Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report S54SK
King’s Stairs Gardens, Jamaica Road

Please note: After phase one consultation this site suitability report and the drive options were reviewed as part of a ‘back-check’. This report was superseded by Site Suitability Report S54SK King’s Stairs Gardens (Summer 2011). This report (Spring 2010) has been provided for information only, as this site was the phase one consultation preferred main and connection tunnel site. 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 Inspectorate’s web site.

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001| Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report S54SK
King's Stairs Gardens, Jamaica Road

THAMES TUNNEL

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT S54SK
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 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 13 13 13

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 Operational requirements Restoration and after-use

5

ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Access Construction works considerations Permanent works considerations Health and safety

6

PLANNING ASSESSMENT 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Introduction Planning applications and permissions Planning context Consultation comments Planning comments

7

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 (terrestrial and aquatic) Flood risk Air quality Noise Land quality

8

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT 8.1 8.2 Socio-economic profile Issues and impacts

9

PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 9.1 9.2 Introduction Crown Land and Special Land comments

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-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

14 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 18 19

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 TABLES

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

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

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

1 1.1 1.1.1

INTRODUCTION Purpose and structure of the report The Site Selection Methodology Paper (May 2009) (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 from these meetings have also been considered within the site suitability assessments.

1.3.2

Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3

SITE INFORMATION Site and surroundings 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. Site S54SK is located within King’s Stairs Gardens, a public park within the London Borough of Southwark. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. The proposal would occupy the northern end of King’s Stairs Gardens and all of Fulford Street. The gardens contain a children’s play area, which shows signs of having been recently invested in, established wooded areas, particularly around its perimeter, grassed areas, pedestrian paths and a second small play area in the southwest corner. There is a river walkway on the northern edge of site, which has undergone some environmental improvements, including street furniture and seating, public art and new paving. The southern end of the site fronts onto Jamaica Road and is not included within the proposed worksite area. The wider area is residential in character and King’s Stairs Gardens serves as a public amenity space within the neighbourhood. The western edge of the site is the amenity space of residential apartment blocks 1 to 24 Cathay House and 1 to 14 The Mission, both located on Cathay Street. On the north-eastern edge, after the river walkway, there is a terrace of residential properties, 1 to 12 King’s Stairs Close. These properties front onto the river and, to the rear, overlook the gardens. The eastern edge of the site is formed primarily by the rear of properties 32 to 62 Elephant Lane. Pilgrim House is located on the south-eastern edge of the site. The south-western edge of the site is St Peter and the Guardian Angels RC Church and its Presbytery. The nearest residents are situated in Cathay House and King’s Stairs Close, approximately 10m from the proposed work area. The Angel Public House is situated northwest of the site, along the river front. It has a small beer garden on the east elevation, adjacent to a small seating area containing public art. The site is covered by various planning and environment designations in the London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan. 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.

2.1.4

2.1.5

2.1.6 2.1.7

2.1.8

2.1.9

2.1.10 The site is 0.35km from Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) Jamaica Road (A200) and can be accessed via Paradise Street. The site is 1km from London Bridge Station and London Underground station Bermondsey is less than 0.5km away. The site is adjacent to the river and is about 100m away from the Wilson moorings. There are no existing jetty/wharfage facilities serving this site. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5. 2.1.11 Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: River wall in the north River View Heights (8-storey) and Tempus Wharf (5-storey) residential buildings outside the western edge of the site An 1143 x 762mm sewer runs in Fulford Street and west to east across the centre of the site A water main (size unknown) runs west to east and north to south across the site 1, Fulford Street, 4-storey residential building on the western side of the site Pynfolds, 5-storey buildings at the outside south-western edge of the site

Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

London Mission, 7-storey building at the outside western edge of the site City Business Centre at the outside south-western part of the site Prince's Tower at the outside north-eastern part of the site Playground in the middle of the site. 2.1.12 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. 2.1.13 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. 2.1.14 It is understood that EDF is planning to build a cable tunnel through this site at some stage (Brunswick Wharf to Osborne Street EDF Tunnel). If this site is selected, there would be dialogue with EDF to consider matters if applicable, such as timing, engineering constraints, cumulative effects of the projects, potential for site sharing, etc. 2.2 2.2.1 Type of site The site S54SK is being considered as: a main shaft site an intermediate shaft site an intermediate shaft site with CSO connection. 3 3.1.1 3.1.2 PROPOSED USE OF SITE – CONSTRUCTION PHASE The proposed construction phase layouts for the shaft sites 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 main shaft site the layout as an intermediate shaft site the layout as an intermediate shaft site with CSO connection potential access points. 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. Drawings of typical activities associated with the shaft construction phase are provided in Appendix 7. Potential above ground construction features (dependent on shaft type) include: approximately 3m high hoarding around the site boundary welfare facilities, temporary structures, approximately 3m high grout plant, approximately 3 to 5m high, including silos mobile crane, approximately 30m high gantry crane, approximately 8m high. 3.1.5 Construction would require full-width closure of Fulford Street and temporary access to No 1 Fulford Street, but maintaining access to St Peter and Guardian Angels RC Church via Paradise Street. A section of the Thames Path may require diversion. A preliminary assessment of the traffic management which would be required is indicated on the temporary traffic management plan in Appendix 5. Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1.

3.1.4

3.1.6

Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

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 Main shaft site 6 to 7 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Barge Road/Barge Intermediate shaft site 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Road* Road * Intermediate shaft site with CSO connection 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Road* Road *

* There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for this site.

4 4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2

PROPOSED USE OF SITE – OPERATIONAL PHASE Operational requirements The indicative operational phase layouts for the shaft sites are located in Appendix 8 – Operational Phase Layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment. 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 shaft sites. The underground infrastructure at this site is likely to be made up of a shaft, double flap 1 valve chamber and a 10m wide overflow culvert . It is possible additional structures would be required for the CSO connection works. 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. It is possible additional structures would be required for the CSO connection works.
3 2

4.1.3

4.1.4

4.1.5

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. There is an earth mound in the site and the structures would be disguised by the mound where possible. For further information on the generic layout of this top structure, refer to Appendix 8. Hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would be fenced. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1.

4.1.6 4.1.7

1

It was anticipated that an overflow culvert would be required at shaft sites when the assessment in this report was undertaken. Although this was subsequently changed with overflow culverts no longer required at all sites, the assessment was not revised as it was considered that the difference would not change any discipline’s conclusion on the suitability of the site. 2 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 discipline’s conclusion on the suitability of the site. 3 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 discipline’s conclusion on the suitability of the site.

Page 4
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

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. 4.2 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 5.1.2 5.1.3 The site is 0.35km from TLRN Jamaica Road (A200) and can be accessed via Paradise Street. For the construction shaft site, access would be through Paradise Street, off Jamaica Road. For the intermediate with CSO connection, a one-way system has been suggested with the addition of an egress directly on to Jamaica Road – this could also be considered for both other options. For the operational phase, the hardstanding could be accessed directly from Fulford Street, which is off Paradise Street. Rail 5.1.5 The site is 1km from London Bridge Station and underground station Bermondsey is less than 0.5km away. River 5.1.6 The provision of jetty/wharfage facilities would be potentially feasible at this site. There are small mooring pontoons opposite the site and it is assumed that these could be relocated to provide space for the new arrangements, if necessary. There would also be an impact on river usage/navigation. It would be necessary for this to be examined in detail in the form of a specific risk assessment (including modelling of barge movements), which would require discussions with and approval of the PLA. Material movement for an intermediate shaft site would likely be by road. However, as the site is adjacent to the river, there may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport. Construction works considerations The playground facilities would need to be temporarily removed during construction. No other demolition is required.

No of traffic movements

5 5.1 5.1.1

5.1.4

5.1.7

5.2 5.2.1

Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

5.2.2

Available data on third-party assets show that the main assets of concern are the river wall, the residential buildings outside the western boundary of the site and the 1,143 x 762mm sewer in Fulford Street and through the centre of the site. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. The proximity of the shaft to the river means that the tunnel alignment deviation from the centre of the river would be minimised. It is likely that the proposed works could be constructed within the overall construction programme. Permanent works considerations The top structure would be raised to approximately 4m above ground level, but there is potential to hide the structures in the mound on the site. Health and safety There are no unusual health and safety issues 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.

5.2.3 5.2.4

5.3 5.3.1

5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1

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 following is a summary of the relevant local planning policies and designations affecting the site and are taken from the current statutory development plan for the borough. The development plan comprises the saved policies from the Southwark Unitary Development Plan, adopted July 2007, and the Consolidated London Plan, adopted February 2008. The site is in close proximity to residential properties, in particular Cathay House. Southwark Plan 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. The proposal site closely matches (almost 100% covers) an area indicated as Metropolitan Open Land (King’s Stairs Gardens). Policy 3.25, Metropolitan Open Land, states that there is a general presumption against inappropriate development on such land which results in a loss of open space. An area indicated as 'other open space' (King Edward III Manor House) is located approximately 30m to the west of part of the site, beyond a road and other buildings. This space is unlikely to be directly impacted by use of the proposed site. The site is within a wider Metropolitan Park Deficiency Area.

6.3 6.3.1

6.3.2 6.3.3

6.3.4

6.3.5

6.3.6

Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

6.3.7

A district park and registered park and garden (Southwark Park) lies beyond a dual carriageway to the south of the site. Use of the site would not directly impact upon Southwark Park. Southwark Plan Policy 3.6, Air Quality Management Area, states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would lead to a reduction in air quality. Policy 3.19, Archaeological Priority Zone, 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, and conditions to secure the excavation and recording of remains before development begins.

6.3.8 6.3.9

6.3.10 There are two Grade II listed features within close proximity of the site, and a scheduled ancient monument (SAM) approximately 30m to the west of the site (moated manor house of Edward III, Rotherhithe). Policy 3.18, Settings of listed buildings, conservation areas and world heritage sites, states that the setting of such sites will be protected from inappropriate development. 6.3.11 Southwark Plan Policy 3.29, Development within the Thames Policy Area, states that special controls of development 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. 6.3.12 The River Thames to the north of King’s Stairs Gardens is designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. Policy 3.28, Biodiversity, states that the council will seek enhancement of biodiversity as part of development proposals and mitigation and/or compensation for damage to biodiversity. 6.3.13 Policy 3.21, Strategic Views Wider Consultation Zone, seeks to protect strategic views of St Paul’s, and the council 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 Policies 4B.17 and 4B.18 of the Consolidated London Plan also highlight strategic panoramas, including views from Greenwich Park to central London. 6.3.15 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. The site is also adjacent to a designated Preferred Office Location area. 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 stated that the site is a park and is designated Metropolitan Open Land. As a protected space, it is a very sensitive site. English Heritage 6.4.3 English Heritage stated that, due to the associated SAM and park setting issues, the site is not preferable. English Heritage advised that a desk-based assessment would be required. Environment Agency 6.4.4 The Environment Agency advised that people fish in the vicinity of the site and that there would be a possible impact on trees and mounded areas. The site holds a single listed building, which is unstable.

Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

Port of London Authority 6.4.5 The Port of London Authority stated that the site is the base for City Cruises and it would therefore be necessary to relocate the moorings. Transport for London 6.4.6 Transport for London stated that the site is very close to the Jubilee Line. Other statutory consultees 6.4.7 The Greater London Authority advised that the loss of the open space may be less problematic due to nearby alternative open spaces. There are possible historical issues associated with the site. Planning comments A number of planning designations are applicable both on and adjacent to the site. These designations have been identified and described in Section 6.3. Those designations relating to residential amenity, metropolitan open land, archaeology, air quality and the Thames Policy Area are the most likely to be affected and lead to potential conflict with planning policy. The site is within a residential area with properties situated close by, and the nearest dwellings are within ten metres of the proposed worksite. This separation distance may not be sufficient to protect residential amenity and may require significant mitigation to reduce negative impacts. This is likely to include the location of the most disruptive and unneighbourly construction works towards the central areas of the park to increase the separation distance and to lessen the potential impacts on surrounding residential properties. Further, the operational hours of the construction works should be restricted to those normally operated within residential areas, for example, 8am to 6pm during weekdays, 9am to 1pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays. The shaft is within 50m of St Peter’s and the Guardian Angels RC Church and the proposed access to the site would be taken from Paradise Street, which is immediately adjacent to the church. Again, suitable mitigation measures would be required to avoid an unacceptable level of impact and disturbance to the church during the construction period. The site is designated MOL, for which there is a general presumption against inappropriate development that would result in a loss of open space. The site also falls within a District Park Deficiency Area and a Metropolitan Park Deficiency Area. The remaining parkland may be sufficient to meet the open space needs of the local community. Additionally, Southwark Park is located to the south of King’s Stairs Gardens, on the south side of Jamaica Road, which may also serve to satisfy local needs. The site falls within a Strategic Views Wider Consultation Zone (Policy 3.21) which protects strategic views of St Paul’s Cathedral. However, it lies within the foreground of views from Greenwich Park and so may not affect the threshold plane for strategic views of St Paul’s. The site is well screened with dense vegetation and tree coverage along its boundaries, and therefore should not have an unacceptable impact on views and/or the surrounding landscape character. Access to the river should be maintained throughout the construction period. However, this would require further investigation. There is no record of tree preservation orders within the site and the site does not fall within a conservation area. However, the proposal should aim to minimise the loss of trees. Further relocation of the concrete batching area to the west side of the shaft would achieve this aim. In general, however, there is no overall concern that there would be an unacceptable level of harm to trees as a result of the use of the site. There are two Grade II listed features to the west of the site, however these are beyond buildings and are unlikely to be affected by use of the site. There is also a SAM approximately 30m to the west of the site (moated manor house of Edward III, Rotherhithe) and this is also unlikely to be directly affected by the proposal. Further appraisal of the heritage consideration is provided in Section 7 of this report. Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

6.5 6.5.1

6.5.2

6.5.3

6.5.4

6.5.5

6.5.6

6.5.7

Site Suitability Report S54SK

6.5.8

As the site is within an archaeology priority area, suitable investigation and remediation works would need to be agreed with the LPA in accordance with Borough, Bermondsey and River Archaeological Policy 3.19. 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. Given the extensive nature of this designation, the purpose of Thames Tunnel Project to improve the environmental condition of the river, and with appropriate mitigation, it is unlikely there would be any adverse impact upon this designation. Southwark Park, to the south side of Jamaica Road, is also a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. A detailed assessment of the likely impact is also included in Section 7.

