Site Suitability Report C31XC: Boat Yard, Calypso Way

Spring 2010
Site Suitability Report C31XC

Boat yard, Calypso Way
Please note: Further details are provided in the Final Report on Site Selection Process (doc ref: 7.05) that can be found on the Thames Tideway Tunnel section of the Planning Inspectorates web site.
100-RG-PNC-C31XC-900001 | Spring 2010

Boat yard, Calypso Way
THAMES TUNNEL
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT C31XC

LIST OF CONTENTS
Page Number 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 Purpose and structure of the report Background Consultation 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11
SITE INFORMATION 2.1 2.2 Site and surroundings Type of site
3 4
PROPOSED USE OF SITE CONSTRUCTION PHASE PROPOSED USE OF SITE OPERATIONAL PHASE 4.1 4.2 Introduction Restoration and after-use
ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Access Construction works considerations Permanent works considerations Health and safety
PLANNING ASSESSMENT 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Introduction Planning applications and permissions Planning context Consultation comments Planning comments
ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 Introduction Transport Archaeology Built heritage and townscape Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Ecology Flood risk Air quality Noise Land quality
SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT 8.1 8.2 Socio-economic profile Issues and impacts
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 9.1 9.2 Introduction Crown Land and Special Land comments
100-RG-PNC-C31XC-900001.doc
9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10
Land to be acquired Property valuation comments Disturbance compensation comments Offsite statutory compensation comments Site acquisition cost assessment
11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 14
SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 Introduction Engineering Planning Environment Socio-economic and community Property
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN APPENDIX 6 SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN APPENDIX 7 CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT APPENDIX 8 OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT APPENDIX 9 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLE
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AOD BAP BT CPO CSO DLR EA GLA HGV LNR LPA LU m MOL ONS ORN PLA POS PTAL SAM SINC SNCI SSR SSSI SuDS TfL TD TLRN TPA UDP UXO
above Ordnance Datum Biodiversity Action Plan British Telecom compulsory purchase order combined sewer overflow Docklands Light Railway Environment Agency Greater London Authority heavy goods vehicle local nature reserve local planning authority London Underground metre/metres Metropolitan Open Land Office of National Statistics Olympic Route Network Port of London Authority public open space public transport accessibility level scheduled ancient monument site of importance for nature conservation site(s) of nature conservation importance site suitability report site(s) of special scientific interest sustainable urban drainage systems Transport for London tunnel datum Transport for London Road Network Thames Policy Area unitary development plan unexploded ordnance
1 1.1 1.1.1
INTRODUCTION Purpose and structure of the report The Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper (paragraphs 2.3.29 - 2.3.34) outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of shaft sites, and this process also applies to CSO sites. Paragraph 2.3.31 lists the type of general considerations that will be addressed in each site suitability report, but they depend on the relevance to the site and professional judgement made in the assessments. This report was prepared through the assessment of information from the perspective of a number of technical disciplines: Engineering, Planning, Environment, Property and Community. The reports have been prepared on the basis of the information listed in Appendix 1 - Sources of Information, and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to the current stage. The Background Technical Paper provides information on the requirements for different site types, their sizes and typical activities/facilities within the sites. Each site suitability report considers a particular site on its own merits. In addition, an engineering options report was produced. Information from both of these reports will feed into the technical assessment of how well the site may fit in with tunnel design options, ensuring combinations of sites spread across the length of the tunnel route provide a reasonable spatial distribution of sites (that will best assist with the construction of the tunnel, operation and maintenance). This is considered in the Preferred Scheme Report. Background The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: Part 1A - Creation of the long list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites Part 1B - Creation of a short list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of shaft (and CSO) sites - an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of shaft (and CSO) sites - assessment against a list of detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.
1.1.2
1.1.3 1.1.4
1.2 1.2.1
1.2.2
The final part of Stage 1 includes this report. The following is an overall summary of all elements that apply to all the sites on the final short list: Part 1C - Creation of the Preferred List of shaft (and CSO) sites - site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that will result in the Preferred Scheme Report.
1.3 1.3.1
Consultation The Thames Water project team held meetings with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders to review the provisional short list of shaft and CSO sites. All general and site specific comments can be found in a separate report titled Consultation on the Short List of Sites: Consultation Feedback Report. These comments were considered to help determine the final short list of sites, but they were also considered at the optioneering workshops. Further meetings were held with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders between January and March 2010. Comments are included in this report.
1.3.2
Page 1
2 2.1 2.1.1
SITE INFORMATION Site and surroundings This site is one of the shortlisted sites for Earl Pumping Station CSO. This section provides an overview of all the site information that will be used by one or more disciplines to assess the site in sections 3 to 9 of this report. The site C31XC is a boatyard located in the London Borough of Southwark, known as South Dock Marina boatyard. The site is roughly rectangular in shape, and existing access to the site is taken from Calypso Way. The nearest residential properties are located within approximately 10 metres of the site boundary. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. Approximately 80% of the site is occupied by a boatyard, and a riverside walk runs through the north and east of the site. The northern area of the boatyard site (20-30%) is made ground with drains visible, with the remainder of the site gravelled. The riverside walk is block-paved. Mature trees line the southern and eastern border of the boatyard boundary, with younger trees along part of the western boundary. The surrounding area is predominantly residential. The site is bounded by a lock accessing the South Dock, located to the north of the site, with three- to four-storey apartments/ townhouses beyond the lock to the north. Adjacent to the east is the Thames Path and the river. To the east of the site is a Grade II listed feature, a parish boundary stone, on the Thames Path. There is a marina opposite the site to the northwest. St Georges Square, a tree-lined square with benches and car parking, is adjacent to the site to the south. Beyond the square are several three- to four-storey residential buildings. Deptford Wharf, closest to the site, is social housing run by Lewisham Homes. Calypso Way borders the west of the site, beyond which lies South Dock (Marina), consisting of four-storey flats and three-storey townhouses. The nearest residences to the west do not directly overlook the site but have small openings to the gable ends of the blocks. The site is within a number of Southwark Unitary Development Plan (2007) designated areas, including the Thames Policy Area, an archaeological priority area and open space area. All the mapped designations are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with an aerial photograph of the site, are attached as Appendix 4. The site is 2.7km from the TLRN A200 Lower Road. The access route is via Plough Way, which has traffic calming in the form of sleeping policemen. The nearest passenger railway station, South Bermondsey, is located 2.3km from the site. The nearest LU station, Canada Water, is 1.9km and the nearest DLR Station, Cutty Sark, is 3.8km away. Therefore, none of the public transport routes can be classed as local. There are no existing wharfage/jetty facilities at the site, although the site does serve the adjacent marina, which is accessed through lock gates. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5.
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.1.6
2.1.7
2.1.8 2.1.9
2.1.10 Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: River wall to the west Earl Storm Outlet runs through the middle of the site to a discharge point in the river. This is a 2.74m diameter pipe which changes to twin 1.52x0.91m box culverts at the outfall. At the point of change, there is a manhole chamber. This is the sewer to be connected to the shaft. Princes Court, four- to five-storey building at the outside northern part of site Rainbow Quay, three- to four-storey residential building at the outside northern part of site
Page 2
A three-storey apartment block to the west of the site. 2.1.11 The locations of other third-party assets, such as BT and fibre optic communication cables, are to be confirmed by further studies and utility searches and may not be shown on the services and geology plan. 2.1.12 Information on the geology specific to this site can be found within the services and geology plan, which is in Appendix 6. This plan shows that the shaft would be founded in the Chalk. 2.2 2.2.1 Type of site The site C31XC is being considered as a CSO site to intercept the Earl Pumping Station CSO (CS31X). PROPOSED USE OF SITE CONSTRUCTION PHASE The proposed construction phase layouts for the CSO site are located in Appendix 7 Construction Phase Layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment. The construction phase layout drawings are illustrative and show: the layout as a CSO site potential access point. 3.1.3 These drawings provide initial preliminary schematic layouts that have not been optimised. If the site proceeds to the next stage as a preferred site, construction phase layouts would be optimised to minimise impacts. Photographs of typical activities associated with the CSO site construction phase are provided in Appendix 7. Potential above ground construction features include: approximately 3m high hoarding around the site boundary welfare facilities, temporary structures, approximately 3m high grout plant, approximately 3m to 5m high, including silos mobile crane, approximately 30m high (maximum and not for full construction duration). 3.1.5 Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Construction phase data Activity Length of construction period Likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) Working days Primary means of transporting excavated material away from site Primary means of transporting materials to site
* There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for this site.
3 3.1.1 3.1.2
3.1.4
CSO site 0.5 to 2 years 12 hrs from 7am to 7pm Mon to Sat Road* Road*
4 4.1 4.1.1
PROPOSED USE OF SITE OPERATIONAL PHASE Introduction The indicative operational phase layout for the CSO site is located in Appendix 8 Operational Phase Layout, and is based on a preliminary assessment.
Page 3
4.1.2
The generic elevations of structures shown on the operational phase layout are located in Appendix 8 and provide an illustration of typical examples of the permanent structures which are applicable to CSO sites. The above ground infrastructure at this site is likely to comprise a ventilation column 10m high and 3m diameter, a ventilation building 5m x 15m x 5m high and a 20m x 10m top structure with openings. The top structure is to provide access and egress into the main shaft and flap valve chamber.
b a
4.1.3
4.1.4
The top structures are envisaged to be finished at a level of 107m tunnel datum (TD) (7mAOD), and since the ground level mean value at this site is 104mTD (4mAOD), the top structures would be raised to approximately 3m above the current ground level. For further information on the generic layout of this top structure, refer to Appendix 8. A hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would not be fenced. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) frequency of visits 1 daytime visit every six months for electrical/instrument inspection. An additional 1 week maintenance period for tunnel/shaft inspection required per 10 years that could be night/day/weekend working. 1 van visit every six months. An additional 1 week period of 2 to 10 movements per day (estimated several vans and 2 cranes) every 10 years.
4.1.5 4.1.6
No of traffic movements
4.2 4.2.1
Restoration and after-use The portion of the site not occupied by the permanent works would be restored to its original condition on completion of the construction works. If any buildings were demolished, these would not be reinstated unless required. ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT Access This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2. Road
5 5.1 5.1.1
5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4
There would be road access to the site via Plough Way/Calypso Way, the former of which has traffic calming measures installed. This is off the TLRN A200, Lower Road. For the construction phase, access to the site would be from the end of Plough Way. For the operational phase, access would be from St Georges Square.
It was anticipated that the ventilation column at shafts sites would be 10m high when the assessment in this report was undertaken. Although this was subsequently changed to 15m high, the assessment was not revised as it was considered that the difference would not change any disciplines conclusion on the suitability of the site. b It was anticipated that the elevation of top structures at both CSO and shaft sites would be finished at 107mTD when the assessment in this report was undertaken. Although this was subsequently changed to 104.5mTD, the assessment was not revised as it was considered that the difference would not change any disciplines conclusion on the suitability of the site.
Page 4
Rail 5.1.5 There would be no rail network local to this site. However, rail access is not considered to be a significant factor for CSO sites. River 5.1.6 River access and jetty/wharfage facilities are not a requirement for CSO sites. However, as the site would be adjacent to the river, there may be feasible opportunities for barge transport. Construction works considerations No demolition would be required. Data available on third-party assets and significant utilities show that the main items of concern in this area are the Earl Storm Outlet which runs through the site, the river/marina wall and possibly the residences to the west of the site. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme. The interception chamber would be just to the south of the site boundary, within St Georges Square. This would be a reasonably open area and construction of the chamber should be straightforward. Permanent works considerations The top structures to the drop shaft and flap valve chamber would be 2m above ground level. Health and safety There are no unusual health and safety issues associated with this site. PLANNING ASSESSMENT Introduction The planning assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Planning applications and permissions Planning context Planning comments. 6.2 6.2.1 Planning applications and permissions An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Southwark online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to the site. Planning context The current planning policy context for the site is provided from the saved policies in the Southwark Unitary Development Plan, adopted in July 2007. The planning designations and policies that are applicable to the site are detailed below. The site is located within a wider air quality management area.
5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2
5.2.3 5.2.4
5.3 5.3.1
5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1
6.3 6.3.1
6.3.2
Page 5
6.3.3 6.3.4
Policy 3.6, Air Quality, states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would lead to a reduction in air quality. The site is within the wider Thames Special Policy Area, within which special controls of developments adjacent to the riverside will be imposed in order to enhance the character of the area and ensure continued and improved access to the river. Policy 3.29, Development within the Thames Policy Area, states that all developments within the Thames Policy Area must reflect the strategic importance of the River Thames and its hinterland, protecting and enhancing the area. Proposals that will have an adverse impact on the River Thames and/or the Thameside area, or adversely impact on the character of the Thameside area, will not be acceptable. The site is located within the wider Borough, Bermondsey and Rivers Archaeological Priority Zone (Site reference: 1A, Appendix 8: Archaeological Priority Areas Schedule, of the Southwark Unitary Development Plan, 2007). Policy 3.19, Archaeology, requires that planning applications in such sites will include an archaeological assessment and evaluation of the impact of the development. There may subsequently be a requirement for preservation in situ or, where the development is deemed necessary, conditions to secure the excavation and recording of remains before development begins. Two Grade II listed features are located within the site boundary towards the northeast corner, South Lock hydraulic capstans and mooring posts and, to the southeast corner, a parish boundary stone. Policy 3.17, Listed Buildings development proposals involving a listed building should preserve the building and its features of special architectural or historic interest.
6.3.5
6.3.6
6.3.7
6.3.8
6.3.9
6.3.10 The land adjacent to the north is Durand's Wharf, which is designated as borough open land. 6.3.11 Policy 3.26, Borough Open Land, states that planning permission will not be granted unless development is ancillary to the use of the open space, is small in scale, does not detract from the site's open nature and character, is required to enhance the activities associated with the space and positively contributes to the setting and quality of the open space. 6.3.12 The southwest corner of the site (approximately 5-10% of the site area) falls within a wider area identified as a strategic view wider consultation zone. 6.3.13 Policy 3.21, Strategic Views, seeks to protect strategic views of St Pauls and will consult with other authorities where development will be above a certain height. The proposed development may be affected by this requirement. 6.3.14 The River Thames to the east of the site is a designated site of importance for nature conservation. 6.3.15 Policy 3.28, Biodiversity, states that developments will not be permitted which would damage the nature conservation value of sites of importance for nature conservation (SINCs) and local nature reserves (LNRs) and/or damage habitats, populations of protected species or priority habitats/species identified in the United Kingdom, London or the Southwark biodiversity action plan. Where, exceptionally, such developments are permitted, the council will seek mitigation and/or compensation for the damage to biodiversity. 6.3.16 Approximately 80-90% of the proposed site is a Strategic Policy 20 proposals site, with uses required of a boatyard and other acceptable uses listed as A1, A3, A4 and a laundrette, with no other uses allowed stated. 6.3.17 Strategic Policy 20 states the uses required within the proposals map schedule (Appendix 3) must be included within any development on sites designated on the proposals map. Planning permission may be granted for other acceptable uses within this schedule, provided that development for the uses required is, has been, or is thereby, secured. A temporary planning permission may be granted to allow good use to be made of a vacant site prior to the commencement of a permanent scheme. 6.3.18 The site is in close proximity to residential properties.
