. They should be lower and further back.
• Due to the huge increase in occupancy of the estate there will be many more people visiting the lake and therefore greatly increasing the disturbance. The planned occupancy level greatly exceeds the level proposed for the site by the GLA.
• The provision of car parking, schools and health centres appears inadequate for the level of occupancy. This will put great strain on local infrastructure, facilities and roads.
• The two reservoirs have an important secondary function as a flood buffer. The huge increase in the local built footprint and areas covered by concrete will have an adverse effect on the carrying capacity in times of heavy rain. Flood events seem to be on the increase at the site from my own observations over a period of 30 years.
• The SSSI boundary with York Park has long been a dumping ground for domestic appliances and waste. The huge increase in occupancy will clearly make this much worse.

Summary

This development will have a major and detrimental impact on both the Reservoir Nature Reserve and the local community. It is inevitable that the SSSI will be adversely affected.  The planned occupancy level needs to be greatly reduced to a level more appropriate to the area and the setting. The tower blocks should be reduced in height and placed back from the margins of the reservoir. The part of the development already completed shows the overbearing and inappropriate nature of the building design next to one of London’s most important sites for recreation and natural history. 

The local council, the owners (of the reservoir) and the developers have a legal duty under existing wildlife legislation to conserve and improve the SSSI. As the proposals stand it is impossible for them to achieve this aim and we can only expect deterioration in the standard of the SSSI.