6.5.9

6.5.10 There would be a loss of amenity space during construction, but this could be remedied on completion of the construction works. However, the locality is well served by parks and open spaces and therefore access to alternative open space, such as Southwark Park, is available, as well as the opportunity to improve or upgrade these existing facilities as part of mitigation measures. 6.5.11 The construction works and remaining top structures should not be overly prominent in this location and should not obstruct local views. There would be no direct impacts to surrounding buildings or other structures on completion. However, there would be a significant loss of residential amenity during construction, and sufficient mitigation would be required to reduce this impact. 7 7.1 7.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL Introduction The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 – Environmental Appraisal Tables. Transport Intermediate shaft site assessment 7.2.1 The site is suitable in transport terms, incorporating some of King’s Stairs Gardens. Site accesses onto the end of Paradise Street and some parking bays close to the access may require removal for construction vehicles. Approximately 30-35 on-street parking bays would be displaced by the site. A new car park could be provided onsite to compensate for the loss, which requires further investigation. Pedestrian access to a church and the remainder of the park would need to be maintained. The Thames Path and cycle route require diversion, in addition to some footways within the park. The access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable, with no major constraints. Potential rail access at the old London Bridge rail site requires the removal of traffic calming (raised table and junction) on St James’ Road and a means of transporting materials to the railway. Potential rail access at the East London Line depot passes over one bridge with no visible constraints, and under two rail bridges with height restrictions. River access is not essential for the intermediate shaft site as excavated material is to be transported by road to the main site. Reasonable potential exists for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking is to be provided onsite for the workforce. On-street parking on surrounding roads would be unsuitable as this is restricted to a maximum stay of four hours. Main shaft site assessment 7.2.2 This would be the same as for the intermediate shaft site assessment above, except river access may be possible via overhead material conveyors. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated.

7.2

Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

Intermediate and CSO shaft site assessment 7.2.3 This would be the same as for the main shaft site assessment above, except that construction of a temporary egress with a left-out only onto Jamaica Road (A200) set-up would be required, enabling a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. A pedestrian footbridge would be constructed over Jamaica Road (A200) to maintain access to the church via King’s Stairs Gardens. Archaeology The site is suitable as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or a main shaft site, although due to a lack of previous investigations in the area, the nature and extent of archaeological receptors cannot be confidently predicted. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within the site. Peat deposits containing archaeological material 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. Built heritage and townscape Intermediate 7.4.1 In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as an intermediate site, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The site may potentially give rise to adverse indirect impacts upon two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten listed buildings. It is likely that these impacts could be mitigated through a carefully considered scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. In terms of townscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as an intermediate site. The site has the potential to give rise to direct adverse impacts upon a protected view, the character of the park, a public open space, the river frontage and local views (especially during construction, which would involve the removal of mature vegetation). Permanent elements would potentially result in adverse direct impacts on the character of the park. Adverse impacts could be partially minimised through a carefully considered scheme design (including sensitive positioning of temporary and permanent structures away from the riverfront, and the retention of existing trees where possible) and/or screening and landscaping. Such mitigation could allow the site to be progressed further, but a more detailed assessment of likely impacts and appropriate mitigation measures would be required, particularly with regards to the Greenwich Park protected view, which passes through the southwest corner of the site. Main/Intermediate with CSO 7.4.3 In terms of built heritage, the site is likely to be suitable as a main site or an intermediate site with CSO, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The details are as for the intermediate, above. In terms of townscape and landscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as a main site or an intermediate site with CSO. The details are as for the intermediate, above. The main and intermediate with CSO shaft sites have the potential to result in a higher magnitude of impact on landscape character and receptors than the intermediate option, due to the increased size of the site, especially during construction. Water resources – hydrogeology and surface water The site is suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or as a main shaft site as although construction would take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within 400-day capture zones of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the

7.3 7.3.1

7.3.2

7.4

7.4.2

7.4.4 7.4.5

7.5 7.5.1

Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27.1 m 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 limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer is anticipated due to the use of a diaphragm wall or caissons. 7.5.2 In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution, although standard mitigation would be required. Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate 7.6.1 The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site as it appears that habitats present could act as an extension of an adjacent BGII site for nature conservation (Southwark Park). The area could therefore support roosting bats, birds of conservation concern and locally notable invertebrates, which in turn may place habitat compensation requirements on the project. A survey would be required to determine the presence of such species and to determine risks. Main/Intermediate with CSO 7.6.2 This site is less suitable for use as a main shaft or intermediate with CSO shaft site for the reasons given above for the intermediate shaft site, and due to the requirement for temporary and permanent land-take from the foreshore and river (a site of metropolitan importance). This may require sensitive working practices and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working, and some compensatory provision. There could also be potential cumulative effects with other jetty structures in the river, and careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required. Flood risk The site is suitable for use as an intermediate, a main or an intermediate with CSO shaft site because there is potentially space for attenuation SuDS, although an investigation is required to determine the suitability for infiltration SuDS. In addition, although the site is within Flood Zone 3 (greater than a one in 200-year risk of flooding), the site is protected to the one in 1,000-year flood level. Air quality The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or a main shaft site due to the proximity of residential properties, since there is potential for emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. Dust impacts can be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is also potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours. Noise This site is considered less suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or main shaft site, due to the proximity of residential receptors to the west, south and east. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers would be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Twenty-four hour working has particular potential to adversely impact upon the closest receptors, and it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only. Access of HGVs to the site is also likely to result in disturbance, as they approach through residential streets. For a main shaft and the intermediate with CSO, the importing and exporting of material by barge would also result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near to the barge jetties. Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

7.6

7.7 7.7.1

7.8 7.8.1

7.9 7.9.1

7.9.2

Site Suitability Report S54SK

7.10

Land quality

7.10.1 The site is considered suitable for use as an intermediate shaft, intermediate with CSO or a main shaft site, based on the low potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. The site is currently landscaped for use as playground/gardens and historically it has not been developed for industrial use. The proposed shaft is not located near to any of the potential contaminants identified. 8 8.1 8.1.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Socio-economic profile The site is located within the Rotherhithe ward of the London Borough of Southwark. Statistics from ONS 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of Southwark, London and England as a whole: Higher percentage of economically active, aged people that are full-time employees than the borough or the country as a whole Slightly lower percentage of unemployed people in the ward than the borough as a whole, but a higher percentage than in the city and country Percentage of people who have achieved Level 4 or 5 educational qualifications is similar to the borough as a whole but is significantly higher than the figure for London or the national average Age profile for the ward is roughly similar to that of the borough as a whole and England, with the only noteworthy differences being the slightly lower percentage in the 16-19 and 60-74 age groups Greater predominance of white British residents than the borough, but otherwise the ethnic make-up is similar, with no other dominant ethnic origins. 8.1.2 In terms of deprivation, statistics for the neighbourhood around the site (Southwark 007D) indicate that the area is one of the most deprived in the country, with particular problems in terms of income, crime, barriers to housing and the deprivation of the living environment. Signage recorded at the site indicates that park users speak Turkish, Vietnamese, Spanish, French, Somali, Bangla and Chinese. The neighbourhood of King’s Stairs Gardens seems to have a complex socio-economic make-up, with diverse ethnic backgrounds, and may experience some social problems. The gardens may be a source of shared community pride, and may act as an equalising factor in the area. Issues and impacts The site is being assessed as a main shaft site, an intermediate shaft site and as an intermediate shaft site with a CSO connection. Main shaft site 8.2.2 The main shaft site covers the majority of King’s Stairs Gardens, including the children’s playground. Loss of the majority of the park, even if temporary, is likely to affect any exercise groups or other recreational users. A newly developed children’s play area also appears likely to be lost. The play area has seen recent investment, and site visits have confirmed that it is well used. However, Southwark Park is located to the south of the site on the other side of Jamaica Road, which is a very large public park with a diverse range of facilities. Main shaft site works are also likely to have a great degree of impact on the residents living in Cathay House (Southwark Council housing) to the west, as well as the mixed typology private residences on King’s Stairs Close and Elephant Lane, as many of these would directly overlook the works. Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

8.1.3 8.1.4

8.2 8.2.1

8.2.3 8.2.4

Site Suitability Report S54SK

8.2.5

The Angel public house is also likely to face disruption from works on the site. Adjacent to this, a small paved area at the riverfront is currently used as a fishing spot by local people, who may also be disrupted by the works. Also potentially impacted are St Peter’s and the Guardian Angels Church. St Peter’s is located within the site polygon but the church is outside the proposed worksite. There is also a private church located adjacent to the site to the south, and any impact on any of these facilities may affect community cohesion and disproportionately impact on specific faith groups. A further church is located in the vicinity to the east, but its distance from the main works area suggests it may not be significantly impacted. Also located opposite the site, to the east is a civic centre and library, but these also appear likely to be at a sufficient distance to prevent any significant impact on their use by the local community. The materials jetties seem likely to impede views from several residential units adjacent to the site on both east and west. An overflow culvert would remain onsite after the works are completed, which may impact on park users’ experience in future, as well as residential properties adjacent to the site, especially towards the east. Intermediate shaft site

8.2.6

8.2.7

8.2.8 8.2.9

8.2.10 Intermediate shaft site works are concentrated towards the western side of the site. Around half the gardens are likely to be used, including the play area. Impacts on Cathay House residents, the Angel public house and the two churches adjacent to the site are likely to be very similar to those associated with a main shaft site. 8.2.11 This type of site would not involve jetties but the overflow culvert, which is to remain on the site after the works, may impact on park users’ experience of the park as well as residential properties adjacent to the site, especially towards the east. Intermediate shaft site with CSO connection 8.2.12 Around half the gardens are likely to be used, including the play area. In addition to impacts on Cathay House residents, this type of site is likely to impact on residents in King’s Stairs Close. 8.2.13 Additional impacts associated with the CSO connection would include the presence of a materials jetty protruding into the river in front of the gardens, which is likely to impact on the Angel public house as well as residents living on the east and west of the site. Impacts on the two churches adjacent to the site are likely to be very similar to those associated with a main shaft site. 8.2.14 The overflow culvert, which is to remain on the site after the works, may impact on park users’ experience of the park as well as residential properties adjacent to the site, especially towards the east. 9 9.1 9.1.1 PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Introduction The site comprises King’s Stairs Gardens, Southwark. Three site options are under consideration: a main shaft site, an intermediate shaft site, and an intermediate shaft site with CSO connection. Crown Land and Special Land comments The majority of the land is owned by the London Borough of Southwark and therefore it may be classified as Special Land under Section 17 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. However, Section 17 does not apply where the body acquiring the land is a statutory undertaker. As Thames Water is a statutory undertaker, Section 17 will not apply to the

9.2 9.2.1

Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

Thames Tunnel Project. However, Section 16 of the Act will apply and provides that land may not be acquired unless the Minister is satisfied that there would be no detriment to the operations of the owner, or that the land can be replaced. Therefore, the compulsory purchase may be subject to a Ministerial procedure. 9.2.2 The land is open space and therefore it may be classified as Special Land under Section 19 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. If this is the case and if an acquisition cannot be agreed with the owner, a special parliamentary procedure may be needed after the Order is confirmed. As the whole Order would be subject to the special parliamentary procedure, not just the acquisition of this site, the project could be delayed by a minimum period of several months in the best case scenario. In the worst case scenario, the Order might be rejected by Parliament, in which case an Act of Parliament would be needed before the Order could come into effect. This could delay the project for a much longer period and even result in the Order failing. Contact should be made with the owner as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. It may also be advisable to consider the inclusion of exchange land in the Order if any is available. The land at 1 Fulford Street, which is required as part of the main shaft construction phase, is privately owned. It appears this property is neither Crown Land nor Special Land. Therefore, there should be no procedural difficulty in acquiring the land using compulsory purchase powers. The foreshore and river bed, which would be needed for conveyors and jetties for the main site, are likely to be owned by the Crown. Crown Land cannot be compulsorily purchased, therefore there is a risk that this land cannot be acquired. Contact should be made with the owner as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. Land to be acquired The compensation assessment assumes that the worksite would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above, in the case of a main shaft and both intermediate shaft site options. The temporary worksite required for a main shaft takes up the majority of the park area, while the intermediate shaft options require much smaller working areas in the northern part of the park. Compensation in relation to No 1 Fulford Street has been assessed assuming a permanent acquisition. Access to the worksite would be gained via existing roads, Paradise Street and Fulford Street. The main shaft and intermediate shaft with CSO connection options require material conveyors and jetties to the River Thames, and would therefore require temporary rights over the foreshore and riverbed during the construction phase. These options would also involve acquiring rights to construct and operate an overflow culvert from the shaft into the river. The operational phase would require the acquisition of a freehold area in the northern part of the site, with dimensions of approximately 40m by 50m for the main shaft and 40m by 40m for the intermediate shaft options. A right of way to enable access to the above freehold would be via the existing road network.