Page 6
6.3.19 Policy 3.2, Protection of Amenity, states that planning permission for development will not be granted where it would cause loss of amenity, including disturbance from noise, to present and future occupiers in the surrounding area or on the application site. 6.4 6.4.1 Consultation comments A series of consultations on the shortlisted sites were held with London local authorities, statutory and other pan-London stakeholders during July to September 2009 and January to March 2010. This section summarises factual comments that have been made by consultees, and which have informed the SSR assessments. London Borough of Southwark 6.4.2 The council raised the issue of considering what is left onsite during and after the construction period. English Heritage 6.4.3 English Heritage advised that the site is associated with a listed building and deep archaeological issues. Environment Agency 6.4.4 No comment. Port of London Authority 6.4.5 No comment. Transport for London 6.4.6 No comment. Other statutory consultees 6.4.7 6.5 6.5.1 No comment. Planning comments There are a small number of planning designations and policies that are applicable both on and adjacent to the sites. These designations and policies have been identified and described in Section 6.3 and, of these, those relating to air quality, heritage, nature conservation, residential amenity and Strategic Policy 20 regarding acceptable land uses are of most relevance to the proposed development. The majority of the proposed site is designated as a Strategic Policy 20 proposals site, which lists acceptable uses as those required of a boatyard and other acceptable uses listed in classes A1, A3, A4 and a laundrette, with no other uses allowed. However, Policy 20 also states that temporary planning permission may be granted to allow good use to be made of a vacant site prior to the commencement of a permanent scheme. There have been no planning applications submitted to date to develop the site. There are two Grade II listed features located within the site boundary towards the northeast corner, South Lock hydraulic capstans and mooring posts, and in the southeast corner, a parish boundary stone. The use of the site as an intermediate shaft site would result in loss of these features. There is little scope to move the working area within the site due to its size, which limits scope to avoid directly impacting upon these features. A detailed heritage assessment is made in Section 7.
6.5.2
6.5.3
Page 7
6.5.4
As the site is within an archaeological priority area, suitable investigation and remediation works would need to be agreed with the LPA. Further appraisal of the archaeological potential on the site is provided in Section 7 of this report. The construction works and remaining top structures should also not result in overly prominent development in this location and would not unacceptably obstruct strategic views. However, local views across the site and towards the river may be affected, and there would be reduced access along the river frontage throughout the construction period. This would be contrary to the aims of the Thames Policy Area and would require mitigation. The site is set approximately 13m from the nearest dwellings. This separation distance may not be considered sufficient in terms of residential amenity and would require significant mitigation to avoid negative impacts and comply with Policy 3.2. There is little scope to move the construction works from residential properties that bound the site, due to site size. The hours of operation of the construction works may also be restricted to those normally operated within residential areas, which are typically 8am to 6pm during weekdays, 9am to 1pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays. The site is located within a wider air quality management area. Policy 3.6 seeks to prevent development that would lead to a reduction in air quality. Mitigation would be required to ensure the construction works did not lead to a reduction in air quality within the designated area, in accordance with Policy 3.6. A further assessment on this consideration has been made in Section 7. The proposal site is adjacent to the River Thames, a designated site of importance for nature conservation. This is a general designation, covering the entire River Thames. The purpose of the Thames Tunnel Project is to improve the overall environmental condition of the river which, among other gains, will promote biodiversity. Construction activity adjacent to the river, with the appropriate level of mitigation, is considered unlikely to adversely impact upon or conflict with the aims of this designation. However, a fuller assessment of the likely impact on the immediate location is included in Section 7. ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL Introduction The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 Environmental Appraisal Tables. Transport The site is suitable. It requires the construction of a new temporary (construction) access onto the roundabout of Calypso Way, in addition to a permanent access into the car park to the south. The sites interception chamber requires the temporary closure of a section of the car park and results in the displacement of approximately ten parking bays. Several parking bays within the car park would also be permanently lost as a result of the need to maintain a permanent site access, although alternative parking is available along surrounding roads. A footway and the NCR4 require diversion around the site. Road access to the TLRN (A200) is possible, containing traffic calming (speed cushions) and passing through a residential area. Access to the old London Bridge rail site is also possible and requires the removal of a raised crossing on St Jamess Road. A means of transporting material to the railway would also need to be provided. However, rail transport is unlikely to be required due to the small volumes of excavated material produced by a CSO site. The site is close enough to the river for river access, although this is not essential for a CSO site. Public transport to access the site for the workforce is low, however some parking could be provided onsite for the workforce and informal parking on surrounding roads is also available. Archaeology The site is suitable, although further investigations would be necessary to determine the nature and extent of any archaeological receptors. It is possible that archaeological Page 8
6.5.5
6.5.6
6.5.7
6.5.8
7 7.1 7.1.1
7.2 7.2.1
7.3 7.3.1
receptors of high or medium value may be present within this site. While no direct evidence has been revealed, peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have been commonly recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the River Thames. Given the location of the site, and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest that waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present. 7.4 7.4.1 Built heritage and townscape This site is less suitable from a built heritage perspective because of the potential adverse impact upon one Grade II listed structure which lies adjacent to the site boundary. In the event that a direct impact upon this structure can be avoided, there is still a high potential for the setting of the boundary stone to be impacted upon. There is also the potential for two other Grade II listed features to be indirectly affected by the development, both of which are located immediately adjacent to the site boundary. Although mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening could help mitigate any adverse impacts upon these structures, their presence would necessitate very careful consideration of the drop shaft location and other operational and constructional aspects. The site is considered suitable from a townscape perspective. The impacts upon the local townscape character and on the River Thames and its frontage could be mitigated through the scheme design, screening and landscaping, and could potentially enhance the permanent visual amenity of the site. Water resources hydrogeology and surface water In terms of hydrogeology, this site is suitable because although the construction of the drop shaft would take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within the 400-day capture zone of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering of the Chalk and Thanet Sand would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 37m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are alluvium, which is classified as a minor aquifer at the shaft site. There would be a limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer due to sheet piling. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because it is located behind the flood defences and there is no direct overland route for pollution to the River Thames. There is a small risk of pollution to the South Dock, manageable with standard mitigation techniques. Ecology This site is suitable as there are no evident ecological constraints. Flood risk This site is considered to be less suitable because there is limited space onsite for SuDS. In addition, the site may not be suitable for infiltration SuDS and further investigation would be required. Although the site is located within Flood Zone 3 (greater than a one in 100-year risk of flooding) it is defended to the one in 1,000-year flood level. Air quality This site is less suitable as there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at residential properties in close proximity to the site. These impacts can be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality, which could, to some extent, be mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
7.4.2
7.5 7.5.1
7.5.2
7.6 7.6.1 7.7 7.7.1
7.8 7.8.1
Page 9
7.9 7.9.1
Noise This site is less suitable, as distances to the nearest residential properties are relatively short and therefore adverse noise and vibration impacts are likely. There is also a relatively high density of residential dwellings around the site. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase is anticipated to be considerably high and is therefore likely to cause an adverse noise impact at properties located on Plough Way. Perimeter hoarding would reduce potential noise impacts but would be relatively ineffective at shielding noise from the upper floors of the nearest dwellings. Land quality
7.10
7.10.1 The site is considered less suitable, based on the high potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from wharf and metal casting (foundry) operations previously located on the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as a risk of ground gas. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. 8 8.1 8.1.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Socio-economic profile The site is within the Surrey Docks ward of Lewisham. Statistics from ONS 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of Lewisham, London and England as a whole: Higher rate of economically active, aged people that are full-time employees, with a corresponding lower proportion of unemployed people. A higher proportion having achieved Level 4 or 5 educational qualifications and a corresponding high proportion of people in managerial or professional occupations. A higher proportion of privately rented households. A higher proportion of people aged between 20 and 44. A high proportion of people born in the UK and a higher proportion of white British people compared to the borough or London. 8.1.2 These statistics indicate people in this area are mostly highly-educated, working professionals. Issues and impacts Due to the proposed location of the engineering works for a small CSO site, it seems likely that the greatest impact from a community perspective would be the loss of part of the boatyard. This may affect the function of the site, such as the amount of repairs that can be carried out, and may impact on the people working at the boatyard. St Georges Square to the south of the site may be affected due to the increase in noise from the use of the site. There is currently dense tree cover between the square and the boatyard. If these are lost due to the site works, the level of noise and visual disturbance could increase. The local residents adjacent to the west of the site and opposite to the south are likely to be affected by the noise and visual disturbance from the site. The trees around the boatyard seem to act as a sound buffer if these are lost through the use of the site, the noise levels at the residential properties may be drastically increased.
8.2 8.2.1
8.2.2
8.2.3
Page 10
9 9.1 9.1.1
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Introduction The site under consideration for a CSO site is part of a boatyard used in conjunction with the nearby South Dock Marina, which forms part of Surrey Quay. The site is situated between a public square to the south known as St Georges Square and the river entrance to South Dock to the north. The site is adjacent to the River Thames. The site and surrounding area was visited by Lambert Smith Hampton on 28th July 2009. The site is adjacent to the river foreshore but is separated from the river by a public path. From the land referencing exercise carried out by Mouchel, the owner of site C31XC is the London Borough of Southwark, which also operates South Dock Marina. Planning enquiries reveal no recent planning history. Crown Land and Special Land comments The site is owned by the London Borough of Southwark and is therefore likely to be considered as Special Land under Section 17 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. Prior to selecting the site, the responsible authority must be consulted so that it can be established whether there are any fundamental issues arising that might prejudice the practicability of using the land. With co-operation of the authority, there should be no risk to the project. However, acquisition of the site may involve a special ministerial procedure, with the possibility of delay. The land is in commercial use and is not public open space, and should therefore not be classified as Special Land for the purposes of Section 19 of the 1981 Act. Land to be acquired The compensation assessment assumes that the worksite and access to it would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above. At the end of the works, a smaller area would need to be acquired permanently. Based on the engineering drawings included in the appendices to this report, use of the site for a CSO would require approximately 25% of the boatyard during the construction phase. After completion of the project, a smaller area of approximately 15m x 20m would be required permanently in the south-eastern part of the site, with a permanent access leading from St Georges Square. Rights would also be required for the interception chamber in St Georges Square and a connecting culvert to the CSO shaft. The site is currently accessible from the public highway and no allowance has therefore been made in the assessment of acquisition cost for rights of way or easements. Property valuation comments Compensation for the acquisition of new rights is normally based on the diminution in value to the land caused by the acquisition. Compensation for the permanent acquisition of land is normally based on market value. However, compensation for the permanent acquisition of unusual types of property, where there is no general market, can be assessed on the basis of the cost of equivalent reinstatement at a new site, but there must be a genuine intention to reinstate. If compensation is assessed on a diminution in value basis for the new rights (temporary occupation during works, access rights during works, access rights for operational purposes) and on a market value basis for the permanent acquisition, the costs are likely to be relatively low and therefore acceptable. The market value for this site would be relatively low, given that it is a boatyard and car park with little in the way of permanent buildings. The 2005 Rating List suggests that the yard forms part of the overall rating assessment for the marina, with an aggregate rateable value
9.1.2 9.1.3 9.1.4 9.2 9.2.1
9.2.2
9.3 9.3.1
9.3.2
9.3.3
9.4 9.4.1
9.4.2
9.4.3
Page 11
of 56,300. The site does not appear to be used particularly intensively, providing onshore storage for boats and parking for the marina. 9.5 9.5.1 Disturbance compensation comments The site is currently used as a boatyard which is owned and operated by the local council. Until consultations with the relevant authorities have been conducted, it is difficult to establish the operational impact the acquisition of the site may have on the working of the whole marina. The current assumption is that the extent of the disturbance would be limited and that any such costs would not be material in the assessment of this site, although the marina business would be affected to some extent and a claim for disturbance is to be expected. Offsite statutory compensation comments The boatyard is adjacent to the River Thames. The yard is accessed from Calypso Way. The access route would need careful consideration and every effort should be made to mitigate the effects of such a major construction site by controlling, as far as possible, noise, dust, lighting, etc. Use of the adjacent public highway would also require careful planning although Calypso Way and the other roads in the immediate vicinity are relatively quiet residential streets, they are essentially the main access roads for the area. There is only a low risk of any statutory claims under either Part 1 of the Land Compensation Act 1973 or Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 being established as a direct result of this site being selected. Site acquisition cost assessment The acquisition cost is currently considered to be acceptable. Further investigation as to occupation and use of the site would be necessary in order to establish the disturbance costs element of the compensation payable. SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE Introduction
9.6 9.6.1
9.6.2
9.7 9.7.1
10 10.1
10.1.1 The conclusions presented in this section are drawn from each disciplines assessment , and are designed to inform the workshop where a final conclusion on whether the site moves forward as one of the preferred sites or not. 10.2 Engineering
10.2.1 This site is suitable as a CSO site. 10.2.2 Whether a CSO site of this size is appropriate or not for the interception of the Earl Pumping Station CSO would be considered at the next stage, in conjunction with the drive strategy that is developed in the Engineering Options Report. 10.3 Planning
10.3.1 On balance, the site is considered suitable as a CSO site. 10.3.2 There are a number of planning designations that are applicable to the site. However, with suitable mitigation, it is considered that the site may be appropriate for use. Potential impacts on existing listed features within the site would require further investigation, as well as the potential for the site to be developed in accordance with its land allocation. In the absence of a submitted scheme, potential implementation timescales are difficult to predict. 10.4 Environment
10.4.1 Overall, this site is considered suitable as a CSO site. Page 12