9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5

9.2.6

9.3 9.3.1

9.3.2

9.3.3 9.3.4 9.3.5

9.3.6

9.3.7

Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

9.4

Property valuation comments General

9.4.1 9.4.2 9.4.3

The freehold is owned by the London Borough of Southwark, with the freehold of 1 Fulford Street being in private ownership. There is no referencing information regarding any leasehold interests in the site. The planning history shows that there has been no planning application activity for the site. Therefore, it appears the site has no significant development potential, apart from 1 Fulford Street. Main shaft site

9.4.4 9.4.5

The land would be reinstated after the works are complete as a part of the engineering works and therefore reinstatement costs are not included in the compensation assessment. 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 needed over the park (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. If compensation is assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis, the acquisition costs would be significantly higher, but possibly acceptable. Although finding replacement land may be difficult, compensation has been assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis in order to be prudent. The site has good river access and therefore there should be no significant additional costs associated with acquiring rights for material transfer, such as a conveyors and jetties.

9.4.6

9.4.7 9.4.8 9.4.9

9.4.10 The drawings show that the new materials conveyor may require the demolition of No 1 Fulford Street. The route of the conveyor could be moved slightly to avoid this property. Intermediate shaft site (both options) 9.4.11 The same comments apply in relation to the intermediate shaft site options as for the main site, except for the comments set out below. 9.4.12 As the site area acquired would be smaller than a main shaft site, the acquisition cost would be lower and acceptable. 9.4.13 For the intermediate shaft only, there would be no requirement for rights for material transfer, such as a conveyor and jetties. 9.4.14 There would be no requirement for the acquisition of the property at 1 Fulford Street. 9.5 9.5.1 9.5.2 Disturbance compensation comments The site is used as a public park and it is unlikely that there would be any claim for disturbance associated with this use. With regard to the acquisition of 1 Fulford Street, disturbance compensation covering relocation costs would be payable if the building is occupied at the time of acquisition, but these costs would be acceptable.

Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

9.6 9.6.1 9.6.2

Offsite statutory compensation comments There is limited potential for claims under Part 1 of the Land Compensation Act 1973, as the completed works are unlikely to result in diminution in value to property. Provided access is maintained to adjacent properties during the construction phase, there should be limited potential for claims under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The arrangement of the temporary working area should avoid closure of the access via Paradise Street to the church immediately to the south of the working site, in order to reduce the likelihood of such a claim. Site acquisition cost assessment The statutory acquisition costs could be high, making the site less suitable for the main shaft site option. The statutory acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable for both of the intermediate shaft site options. SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE Introduction

9.7 9.7.1 9.7.2

10 10.1

10.1.1 The conclusions presented in this section are drawn from each discipline’s 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 Main shaft site 10.2.1 This site is suitable as a main shaft site because it is large enough to fit all the site facilities, there is no demolition required other than the playground, and wharfage/jetty facilities could be provided. Intermediate shaft site 10.2.2 This site is suitable as an intermediate shaft site because it is large enough to fit all the site facilities and there is no demolition required other than the playground. Intermediate shaft site with CSO connection 10.2.3 This site is suitable as an intermediate shaft site with CSO connection as it is large enough to fit all the site facilities, there is no demolition required other than the playground, and wharfage/jetty facilities could be provided. 10.3 Planning

10.3.1 This site is considered suitable for both a main or intermediate shaft site, subject to appropriate mitigation measures. There are few planning designations that are applicable to the site and it is considered that, with appropriate mitigation measures, these designations are unlikely to be unacceptably impacted upon. However, potential impacts on residential amenity should be considered further, and in particular the potential to relocate construction works within the site to increase the separation distance between the works and the facades of adjacent dwellings. 10.3.2 There would be a loss of amenity space. Notwithstanding the metropolitan park deficiency area, which affects the borough as a whole, the immediate area is well served by parks and open spaces locally, especially Southwark Park.

Page 16
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

10.4

Environment

10.4.1 Overall, the site is suitable as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or a main shaft site, although mitigation would be required to enable the site to be used. 10.4.2 Based on current information, the site is suitable from the perspective of transport, archaeology, built heritage, water resources, flood risk and land quality. 10.4.3 The site is considered less suitable from the perspective of townscape, ecology, air quality and noise. 10.4.4 Overall, the site is considered suitable, subject to further investigation of whether townscape, ecology, air quality and noise impacts can be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations would include: Townscape – a high-quality scheme design to minimise impacts on the character of the park, local views and potentially on a protected view would be required. Ecology – ecological surveys would be required to determine the presence of any protected or notable species. Some compensatory habitat provision may be required for any loss of BAP priority habitat within the park. Where development occurs on the foreshore, there is likely to be a requirement for sensitive working practices and potentially for seasonal restrictions on working and compensatory provision. Noise – standard noise barriers are unlikely to be effective for upper floors of adjacent blocks, and other techniques including limits on working hours may be required to reduce construction noise to acceptable levels. Air quality – measures to ensure dust at the closest receptors is adequately mitigated for. 10.5 Socio-economic and community Main shaft site 10.5.1 This site is unsuitable as a main shaft site from a community impacts point of view, as the use of the majority of King’s Stairs Gardens is considered a severe impact. The pre sence of the playground onsite, dense residential properties adjacent to the site on both east and west, as well as two churches adjacent to the site, compounds the potential impact. Intermediate shaft site 10.5.2 This site is less suitable as intermediate shaft site, even though around only half the site would be used. There may be a number of significant impacts on the local community, including impacts on the playground onsite, dense residential properties adjacent to the site on both east and west, as well as two churches adjacent to the site. 10.5.3 Mitigation would include discussions around reproviding green space and play facilities, along with noise attenuation during site works. Community safety during works would also be an important issue to address. Intermediate shaft site with CSO connection 10.5.4 This site is unsuitable as an intermediate shaft site with CSO connection as, in addition to the impacts associated with an intermediate shaft site, works would involve a large jetty protruding into the river, disrupting views from the Angel public house and riverside residences in the area. The overflow culvert that would remain after the works is also likely to affect the user’s experience of the park in future. 10.5.5 The proportion of the park likely to be lost for any of the three types of sites is a significant issue, especially the loss of the new children’s play area. This loss of open space can, in part, be mitigated for, due to the availability of alternative open space in the vicinity in the form of Southwark Park. However, the character of King’s Stairs Gardens as a river-facing public open space may be difficult to replicate.

Page 17
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK

10.6

Property Main shaft

10.6.1 The site is less suitable as a main shaft site. 10.6.2 The advantage of the site is as follows: It is not a developed site. 10.6.3 The disadvantages of the site are as follows: A special parliamentary procedure may be required The foreshore is likely to be Crown Land Acquisition costs could be significant, but possibly acceptable The engineering drawings for the main shaft include the eastern end of Paradise Street within the temporary working area. This would affect access to the church and other adjacent buildings and could give rise to a claim for compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The site boundary should be moved slightly to avoid interfering with this access. The drawings show that the new materials conveyor would require the demolition of No 1 Fulford Street, which appears to be a vacant house. The route of the conveyor could be moved slightly to avoid this property. Intermediate shaft (both options) 10.6.4 The site is suitable as an intermediate site. 10.6.5 The advantages of the site are as follows: It is not a developed site Acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable. 10.6.6 The disadvantages of the site are: A special parliamentary procedure may be required The foreshore is likely to be Crown Land The engineering drawings for the intermediate shaft include the eastern end of Paradise Street within the temporary working area. This would affect access to the church and other adjacent buildings, and could give rise to a claim for compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965. The site boundary should be moved slightly to avoid interfering with this access. This does not apply to the intermediate shaft with CSO connection option.

Page 18
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK - Appendices

APPENDICES

Page 19
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 1

APPENDIX 1 – SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Engineering Traffic Management and Access Roads/Rail – Scott Wilson Access River – BMT Third Parties (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 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 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 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

Appendix 1 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 1

Envirocheck Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan - www.lbp.org.uk 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 http://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 Land quality Google Maps/Earth Site walkover information

Socio-economic and community Statistics from the Office of National Statistics 2001 Census data

Appendix 1 – Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 1

Property Mouchel referencing data Rating records from VOA Website Promap Multimap/Live maps

Appendix 1 – Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2 – SITE LOCATION PLAN

Appendix 2 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

N

FI D

EN

TI AL

O

Area of Main Map

&

C

TOWER HAMLETS

AF T

Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

D

R

S54SK
0 50 100

±
200 Metres 300 400

SOUTHWARK

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.

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-00602 Date : .............2009/11/16 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

Title:

APPENDIX 2 S54SK SITE SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3 – PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS

Appendix 3 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

TI AL

10

3a

EN

FI D

16
1

3.2m

c in Pr

e's

59
9

N

3

O

Shingle

8

C

King's Stairs

12

&

G KIN
The Angel (PH)

C LO IRS S TA

SE

KING STAI RS

CL

Ivory Wharf
4

Ceylon Wharf

1 to 13

3.1m
y' s d ar y ar M St ur ch Ch

5

National Wharf

to 18 0 3

AF T

DW

39 to 47

32

r Mean High Wate
CP

14

King's Stairs Gardens

1

PH
3
33

101

1 to

3.9m
P ELE

R

D

El Sub Sta
48

s Po

ts

t tle Co
14

62

Wa

y

8 to

16 11 5

S54SK
lg Pi
72

TH AR DW S E DW E KIN GTHIR D M

E
1 to

SOUTHWARK
66 to 76

Miss
23

The

14

io n

3.1m
er 's St P et e an d Th ng el s ia n A Guard h hu rc RC C
Pa

19

! ! ! ! !
2

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
18

! ! ! ! ! ! !
212 to

! ! ! ! !
1 to 26 27 to 59

3.0m

! ! ! ! ! !
JAMAIC

! ! !
3.2m

Pynfolds
El Sub Sta

! !

!
D

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !
1 to 70

A ROA

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
M ill
236 238
1 to 26

254

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

PH

! ! ! ! ! ! !

House st re am

! ! ! ! ! ! !

1 to 70

Kirby Estate

3.4m

! ! !

248 250

!
234

!

60 to 10

3

1 to

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

E TR E ES AD IS PA R 3.6m

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

T

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !
Hall

King Stairs Gardens

Pa

th

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Christ Church Gate
281

Ch ur ch (Pr ivate)

JAM A ICA

RO A D
14

Legend
Southwark Park
LO W

Protected Shopping Frontages
37

Southwark Park

Memorial
Garden

E R Thames Policy Area R O A D

Protected/Strategic Views Action Areas

! !

! ! 2.6m

! !