10.4.2 The site is suitable from the perspectives of transport, archaeology, townscape, water resources (hydrogeology and surface water) and ecology. 10.4.3 The site is considered less suitable from the perspectives of built heritage, flood risk, air quality, noise and land quality. 10.4.4 Overall, the site is considered suitable, subject to further investigation of whether built heritage, flood risk, air quality, noise and land quality impacts as well as hydrogeology impacts could be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations include the following: Built heritage a high-quality scheme design and / or screening. Hydrogeology dewatering required during the construction phase. Flood risk further investigation to establish the suitability of the site for infiltration SuDS. Air quality minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours may be required to mitigate local air quality impacts. Noise perimeter hoarding would reduce potential noise impacts but would be relatively ineffective at shielding noise from the upper floors of the nearest dwellings. Land quality any required remediation of contamination (at this high risk site) and/or measures to ensure no mobilisation of contaminants remained in situ. 10.5 Socio-economic and community
10.5.1 This site is less suitable as a small CSO site. The use of the site is likely to impact on the use of the boatyard and the people working there. Mitigation may involve discussions around minimising disturbance to the remainder of the boatyard and maintaining any access required by the boatyard to the river or the local roads. 10.5.2 St Georges Square to the south of the site may be affected due to the increase in noise from the use of the site. The local residents adjacent to the west of the site and opposite the site to the south are also likely to be affected by the noise and visual disturbance. Mitigation may involve discussions around ensuring any trees lost are replanted and providing screening of the site from the local residences and the square. 10.6 Property
10.6.1 The site is considered suitable for use as a CSO site at acceptable acquisition cost, given that it is a boatyard and car park for the adjacent marina. 10.6.2 It is likely that some disturbance would be caused to the marina operation, but as only part of the site would be required for CSO works, the effect should be limited.
Page 13
Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendices
APPENDICES
Page 14
Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 1
APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Engineering Traffic Management and Access Roads/Rail Scott Wilson Access River (Shafts/CSOs) Mott MacDonald and AECOM Geology Thames Water Utilities Thames Water and AECOM Construction and Operational Layout Template London Tideway Tunnels Background Technical Paper London Tideway Tunnels Planning London Borough of Southwark online planning applications database Saved policies in the Southwark Unitary Development Plan, adopted in July 2007
Environment Transport Map of Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) - www.tfl.gov.uk Bus Route Maps: North-east, north-west, south-west, south-east - www.tfl.gov.uk Crossrail Plans - www.crossrail.co.uk/crossrail-bill-documents PTAL scores - Obtained from Table 2.3 information Thames Path map - www.walklondon.org.uk Capital Ring - www.walklondon.org.uk The Lea Valley Walk - www.walklondon.org.uk Cycle Routes - www.sustrans.org.uk and Local Cycling Guides, 1-14 Design Manual for Roads and Bridge TD 42/95, Highways Agency Built heritage and townscape Wandsworth List of Locally Listed Buildings Hammersmith and Fulham list of Conservation Areas Hammersmith and Borough list of Open Spaces Greenwich List of Locally Listed Buildings Newham List of Locally Listed Buildings Westminster Open Spaces Strategy Southwark list of Conservation Areas National Monuments Record - for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens Unitary development plans Local authority websites Bing maps
Appendix 1 - Page 1
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Environment Agency abstraction licence details Environment Agency groundwater levels Local authority details of unlicensed abstractors Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan - www.lbp.org.uk Tower Hamlets Local Biodiversity Action Plan (2004) Richmond upon Thames Habitat Action Plan for the Tidal Thames Lambeth Tidal Thames Action Plan (2006) Hammersmith and Fulham Biodiversity Action Plan (2003) Westminster Biodiversity Action Plan (2007) Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) www.magic.gov.uk - statutory designated sites London Wildweb - http://wildweb.london.gov.uk - non-statutory site of importance for nature conservation Black redstart distribution in London - www.blackredstarts.org.uk/pages/ londonmap.html National Biodiversity Network - http://searchnbn.net - distribution of protected species Google Maps - aerial views of habitat features BAP habitats - www.natureonthemap.org.uk Priority habitats and species on national and local scales - www.ukbap.org.uk Flood risk Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck Air quality Local authority websites www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/default.asp?la_id=&showbulletins=&width=1680 www.airquality.co.uk Noise Envirocheck - Identification of receptors Promap - Calculation of distances between site and receptors Multimap - Aerial photography www.multimap.co.uk Defra noise maps - Identification of existing noise levels
Appendix 1 - Page 2
Land quality Google Maps/Earth Site walkover information
Socio-economic and community Statistics from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) 2001 Census data Lewisham Homes - www.lewishamhomes.org.uk/sitemap.html and www.lewishamhomes.org.uk/about-lewisham-homes.html Lewisham Strategic Partnership - www.lewishamstrategicpartnership.org.uk/ partnerships.asp Pepys Community Forum - www.urbandesigncompendium.co.uk/ thepepyscommunityforum St Georges Square Improvements - www.lewishamhomes.org.uk/editpics/1344-1.pdf
Property Site visit Promap, Ordnance Survey and A-Z mapping Multimap/Google Earth aerial/satellite photographs Valuation Office Agency rating lists and summary valuations Valuation Office Agency Property Market Report January 2009 Focus and EGi Mouchel referencing
Appendix 1 - Page 3
APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN
Appendix 2 - Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
Area of Main Map
AF T
&
Legend
Local Authority Boundary
SOUTHWARK
Short Listed CSO Sites
# *
TOWER HAMLETS C31XC
! (
CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station
! (CS31X
Earl Pumping Station CSO
# * Earl Pumping Station

0 50 100
200 Metres 300 400
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way.
LEWISHAM
Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-01045 Date : .............2009/11/26 Projection : .....British National Grid
Thames Water Utilities

MAJOR PROJECTS
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
GREENWICH
Title:
APPENDIX 2 C31XC SITE SITE LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS
Appendix 3 - Page 1
d Bon in g
NO R WA
Y ard
TI AL
1 to 24
12
Pond Weir
21 to
59
10
VE R GULLI STR EET

63
GUL L
IV E R
ST
RE
1 to 24
ET
# * # * * # * #
9
* # * # * #
LB
# * # *
DO
* # * # * #
1 4
* # * #
2.2 m Ship and Whale

(PH)
Lo we
Ran da
es r Od
ar sa Wh
94
ATE YG
Wa
36
to
FB
EN
TE RE
ST RE E T
T he Quebec Curve
RE
DR
IF
RO
AD
61 59 60
62
18
16
31
FI D
1 to
El Sub Sta
46 39 to
16
5. 4m
1 to
W ML
142
1 to
78
84
132
Rus sell Plac e

6
PH
23 17 to 1 to 16 30 24 to
37 Co nd 31 to Ala
ur t
44 38 to
MLW
&
122
AF T
21
112
to
114 120
Bol Cn
Tavistock Tower
Cn Bol
Bol
Lan
d in
ta gS
ge
20
39 31 to
MHW
10
Bol
Ch
FB dge g Bri (S win
Bol Bol Bol

Ste
71 67 to 66 62 to
72
Lan ding Stage
Sw e
25 21 to
dis
a h Qu
ys
35 31 to
to 61
56
80 to 84
11 1 to
96
1 to
10
97
to 41
42
36
55 to 89 90 92 50 93 95 85
Lan ding Stage Bascule Bri dge Cn
Bol lards
15 to 20
South Dock (Ma rina )