Memorial Garden

Air Quality Management Area Strategic Cultural Areas
Air Shaft

Strategic View Wider Consultation Zone
CU LL IN G RO A D

1t

Playground

o2

1

St
1 to

Ma

r

Es y's

38

12 to 22

ta

13

to

te

22

1

4.4m

1a

National Terrace

10

4.2m

2.9m
1t o3 5

2.9m
CK PA RU
LB

PCs

ST SQ OL U AV AR 'S E
1 11

30 41 52
29 40 51

21 31 42 22 32 43 33
26
44
7 17

23 34 45

48

25 36 47

24 35 46

City Business Centre

70

Jett

y

Jetty

Prince's Stairs
10

9

3 to

97

9 1 to w Ne h ers c Ar u rt Co

FB

nn ra G 3 e to 1 Th 1

e us Ho le a b 1 0 ay St 1 t o b m rt BoCou 0

10

3

FB

Ho

us

e

East India Court

1 to 19

3.4m

ST

M

Y AR

CH

UR

CH

RE ST

ET

ar y

1t

o2

The Rectory

Area of Main Map

8
7

6

11 to 23
25

EL EP HA NT LA

The Old Mortuary

Legend
Local Authority Boundary
e

He

NE

y nle se Clo

an Fr

k

W

h

ym

k ar

Ho

us

Short Listed Shaft Sites

HA LAN NT E

43

ST M YC AR

F UL FO R T RE E D ST
51

R HU CH
STREET

Catha

1 to 24

7

y Hou

M

Po sts

F AY

4

31 to 38

LO

0
2.2m

10

20

±

AY CATH ST RE ET

se
b Pres y

W ER ST E RE

ST RE

40

60

80

it Un ed

T

ET

1 to 8

Metres

Ho us e

r im Ho us

Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance m 0.2 Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345
s v' la O rch St hu C

th

e

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 designation layers provided by affected London local authorities. Please refer to the text in the SSR's for the full planning and environment assessments.

2 24

16
14

Pla

yA

rea

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-00507-S54SK Date : .............2009/11/18 Projection : .....British National Grid

WE LO RR D OA

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS
10 8
18

EET PRO SPECT STR

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

20

Title:

Blick House

APPENDIX 3A S54SK SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

st Kirby E at e

10

3a

TI AL

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
Jett y

!
Jetty

!

Prince's Stairs

!

!
10
93 to 97

9 1 to w Ne h ers c Ar u rt Co

FB

a nn ra G 3 e to 1 Th 1

e us Ho le a b 1 0 ay St 1 t o b m rt BoCou 0

3 10

FB

EN

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
3
1

!

!16

!

FI D

3.2m

in Pr

's ce

59
9

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
Shingle

!
King's Stairs

!

!

!

!

!
12

!
8

!
SE

!
KING STAI RS

O

!

!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
31 to

!

!

!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
11

!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
AY CATH

!

!
King's Stairs Gardens

!
1

!

!

!

!

!

G KIN

C LO IRS S TA

N

CL

Ivory Wharf
4

Ceylon Wharf

1 to 13

3.1m
y' s d ar ar M hy St ur c Ch

!

!
to 18 0 3

!
25
32

5

C

National Wharf

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

DW

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
5

!

39 to 47

r Mean High Wate

!
National Terrace

&

!

!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! 101

!

!

!

3.9m

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
P ELE

AF T

10

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

El Sub Sta
48

R

D

Po

st

s

t tle Co
14

62

y Wa
Po

! ! !

!
16 !

8 to

!

S54SK
lg Pi
72

TH E AR DW S E DW E KIN GTHIR D M

1 to

The io n Miss
19

14

3.1m
er 's St P et e an d Th ng el s ia n A Guard hu rch RC C
Pa

23

E TR E ES AD IS 3.6m PA R

T

King Stairs Gardens

3.0m

Pa

th

27 to 59
18

Hall

Ch ur ch (Pr ivate)

Pynfolds
El Sub Sta

3.2m
60 to 10 3

281

JAM A ICA

RO A D
14

JAMA

AD ICA RO
254

Christ Church Gate
248 250

PH

am M ill st re

House

Southwark Park

Legend
LO W E R
Memorial
Garden

Borough Open Land
37

1 to 70

Kirby Estate
3.4m

Southwark Park

R

O

A

D

District Parks City Business
Centre

Metropolitan Open Land Open Spaces
Air Shaft

Memorial Garden

2.6m

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

Metropolitan Park Deficiency Sites of Metropolitan Nature Conservation Importance Blick
D A Sites of RO Nature G IN Conservation Importance LL CU

1 to 70

!

!

!
71 to 11 9

!

1t

o3

8

1t

Playground

o2

1

St
1 to

r Ma

y's

Es

38

12 to 22

ta

13

to

te

22

1

4.4m

1a

4.2m ! !

2.9m
1t o3 5

1 to

The Angel (PH)

14

PH
3
33

2.9m
CK PA RU
LB

PCs

ST SQ OL U AV AR 'S E
1 11

30 41 52
40 51

21 31 42 22 32 43
44
7 17

29

33

26

23 34 45

48

25 36 47

24 35 46

70

Ho

us

e

East India Court

1 to 19

3.4m

ST

MA

R

H YC

UR

CH

RE ST

ET

ry

1t

o2

The Rectory

8
7

6

Area of Main Map
The Old Mortuary

11 to 23

EL EP HA NT LA

He

NE

y nle

CP

se Clo

Legend
e

an Fr

k

W

m hy

k ar

H

s ou

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

HA LAN NT E

43

ST M YC AR

F UL FO R T RE E D ST
51

R HU CH
STREET

Catha

1 to 24

7

y Hou

M F AY

sts

LO

se

W

38

ER ST

17

ST RE ET

ST

E RE

RE

it Un ed

T

ET

1 to 8

2.2m

0
0.2 m

10

20

±

Ho

236 238

1 to

4

234

1 to 26

212 to

2 24

66 to 76

39 to 54
16
14
2

us e

40

60

80

r im Ho us

b Pres y

Metres

th

e

St

s v' la O rch u Ch

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 designation layers provided by affected London local authorities. Please refer to the text in the SSR's for the full planning and environment assessments.

Pla

yA

rea

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-00508-S54SK Date : .............2009/11/18 Projection : .....British National Grid
8

LO WE RR D OA

EET PRO SPECT STR

18

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

1 to 26

10 20

Title:

House

APPENDIX 3B S54SK SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

stat e Kirby E

s FB

Ground

y's St Mar Church

EET

82

TI AL

2.7m
10 3a
FB

E TUN N

AD L RO

EN

FI D

N

3

1

3.2m

O

Shingle

8

King's Stairs

C

12

G KIN
The ! Angel !

IRS S TA

SE C LO

KING STAI RS

CL

Ivory Wharf
4

Ceylon Wharf

1 to 13

3.1m
y' s d ar y ar M St ur ch Ch

5

14

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
66 to 76
31 to 38

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

AF T

DW

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
1 to 4

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

101

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
16

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
AY CATH

! ! ! ! ! !
Catha
El Sub Sta

3.9m
P ELE

1 to

!
(PH)

!

39 to 47

! Stairs Gardens

to 18 0 3

32

r Mean High Wate

&

National Wharf

King's

1

PH
3
33

The Old Mortuary

Legend
Local Authority Boundary
Po st s

10

R

! ! ! ! ! ! !
11

D

48

Po

st

s

62

! ! ! ! !

t tle Co
14

Wa

y

8 to

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

5

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

S54SK
lg Pi
72

TH E AR D S E DW EW KIN GTHIR D M

! ! ! S TR ! !

1 to

Miss

The

14

io n

3.1m
er 's St P et e an d Th ng el s ia n A Guard hu rch RC C
Pa

19

23

! ! !

! ! !

E AD IS PA R 3.6m

! ! !

EET

King Stairs Gardens

!

27 to 59

Hall

Ch ur ch (Pr ivate)

Pynfolds
El Sub Sta

PCs

ST SQ OL U AV AR 'S E
1 11

3.2m
60 to 10 3

281

JAM A ICA

RO A D
14

This plan is a strategic and standardised overview based on an interpretation of GIS policy designation layers provided by affected London local authorities. Please refer to the text in the SSR's for the full planning and environment assessments.

82

JAMAIC

A ROA

D
248 250

30 41 52
40 51

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

21 31 42 22 32 43 33
26 48
44
7 17

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-00509-S54SK Date : .............2009/11/18 Projection : .....British National Grid
45 to 67

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Christ Church Gate
254

29

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

PH

1 to 70

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Kirby Estate
3.4m

Southwark Park

Memorial
Garden

Legend
LO W E R R O A D

25 36 47

Memorial Garden

!

Listed Buildings Listed Buildings
Air Shaft

City Business Centre

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

Archaeological Areas Registered Historic Parks and Gardens

2.6m

Title:
1 to 14

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

1 to 70

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

CU

LL

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

NE P

IN

G

TU

8

RO

o3

A

NE

1t

Scheduled Ancient Monuments D

ST

Blick House

RE E

T

1

M ill st re

se am Hou

Southwark Park

37

24 35 46

to 20

23 34 45

Irwell Estate
8

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

20

u Ch

22

! 3.0m !

Pa

th

1t

Playground

o2

1

St
1 to

r Ma

y's

Es

38

12 to 22

ta

13

to

te

22

1

4.4m

1a

4.2m

!

2.9m
1t o3 5

an Fr

k

W

hy

m

k ar

Ho

e us

1

to

23

2.9m
CK PA RU
LB

17

2.2m

0

0.2

m

Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright 5 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 PH incomplete in any way.

St

O

la

s v' h rc

to

87

59
9

44

16

in Pr

ce

's

70

J

etty

Jetty

Prince's Stairs
10

93

to

97

9 1 to w Ne h ers c Ar u rt Co

3 10

FB

Ho

e us

East India Court

1 to 19

3.4m

ST

MA

RY

CH

UR

CH

RE ST

ET
12 1 to

5 14

The Rectory

s am Ad

G

ar

ns de

Es

ta

te

y ar nn ra G 3 e to 1 Th 1 e us Ho le a b 1 0 ay St 1 t o b m rt BoCou 0

1t

o2

Area of Main Map

8
7

6

11 to 23
25

EL EP HA NT LA

He

NE

y nle

CP

se Clo

Short Listed Shaft Sites

HA LAN NT E

43

ST M YC AR

F UL FO R T RE E D ST
51

R HU CH
STREET

1 to 24

7

y Hou

M

Po sts

F AY LO

se

W ER ST

10

20

±

ST

ST RE

E RE

RE

it Un

T

ET

ET

1 to 8

40

60

80

ed

Ho us e

Metres

r im Ho us

b Pres y

th

e
Pla

yA rea

236 238

234

1 to 26

LO WE RR D OA

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

EET PRO SPECT STR

18

212 to

2 24

1 to 26

10 20

APPENDIX 3C S54SK SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN

stat e Kirby E
71 to 11 9

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 4

APPENDIX 4 – PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

Appendix 4 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

FI D

EN

TI

AL

O

TOWER HAMLETS

&

Legend

Area of Main Map

C

N

AF

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

D

R

T

S54SK SOUTHWARK

0

25

50

100 Metres

±

150

200

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.

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-00603 Date : .............2009/11/16 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

Title:

APPENDIX 4 S54SK SITE AERIAL PLAN

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 4

View of the site looking north towards the River Thames.

View of the site looking south from the Thames Path.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 4

View of the children’s playground located in the central area of the park and looking west.

View of St Peter and the Guardian Angels RC Church looking east along Paradise Street.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 5

APPENDIX 5 – TRANSPORT PLAN

Appendix 5 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

Prince’s Stairs
Jetty

Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

East India Court
1 to 19

THAMES PATH CLOSED

3.2m
THIS DRAWING PROVIDE TURNING HEAD

A
SHAFT SITE

3.1m Ceylon Wharf
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

Shingle
King’s Stairs Ivory Wharf
NO 1 FULFORD STREET

1 to 13
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.

NOTES THAMES PATH CLOSED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. FULL WIDTH CLOSURE OF FULFORD STREET, APPROXIMATELY 90m CLOSURE LENGTH. PARKING SUSPENDED IN FULFORD STREET AS PART OF THIS CLOSURE. PARADISE STREET (EAST) TO BE MAINTAINED AS ACCESS ONLY AND USED FOR PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE THROUGH ROUTE. NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS TO NO 1 FULFORD STREET REQUIRED. SUGGEST ACCESS FROM NORTH END OF CATHAY STREET. DETAILS TO BE AGREED AT A LATER DESIGN STAGE. CLOSURE OF THAMES PATH REQUIRED. DIVERSION ROUTE VIA ELEPHANT LANEAND FOOTWAY THROUGH PARK TO PARADISE STREET.

The Angel (PH)
NEW ACCESS CONSTRUCTED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN VEHICULAR ACCESS TO NO 1 FULFORD STREET

King’s Stairs Gardens

PH
2. 3.

3.9m

4.