Cn Bol lards
Lan ding Stage
14
47 1 4 9
5
5.6 m
* #
Sand
55
69 68
* # * # * #
Crane
Sports Centre
* #
* #
TCP
South Dock (Marina)

Lan ding Stages Lan ding Stages
RO
PE
ST
RE
ET
* # # * !
WI ND SO CK CL OS
193
4. 7m Bol lard
* #
4.9 m
Hor nblower Close
RO
74
PE
ST
RE
ET
Mud
Und
South Dock (Marina)

6
Sta ding ges
4. 9m
St George's Wharf
14
15
13
5
25
23 21
29 31
1 to
AY
20
4. 8m
37
35
Caroni a Court
61
7.0 m
24
17
63 49 to
1 to
39
Nursery
CH
p De
8 10 to 13 6
26 to 34
Ps
ON I LT
ot
79
1 to
Works
El Sub Sta
15
245 t o 273
20
23
4. 4m
248
69
CH
57
16
1 to 8
6t o8
40 to
1. 9m
31
16
25
26
! * # ! * #
Merry Cri cketers (P H)
!
BE R ST ST
Protected/Strategic Views ! ! !
8 to 23
30
Crofters Court
El Sub Sta
23
13
Ma rathon House
TC B
Vi
27
Playgrou nd
EE
1 to 8
Be 1 nc to 53 e Ho us e
Depot
SA
PP
67
H IR
BA
RF
LE
UR
B Ho e n c u se e
PP
H IR
1 to
96
RO
14
Court
Crandle y
Games Court
1 to
Riv e rs ide Youth C lub
2 to
14
Da
u be
ne
w To
er
R IV
21 to 29
LL
56
13
28
11
!
16
Trin 1 to ity 9 C ou rt
C LA
YT
39
to
22
ON
36 to 51
11
42
! !
! !
21
185 t o 195
Depot
Fr ob Co is he ur r t
1 to
to
Depot
Areas of Opportunity
14
1
2.1 m
5.5 m 7.0 m
80
OX E S TAL
L S R OA D
1 to 6 Ra Co le ig ur h t
2. 0m
1 to
85
1 to Co 6 Co ok ur t
De ptf Pri ord m Pa ary rk Sc ho ol
!
O X E S TA
!
Cro wn Wh arf
BO
DI
T CH
15
SA
1 to
26
24
18
97
to
10
Strategic View Wider Consultation Zone

! ! ! ! !
1 to 53
!
de n Ho us e
!
1 to 53
30
1 to
80
Gra ns de n Hous e
16
RO
to
Eddysto ne Tower
2. 1m
to
45
LA
31
Air Quality Management Area

1
NE
to
60
Co m m u n it y C
en t r e
46
2.0 m
Play
l5 to 20
RA
IN
SB
RO
UG
gr
nd ou
Crandley C ourt
1 to 96
Co m m u n it y C en t r e
* #
89 to 96
E AV
10
men Cle
to
9 to 14
UE
88
Development Sites
E
1 to
3 to 4
53
o us tH
Jame s Lind Hous e
!
1 to
n Ho
87
Po st
5 to 10
LY
to
73
FB
!
64
FO
RE
!
1 to 12 ar le Ho us e
S HO
Pe py s Park
b em Al
!
Pe py s P a rk
66
EV
se
RE
6 to
o n 12 a H ou
to
Cl ini c
LO
to 72
Po
58
Defined Employment Area ! ! !

35
1.9 m
Pe
n de
1 to
n ni
os Arg
NG
S HO
RE
57
53
1 to
to
53
yH
43
* #
Proposals Sites
y sl
11
Ha ze lw 1 oo to 90 d Ho
us e
22
1 to
31
Chy
Cannon Wharf Business Centre
to 18
13
1. 4m
33
25
to
10
WB
Gro ve Medical Centre Gro ve Medical Centre
!
El Sub Sta
!
o us sH e
18
23
24
to 29
31
Me lv ille Court
Regeneration Areas
9 to
43
26
1t o6 Lim e Tree House
12
34
!
16
!
14
41t o53
231
Saw Mill
Works
36
T ank
CA
RT
E RE
AY
12
!
Al lotment Gardens
!
LB 3. 0m
23
!
5
1 to
Th
e Co
lo n
na
de
6 to 8
El Sub Sta
!
W I ND L AS
P LA
CE
1 to 53
!
FB
WI NDL AS
S P LA CE
2. 5m
Lan ya r d
H ous e
Lan ya rd
1 to 53 H ou se
1 to 53 Bem b ri d ge Ho u se
!
FB
se ou
Ha rm
26
24
14
2 to 12
! Policy ! Area Thames

O FT M EW S
56
CR
46
46
FT
1 to 15
48
38
O I LT
2 to
RO
VE
Legend
30
2
Depo t
Linberry Walk
238
1 to 11
13
23
35
51 37 to
1 to
2 to
!
Depot
El Sub Sta
!
S TR E ET
!
52
!
64 to 78
!
GRO V E S TRE E T
!
JOD ANE RO AD
19
23
4 to 11
12 to 17
12 to 17
WB
1 to
15
17
19
27
to
39
ROAD
1 to 3
17
KE
MPTH ORNE
to 31
KE M P TH
ORN E
1 to
R OA D
260
TA RR
IF F
CR
ES
CE
NT
67 53 to
us e Ho in g me ) Fl em g Ho rsin (Nu
El Sub Sta
!
1 to Th e Te 20 ce
LO NG S HO RE
r ra
!
1 to
10
10 11
12
G RO
16
VE
91
36
24
!
Em pi
1 to
!
es Fr
1 to
!
70 to
1. 4m
Pu
tio rl Ea S ta ng pi
Depot
El Sub Sta
47 33 to
2a 1a 21a 11a 41a 31a
1 to
280
T anks
Hoc kett Clo se
Hoc kett
Cl o se
2. 7m
270
1 to
11
# * Earl Station ! Pumping ! !

AN ST RE ET
15
13
2b 1b 21b 4a 11b 41b 3a 22a 31b 12a 42a 32a us e a Ho Jur 30
16
32
41 27 to
CA
PS
!
20
18
2 to
57 43 to
25
23
19
10
40 to 48
22c 42c 12c 21d 32c 3c 41d 11d 4c 31d 2d 1d
18
49
Ju r
ou a H
se
Plough Bridge
Marine Wharf
TA N
R OA
18
10
50 68
22d 42d 12d 32d 3d 4d
!
21c 41c 11c 31c 1c 2c
2.1 m
58 76
65
!
YE OM
!
282
19
67
151
153
66 84
71
TCP
Ice la nd Wharf
3
Posts
155
157
St.
20
Ge
75
1 to
86
to 12
ard Cun
Wa l
LI GH
TE R
C LO
SE
167
16 9
Posts
4
7
3.5 m
290
or ge
ew 's M
16
11
73
21
1 to 69
171
* #
* #
* #
1 to
81
!
20
11 12
LB
12
83
173
175
1. 9m
El Sub Sta
Posts
320
302
33
81
183
Posts
314
!
1 to 15
20
27
19 17
ar Cun d Wa lk
91
1 to 11
* #
Carin thi a Court
16
93
357
25
26 27
Cab
to 13
u l e Co
rt
* # !
PL O UG H
Tav
# * !
5. 4m
e rn
ua y
Lan
13
GR
EE
N LA
10
Trafa lgar Close
15
80
ND
QU
AY
11
1 7 3
Swedish Yard
209
CF
Baltic Quay
Mulhe rry Quay
5 4
3
2
BOAT
LI FT
ER
WA
!
rt Cou
!
TR A
189 191
# * !
195
CR
PL O
UG
H WA
* #
Und
Und
* #
EK
Bor
, GL Co nst
As ly
Const
Po s
ts
ST GEORGE'S SQU ARE
Po s
ts
* # !
ts
& LB
Bdy
Dol phin
!
Mud and
1 to

! ! !
* #
!
Dol phin
!
T er Riv
Lim o eh
!
As ns t ly Co & LB Bdy
16
DE
P TF
O RD
WH
A RF
!
1 to 6
!
le i ng d Sh d an Mu
2 12
!
AD
GE
O RG
EA EB
RD
RO
Aragon Towe r
LEWISHAM
steps
!
De pt
steps
MLW
Posts
!
63
Posts
Library
!
W ML
!
Gre
!
ro Bo Co ns t, G LA
CC LW
!
C sly st on
4. 7m
Posts
5
3
7 to
69
!
MLW Posts Post
!
Mud d an
4. 5m
!
Playground
!
Riv
lla Bo rd
lla Bo rd
!
G re er en T w es h am e a ch R h ic
4.6 m
Bol lard
!
h W at er
53
81
86
37
GR
1 to
36
!
GR
!
30
EE
N LA
ND
QU
43
AY
50
49
48
Greenl an d Dock (dis)
51
GR
EE
N LA
ND
QU
AY
South Dock
*! #
* !#
# * !
SW E DE ATE N G
Jetties
(Mari na)
5 3 4
* ! # # *
CA LY P SO W AY
t o 327
to 77
1 to 98
Cn Bol lard
gl e
Mud
Mud Bol lard
4.9 m
South Dock Lock
Bol
s lard
Cn Bol lard
Sli pway
Mud Shin gle
3.8 m
! * #
St George's Wha rf
!
As , GL Co nst nst ly Co & LB
Und
C31XC
* # !
Po s
* #
TOWER HAMLETS
! !
!
1 to 53
Bdy
Boro
Montcalm House
! (CS31X
Montcalm House
21
10
22
310
11
BR
1 to
UN
S WI
CK
10
Q UA
SOUTHWARK
Greenlan d Do ck
1 to
1 to
10
to 61
RA
I NB
51
OW
1 to
10
Q UA
Do cks
1 to 1 to 10
11 101
100
ST RE ET
10 1 to 99
RO
PE
31
41
Surrey Commercial
1 to
1 to
10
42
Surrey Commercial Docks
11
29
RA
1 to
50
to
52
60
I NB
Q UA OW
25
96 104 to
106
7 to
19
13
Statue
4 5
Marin a
Lan ding Stag e
Bol
1 to
19
Pr ince 's Court

32 to 55
Gre enla nd Doc k (Ma rina )

Y
Mud
1 to 61
1 to
S WI BR UN
CK
lards
Arn hem W harf
86 to 92
* #
* #
BR UN S WI CK
* #
72
11
QUAY
Fin
lan d
Qu a
Bol Cn
Bols
W ML
Me an H ig h W ater
64 to 70
29 28
117
5. 4m
127
121
* #
2 to 6 8
Q UA
EE N LA ND QU AY
# *
i ck nsw Bru se Hou
* #
182
144 to 154
184 t o194
198
* #
El Sub Sta
17
18
Fin
FB
67 52 to
lan d
Lan
ding
e Stag
Cn
W ML
W ML
Bol lards
180
200 to 210
15 13 to 8 7 to
5 6
3 6
24 19 to
25
26
Qu a
51 45 to
Bol
37 38
156
168 t o 178
32 27 to
FI NL
yE
a st
33 36
AN
5.5 m
s Bol lard
W ML
M LW
166
33
34
RE ST
34 31 to
40 35 to
41
ET
HE
LS I
NK
47
I S QU
27 to 30
16
42
AR
Fi
d nl an
Qu
ay
W ML
MLW
FB
Bol
s lard
Gre enla nd Doc k (disused)
Cn
Bol
5.3 m
50
Bol lard
5. 2m
41 17 to
5. 5m
43
to 55
60
26
61
E ast
22
23
81
# *
ada Can se Hou
1
* #
FB FB
Weir
FB
FB
12
Pond
71
FI NL
AN
T D S
RE
ET
5. 0m
2 1
8 I S QU AR E
Queen Of Denma rk Court