4.2m
SHAFT SITE

2.9m
THAMES PATH DIVERSION ROUTE PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 7 YEARS (APPROX) ROAD CLOSURE - 7 YEARS (APPROX) TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 1

El Sub Sta
SHAFT SEGMENT STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES

B

SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA THAMES PATH DIVERSION ROUTE

Playground

ROAD CLOSURE AND SUBSEQUENT SUSPENSION OF PARKING IN FULFORD STREET THAMES PATH DIVERSION ROUTE

PARKING, OFFICES, WELFARE CANTEEN ETC

3.1m
TCBs

KEY

AREA OF ROAD/ FOOTWAY CLOSURE

SITE AREA

King Stairs
VEHICULAR, PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE ACCESS TO BE MAINTAINED IN PARADISE STREET

AREA OF ACCESS ONLY

TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE

Gardens

AREA OF TEMPORARY WORKS

PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION ROUTE

3.6m
AREA OF EXCAVATION (INDICATIVE) ALTERNATIVE ACCESS ROUTE

3.0m
150 AB SECOND ISSUE IL MJL
Description Dsgnr

GT AJW
Chkd

GT MRW
Appd

15-01-10 22-07-09
Date

AA FIRST ISSUE
Iss

Pynfolds
The Point, 7th Floor,

3.2m D

37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:

LONDON N/A

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

30

10 m

0

40 m

TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN S54SK INTERMEDIATE
Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

PLOTTED ON

19\01\10

BY

Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\Infrastructure\Routewide\100-DE-TRA-S54SK-800501.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

Christ Church Gate

SCALE 1 : 500

100-DE-TRA-S54SK-800501

1:500

A1

AB

50

N

LTTDT

WASTE

100

200mm

C

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 6

APPENDIX 6 – SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN

Appendix 6 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

1

St Johns Court

2
7107 9118
Ps

3

4 N

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Status:

WO

St John’s Churchyard

6103
4.3m

IL-1.28m 7110

GEOLOGY

WORK IN PROGRESS
7003 5719 7006
Waterside Gardens New Tower Buildings

9002
King Henry’s Wharves

Ground level
6951

Keyplan:

N

104(m OD + 100) DRAWING LOCATION 97(m OD + 100) Base of Made Ground and Superficial

6003 5 STEPS
Wapping Pier Head
LB

1 to 41

Club

8001 SE 5 STEPS 2400 IL-1m
El

6002 SE 7231
4.1m
1 to 40

2351
TCB

Dundee Court

IL-1.16m
Mud
King Henry’s

2555 VT

Pierhead Wharf

4.3m

VT CL4.35m

Stairs

IL-0.61m DBV475029 5001 SE
Oliver’s Wharf
1 to 5 FB

7004 SE
Morocco

Sub Sta

IL-0.64m 6454 IL-0.79m

VT CL4.35m
101 to 502

3.9m

7005
77

Wharf

The Sanctuary
79 81

2559

EAST LONDON LINE (THAMES TUNNEL)
Old
MP

El Sub Sta

Shingle

A
Orient Wharf
Wapping Old Stairs

VT CL4.22m IL-0.82m

4.3m

Base of Lambeth Group
Wapping Pier

IL-0.94m

Aberdeen Wharf
MP

79(m OD + 100)

MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE
Hanover Stairs

Waterside Gardens

Sand and shingle

SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND
FS

DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

Sand and shingle

Police Boat Yard

Wapping New Stairs
Sand and shingle

4.4m
Shingle Shingle

Waterside Gardens

4902

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.

Base of Thanet Sand Formation
Cumberland Wharf

Shingle Police Boat Yard

Shingle

64(m OD + 100)
3902
4.1m

NOTES 1. LIMITED FIBRE OPTIC AND BT COMMUNICATION CABLES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. DETAILS OF THESE CABLES AND OTHER SERVICES AND THIRD PARTY ASSETS TO BE CONFIRMED BY FURTHER STUDIES AND UTILITY SEARCHES.
CLIFTON PLACE

Navigation Light

Pier

(fixed green)

INLET FLAP

3903 ZBV030813

Lift

FS

Suggested invert level of shaft 51.86(m OD + 100)

Pontoon

BS
3.4m

2. INVERT LEVEL OF SHAFT SHOWN.BASE OF CONSTRUCTION WILL BE BELOW THIS LEVEL AND WILL DEPEND ON CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE. THIS IS ONLY PROVISIONAL AS DESIGN IS AT EARLY PRELIMINARY STAGE.

1044 3901

Church Stairs

WO
4.0m

2901
Posts

4901
WESTERN PLACE

ZBV030808

1045
2.7m PH FB

3807

SITE BOUNDARY
1801 WO

3.6m

1046 ZBV030812 4801

LEGEND
FOUL WATER

Wks

2803 1047
El

3805
Sub Sta

1071

B
RE

Crane Play Ground

WO 2802 SU 2801
Posts

3804 3803 1070
Post

2.9m

1 to 14

ZBV030810 ZBV030809
PH

Walter Langley

SURFACE WATER

3806

Court

1804

2.7m

CLEAN WATER
FB

3801

1048

Chalk
NF
Prince’s Stairs
Jetty

GAS
3808 IL-1.63m 1080

1031

1803 2804
Posts

FIBRE OPTICS
1072 IL-1.7m

1802
East India Court
1 to 19

3.4m The

Ps

3802

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

0711 1049 0712
3.2m

Rectory

1704

2704

Cherry Garden Pier

0707
1032 WO
Shingle
King’s Stairs

3.1m Ceylon Wharf

1702

SYNTHETIC GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DERIVED FROM THE BGS VT CL2.52m LONDON LITHOFRAME50 MODEL, HISTORICAL BOREHOLES AND BERRY (1979). PLEASE NOTE, GROUND CONDITIONS MAY 4702 2711 VARY AND THIS DATA 3701 SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DETAILED Govt 2710 ENGINEERING PURPOSES Office
3702 2708 2705 2707 WO 2706 1081 WATERING POINT 4701

LOW VOLTAGE CABLES

HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES

5" 3"6" FK 2"0" DEEP

ZBV506094 0702 9705 DM04452 PS SU
0709

1 to 13 Ivory Wharf Posts

EXISTING TUNNELS

Shingle
National Wharf

9702 1035
The Angel (PH)

Corbetts Wharf
Cherry Garden Stairs

9701

King’s Stairs Gardens

ABANDONED

PH

DW

DW

0705 8705
3.9m

0716 1050 1701 1703
2.9m

The Old Mortuary Play Area

2709 2.1m

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
WATER - ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS

8701 FB 5702
4.3m 1 5

FB 8702

1321
4.0m

6701
4.2m

FB

10

7703
4.4m

4.2m

305
BERMONDSEY WALL EAST

2702 WO
-3.1m

LB

Turner Court

WO ZBV030845 984 FB 988

IL1.64m IL1.64m 1024

7701

7702

SU IL2.26m 1023

1018
El Sub Sta

ABANDONED 0710
ABANDONED

1074

1077 3703 0717 1706 2703

3704

STORM & FOUL SEWERS

8703

8706 8704 SE

ABANDONED IL0.77m 9703
Playground

0708 ABANDONED 0714 1705 WO 1054 1604
2.9m

OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS:
5288 2701

TELECOMS
WO
Chy

- ONLY FIBRE OPTIC CABLES - HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES - LARGE BANKS OF LOW VOLTAGE CABLES - LOW PRESSURE ABOVE 300mm DIAMETER - INTERMEDIATE, MEDIUM OR HIGH PRESSURE 200mm

1036 6601
3.1m

0605 0603 0610
ABANDONED

2603 1083
-1.5m

ELECTRICITY
1075 IL-2.27m 2606 WO WO

1019

2604

7"

5604

GAS

C

985

WO WO

1606 0608

LB

1608

2602

TCB

ZBV030816 6602 WO 989

Millpond Estate WO 8602 1039 WO 1026 8605 9601 SE 8603 SU 8601 1021 WO 1038
3.6m 3.1m

S54SK
9602
King Stairs Gardens

1040 0604

ABANDONED

ABANDONED

1078
PH
2.2m

WO 2607

ABANDONED 0602 0601 1055 0606 0615 0612 0614 0609 1079
TCBs

1602 2"2"DEEP 2601

1607 1609

3601

10 m

0 SCALE 1 : 1250

100 m

Pond

WO 1087

El Sub Sta

7601

3.0m

7604 7603 986
3.9m

0613 8604 1601 1238 1605 80mm WM 3000K 2605
PH

7602

3602 1084

MH 1025 6502 DBV005291 SE 982 5504 WO 5505
3.2m

3503 450mm HP

7507

WO IL-0.44m Pynfolds 100mm 1042 8505 WO WO WO 7503 7510
BD

9501 SE 9502 SE

300mm HP WO WO

0503 1043 0502 0504

1502 0505 0508 2502
PCs

1086 3502 ZBV505989 2506 WO 3501

179yds OF 6" LAID JULY "67 WO 6503 990
War Meml

El Sub Sta

6448

STS 1041 8506

0513 2510
1503

6708 WO 2503

3504
Chy

AB

DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE

IL RS
Dsgnr

GT DS
Chkd

GT CH
Appd

27-11-09 24-07-09
Date

2508 2509

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

WO 0501 ABANDONED VT 0506 0511
30 21 31 42

WO

1504 IL-2.92m
El Sub Sta 22 32 43

1501

41 52

House

Council Offices

WM KENT 3000
UNABLE TO LIFT LID

VT
STS

Christ Church Gate

Irwell Estate
23 34 45

3505 2504 1085
Calgary Court

FH

7502
3.2m

7508 SE

MH 1028 8501 8503
Southwark Park

33

0512
25 36 47

7501
WO WO 991 1 " WO TML4/22

DM04171 WM 7504 1027

7506
PH
0509

24 35 46

IL-1.05m 3506 2505 2507
1 to 80 Regina Point

KENT 3000
TCB

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:
Bus Station

Southwark Park Kirby Estate

SE BS VT
WO
FB

LUL JUBILEE LINE

Memorial
IL0.48m

City Business Centre
ABANDONED

DBV005228

3"
3.4m

ABANDONED

300 ABANDONED

D

AV

2.6m

3" 8401 WO
2.6m

Memorial Garden

1239 1411 1403
Scotia

6709

N/A
4402
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

6401
Hall
UNABLE TO LIFT LID

1404
Air Shaft

3401 3403
Blick House

Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:

LONDON N/A

8402 1110 6402 WO

1402 1410

2401

THAMES TUNNEL
1029 7402 7401 8403 8404 WO WO
IL1.11m

WO 1091
Niagara Court Edmonton
Assembly Hall

Contract Name:

Surgery

LB

1126

WO WO

3406 6710

0401
88.6 METRES LAID JAN 80

WO 1405 2403
Court

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

ZBV083003 WO New Place Square 6405
Play

3404 057 1102
IL0.38m

FB ABANDONED ZBV030817 WO 7403
Thames Tideway Tunnel

WO

3405

3.5m

SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN S54SK
Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

1407
2.5m

SU
PLOTTED ON 04\12\09 BY

3402 2404 WO 6711

Area

6403 Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100101.dgn

2.4m

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

LVHTCABGWF

FWSGT

0

ZBV505928 SEE DRG MPH.3567/79

100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100101

1:1250

A1

AB

50

WO IL-1.69m

5403

6404

2402

Court

LTTDT

WASTE

100

Trotwood

WO 987

8504

150

SW

FWSGT

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 7

APPENDIX 7 – CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 7 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

1

2

3

Stairs
Jetty

4

5 East India Court
1 to 19
Status:

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

3.2m

SITE BOUNDARY

3.1m Ceylon Wharf

Shingle
A
King’s Stairs Ivory Wharf

1 to 13

DRAWING LOCATION

MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 25m I.D. SHAFT ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

The Angel (PH)

King’s Stairs Gardens
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 9095m2

PH

3.9m

4.2m 2.9m
2

120

0m

El Sub Sta
SECONDARY CRANE

PRIMARY CRANE

2

0 100

m

Playground

B

350
2

0m

KEY: SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA WORKSHOP AND STORES AREA

3500m

2

1000m

2

500m

2

PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING, OFFICES, WELFARE, CANTEEN AND MEDICAL

2

SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE
1200m
2

500

m

3.1m
TCBs

King Stairs
ACCESS

Gardens

DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.

10 m

0

40 m

SCALE 1 : 500

AC AB

DRAFT - THIRD ISSUE DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE

RE RS SS
Dsgnr

SMS DS RS
Chkd

MK CH SJW
Appd

15-10-09 24-07-09 12-06-09
Date

Pynfolds
3.2m

AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:

D

N/A
Project Group: 21

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

30 41 52 Christ Church Gate

LONDON N/A

Site Name: Project Name:

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

CONATRUSTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK (INTERMEDIATE) Southwark Park
PLOTTED ON 15\10\09 BY Andy.Purdy LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel X:\Project\371840\CAD\Design Data\CAD Thames\Drawings\Planning-Consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100102.dgn Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

N

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

PH

0

100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100102

1:500

A1

AC

50

31 Location / Town: 42

LTTDT

WASTE

100

150

200mm

C

3.6m

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

N
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

Prince’s
EXCAVATED MATERIAL JETTY NEW MATERIAL CONVEYOR

Stairs
Jetty

East India Court
1 to 19
NEW MATERIAL JETTY EXCAVATED MATERIAL CONVEYORS DRAWING LOCATION

A

3.2m
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345 OVERFLOW CULVERT

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.

Shingle
COFFERDAM

King’s Stairs

Ivory Wharf

25m I.D. SHAFT

National Wharf The Angel (PH)

King’s Stairs Gardens

3.9m
10

4.2m 4.4m
100 0m† 140 0m†

El Sub Sta

B

247

0m†

PRIMARY GANTRY CRANE

KEY: SLURRY PROCESSING AND EXCAVATED MATERIAL SEPERATION PLANT, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA WORKSHOP AND STORES AREA

Playground

30m I.D. SHAFT FOR ALT 2 (SO21T)

PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING, OFFICES, WELFARE, CANTEEN AND MEDICAL

100

0m†
SECONDARY CRANE

SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE, SEGMENT STORAGE STOCKYARD

DISCLAIMER:

3.1m C

INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.

King Stairs
10 m 0 40 m

AC

CE

SS
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 11870m†

Gardens
SCALE 1 : 500

3.6m

3.0m

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

DB
Dsgnr

SMS
Chkd

MK
Appd

09/10/09
Date

EGRESS

The Point, 7th Floor,

Pynfolds
D 3.2m
El Sub Sta

37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

DB

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:

NEW PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S54SK - INTERMEDIATE + CSO DRIVE SITE
Drawing No.:

PLOTTED ON

08\10\09

BY

Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100202.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

Christ Church Gate

0

100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100202

1:500

A1

AA

100

SITE BOUNDARY ARE = 29448m†

150

200mm

EG RE SS

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 8

APPENDIX 8 – OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 8 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

N
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

Prince’s Stairs A
Jetty
DRAWING LOCATION

East India Court
1 to 19

MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND 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

3.2m
OVERFLOW CULVERT

DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.

Ceylon Wharf

Shingle
King’s Stairs Ivory Wharf

1 to 13

The Angel (PH)

King’s Stairs Gardens

20m x 10m TOP STRUCTURE @ 107m (AOD + 100m)

PH

3.9m
PERMANENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS FENCE

B

4.2m 2.9m

El Sub Sta
BURIED 25m I.D SHAFT

PERMANENT ACCESS

VENTILATION BUILDING 15m x 5m x 5m HIGH

Playground

VENTILATION TOWER 10m HIGH

DISCLAIMER:

3.1m
10 m 0 40 m

TCBs
SCALE 1 : 500

King Stairs
150 AC AB DRAFT-THIRD ISSUE DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE IL RS RS
Dsgnr

Gardens

3.6m
GT DS DS
Chkd

GT CH CH
Appd

18-12-09 24-07-09 17-07-09
Date

AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

3.0m
100
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:

D

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

LTTDT
Location / Town:

WASTE LONDON N/A 50
Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

Pynfolds
3.2m
El Sub Sta

Site Name: Project Name:

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT S54SK
Drawing No.:

PLOTTED ON

15\12\09

BY

Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100003.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DL-PNC-S54SK-100003

1:500

A1

AC

200mm

C

INDICATIVE OPERATION PHASE ARRANGEMENT, BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

VENTILATION BUILDING (SHAFTS)
107m (AOD +100) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE FLAP VALVES (LOCKABLE)

Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

10 3m 9m

m

A

20

m

107m (AOD + 100m)
RI ES

MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

V

A

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36.
2m

ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.

VARIBLE DEPENDING ON

NOTE: 1. STRUCTURE TO BE PROTECTED BY REMOVABLE HANDRAILS IN THE TEMPORARY CASE. GROUND LEVEL 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.

7m (AOD +100m) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE SHAFT (LOCKABLE)

B

5000

REMOVABLE COVERS ARE SPLIT UP INTO SECTIONS AND SUPPORTED BY BEAMS, WHICH ARE ALSO REMOVABLE

50

00

15000

SCALE 1:100

DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF TOP STRUCTURE ABOVE MAIN AND INTERMEDIATE SHAFTS VENTILATION TOWER (SHAFTS)

- - 10000 - - - - - - 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

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:

D

N/A
Project Group:

---

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name:

WASTE LONDON N/A 50
Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

3m DIA
Project Name:

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

SCALE 1:50

GENERIC ELEVATION AND TOP STRUCTURE FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - SHAFT 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-00000-000002.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DH-GEN-00000-000002

NTS

A1

AB

100

150

200mm

C

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

APPENDIX 9 – ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLES

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Access to road network Comments Site accesses directly onto the carriageway of Paradise Street. The site incorporates part of the King’s Stairs Gardens park (including a playground), part of Paradise Street, and the entirety of Fulford Street both of which currently provide on street parking. Access to the church will need to be maintained in addition to a section of King’s Stairs Gardens in the southeast section of the site. The Thames Path and cycle route may require diverting around the site along Jamaica Road. Several shared cycle/footways through the park also require diversion. Mitigation required and conclusions Conclusion: Road access to site on Paradise Street suitable for HGVs with the removal of some on street parking bays near to the site access. Thames Path and cycle route will likely require diversion around the site. Access to church/remainder of park needs to be maintained. Alternative accesses via King’s Stairs Close and Jamaica Road are unsuitable. Access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable via Paradise Street and Cathay Street. No visible restrictions other than passing through a Comments As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left Intermediate and CSO Comments As for intermediate, see left, except: Construction site egress will be onto Jamaica Road (A200) to the south of the site via an access road through the park. This will enable a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. The pedestrian egress will require construction and will require a left out only setup. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed to maintain pedestrian access to the church via King’s Stairs Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left, except: Construction site egress will be onto Jamaica Road (A200) to enable a oneway system through the site for construction vehicles. The construction egress will require construction and will require a left out only setup. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed to maintain pedestrian access to the church.

Appendix 9 – Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Comments Alternative access from King’s Stairs Close unsuitable due to traffic calming (raised tables), on street parking, narrow carriageway width and residential surroundings. Access onto Jamaica Road also unlikely to be suitable due to continuous bus lane on the nearside carriageway. Paradise Street is subject to a 30mph speed limit and is street lit. It has a carriageway width of 5.2m reduced to an effective width of 3.1m due to on street parking. Several on street parking bays on Paradise Street within the vicinity of the access will require removal to ensure that visibility is sufficient and the access is not Mitigation required and conclusions residential area. Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Gardens. Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Comments obstructed for construction vehicles. Access to the A200 Jamaica Road (TLRN strategic highway network) via Paradise Street and south along Cathay Street. Access route has no visible restrictions other than passing through a residential area. Distance to TLRN (A200) approximately 100m. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Access to river Intermediate shaft site – river access not essential as road will be used to transport excavated material to main site. River access not required. Excavated material will be transported away by road to main site. Main shaft site – site adjacent to the river for access via overhead material conveyors. The Thames Path and a cycle route would require diverting. City Cruises mooring point may need to be River access possible via overhead material conveyors. The Thames Path and a cycle route require diversion. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated. As for main site, see left. As for main site, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Route to potential rail link at old station site possible requiring the removal of the traffic calming (raised crossing and raised junction) 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. Alternative rail access at London Bridge station is possible. The route from the site passes under and over several bridges with no visible restrictions, as well as through a high street area and Comments relocated. Access to rail Access route to old London Bridge station site for rail access (approximately 1km southeast of London Bridge station) is from the TLRN (A200) onto St James’ Road then Dockley Road. The route passes through a 20mph zone, with traffic calming along St James’ Road (speed cushions, raised zebra crossing) and raised junction treatment onto Dockley Road. Raised crossing and junction treatment 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. Alternative rail access at The East London Line Depot has the potential to be used during the day, As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 4
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Comments although considerable use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Site accessible via the TLRN (A200), Lower Road, Trundley’s Road, Sanford Road and Edward Street which passes over one bridge with no visible constraints and under two rail bridges. Both bridges have height restrictions with one either a 4m height restriction and the other a 2.3m restriction. The route also passes through a high street area and the congestion zone. Distance 1.1km to rail access point at old station site and 3.7km to rail access at East London Line Depot from site. Parking Some parking could potentially be provided on site for the Parking could potentially be provided on site for As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions the congestion zone. London Bridge station has the potential to be used during the night and off peak, although significant use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Comments workforce. On street parking nearby along Paradise Street, Cathay Street and other surrounding roads is unsuitable as restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs (Mon-Fri 08:00-18:30).. Approximately 25-35 on street parking bays (around 10-15 public and 15-20 permit holder) are incorporated within the site boundary and will therefore be lost. A new car park to compensate for the lost permit holder bays could be provided on site which requires further investigation. The 10-15 public parking spaces are assumed to be for the park. Several parking bays along Paradise Street also require removal for access into the site. Mitigation required and conclusions workforce. On street parking on surrounding roads limited to a maximum stay of 4hrs so unsuitable for workforce. A new car park could be provided on site to compensate for the removal of approximately 1520 permit holder bays which requires further investigation. Several on street parking bays along Paradise Street also require removal. Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Public transport accessibility Comments PTAL 3-4 (medium), as identified within Table 2.3. Mitigation required and conclusions Reasonable possibility for workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. The Thames Path and cycle route will require diversion around the site. Paths within the park will also need rerouting. Several on street parking bays need to be removed and access to the church must be maintained. Rail access at the old London Bridge side requires the removal of a raised crossing and junction treatment. A new car park could be provided for permit holders to replace lost bays. Comments As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left Intermediate and CSO Comments As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left

Traffic Management

Diversion of Thames Path and cycle route paths around the site. Several on street parking bays on Paradise Street to be removed. Removal of raised crossing and junction treatment required for rail access at the old London Bridge site. Possible construction of a new car park on site to compensate for loss of permit holder parking. Access to church/park must be maintained.

As for intermediate, see left

As for intermediate, see left

As for intermediate, see left, in addition to: Construction of temporary construction egress. Construction of pedestrian footbridge over Jamaica Road (A200).

As for intermediate, see left, in addition to: Construction of temporary construction egress. Construction of pedestrian footbridge over Jamaica Road (A200).

Appendix 9 – Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate Site considerations Summary: Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate and CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

The site is suitable in transport terms incorporating some of King’s Stairs Gardens. Site accesses onto the end of Paradise Street and some parking bays close to the access may require removal for construction vehicles. Approximately 30-35 on street parking bays would be displaced by the site. A new car park could be provided on site to compensate for the loss which requires further investigation. Pedestrian access to a church and the remainder of the park would need to be maintained. The Thames Path and cycle route require diversion in addition to some footways within the park. Access route to the TLRN (A200) is suitable with no major constraints. Potential rail access at old London Bridge rail site requires the removal of traffic calming (raised table and junction) on St James’ Road and a means of transporting materials to the railway. Potential rail access at East London Line Depot passes over one bridge with no visible constraints and under two rail bridges with height restrictions. River access not essential for intermediate shaft site as excavated material to be transported by road to main site. Reasonable potential exists for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking to be provided on site for workforce. On street parking on surrounding roads unsuitable as restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs.

As for intermediate, see left, except: River access possible via overhead material conveyors. The City Cruises mooring point may need to be relocated.

As for intermediate, see left and in addition: Temporary construction egress with a left out only setup will require construction onto Jamaica Road (A200), enabling a one-way system through the site for construction vehicles. A pedestrian footbridge will be constructed over Jamaica Road (A200) to maintain access to the church via King’s Stairs Gardens.

Appendix 9 – Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Comments Designations, including Archaeological Priority Areas Summary of historical uses The site is within the Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APAS) The site is located close to the Thames Foreshore on the bank previously occupied by terraced housing and a th th church/school in the south area during the 19 and 20 centuries. The terraces were demolished in the 1970’s. A church and graveyard were present to the south of and outside the site. A moated medieval manor house (Rotherhithe Palace) associated with Edward III (NMR 918320) was located approx 80 - 100 m to the west of and outside the shaft site. Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium value with the potential to be directly affected No archaeological receptors are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. No archaeological receptors are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site An archaeological excavation to the west of the site revealed evidence of medieval activity which may continue into the area of the site. Construction impact of potential waterlogged deposits containing archaeological remains may cause dewatering. This potential impact should be considered given the close proximity of the site to the Thames River. 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. Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.

Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected

Appendix 9 – Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Comments Extent of existing disturbance (if known) Terracing in the area of the proposed shaft may have disturbed archaeological remains of medieval or earlier date. Borehole data in the area suggests made ground of up to 7m which could be in part archaeological material. Detailed design proposals, and an outline method statement will be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts, and to inform mitigation proposals. With the currently available information it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Mitigation methods could include: Desk based assessment Production of deposits model Archaeological monitoring of geo technical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation. Summary: The site is suitable as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or main shaft site although due to a lack of previous investigations in the area the nature and extent of archaeological receptors cannot be confidently predicted. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within the site. Peat deposits containing archaeological material 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.

Potential issues

Appendix 9 – Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Designations including Conservation Areas, including trees Comments Listed Buildings Sir William Gaitskell House, railings handrail and lampholder, Paradise Street, Grade II: 30m Corbett’s Wharf, Bermondsey Wall East, Grade II: 145m Archway to the Rotherhithe Tunnel Approach, Rotherhithe Tunnel Approach, Grade II: 90m St Olavs Kirke, Albion Street, Grade II: 120m The Finnish Church (including attached tower), Albion Street, Grade II: 215m Former Engine House in recreation ground, St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 135m Watch House in recreation ground (adjoining 70 St Marychurch Street), St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 165m 70 St Marychurch Street, Appendix 9 – Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left

Mitigation required and conclusions In the case of listed buildings, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens 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.

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Grade II: 170m Grice’s Granary Film Studios, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 245m Grice’s Wharf, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 250m Church Stairs, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 240m Church of St Mary, Rotherhithe, St Marychurch Street, Grade II*: 195m Monument to Prince Lee Boo (approx. 10m west of the west tower of the church of St Mary), St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 170m Hope Sufferance Wharf, St Marychurch Street, Grade II: 155m East India Wharf, Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 106m 105 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 135m 103 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 115m 101 Rotherhithe Street, Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Grade II: 105m 99 Rotherhithe Street, Grade II: 95m Locally Listed Buildings The borough of Southwark of does not maintain a local list. The borough of Tower Hamlets does maintain a local list but there are no locally listed buildings within the borough and within 250m of S54SK. Conservation Areas Wapping Pierhead Conservation Area: 125m St Mary’s Rotherhithe Conservation Area: 50m Registered Historic Parks and Gardens Southwark Park, Grade II: 30m Locally Listed Parks and Gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of S54SK. Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Protected Views S54SK is located 0m 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 protected view (the ‘Greenwich Park’ view as designated by the London View Management Framework) to be directly affected by S54SK as the southwest corner of the site is cut by the protected viewing corridor. Because the ‘Greenwich Park’ protected view cuts the southwest corner of S54SK, the development of the site has the potential to cause a direct impact upon the protected view. Mitigation in the form of a high quality and sensitive design and/or screening may therefore be required to reduce any adverse impacts. In particular, it may be necessary to ensure that any temporary and permanent structures related to construction and operation of S54SK are located as far away from the southwest corner of the site as is possible and practicable in order that the distance between such elements and the protected view is As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions increased and the potential visual intrusiveness of the site minimised. 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. Not Applicable. Not Applicable. Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

There is the potential for 19 listed buildings (one Grade II* and 18 Grade II listed buildings), two conservation areas and one registered historic park and garden to be indirectly affected by the development.

Of the 19 listed buildings within 250m of S54SK, 9 do not fall within the visual envelope of the site (The Finnish Church, Albion Street; the former engine house, St Marychurch Street; the Watch House, St Marychurch Street; 70 St Marychurch Street; Grice’s Granary Film Studios; Church Stairs; Grice’s Wharf; the Church of St Marys, Rotherhithe; and the monument to Prince Lee Boo). Consequently, no impact is expected arising from construction or operation of S54SK upon these seven listed structures and therefore no mitigation will be required. Of the remaining 10 listed buildings (all Grade II listed), all fall within the visual

As for intermediate, see left

As for intermediate, see left

Appendix 9 – Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions envelope of the site. All of these structures therefore have the potential to be indirectly affected by the construction and operation of S54SK. Mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design and/or screening is therefore likely to be required. Both of the conservation areas within 250m of the site (the Wapping Pierhead Conservation Area and the St Mary’s Rotherhithe Conservation Area) lie within the visual envelope of the site. There is consequently the potential for S54SK intermediate to impact upon the setting of or views to and from these designated areas. Mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design and/or screening may therefore be required. Similarly the Southwark Park registered historic park and garden lies within the visual envelope of S54SK and could therefore experience an impact upon its setting as a Appendix 9 – Page 16
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions result of the development. Mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design and/or screening may therefore be required. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Not Applicable. Not Applicable. Not Applicable. Not Applicable. Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Sensitive landscape character areas likely to be affected, including trees and TPOs

Site partially in the Thames Special Policy Area, closely matches definition of Metropolitan Open Land, site within wider designation of Metropolitan Park Deficiency Area and adjacent to Site of Nature Conservation Importance. Sensitive site in King’s Stairs Gardens on the south bank of the River Thames. River Thames to the north with residential properties along the north bank, site surrounded by residential properties, King’s Stairs Gardens surrounded by Jamaica and Brunel Road to the south, Cathay Street and Fulford Street to the west,

Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to replace lost vegetation and relate to the character of the park and the adjacent river frontage. Removal of mature vegetation and the presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings on site is likely to severely impact character of the park and river frontage. This site is, therefore, not suitable.

As for intermediate, see left, except that the jetties and conveyors protruding into the River would result in a further adverse impact on the character of the River.

As for intermediate, see left

Appendix 9 – Page 17
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments residential properties to the east. Construction site is constrained by mature trees and vegetation. The removal of mature vegetation in the park would increase openness of site. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would potentially result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the park and the river frontage and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would potentially result in permanent, adverse direct impacts on the character of the park, the River and its frontage. Potential views likely to be affected Site partially falls in the ‘Strategic View wider consultation area’. Open views from the River, from within the park, and overlooking residences During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimize visual impact. The excavated material could be used as a bund for As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 18
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments around the park and on the north bank of the River. Partially interrupted views from other residences along the north bank of the River. During construction, view of cranes from the surrounding properties and Tower Bridge. Permanent elements visible from residences along Cathay Street, King’s Stairs Close, Elephant Lane and St Peter’s Church on site. Mitigation required and conclusions screening, especially along the south, east, and west. Design of top structure, vent column, and electrical kiosk to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant. Integrated landscape scheme to aid visual impact and minimize visual impact. Removal of mature vegetation would be visually significant, therefore, adequate new planting would be important to protect visual amenity. This site is less suitable since the ventilation column could interfere with the Strategic View and the permanent plant could adversely impact on views from surrounding properties. Any permanent structures would need to be of a high quality design, sensitively located and/or screened in order that any physical and visual impacts upon the ‘Greenwich Park’ protected view, two conservation areas, As for the intermediate, see left; Permanent structures at the site also have the potential to impact upon the character of the park within which the sits is located, the River and its frontage, particularly through As for the intermediate, see left In order to mitigate impacts upon the local townscape character and the character of the River and its frontage, the scheme design will require careful consideration Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

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 one protected view and an indirect impact upon two conservation areas, ten Grade II listed buildings and one registered historic park

Appendix 9 – Page 19
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments and garden. The design and location of any permanent structures within the site will need to be given careful consideration and some screening during construction and operation may be required. Mitigation required and conclusions one registered historic park and garden and ten Grade II listed buildings are minimised in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. In respect of the protected view which passes through the southwest corner of S54SK, mitigation through design may need to include consideration of the location of any temporary and permanent structures or features associated with construction and operation of the site, as far away from the protected view as is possible and practicable within the site boundary. This would increase the distance between such features and the protected view and would help to minimise the visual intrusiveness of the development. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening in order that potential direct and indirect impacts of the development upon one Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments the removal of mature vegetation. Mitigation required and conclusions and landscaping and planting will be required.

Potential issues

Construction and operation of the development could result in a direct impact upon one protected view and an indirect impact upon two conservation areas, one registered historic park and

As for intermediate, see left

As for intermediate, see left

Appendix 9 – Page 20
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments garden and ten Grade II buildings. The impact of the scheme upon the townscape character, including existing trees at the site, will also need to be carefully considered. However, there is the potential to mitigate against any adverse impacts through a high quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. Mitigation required and conclusions protected view, two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten Grade II listed buildings. Particular attention may need to be paid to the location of constructional and operational features within the site in order to mitigate against potential impacts upon the protected view which passes through the southwest corner of S54SK. In terms of built heritage the site is likely to be suitable as a main site or intermediate with CSO, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The details are as for the intermediate, see left. In terms of townscape and landscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as a main site or intermediate with CSO. The details are as for the intermediate, see left. The main and intermediate with CSO shaft sites have the potential to result in a higher magnitude of impact on landscape character and receptors than the intermediate option, due to the increased size of the site especially during construction. Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Summary:

In terms of built heritage the site is likely to be suitable as an intermediate site, as impacts to built heritage receptors identified at this stage are limited. The site may potentially give rise to indirect impacts adverse upon two conservation areas, one registered historic park and garden and ten listed buildings. It is likely that these impacts could be mitigated through a carefully considered scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. In terms of townscape impacts, the site is likely to be less suitable as an intermediate site. The site has the potential to give rise to direct adverse impacts upon a protected view, the character of the park, a public open space, the river frontage and local views (especially during construction which would involve the removal of mature vegetation). Permanent elements would potentially result in adverse direct impacts on the character of the park. Adverse impacts could be partially minimised through a carefully considered scheme design (including sensitive positioning of temporary and permanent Appendix 9 – Page 21

100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

structures away from the riverfront, and the retention of existing trees where possible) and/or screening and landscaping. Such mitigation could allow the site to be progressed further, but more detailed assessment of likely impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be required, particularly with regards to the ‘Greenwich Park’ protected view which passes through the southwest corner of the site.

Appendix 9 – Page 22
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments 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 Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (7m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet sand (25m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric Level in Chalk Aquifer: ~ -21mAOD (~25 mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater Monitoring Location EA Hydrometry Sites: TQ37-268 – 1.52km southeast of the site (water levels to Nov 2007) TQ37-276 – 353m northeast of the site (water levels to March 2009) TQ37-7E – 1.08km southwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) Watercourses Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft will be constructed to an invert level of approximately 52.14mbgl therefore the shaft will be founded in the Chalk. Piezometric head in Chalk will be approximately 27.14m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design. Note: Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum.

SPZs and groundwater users

SPZ Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA EA Licensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details 11 licensed abstraction borehole within 2 km radius
Licence Numbers: 1. 28/39/39/0002 (1 borehole)

A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the 400 days travel times of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100 mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follow;
1. 150 m 2. 85 m

Appendix 9 – Page 23
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments
2. 28/39/39/0066 (1 borehole) 3. 28/39/42/0048 (3 borehole) 4. 28/39/42/0062 (4 borehole) 5. 28/39/42/0073 (2 borehole) Locations: 1. 1.67 km northwest of the site 2. 2.0 km northwest of the site 3. 794 m southeast of the site 4. 1.5 km northwest of the site 5. 1.17 km southeast of the site Operator: 1. Mars Pension Trustees Limited 2. DB6 Limited 3. London Borough Of Southwark 4. London Bridge Development Limited 5. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted Aquifer Unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk 4. Chalk 5.Chalk Abstraction Purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public services (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 2. Industrial, commercial and public services (drinking, cooking, sanitary, 3. 258 m 4. 581m 5. 203 m

Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions

The shaft is not located within any of these catchment areas.

Appendix 9 – Page 24
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments
washing) 3. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/public services- make-up or top up water0 4. Industrial, commercial and public services (public administration-nonevaporative cooling 5. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printing- process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing Abstraction Quantity (annual): 1. 28,185 m3 2. 9,092 m3 3. 83,804 m3 4. 424,600 m3 5. 52,000 m3

Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions

Unlicensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Tower Hamlet Council Boundary No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Southwark Council Boundary Borehole locations and depths There are 12 historical records of water wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 10.06 – 215.95m Potential impacts on surface water features The site is located adjacent to the River Thames. The site is behind flood defences so the pollution risk is through drainage to the Thames. Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines – PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23. Not applicable

Appendix 9 – Page 25
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality) An impact on groundwater at depth is likely since the intermediate shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (major 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 diaphragm wall or caissons. Mitigation unlikely to be required as construction of the intermediate shaft will not take place within the 400 day capture zone of licensed abstractions. The intermediate shaft to be excavated in Chalk below the piezometric head, therefore dewatering will be required during construction. Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer. Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions See below (likely types of mitigation measures that will be required)

Likely types of mitigation measures that will be required Potential issues

Not applicable

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.