New Atl as W h arf
HE
NK LS I
Me an H ig h W ater
PL
26
2 to
39
QUE B E C WAY
Atla nta se Hou
lk
20
Ru ssia Dock Woodland
nts ll s Re
41 45 to
134
4 2
Pla ygr
136
El Sub Sta
7
al Roy C ou rt
12
d oun
BE RG EN
1 to
30
34
FB
King Fre de rick IX Tower
12
RE SQUA
142
15 to 19
10
3 1
144
13
150
Cn Bol lards
MLW
!
Limehou se Reach
& LB Bdy Boro Co nst, GL Asly Const
!
River Thames
Shingle
Bol
1 to 151
ON EG A GA TE
Lan Sta ding ge
SO UT E H S TR A S EE T
ML W
Bol lard
ARN H
L ACE EM P
MLW
s Bol lard
5.2 m
El Sub Sta
Ar nhe
ar m Wh
a f P rim
ry S c
hoo l
Area of Main Map
CCLW
20 18 to o 12 11 t
5.2 m
54
Legend
f
224
FB
20
m Boo
22 30 32 to 40
!
Gre enla nd Pier
!
's Klein W h ar
Navigation Light
(Fi xed Red )
Bol lards
Bol lard
Sh in
1 to 29
# *
! (
1 to
RA I NB OW
10
el yar d Cu t
Q UA Y
ou se Limeh
Riv er Tha m es
Reach
Sli pw ay
25
50
100
150
200
1 2
DU NN
Metres
AG
25 22 21
E CR ES CE
EK
DU NN AG
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way. This plan is a strategic and standardised overview based on an interpretation of GIS policy and designation layers provided by affected London local authorities. Please refer to the text in the SSRs for the full planning and environment assessments.
NT
Rus tter hcu rt Cou s
E CR ES CE NT
Ma st
NS OM CL OS
7
8
296
1 to
GR EE N LA ND QU AY
ro Bo Co ns t, GL As ns ly Co t& LB y Bd
42 32
Shi ngle
6 1 to 8 1 to 6 1 to 6
eh ou Lim se Re
ach
h Wat n Hig Mea er
Boro Co ns t, GL
b Sta El Su
CC LW
s me ha
e us
h ac Re
Hu
1 to 24
EN
sb
TE R
o rn
P RI
G ra
1 to 24
e H ou
ZE
ve
WA
ly
1 to
se
H ou se
w ic
23
kH e o us
18
n gh
23
De an sh
am Ho
74
1 to
e
an
u se
1 to
us 23 Ho g er
10
CR
1 to
80 to 90
62
58 to 62
W O OD CR
T er Riv
AC
AC
234
IA
CL
me ha
SE
fo rd
e M
to 40
Stra
lv
ill
e C t
nd
31 7
CR
16 14
Me an High

MAJOR PROJECTS
1 to 42
Wa te r
ro Bo ns Co
ns Co L t&
A L G t, Bdy B
CR
ca
ra
SM
on
&
53
w ic en
LB
Ho
nd P l ac e Go ld en Hi
y Bd
us e
BO W DI T CH
hR
61
ch ea
El
(be
a b St Su ) l ow
Title:
APPENDIX 3A C31XC SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN
Pe li ca
53
u se
le i ng Sh
Ed dy st e To on wer
Pe li ca n Ho
u se
Gra ns
M ud an d S h in
lla Bo s rd
11 6
g le
DW
MI L LA RD RO AD
an Me H ig
TI AL
EN
Legend
Green Corridor/Chains
FI D
Metropolitan Open Land District Park Deficiency Green Space

Area of Main Map
&
Sites of Nature Conservation Importance

! !
AF T
Sites of Metropolitan Nature Conservation Importance Open Space Deficiency Areas

! ! !
Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
SOUTHWARK
Open Spaces
Borough Open Land
# *
! (
Flood Protection Areas
C31XC
TOWER HAMLETS
25
50
100
150
200
Metres
! (CS31X

LEWISHAM

MAJOR PROJECTS
Title:
APPENDIX 3B C31XC SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN
Wal ker
n tr e ) (Co m m un i ty Ce
OS
TI AL
Bar k an t in e Ha ll
LO
36
Post
26
27
ODE S S A S T RE E T
1t o116
PL
New C aledonia n Wharf
FA
110
Limeh ou se
River Tham es
3. 1m
Redriff Es tate
1 to 60
RO
Reach
12
78 44 to
EN
36
FI D
1 to 24
12
Pond Weir
21 to
59
10
VE R GULLI STR EET

63
GUL L
IV E R
ST
RE
Ru ssia Dock Woodland
ET
FB
R ED
IF
RO
AD
61 59 60
62
18
16
31
1 to
El Sub Sta
24 to 29
&
46 39 to
i ck nsw Bru se Hou
182
AF T
144 to 154
El Sub Sta
17
18
1 to
184 t o194
W ML
142
198
132
Rus sell Plac e

6
PH
23 17 to 1 to 16 30 24 to
37 Co nd 31 to Ala
ur t
44 38 to
MLW
122
20
112 106
to
114 120
MHW
10
Lan ding Stage
Sw e
25 21 to
dis
a h Qu
ys
35 31 to
to 61
56
66 62 to 80 to 84
Bol
11 1 to 96
1 to
10
97
Bol lard
Mud
Mud
4.9 m
Me an H ig h W ater
Sli pway
to 41
42
36
55 to 89 90 92 50 93 85
Lan ding Stage Bascule Bri dge Cn
Bol lards
South Dock Lock
Bol
s lard
15 to 20
!
Cn
Bol lard
Sli pway
Bol lard
Mud Shin gle
South Dock (Ma rina )

Cn Bol lards
Lan ding Stage
14
47 1
95
3.8 m
Crane
South Dock (Marina)

4. 7m Lan ding Stages Lan ding Stages Bol lard
Sports Centre
9
5
5.6 m
Sli pw
RO
PE
ST
RE
ET
Hor nblower Close

74
RO
ST PE
RE
ET
South Dock (Marina)

6
Sta ding ges
4. 9m
St George's Wharf
9
13
Carin thi a Court 1 to 11
13 1 to e Co u rt l
Cab
Tav
e rn
Q ua
ar Cun
d Wa
lk
1 to
AY
20
4. 8m
1 to
7.0 m
19
151
24
17
16
63 49 to
32
1 to
1 to
39
1. 4m
Pu
tio rl Ea S ta ng pi
Depot
El Sub Sta
47 33 to
280
DE
P TF
O RD
CH
p De
8 10 to 13 6
26 to 34
ON I LT
ot
79
1 to
Works
El Sub Sta
15
245 t o 273
20
23
4. 4m
248
69
19
Depo t
Linberry Walk
238
1 to 11
13
23
35
51 37 to
1 to
57
16
1 to 8
12
9 to
231
43
33
10
WB
Gro ve Medical Centre Gro ve Medical Centre
31
30
El Sub Sta Playgrou nd
23
13
1 to 8
Be 1 nc to 53 e Ho us e
SA
PP
67
H IR
BA
RF
LE
UR
B Ho e n c u se e
PP
H IR
1 to
E RO A D
96
15
SA
9
30
1 to
1 to
80
Gra ns de n Hous e
16
RO
to
Eddysto ne Tower
2. 1m
to
45
LA
31
NE
to
60
Co m m u n it y C
en t r e
46
2.0 m
Play
l5 to 20
RA
IN
SB
RO
UG
AV
gr
nd ou
Crandley C ourt
1 to 96
Co m m u n it y C en t r e
10
EN
men Cle
to
9 to 14
UE
88
1 to
3 to 4
53
o us tH
e
El
Jame s Lind Hous e
87
Po st
5 to 10
LY
to
73
FB
FO
RE
S HO
64
1 to
12 ar
Pe py s Park
b em Al
le
66
EV
se
RE
Ho
6 to
o n 12 a H ou
to
Cl ini c
LO
to 72
Po
58
Pe
n de
1 to
n ni
os Arg
NG
S HO
RE
57
53
1 to
to
53
43
Ha ze lw 1 oo to 90 d Ho
Chy
Cannon Wharf Business Centre

El Sub Sta
us e
o us sH
26
Saw Mill
Works
36
T ank
CA
RT
E RE
AY
12
23
3. 0m
Al lotment Gardens
!! !
1 to
LB
Th
e Co
lo n
na
de
6 to 8
El Sub Sta
WI NDL AS
P LA CE
1 to 53
S P LA CE
2. 5m
1 to 53 ge Ho u se Bem b ri d
I ND
L AS
FB
Lan ya r d
H ous e
Lan ya rd
1 to 53 H ou se
FB
se ou yH
Ha rm
26
24
14
2 to 12
56
CR
46
18
13
to 18
46
FT
1 to 15
48
El Sub Sta
S TR
EE
23
4 to 11
12 to 17
12 to 17
WB
JOD ANE
RO AD
1 to
15
17
19
27
to
39
1 to 3
ORNE KE MPTH ROAD
31 17 to
KE M P TH
ORN E
1 to
R OA D
260
TA RR
IF F
CR
ES
CE
NT
67 53 to
us e Ho in g me ) Fl em g Ho rsin (Nu
!
1 to 20 Th e Te r ra
ce
LO
NG
S HO
RE
10
10
11
12
G RO
16
VE
91
36
El Sub Sta
24
T anks
Hoc kett Clo se
Hoc kett
Cl o se
2. 7m
270
20
18
2 to
16
WH
A RF
El Sub Sta
Me rcury Court
1 to 27
1 to 23
Pose idon Court
Neptune Court
1 to 27
1 to 15
Artem is Court
12
GE
O RG
EA EB
RD
RO
AD
Aragon Towe r
LEWISHAM
steps
to 17
1 to
11

AN ST RE ET
41 27 to
CA
PS
57 43 to
Plough Bridge
Marine Wharf
18
TA N
R OA
18
25
153
23
19
15
10
13
22
23
24
to 29
18
66 84
TCP
Ice la nd Wharf
3
Posts
155
157
20
LI GH
St.
1 to
TE R
Ge
75
C LO
SE
167
16 9
Posts
3.5 m
290
or ge
ew 's M
11
po
73
171
88
21
llo
1 to 69
81
to
LB
12
in ild
83
173
175
1. 9m
El Sub Sta
Posts
320
302
81
183
Posts
314
91
93
PL
UG
5. 4m
BOAT
LI FT
ER
WA
Mulhe rry Quay

4
193
H WA Y
Und
EK Und
Bor
GL nst, o Co
As ly
Const
& LB
54 in g 1 to il d Bu va 3 No
357
Lan
86
to 12
80
11
!
CF
Mud
Und
1 7 3
Swedish Yard
209
Baltic Quay
5 4
195
Bdy
CR
PL O
UG
Po s
ts
Dol phin
189
191
ST GEORGE'S SQU ARE
Po s
ts
Dol phin
16
11
12
MLW
steps
Posts
Posts
Library
! ! ! !
4. 7m Posts
7 to
69
MLW
Posts
Post
us
4. 5m
53
!
LY P SO
1 to
69
68
55
51
GR
EE
N LA
ND
QU
AY
Sand
TCP
4.9 m
St George's Wha rf
C31XC ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
1 to
South Dock
Jetties (Mari na) 3
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! (CS31X
Mud and
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Boro
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
As , GL Co nst
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
nst ly Co
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Und
& LB
Bdy
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
TOWER HAMLETS
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Playground
Pos
ts
1 to 53
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! Montcalm House ! Montcalm ! House ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

1 to 53
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Posts
Sub Sta
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Ps El
Ps
Montrose Hou se
Mo n
tro se
Ho us
12
17
GA V
E RI
CK
ME
WS
El Sub Sta
Car P ark
Orion P oint
1 to 101
71 67 to
72
t o 327
to 77
1 to 98
Cn
gl e
21
10
22
310
Bol
Bol lards
Sh in
Bol
10 1 to 99
RO
PE
1 to 29
12
15
Bol
Ch
!
Ste
FB dge g Bri (S win
10
1 to
11
Greenlan d Do ck
1 to
10
RA
I NB
OW
1 to
10
Q UA
3
11
Do cks
1 to 10 1 to
11 101
100
ST RE ET
31
Surrey Commercial
1 to
1 to
10
Surrey Commercial Docks

5
Gre enla nd Pier
's Klein
W h ar
f
WA TE
1
122
11
RA
t o 126
1 to
I NB
OW
25
Q UA
104
SOUTHWARK
!
Bol Cn
Tavistock Tower
1 to
7 to
13
Statue
4 5
Marin a
Lan ding Stag e
lar Bol
1 to
19
1 to 61
ds
Arn hem W harf
Fin
lan d
Qu a
Bol Cn
Bols
W ML
Gre enla nd Doc k (disused)
5.2 m
Cn
Bol
5.3 m
!
50
Me an H ig h W ater
200 to 210
15 13 to 8 7 to
67 52 to
51 45 to
Bol
!
FB
Fin
lan d
Lan
16
ding
e Stag
Cn
W ML
Bol lards
180
24 19 to
Qu a
5.5 m
5 6
Bol
s lard
!
FB Bol lard
W ML
MLW
W ML
ML W
ARN H
L ACE EM P
MLW
s Bol lard
5.2 m
Bol lard
El Sub Sta
m Ar nhe
Wh ar
a f P rim
ry S c
hoo l
54
Cn Bol
Bol
Lan
d in
ta gS
ge
Pr ince 's Court

32 to 55
El Sub Sta

Y
Mud
2.2 m
5. 2m
Depot
Navigation Light
(Fi xed Red ) Bol lard
OL D BE L LG ATE W HARF
1 to 22
Posts
6 to
E a st
Car Par k
1 to
Michigan House
CR
EW
ST
1 to 89 Galax y Building
17
25
El Sub Sta
25
RE
ET
26
37 38
1 4
156
168 t o 178
32 27 to
FI NL
33 36
AN
s Bol lard
W ML
M LW
166
33
34
T D S
RE
18 to 23
34 31 to
40 35 to
41
ET
HE
LS I
NK
47
I S QU
27 to 30
16
42
AR
Fi nl
an d
Qu
ay
41 17 to
5. 5m
55 43 to
60
26
61
E ast
22
23
81
FB FB
Weir
FB
FB
12
Pond
71
FI NL
AN
RE ST
ET
5. 0m
2 1
8 I S QU AR E
Queen Of Denma rk Court
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Cn Bol lards
MLW
Area of Special Character

Bol
New Atl as W h arf
Me an H ig h W ater
PL
26
2 to
39
18 to 23
Water
22
94
to
34
FB
2 to
24
11
Quebec Industrial Estate
28
RO
SQ
H ou se
AD
U AR
36
10
LB
Mud 1.8 m 2.2 m

1 to 24
Legend
EL G AR
34
S T RE
El Sub Sta 1 to 82
12 0
ET
Lo we
sa Od es
Wh ar
Ship and Whale

(PH)
Ran da
nts ll s Re
! Listed Buildings
Sir Joh n McDougal Gardens
Bo wsprit Point
26
Shelter
89 to 133
d Bon in g
130
NO R WA
Y ard
47
12
to
17
1 to
20
132
ATE YG
Wa lk
20
El Sub Sta
7
al Roy C ou rt
12
1 to
30
King Fre de rick IX Tower
Archaeological Areas
1 to 151 3
2.0 m
9 18
41 45 to
134
34
81
50
86
49
48
58 76
4 2
224
ro Bo Co ns
Pla ygr
136
d oun
BE RG EN
Shelter
12
RE SQUA
142
15 to 19
10
3 1
1.7 m
40 30 to
41 to 46
47 to 50
HE
LS I
NK
Shingle
Area of Main Map
144
13
150
CARAVEL C LOSE
1.7 m
Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station
ON EG A GA TE
Lan Sta ding ge
SO UT E H S TR A S EE T
Limehou se Reach
& LB Bdy Boro Co nst, GL Asly Const
River Thames
WE S T FE R RY RO AD
CCLW
20 18 to o 12 11 t
FB
m Boo
# *
7
! (
R IDG OS E CL E
1 to
RA I NB OW
10
el yar d Cu t
Q UA Y
25
50
ou se Limeh
Riv er Tha m es
Reach
100
150
200
Metres
ay
CA
W AY
WI ND
SW E DE ATE N G
SO CK
DU NN AG E CR ES CE
CL OS E
Po s
ts
EK
DU NN AG
NT
Rus tter hcu rt Cou s

TR A
E CR ES CE NT
NE WT ON PL
Ma st rt Cou
AC
NS OM CL OS E
7
8
296
1 to 6
42
1 to
t, GL As ns ly Co t& LB y Bd
Shi ngle
eh ou Lim
1 to 8
se Re
32
1 to
ach
h Wat n Hig Mea
Boro
Co
282
ns t, GL
er
As
b Sta El Su
ns t ly Co
CC
YE OM
T er Riv
LW
20
Lim
& LB
o eh
Bdy
me ha
e us
h ac Re
EN TE R P RI ZE WA Y
Aphrodite
1 to
18
1 to 6
1 to 23
Hera Court
Me an
74
CR
62
H ig
1 to
ate hW
10
1 to
80 to 90
64 to 78
GRO V E
52
S TRE E
58 to 62

MAJOR PROJECTS
W O OD CR O FT
M EW S
T er Riv
AC AC IA CL O SE
234
me ha
De
pt fo rd
Stra
nd
16 14
4
Me an High
1 to
42
Wa
te r
Title:
APPENDIX 3C C31XC SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN
W ML
ro Bo
G re
Co ns t, G
en w ic h
LA
Re
C sly
35
1 to 53
a ch
SM
CC
Gre
st on
LW
1 to 53
63
on
&
w ic en
LB
Ho
nd P l ac e Go ld en Hi
y Bd
us e
BO W DI T CH
hR
61
ch ea
(be
a b St Su ) l ow
Pe li ca n Ho
1 to
Mud
53
d an
u se
le i ng Sh
Ed dy st e To on wer
1 to
Pe li ca n
53
Ho u se
APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
Appendix 4 - Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF T
&
SOUTHWARK
# *
C31XC
! (
! (CS31X
TOWER HAMLETS

0 50 100
200
300
400
Metres
LEWISHAM

MAJOR PROJECTS
GREENWICH
Title:
APPENDIX 4 C31XC SITE AERIAL PLAN
View of the site looking northeast from Calypso Way.
View of the site looking southwest.
Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-C31XC-900001
APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN
Appendix 5 - Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
Area of Main Map
&
Legend
AF T
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station Transport Access Routes TfL Road Network Thames Path
# *
SOUTHWARK TOWER HAMLETS
Traffic calming at various points along access route
! (
London Cycle Routes
Residential area
0 40 80 160
Meters
240
320
400
C31XC
! (
On-street parking Egress route for large site
# *Earl Pumping Station
Map Ref : ........... 101PL-SS-00723 Date : ................. 2009/11/19 Projection : ......... British National Grid

MAJOR PROJECTS
LEWISHAM
Title:
APPENDIX 5 C31XC SITE TRANSPORT PLAN
APPENDIX 6 SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN
Appendix 6 - Page 1
APPENDIX 7 CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT
Appendix 7 - Page 1
APPENDIX 8 OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT
Appendix 8 - Page 1
6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
VENTILATION COLUMN (CSO)
Status:
WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N
A
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND 107m (AOD +100) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE WEIR (LOCKABLE) DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
NOTE:
4m
3m
6m
1. STRUCTURE TO BE PROTECTED BY REMOVABLE HANDRAILS IN THE TEMPORARY CASE. 2. POSITION OF COVERS ARE VARIABLE WITHIN 10m FROM THE EDGE OF THE STRUCTURE, AND THE LOCATION IS BASED ON SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT 3. CLADDING OF VENTILLATION BUILDING TO SUIT LOCATION AND AESTHETICS. 4. ALL TOP STRUCTURES TO HAVE:ACCESS STAIRS/LADDER TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT HAND RAILING 5. ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. GROUND LEVEL
10000
5m
REMOVABLE COVERS ARE SPLIT UP INTO SECTIONS AND SUPPORTED BY BEAMS, WHICH ARE ALSO REMOVABLE
1m DIA
SCALE 1:50
DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF TOP STRUCTURE ABOVE CSO SHAFTS ELECTRICAL CONTROL KIOSK (CSO)
- - - - - - 1500 - - AB DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE IL RS

Dsgnr
GT DS
Chkd
GT CH
Appd
27-11-09 - 22-05-09
Date
AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description
60
2000
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
---
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT

Drawing Title:
SCALE 1:25
GENERIC ELEVATION AND TOP STRUCTURE FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - CSO SITES
Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
04\12\09
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
Thames Tideway Tunnel
x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DH-GEN-00000-000001.dgn
c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008
100-DH-GEN-00000-000001
NTS
A1
AB
100
150
200mm
VARIBLE DEPENDING ON
APPENDIX 9 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLES
Transport Site considerations Access to road network Comments The site is located in St Georges Wharf and requires the construction of a new site access onto the roundabout type junction of Calypso Way forming an additional arm. The permanent site access will access onto the car park in St Georges Square and will also require construction resulting in the permanent loss of several parking bays within the car park. The sites interception chamber located in St Georges Car Park (to the south of the site) will displace approximately ten parking bays and requires the temporary closure of a section of the car park. The footway and National Cycle Route 4 (NCR4) also require diversion around the site. Calypso Way is subject to a 30mph speed limit and is street lit. It has a carriageway width of 6.1m which is reduced to an effective width of 4.1m due to on street parking to the north. Visibility onto the roundabout is sufficient. Access to the A200 (TLRN strategic highway network) from Calypso Way onto Plough Way then onto Lower Road towards the A200. The route runs through a residential area and is traffic calmed (speed cushions) along Plough Way. Distance of 2.0km to TLRN. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Access to river Site located within close proximity to the river although river access not essential for a CSO site as road will be used to transport excavated material. Use of rail is unlikely to be feasible due to the small quantities of excavated material Appendix 9 - Page 1
Mitigation required and conclusions Road access to site possible for HGVs requiring the construction of a new permanent access. The permanent site access will result in the permanent loss of several parking bays within the car park. The sites interception chamber will displace approximately ten parking bays requiring the temporary closure of a section of the car park. A footway and NCR4 require diversion around the site. Access route to the TLRN (A200) is traffic calmed (speed cushions) and passes through a residential area.
River access not required. Excavated material will be transported away by road for CSO site. Route to potential rail link at old station site possible requiring the removal of the
Access to rail
Transport Site considerations Comments produced by a CSO site. Access to old station site for rail access (approximately 1km southeast of London Bridge station) from TLRN (A200) onto St James Road. The route passes through a 20mph zone with traffic calming (speed cushions and raised crossing) as well as a residential area. The raised crossing will require removal. Old station site is likely to have very limited night use being on the main line with no space for sidings on the viaduct. Distance 3.1km to rail access point at old station site. Parking Some parking could be provided onsite and additional informal on street parking is available on surrounding roads for the workforce. Site will displace approximately ten parking bays within the car park (several bays will be lost permanently). Alternative parking spaces are available along surrounding roads. Public transport accessibility PTAL 1-2 (low), as identified within Table 2.3. Some parking could be provided onsite and informal on street parking is available on surrounding roads for the workforce. Site will displace parking (several bays will be lost permanently), with alternative on street parking available along surrounding roads. Low possibility of workforce being able to use public transport to access the site. Construction of a new temporary (construction) and permanent site access and the creation of an additional arm to the roundabout. Temporary closure of a section of the car park. Permanent removal of several parking bays within the car park. Diversion of footpath and NCR4 around the site. Raised crossing on St James Road requires removal. Mitigation required and conclusions traffic calming (raised crossing) on St James Road. The site is likely to have limited use during the night and a means of transporting material from the construction vehicles to the rail site would need to be provided.
Traffic Management
Construction of a new temporary (construction) and permanent site access and the creation of an additional arm onto the roundabout on Calypso Way. Temporary closure of a section of the car park. Permanent removal of several parking bays within the car park. Diversion of footpath and NCR4 around the site. Removal of raised crossing on St James Road.
Appendix 9 - Page 2
Transport Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: The site is suitable. It requires the construction of a new temporary (construction) access onto the roundabout of Calypso Way, in addition to a permanent access onto the car park to the south. The sites interception chamber requires the temporary closure of a section of the car park and results in the displacement of approximately ten parking bays. Several parking bays within the car park will also be permanently lost as a result of the need to maintain a permanent site access, although alternative parking is available along surrounding roads. A footway and the NCR4 require diversion around the site. Road access to the TLRN (A200) is possible, containing traffic calming (speed cushions) and passing through a residential area. Access to the old London Bridge rail site is also possible and requires the removal of a raised crossing on St James Road. A means of transporting material to the railway would also need to be provided. However, rail transport is unlikely to be required due to the small volumes of excavated material produced by a CSO site. The site is close enough to the river for river access, although this is not essential for a CSO site. Public transport to access the site for the workforce is low, however some parking could be provided onsite for the workforce and informal parking on surrounding roads is also available.
Appendix 9 - Page 3
Archaeology Site considerations Designations, including Archaeological Priority Areas (from Table 2.3) Comments The northernmost 30m of the site is within the Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APAS). The rest of the site is undesignated The 19th century OS maps indicate the site to be located in an area labelled St. Georges Wharf comprising a single long thin building in the southern portion of th the site. By the early 20 century, the majority of the site was developed for a Manganese Bronze and Brass works. Cranes occupy the foreshore to the east and just outside of the site The large factory building remained until the recent past. Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of High value being present within the site. Potential receptors of medium value with the potential to be directly affected No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of Medium value being present within the site. Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected Construction impact of potential waterlogged deposits containing archaeological remains may cause dewatering. This potential impact should be considered given that the site is in close proximity to the Thames River. Construction impact of previous development for the various recent and modern structures may have disturbed earlier remains. Borehole data in the area suggests made ground of 13m, some of which could be archaeological in nature. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Mitigation required and conclusions N/A
Summary of historical uses
A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Extent of existing disturbance (if known)
Appendix 9 - Page 4
Archaeology Site considerations Potential issues Comments Detailed design proposals and an outline method statement will be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts and to inform mitigation proposals. Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation methods could include: Review/production of desk based assessments (Report exists) Production of deposits model Archaeological monitoring of geotechnical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation. Summary: The site is suitable although further investigations will be necessary to determine the nature and extent of any archaeological receptors and it is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within this site. While no direct evidence has been revealed, peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have been commonly recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the Thames. Given the location of the site, and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present.
Appendix 9 - Page 5
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Designations including Conservation Areas, including trees (from Table 2.3) Comments Listed Buildings Parish boundary stone, St Georges Wharf, Grade II: 5m South Lock, hydraulic capstans and mooring bollards, South Docks, Grade II: 15m Parish boundary stone, wall and pier, St Georges Wharf, Grade II: 10m Swing footbridge over Steelyard Cut, Surrey Docks, Grade II: 205m Tide gauge house on South Quay of Greenland Lock (Surrey Docks), Grade II: 185m Lock keepers cabin and storeroom on South Quay of Greenland Lock, Surrey Docks, Grade II: 170m Footbridge over Greenland Dock, Surrey Docks, Grade II: 190m Greenland Dock (including gates, bollards and capstans, Grade II: 210m Locally Listed Buildings The borough of Southwark does not maintain a local list. In contrast, the borough of Lewisham does maintain a local list but it was not available at the time of this assessment. The borough of Tower Hamlets does maintain a local list but there are no locally listed buildings within the borough and within 250m of C31XC. Conservation Areas There are no conservation areas within 250m of C31XC. Registered Historic Parks and Gardens There are no registered historic parks and gardens within 250m of C31XC. Mitigation required and conclusions In the case of listed buildings and protected views a high quality scheme design and adequate screening for the development may be required as discussed below. A detailed desk-based assessment in conjunction with archaeology work will be required to further inform the likely impact of the development and to determine more detailed mitigation proposals.
Appendix 9 - Page 6
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Locally Listed Parks and Gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of C31XC. Protected Views C31XC is located 250m away from the Greenwich Park protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework). Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly affected There is the potential for one Grade II listed building to be directly affected by the development. The Grade II listed parish boundary stone, St Georges Wharf, is located adjacent to the site boundary of C31XC and may therefore experience a direct impact as a result of the development. Mitigation in the form of a carefully considered scheme design and /or screening would be required. Particular attention would need to be paid to the location of permanent and temporary structures within the site, their relationship with the listed structure and its setting, and the boundary treatment of the site. On the basis of current drawings (100-DL-PNCC31XC-171002) the listed boundary stone will be located close to the temporary working area and it would be preferable to move this working area away, to increase the distance between the listed boundary stone and constructional and operational aspects of the site. This would limit the potential direct impact of the site on the listed boundary stone but it may still result in an impact upon the setting of the boundary stone which is likely to require mitigation Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 7
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions through a high quality scheme design and/or screening. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Not Applicable Not Applicable
There is the potential for 7 Grade II listed buildings and one protected view (Greenwich Park London Views Management Framework) to be indirectly affected by the development.
Of the 7 Grade II listed buildings which have the potential to be indirectly affected by the development, only two (the South Lock, hydraulic capstans and mooring bollards, South Docks and the Parish boundary stone, wall and pier, St Georges Wharf) are likely to share a visual relationship with the site as they lie immediately outside the boundary of C31XC. As the development could impact upon the setting of these listed structures mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design and/or screening would be required. In the case of the other three Grade II Listed structures, they do not share a visual relationship with C31XC because of screening provided by existing buildings around the Surrey Docks. These five listed structures would therefore not experience any impact as a result of the development and no mitigation would be required. The Greenwich Park protected view lies 250m from C31XC and is not intercepted by the site. Development at C31XC would therefore not impact upon this vista or the area immediately around it and therefore no mitigation would be required.
Appendix 9 - Page 8
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Comments Not Applicable Mitigation required and conclusions Not Applicable
Sensitive landscape character areas likely to be affected, including trees and TPOs
Site to the west of River Thames which is a Site of Nature Conservation Importance, adjacent to an Area of Special Character and Thameside Policy Area, Green Corridor runs to the south of the site. Site on boatyard with mature vegetation on the south bank of the River Thames. Residential development to the north, River Thames to the east, residential development to the south, South Dock and residential development to the west. Loss of vegetation onsite increases openness. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would result in temporary, direct adverse impacts on the character of the site and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would cause an adverse effect on the character of the River frontage and the surrounding residential character.
Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of a landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to replace lost vegetation and enhance the character of the River frontage and the site. This site is suitable since the current character of the site is cluttered and busy. The Proposals create an opportunity to enhance its character with appropriate mitigation listed above.
Potential views likely to be affected
Site in Strategic View Wider Consultation Area. Open views from the River, residential properties on the opposite bank of the River, residential properties on Calypso Way, Enterprize Way and Grove Street. Partially interrupted views from Princes Court, Boat Lifter Way, Transom Close, and Old Bellgate Place on the opposite bank of the River. During construction, views of cranes from the properties listed above and the River.
During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimise visual impact. Design of top structure, vent column, and electrical kiosk to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant. Integrated landscape scheme to enhance visual amenity and reduce visual impact.
Appendix 9 - Page 9
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Permanent elements mainly visible from the River, residences in Grove Street, Plough Way, Calypso Way, and Deptford Wharf. Mitigation required and conclusions This site is suitable since, although the construction would have an adverse visual impact, there would be an opportunity to create a green open space onsite with Helsinki Square and soften views by retaining existing and adding new planting. Any permanent structures would need to be of a high quality design, sensitively located and/or screened and landscaped in order that any physical and visual impacts upon several Grade II listed structures and the character of the local townscape and the River Thames are minimised. Particular attention would need to be paid to the impact the layout of the scheme and its appearance both during construction and operation might have on the Grade II listed parish boundary stone, St Georges Wharf, and the Grade II listed South Lock, hydraulic capstans and mooring bollards, South. Similar consideration would need to be paid to the Parish boundary stone, wall and pier, St Georges Wharf which is located adjacent (10m) to C31XC. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening and landscaping in order that potential direct and indirect impacts of the development upon numerous listed structures and the character of the local townscape and the River Thames and its frontage are minimised. The location of the shaft
Particular considerations on sites where new permanent structures are required
Any permanent structures at the site have the potential to cause a direct impact upon two Grade II listed buildings and an indirect impact upon a further three Grade II listed structures. There is also the potential for an impact upon the character of the local townscape and the River Thames and its frontage. The design and location of any permanent structures within the site will need to be given careful consideration and some screening and landscaping during construction and operation may be required.
Potential issues
Construction and operation of the development could result in a direct impact upon one Grade II building and an indirect impact upon two Grade II listed structures as well as an effect upon the character of the local townscape and the River Thames and its frontage. However, there is the potential to mitigate any adverse impacts through a high quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping.
Appendix 9 - Page 10
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions and other constructional and operational aspects of the site will need to be carefully considered with regard to the Grade II listed parish boundary stone, St Georges Wharf, as this structure is located close to the site boundary. Summary: This site is less suitable from a built heritage perspective because of the potential adverse impact upon one Grade II listed structure which lies adjacent to the site boundary. In the event that a direct impact upon this structure can be avoided, there is still a high potential for the setting of the boundary stone to be impacted upon. There is also the potential for two other Grade II listed features to be indirectly affected by the development, both of which are located immediately adjacent to the site boundary. Although mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design and/or screening could help mitigate any adverse impacts upon these structures, their presence would necessitate very careful consideration of the drop shaft location and other operational and constructional aspects. The site is considered suitable from a townscape perspective. The impacts upon the local townscape character and on the River Thames and its frontage could be mitigated through the scheme design, screening and landscaping and could potentially enhance the permanent visual amenity of the site.
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Hydrogeological conditions (Groundwater and Surface Water) From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river Comments Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (13m) Lambeth Group (2m) Thanet sand (13m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric Level in Chalk Aquifer: ~ -12mAOD (~17 mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater Monitoring Location EA Hydrometry Sites: TQ37-268 579m west of the site (water levels to Nov 2007) TQ37-276 1.66km northwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) Watercourses Adjacent to River Thames and South Dock Lock SPZs and groundwater users (from Hydro - assessment) SPZ Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA EA Licensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details 7 licensed abstraction boreholes within 2 km radius
Licence Numbers: 1.28/39/39/0234 (1 borehole) 2. 28/39/42/0043 (1 borehole) 3. 28/39/42/0048 (3 boreholes) 4. 28/39/42/0073 (2 boreholes) Locations: 1. 1.18km northeast of the site 2. 1.83km southwest of the site 3. 1.13km northwest of the site 4. 773m northwest of the site Operator:
Mitigation required and conclusions The drop shaft will be constructed to an invert level of approximately 53.55mbgl therefore the shaft will be founded in the (1) Chalk. Piezometric head in Chalk will be approximately 36.55m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design.
A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the 400 days travel times of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows:
1. 250m 2. 690m 3. 258m 4. 203m
The shaft is not located within any of these catchment areas.
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments

1. Britannia Hotels Limited 2. National Grid Co Plc 3. London Borough Of Southwark 4. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted Aquifer Unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk 4. Chalk Abstraction Purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public services (hotels, public houses and conference centres- drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 2. Industrial, commercial and public services (non-evaporative cooling) 3. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/public services- make-up or top up water0 4. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printing- process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing Abstraction Quantity (annual): 1. 78,840m3 2. 598,980m3 3. 83,804m3 4. 52,000m3
Mitigation required and conclusions
Unlicensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No abstraction borehole within 1 km radius inside Tower Hamlet Council Boundary No abstraction borehole within 1 km radius inside Southwark Council Boundary No abstraction borehole within 1 km radius inside Lewisham Council Boundary borehole locations and depths (from Hydro - assessment) There are 5 historical records of water wells within 1 km radius. Depth range: 6.09 201.78m Not applicable
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Potential impacts on surface water features Comments The site is located adjacent to the River Thames and is located behind the Thames defences. There is no direct overland pathway to the River Thames. The site is also located adjacent to the South Dock Lock, which is also defended, however there is a small risk of pollution to the South Dock from the site. Standard mitigation would prevent this. Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality) An impact on groundwater at depth is likely since the drop shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (major aquifer) overlain by Thanet Sand (minor aquifer) which will need to be dewatered. At shallow depth, the shaft is located in Alluvium which is classified as a minor aquifer. Limited impact on shallow aquifer if water is excluded from the excavation by sheet piling. Please refer to ecological section for potentially sensitive ecological features. Mitigation unlikely to be required as construction of the drop shaft will not take place within the 400 day capture zone of licensed abstractions. The drop shaft to be excavated in Chalk below the piezometric head, therefore dewatering of the Chalk and Thanet Sand will be required during construction. Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer. See below (likely types of mitigation measures that will be required). Mitigation required and conclusions Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23.
Potential impacts on hydroecological features. Likely types of mitigation measures that will be required
Please refer to ecological section. Not applicable
Potential issues
Piezometric head in Chalk to be considered as part of geotechnical design. The issue of the appropriate disposal of discharges from dewatering to be considered. Impact on and mitigation for shallow aquifer will depend on construction design.
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: In terms of hydrogeology, this site is suitable because although the construction of the drop shaft will take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within the 400 day capture zone of licensed abstractions. No long term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering of the Chalk and Thanet Sand will be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 37m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are Alluvium which is classified as a minor aquifer at the shaft site and there will be limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer due to sheet piling. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because it is located behind the flood defences and there is no direct overland route for pollution to the River Thames. There is a small risk of pollution to the South Dock; however this can be managed with standard mitigation techniques.
(1) Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum.
Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Statutory designations (from Table 2.3) Comments Sue Godfrey Nature Park Local Nature Reserve (LNR), Mudchute Park Farm LNR and Lavender Pond LNR are within 2km Site is adjacent to River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI CSO site is adjacent to Greenland Dock BGII site. Foreshore consists of BAP habitat mudflats. The Tidal Thames is a London BAP habitat. protected or otherwise notable species within the Study Area Potential issues No direct impact on aquatic receptors. No other issues Mitigation required and conclusions None required
Non-statutory designated wildlife sites (from Table 2.3)
No landtake from the river or foreshore is anticipated. Care will need to be taken to avoid discharge or runoff into the river. No landtake from the river or foreshore is anticipated. Care will need to be taken to avoid discharge or runoff into the river. None required No other issues
BAP priority habitats
Summary: This site is suitable as there are no evident ecological constraints.
Flood risk assessment Site considerations Flood Risk Zone (In enviro-check reports) Comments Flood Zone 3 (1 in 200 year flood extent) but defended to the 1 in 1000 year flood level. There is a residual risk of a breach for which mitigation would need to be considered as part of the FRA. Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible according to table D.2 of PPS25 Assessment of conditions for SuDS There is limited space for SuDS, hence it would be difficult to attenuate runoff from the site to PPS25 requirements for the duration of construction. In addition, the site is unlikely to be suitable for infiltration SuDS and an investigation would be required. Potential issues No other issues No other issues N/A Mitigation required and conclusions A FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site.
Summary: This site is considered to be less suitable because there is limited space onsite for SuDS. In addition, the site may not be suitable for Infiltration SuDS and further investigation would be required. Although the site is located within Flood Zone 3 (greater than a 1 in 100 year risk of flooding) it is defended to the 1 in 1000 year flood level.
Air quality Site considerations AQMA Comments The air quality objectives for NO2 exceeded on major roads in the vicinity of the site. There are residential properties along Lower Road (A200), Plough Way (B206) and the access route to the site. There are residential properties within 35m on Plough Way and Calypso Way. Existing traffic issues The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A200 and A2208 corridors. See above There is no data at likely access to the A200 and the nearest data indicates existing AQLV exceeded. The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is moderate. Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. There are relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works. Additional vehicle emissions have a moderate potential to interfere with local air quality action plan policies. See above Collect a minimum of 6 months diffusion tube data at site access to the A200 or other point of access to major road network. Minimise HGV movements on the local road network during the peak hour. Standard dust control measures will minimise the effect of fugitive dust on nearby sensitive receptors.
Sensitive Receptors (from Table 2.3, comms and planning visit)
Existing sources of significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring
Potential issues
Summary: This site is less suitable as there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at residential properties in close proximity to the site. These impacts can be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality which could to some extent be mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
Noise Site considerations Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Comments Information from Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of less than 58 dB LAeq and night-time noise levels of less than 50 dB to LAeq at the residential properties nearest to the site. The residential properties closest to and facing the site are likely to experience relatively low daytime and night-time noise levels due to their distance from any major roads. Noise levels from the Defra noise maps provide an indication of prevailing noise levels only, and will not be employed in any detailed assessments for chosen sites. Sensitive Receptors (from Table 2.3, comms & planning visit) There are sensitive receptors close to the southern and western boundaries of the site. The closest receptors are located on Plough Way. Further residential properties are located on Enterprise Way and St Georges Square. Sensitive receptors at Plough Way to the west of the site consist of 3 storey residential flats and dwellings. These are located approximately 20m from the temporary working area and 30m from the shaft location. Properties on Enterprise Way to the east of the site consist of 3 storey residential dwellings and are located approximately 35m from the temporary working area boundary and 50m from the shaft location. Existing traffic issues Road traffic on local roads and more distant road traffic on the A200 to the west will contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. Road traffic on local roads and more distant road traffic on the A200 to the west will contribute to the existing noise climate in Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable
Existing sources of significant noise emissions
Not applicable
Noise Site considerations the area. There are no railways or significant industrial noise sources noted in the immediate surrounding area. Potential issues Construction: The construction period is estimated at 2 to 3 years and working hours will be 12 hours per day (7am-7pm) Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site. The number of HGV movements has the potential to have an adverse impact on a large number of residential receptors located along Plough Road which is assumed to be the haul route to the A200. Whilst the shaft location within the site may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant to the east of the site would maximise the distance between them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 30m and it is unlikely that vibration levels will result in minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case by case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Siting of noisy equipment and construction activities as far as is practicable from sensitive receptors. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Noise Site considerations Comments With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and top chamber should result in adverse noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Summary: This site is less suitable as distances to the nearest residential properties are relatively short and therefore adverse noise and vibration impacts are likely. There is also a relatively high density of residential dwellings around the site. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase is anticipated to be relatively high and is therefore likely to cause an adverse noise impact at properties located on Plough Way. Perimeter hoarding will reduce potential noise impacts but will be relatively ineffective at shielding noise from the upper floors of the nearest dwellings. Mitigation required and conclusions
Land quality Site location Current site use Grid Reference: 536644, 179002 The site is occupied by a boat yard. The northern area of the site (20-30%) is hard standing with drains visible, with the remainder of the site gravelled. Mature trees line the southern and eastern border of the boat yard boundary with younger trees along part of the western boundary. The site is relatively flat ground. Some evidence of rubbish, liquid and gas containers and ground staining visible from the site boundary some potential for contamination. North: A riverside walk area borders the north of the site, beyond which is a lock accessing the south dock. 3-4 storey private apartments/townhouses lie beyond the lock. East: A riverside walk area borders the east of the site, beyond which is the river Thames. South: St Georges Square a car park is located to the south of the site. The car park serves 3-4 storey local authority flats which are located beyond the car park to the south. West: Calypso way borders the west of the site, beyond which lies South Dock (Marina), 4 storey flats and 3 storey townhouses. These residences do not face the site. Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata
1
Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site)
Superficial Geology and Made Ground (13m) Lambeth Group (2m) Thanet sand (13m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft)
Underlying aquifer classes
Non-Aquifer: London Clay Minor Aquifer: River Terrace Deposits, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sands Major Aquifer: Chalk
Groundwater vulnerability/ Soil classification (High/Intermediate/Low/ 2 Not applicable) Source Protection Zone details Surface Water Receptor
River Terrace Deposits - Minor Aquifer High Leaching Potential of Soils (U)
2
Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA River Thames (10m east of the site) South Dock Lock (12 north of the site) South Docks (15 northwest of the site)
Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site Historical potentially contaminating activities (based on mapping data) Onsite Wharf operations (transport support and handling), 18621995 Manganese, bronze & brass works, 1898-1920
Land quality Site is covered with hard standing and used as a boat yard, present Offsite Railway lines installed running directly adjacent to (south) site form part of the docklands, 1949-1951 Building development in vicinity of site (30m south) 1991 Areas cleared due to enemy action (50m north), 1953-1965 Unknown filled ground listed possible northern part of Deptford Wharf (50m north) 1896 Several historical buildings listing potential fuel-related tanks use in the northern direction (closest located 80m north) 1887-1965 Historical building listed potential fuel use patent fuel stacked (110m north) 1887 Steel yard (110m north) 1874 1916 Unknown filled ground listed (137m south) 1949 Transport Manufacturing and Repair (140m north), 1898 Railway yard (150m southwest) 1896 - 1916 Sawmilling, including timber treatment (159m west) 1882 Military land (167m south) 1882-1949 One electrical sub-station (183m southwest) no mapping dates Portion (south) of Deptford Wharf filled with land (187m south) 1898-1916 Tanks (213m and 239m southwest) 1950-1951 Unknown filled ground listed (220m north) 1896 and 1949 Historical building listing potential fuel-related tanks (250m southwest) 1965 Pollution incidents to controlled waters Two: Unknown sewage, minor incident (110m west) Oils unknown, significant incident (120m northwest) Landfill sites Other waste sites Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/Depots Contemporary trade directory entries None None None None None
Site classification based on above information Activity Potential site contaminants derived from surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) 1) Some potential for made ground from potential filling operations during development Distance and direction to site 1) Onsite and directly adjacent to site Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH
Land quality 2) Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling) 3) Metal casting/foundry Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site Potential contamination pathways to site 3 (Conceptual Site Model) Contamination category 1) Railway Lines 2) Onsite and directly adjacent to site 3) Onsite 1) Directly south 2) TPH, Metals, PAHs
3) Metals, PAHs, TPH, Solvents 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH
Source 1: A1, A3, B4 Source 2: D6, E1, F7 Category 3 Assessed as High Risk
Summary: The site is considered less suitable based on the high potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from wharf and metal casting (foundry) operations previously located on the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. Notes: 1. From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river. 2. Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise. 3. Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathwayreceptors.
Contacts
For information about the Thames Tideway Tunnel Call: 0800 0721 086 Lines are open 24 hours a day Visit: www.thamestidewaytunnel.co.uk Email: info@tidewaytunnels.co.uk For our language interpretation service call 0800 0721 086
For information in Braille or large print call 0800 0721 086

For information about acceptance of our application and the examination process please contact the Planning Inspectorate. Call: 0303 444 5000 Visit: http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk

Site Suitability Report C31XC: Boat Yard, Calypso Way

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Site Suitability Report C31XC: Boat Yard, Calypso Way

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report C31XC

100-RG-PNC-C31XC-900001 | Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report C31XC

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT C31XC

SITE INFORMATION 2.1 2.2 Site and surroundings Type of site

9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4

Site Suitability Report C31XC

5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2

5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

7.6 7.6.1 7.7 7.7.1

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC

9.1.2 9.1.3 9.1.4 9.2 9.2.1

Site Suitability Report C31XC

10.4.1 Overall, this site is considered suitable as a CSO site. Page 12

Site Suitability Report C31XC

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendices

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 1

APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 1

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 1

Land quality Google Maps/Earth Site walkover information

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN

Area of Main Map

Short Listed CSO Sites

CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station

Earl Pumping Station CSO

# * Earl Pumping Station

200 Metres 300 400

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-01045 Date : .............2009/11/26 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities

APPENDIX 2 C31XC SITE SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Suitability Report C31XC Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS

VE R GULLI STR EET

2.2 m Ship and Whale

Rus sell Plac e

FB dge g Bri (S win

Bol Bol Bol

Lan ding Stage

Lan ding Stage Bascule Bri dge Cn

South Dock (Ma rina )

Lan ding Stage

South Dock (Marina)

Hor nblower Close

South Dock (Marina)

Merry Cri cketers (P H)

Riv e rs ide Youth C lub

De ptf Pri ord m Pa ary rk Sc ho ol

Strategic View Wider Consultation Zone

Air Quality Management Area

Jame s Lind Hous e