Summary:

The site is suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or as a main shaft site as although construction would take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within 400 day capture zones of licensed abstractions. No long term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27.1m 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 limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer is anticipated due to diaphragm wall or caissons. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution although standard mitigation would however be required.

Appendix 9 – Page 26
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate Site considerations Statutory designations Non-statutory designated wildlife sites Comments Lavender Pond LNR lies within 2km River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI lies adjacent to the development site Southwark Park BGII site lies adjacent to the site, separated by the A200 Mitigation required and conclusions No likely impacts Any constructions affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. No direct impacts likely. BAP priority habitats Much of the site comprises London BAP priority habitat ‘Parks, Squares and Amenity Grassland’ The Tidal Thames is a London BAP habitat. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision, but this is likely to be straightforward. Any construction affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. If bat roosts were found to be present, mitigation would be required, possibly including off-site provision. Careful placement of lighting to minimise illumination of Appendix 9 – Page 27
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments As for intermediate, see left The proposed jetties will lead to direct impacts to the SMI including landtake Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left Mitigation for the jetties will be required. In the worst case the provision of compensatory habitat may be required.

The proposed jetties will lead to direct impacts to the Tidal Thames BAP habitat.

Mitigation for the jetties will be required. In the worst case the provision of compensatory habitat may be required.

Protected or otherwise notable species within the Study Area

Trees within the parkland may have the potential to support roosting bats. Pipistrelles have been recorded in adjacent Southwark Park.

As for intermediate, see left

As for intermediate, see left

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate Site considerations Comments Notable breeding birds may be present – spotted flycatcher is known to breed in the adjacent Southwark Park. The parkland may have value for locally uncommon invertebrates. No direct impacts on aquatic ecology receptors, although any piling close to the river bank could result in impacts on fish in the River Thames. Mitigation required and conclusions surrounding habitat will be required. If notable breeding birds are present, mitigation would be required, including sensitive working practices, and possibly off-site provision. Mitigation will be possible. Any constructions affecting the Thames (such as an overflow culvert) will require extensive restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case the provision of compensatory habitat may be required. No other issues. The cumulative impact of all jetties proposed within the scheme may increase flow velocity in the river with effects on juvenile migratory fish Consideration needs to be given to the cumulative impacts on hydrodynamics with reference to known critical flow velocities for fish. Not considered significant at a site specific level. Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Potential issues

No other issues.

Appendix 9 – Page 28
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate Site considerations Summary: Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Main/Intermediate with CSO Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site as it appears that habitats present could act as an extension of an adjacent BGII site for nature conservation (Southwark Park). The area could therefore support roosting bats, birds of conservation concern and locally notable invertebrates, which in turn may place habitat compensation requirements on the project. A survey will be required to determine the presence of such species and to determine risks.

This site is less suitable for use as a main shaft or intermediate with CSO shaft site for the reasons given left and due to the requirement for temporary and permanent landtake from the foreshore and river (a Site of Metropolitan Importance). This may require sensitive working practices and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working, and some compensatory provision. There could also be potential cumulative effects with other jetty structures in the river and careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required.

Appendix 9 – Page 29
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Flood Risk Assessment Site considerations Comments Flood Risk Zone Flood Zone 3 – up to 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 space on site for SuDS. The superficial geology is such that the site may not be suitable for infiltration SuDS. As such an investigation would be required to investigate No other issues. No other issues. Not applicable. Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Mitigation required and conclusions A FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site.

Potential issues Summary:

The site is suitable for use as an intermediate, main or intermediate with CSO shaft site because there is potentially space for Attenuation SuDS although an investigation is required to determine the suitability for infiltration SuDS. In addition, although the site is within flood zone 3 (greater than 1 in 200 year risk of flooding) the site is protected to the 1 in 1000 year flood level.

Appendix 9 – Page 30
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Air Quality Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations AQMA Comments The air quality objectives for NO2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties along Jamaica Road (A200) and roads on the route to the A200. There are residential properties at the access point to the site, on Paradise Street. There are residential properties within 20m from the site at Cathay House. Existing traffic issues The main traffic issue in this are is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A200 and A101 corridors. See above. There is no data at likely access to A200 and the nearest existing data indicates AQLV exceeded at present. 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. As for intermediate, see left As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. There are relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route the construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works. Comments As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left

Sensitive Receptors

As for intermediate but there are also residential properties within 20m from the site on Elephant Lane.

As for intermediate, see left

Existing sources of significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring

See above. As for intermediate, see left

See above. As for intermediate, see left

Appendix 9 – Page 31
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Air Quality Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations Potential issues Comments The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is moderate. Summary: Mitigation required and conclusions 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. Comments As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions As for intermediate, see left

The site is less suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or main shaft site due to the proximity of residential properties since there is potential for emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. Dust impacts can be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is also potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.

Appendix 9 – Page 32
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Comments Information from Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of up to 68 dB LAeq and night-time noise levels of up to 60 dB LAeq in the southern area of the proposed site closest to the A200 (Jamaica Road). Noise levels drop significantly with increased distance from the A200. 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 There are sensitive receptors located to the west, south and east of the proposed site. To the immediate west are 4 storey residential properties in Cathay House. To the east, 3 storey residential properties are located on King’s Stairs Close, and Elephant Lane. n/a As for the intermediate; the 4 storey residential properties in Cathay House are located approximately 5m from the temporary working area and 30m from the shaft location. The 3 storey residential properties on King’s Stairs Close, and Elephant Lane are located approximately 8m from the temporary working area and 35m from the shaft Appendix 9 – Page 33
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Main Comments As for intermediate, see left Mitigation required and conclusions n/a

Mitigation required and Conclusions n/a

n/a

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations Comments Within the south west corner of the site boundary is another (private) church and residential dwelling. The site is located within King’s Stairs Gardens itself, which includes St Peter’s and the Guardian Angels RC Church. Existing traffic issues Road traffic noise from the A200 (Jamaica Road) to the south is likely to dominate the noise climate in the area. Road traffic noise from the A200 (Jamaica Road) to the south is likely to dominate the noise climate in the area. There are no railway lines or significant industrial sources apparent in the surrounding area. Potential issues Construction: The construction period is estimated at 4 to 5 years and working hours will be 24 hours per day Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Considered positioning of noisy equipment and construction activities to maximise distance between Construction: The construction period is estimated at 6 to 7 years and working hours will be 24 hours per day Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts upon As for intermediate, see left n/a As for intermediate, see left n/a Mitigation required and Conclusions location. Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Existing sources of significant noise emissions

n/a

As for intermediate, see left

n/a

Appendix 9 – Page 34
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations Comments noise impacts upon the sensitive receptors surrounding the site. HGV movements have the potential to result in adverse noise impacts at properties facing Paradise Road or Cathay Street. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Careful positioning of the noisiest plant i.e. central areas of the site will assist in reducing the potential noise impact. 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 45 metres. Vibration levels are therefore unlikely to result in annoyance or minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a Mitigation required and Conclusions source and receiver positions. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Restriction of some construction activities to daytime working. Comments the sensitive receptors surrounding the site. HGV and barge movements have the potential to result in adverse noise impacts at properties facing Paradise Road and Cathay Street, and King’s Stairs Close. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Careful positioning of the noisiest plant i.e. central areas of the site will assist in reducing the potential noise impact. 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 30 metres. Vibration levels are therefore unlikely to result in annoyance or minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case by case Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 – Page 35
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate/Intermediate with CSO Site considerations Comments case by case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and associated permanent structures should result in adverse noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Summary: Mitigation required and Conclusions Comments basis at particularly sensitive locations. Operation: As for intermediate, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions

This site is considered less suitable for use as an intermediate, intermediate with CSO or main shaft site due to the proximity of residential receptors to the west, south and east. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers will be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. 24 hour working has particular potential to adversely impact upon the closest receptors, and it may be necessary to restrict some of the noisier activities to daytime only. Access of HGVs to the site is also likely to result in disturbance, as they approach through residential streets.

For a main shaft and the intermediate with CSO, the importing and exporting of material by barge would also result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near to the barge jetties.

Appendix 9 – Page 36
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site considerations Site location Current site use Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site) Grid Reference: 534946, 179676 The site is located within King’s Stairs Gardens, which includes St Peter’s and the Guardian Angels RC Church. The park appears well used with evidence of recent investment in playground equipment. The park is a landscaped public park with grassy mounds. No visible evidence. Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO

To the immediate west are 4 storey residential properties in Cathay House. To the east, 3 storey residential properties are located on King’s Stairs Close, and Elephant Lane. Within the south west corner of the site boundary is another (private) church and residential dwelling. The River Thames lies to the north.

Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata
1

Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (7m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet sand (25m) 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

Appendix 9 – Page 37
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site considerations 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) Note: 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. Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA River Thames (adjacent to site, north) Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO

Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site Historical potentially contaminating activities Onsite Residential housing occupying most of site, timber yard (southeast), granary (northeast), 1862-1895 Residential housing occupies all of site, 1896-1898 Residential housing occupies most of site. Also present are two churches, a school in the southeast and park buildings in the north, 1909-1920 Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling), (north extent of site), 1920-1995 Historic building plans list underground fuel tanks (4No., east), 1942-1960 Historic building plans list gas use, (east), 1942-45 Engineering works (south) and a nursery (northwest) also present, 1950-1968 Areas cleared due to enemy action, (3 areas, northeast and east), 1957-1966 Historic plans list above ground fuel tank, (northeast), 1966 Residential housing only occupies the southern site border and the site of the nursery, 1967-1978 Electricity substations, (2 No., northwest), 1968-1969 Tanks – contents unknown, (2 No., northeast), 1968-1969 The majority of the site is soft landscaping, church buildings (southeast) and residential flats (northwest) remain, 1981present

Appendix 9 – Page 38
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site considerations Offsite Historical building plans list numerous fuel related tanks in eastern direction, (closest located 2m east), 1942-1960 Tanks – contents unknown, (closest located 10m west), 1967 Flour Mill, (15m east), 1950-1978 Timber yard, (25m west), 1862-1895 Numerous electricity substations in eastern direction, (closest located 30m east), 1966 Granary, (35m west), 1862-1895 Timber yard, (90m west), 1862-1895 Timber yard, (160m east), 1862-1898 Hospital, (210m south), 1898-1949 Foundry, (250m southeast), 1882-1896 Pollution incidents to controlled waters Two incidents: Miscellaneous - unknown, minor incident, (232m north),within River Thames Miscellaneous - unknown, minor incident, (245 north), Oliver’s Wharf Landfill sites Other waste sites Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/Depots Contemporary trade directory entries None None None None Ten Power Transmission Services and Equipment, active (40m east) Millinery manufactures and wholesalers, inactive (100m east) Ceramic manufacturers, supplies 7 services, inactive (100m east) Furniture manufacturers, inactive (100m east) Fax machines, active (110m southeast) Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO

Appendix 9 – Page 39
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site considerations Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO Office furniture and equipment, active (110m southeast) Office furniture and equipment, inactive (120m southeast) Cleaning services – commercial, inactive (120m southeast) Ironing and Laundry Services, active (120m west) Launderette, inactive (220m southwest) Lists the relevant contemporary trade entries within a 250m radius of the site. Both active and inactive trade entries are listed. 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 2) Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling) 3) Electricity substations 4) Gas use 5) Fuel tanks 6) Engineering works Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site 1) Fuel tanks 2) Tanks – contents unknown 3)Timber yard 4) Electricity substation Potential contamination pathways to site (Conceptual Site Model)
3

Distance and direction to site 1) Onsite and directly adjacent to site 2) Onsite and directly adjacent to site 3) Onsite 4) Onsite 5) Onsite 6) Onsite

Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, TPH, PAHs 3) PCBs 4) Metals, TPH, PAHs 5) TPH, Metals, PAHs 6) Metals, TPH, PAHs

1) 2m east 2) 10m west 3) 25m west 4) 30m east

3) TPH, Metals, PAHs 2) TPH, Metals, PAHs, Solvents 3) Metals, TPH, PAHs 4) PCBs

Source 1: A1, A2, A3, B4, C5 Source 2: D6, E1, F7 Note: Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathway-receptors

Appendix 9 – Page 40
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S54SK – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site considerations Contamination category Summary: Category 1 – Assessed as Low Risk The site is considered suitable for use as an intermediate shaft, intermediate with CSO or main shaft site based on the low potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. The site is currently landscaped for use as playground/gardens and historically it has not been developed for industrial use. The proposed shaft is not located near to any of the potential contaminants identified. There is a potential for unexploded ordnance to be present on site as historical information indicates that nearby areas have been cleared of ordnance. It would therefore be prudent for a UXO survey (or equivalent) to be conducted at the site if not done so already. 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-pathway-receptors Intermediate/Main/Intermediate with CSO

Appendix 9 – Page 41
100-RG-PNC-S54SK-900001.doc

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

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful