Autumn 2011

Site suitability report S036T
Limehouse Basin

Please note: Further details are provided in the Final Report on Site Selection Process (doc ref: 7.05) that can be found on the Thames Tideway Tunnel section of the Planning Inspectorate’s web site.

110-RG-PNC-S036T-000605 | Autumn 2011

Site suitability report S036T
Limehouse Basin

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

Addendum
Following phase one consultation, a ‘back-check’ process was carried out for all the main tunnel sites in main tunnel Zone S7 Limehouse. As part of this process, this site suitability report was reviewed by all disciplines (engineering, planning, environment, community and property), but the text was not updated. The overall conclusions reached in Section 10 did not change in any significant manner. It should be noted that the conclusions in Section 10, along with comments below, are drawn from each discipline’s assessment, and are designed to inform the workshop where a final conclusion is reached on whether the site can be taken forward as a potential preferred site, subject to its fit with possible tunnelling drive strategies for the main tunnel. General observations by disciplines are as follows: • Engineering – UK Power networks (formerly EDF) cable tunnel is no longer a constraint, but this change would not alter the conclusions for either site option, so both remain unchanged as not suitable. Planning – It was noted that some of Tower Hamlets’ UDP policies have now been superseded by its Core Strategy, some Interim Planning Guidance policies are also relevant and there are a few new minor planning applications. Also, an EIA screening opinion for additional moorings for water taxis has been issued, and a planning application for change of use of leisure moorings to residential moorings has been approved. Therefore, both site options remain unchanged as not suitable. Environment – There are no significant factors that would alter the conclusions for either site option, so both remain unchanged as suitable. Community – There are no significant factors that would alter the conclusions for either site option, so both remain unchanged as less suitable. Property – There are no significant factors that would alter the conclusions for either site option, so both remain unchanged as less suitable.

• • •

In terms of the next steps in the site selection process, it should be noted at this point in the process that the above conclusions do not represent an overall recommendation on the suitability of a site. The disciplines discuss their site suitability report conclusions at optioneering workshops, along with main tunnel drive strategy options. Therefore, a preferred site can only be identified through a series of main tunnel option comparisons. Also, there was an opportunity to consider this site as a possible reception/intermediate site to connect the North East Storm Relief CSO (CS29X) to the main tunnel. The outcome of this two-step process (sites and then drive option comparisons) is set out in the Phase two scheme development report. In this case, the site remains shortlisted as both a main tunnel and reception/ intermediate site. Site Suitability Report S036T, Limehouse Basin (document number 100-RG-PNCS036T-90001), Spring 2010, is attached as Appendix A. The introduction in the attachment has been superseded by the following section and this should be read in preference.

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

i

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

ii

Site suitability report S036T

1 1.1
1.1.1

Introduction Purpose and structure of the report
The Site selection methodology paper (May 2009 and revised August 2011) a outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of main tunnel 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. Whether a consideration is relevant to the assessment of a site will depend on available information and professional judgement. 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 and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to this stage of assessment. The Site selection background technical paper provides information on the requirements for different types of sites, 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, which relates to main tunnel and connection tunnel options. 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). The outcomes are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.

1.1.2

1.1.3

1.1.4

1.2
1.2.1

Background
The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site selection methodology paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: • • Part 1A – Creation of the long list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites Part 1B – Creation of a short list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites – an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites – assessment against a list of more detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.

a

The amendments made in August 2011 do not change the site selection methodology process. The amendments only related to the introduction of a second phase of consultation (paragraphs 2.3.13-2.4.15) and minor factual updates.

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

Page 1

Site suitability report S036T 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 main tunnel (and CSO) sites – site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.

1.2.3

The Site selection methodology paper also contains a provision for a back-check process in paragraph 2.5.6 that states: “If any sites for any of the main tunnel sites or intermediate sites (or CSO site) are eliminated for any reason, if there are significant changes of circumstances in relation to existing sites or combinations of sites, if new or replacement sites are required or found or if the engineering design develops in unexpected ways then a targeted repeat of stages 1-3 will need to be undertaken in order to fill in any site gaps.”

1.3
1.3.1

Consultation
Thames Water’s approach to engagement and consultation for the Thames Tunnel project is outlined in the Statement of Community Consultation and the accompanying Community Consultation Strategy. Thames Water has engaged regularly with all potentially affected London local authorities, other stakeholders and interested parties on sites and the project. Phase one consultation has been completed for all the preferred and shortlisted sites along with the three main tunnel route options. The analysis of the consultation responses is set out in the Report on phase one consultation and Interim engagement report. Any relevant site comments were considered at the post phase one consultation optioneering workshops. The outcomes of these workshops are reported in the Phase two scheme development report. After the workshops, engagement on sites has continued with key stakeholders, and the engineering design for sites has also continued in parallel. In autumn 2011, phase two consultation will provide another opportunity for people to comment on sites.

1.3.2

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

Page 2

Site suitability report S036T – Appendix A

Appendix A – Site suitability report S036T Spring 2010

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

Page 3

Site suitability report S036T – Appendix A

Site suitability report S036T Limehouse Basin

Page 4

100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001 | Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report S036T
Limehouse Basin

THAMES TUNNEL

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT S036T
LIST OF CONTENTS

Page Number 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 Purpose and structure of the report Background Consultation 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 7 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 12

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 9.3 Introduction Crown Land and Special Land comments Land to be acquired

100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10

Property valuation comments Disturbance compensation comments Offsite statutory compensation comments Site acquisition cost assessment

12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 15

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-S036T-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-S036T-900001.doc

100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

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 are included in this report.

1.3.2

Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

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 S036T, otherwise known as Limehouse Basin, is located north of Narrow Street, in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. Limehouse Basin hosts a well used marina with three large pontoons. The basin is accessed from the south via the River Thames, through a swing bridge and lock. The basin is surrounded on all sides by modern, high-rise flats. The flats are within a series of blocks ranging from three to twelve storeys in height, with habitable rooms and balconies overlooking the basin. In addition, there is the Cruising Association Members Club to the east and a boat keepers’ office located to the south of the site. The DLR line runs along the northern boundary of the site behind apartments within Basin Approach. The site is covered by various planning and environment designations in the Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan (1998), including the Narrow Street Conservation Area. All the mapped designations are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with an aerial photograph of the site, are attached as Appendix 4. There is no direct road access to the site. The site can be reached via a car park off Horseferry Road. The nearest London Underground/Docklands Light Railway station (Limehouse) is very close to the site. There are no existing industrial jetty/wharfage facilities, although there are jetties for pleasure boats, accessed through a swing bridge and lock. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5. Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: Limehouse Marina Residential buildings in close proximity surrounding the site Limehouse Link road tunnel passing through the northern edge of the site DLR and Network Rail tracks through the outside northern part of the site Proposed Crossrail Line 1 through the outside northern part of the site Limehouse Basin swing bridge at the southern edge of the site River walls around the site One well potentially within the site.

2.1.4

2.1.5 2.1.6

2.1.7

2.1.8

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. 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 Chalk.

2.1.9

2.1.10 It is understood that EDF is planning to build a cable tunnel which would run through the southern part of this site (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 S036T is being considered as an intermediate shaft site.

Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

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 an intermediate site 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. Photographs of typical activities associated with the shaft construction phase are provided in Appendix 7. Potential above ground construction features (dependent on type of shaft) 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.

3.1.4

3.1.5

Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Construction phase data Activity Length of construction period Likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) Working days Primary means of transporting excavated material away from site Primary means of transporting materials to site
*There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for this site.

Intermediate shaft site 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Road* Road*

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 a valve chamber and a 10m wide overflow culvert . 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
b

4.1.3 4.1.4

a

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.

Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

structure with openings. The top structure is to provide access and egress into the main shaft and flap valve chamber. 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. 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. Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) frequency of visits No of traffic movements 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.
c

4.1.6 4.1.7

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. ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT Access This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2. Road

5 5.1 5.1.1

5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4

There is no access road to the site. The small car park at the corner of Horseferry Road could be used as an access point to the site. It is envisaged that one of the neighbouring three-storey buildings adjacent to the car park may require demolition to create sufficient access for construction and operation vehicles. The site is in close proximity to the Transport for London Road Network A13, but the route passes through narrow roads and under rail bridges with height restrictions. Rail

5.1.5

DLR and Network Rail tracks pass adjacent to the site, but there is no usable rail network local to this site. The nearest London Underground/Docklands Light Railway station (Limehouse) is very close to the site.

b

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. c 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-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

River 5.1.6 It is likely that material movement for an intermediate shaft suite would be by road. However, as the site is within an active marina, there may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport, although it is noted that this would require access through the existing swing bridge and lock and this could impinge significantly on day to day marina operations. In addition, movements of the barges within the marina are likely to be difficult in the space available and with the large numbers of vessels moored there. Construction works considerations The site is based within the Limehouse Marina, which is currently in use. The construction of the shaft at this site would require extensive enabling works and reinstatement before and after construction. The enabling works would entail construction of a temporary cofferdam to provide an appropriate working area. For the permanent works, part of the marina dock should be removed to allow the sinking of the shaft. The site is surrounded by water, and significant protection measures for personnel and machinery would be required. Available data on third-party assets show that the main assets of concern are the Limehouse Marina, adjacent residential buildings, Limehouse Link road tunnel, the proposed EDF cable tunnel and the river wall around the site. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. It is assumed that the Environment Agency would not allow discharges direct into the basin and the overflow culvert may have to be taken to the river. It is unlikely that a 10m wide overflow culvert could be routed from the proposed shaft location to the river without running under the adjacent buildings as a siphon (which is not desirable) or requiring some building demolition. There are constraints on this site and a requirement for extensive enabling works, but it is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme. Permanent works considerations The top structure would be raised to approximately 3m above ground (shore) level. The top structure would also be in the marina, although this is not considered to be a particular issue in respect of movements of the vessels using the marina. Health and safety Construction works would take place adjacent to and over water. Operational phase access would involve working adjacent to and over water. There are no other 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 5.2.1

5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 5.2.5

5.2.6

5.2.7

5.3 5.3.1

5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3 6 6.1 6.1.1

Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

6.2 6.2.1

Planning applications and permissions An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to the site. Planning context The current planning policy context for the site is provided from the saved policies in the Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan, adopted in 1998. The planning designations and policies that are applicable to the site are detailed below. The whole site is designated as a Water Protection Area and a Flood Protection Area. According to Policy DEV46, Riverside, Canalside, Docks and other Water Areas, waterways and water bodies will be protected and promoted for their contribution to the character of the borough, and as important open areas within the borough, by a number of ways of protecting and enhancing the waterway environment. According to Policy U2, Development in Areas at Risk from Flooding, the council will consult with the Environment Agency and Thames Water Utilities on all applications for new development or the intensification of existing uses in the areas shown on the proposals map as being at risk from flooding. Under Policy U3, Flood Protection Measures, appropriate flood protection will normally be required where the redevelopment of existing developed areas is permitted in areas at risk from flooding. The flood protection requirements for such redevelopments will be defined by the council in consultation with the Environment Agency. The site is wholly within the Narrow Street Conservation Area. According to Policy DEV25, New Development in Conservation Areas, in considering applications for development in conservation areas, the council will pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of those areas. Policy DEV2 also sets requirements to protect the amenity of residential occupiers, including protection from the effects of development upon pollution, loss of privacy, sunlight or daylight. The site is partly located within an area of Archaeological Importance or Potential.

6.3 6.3.1

6.3.2 6.3.3

6.3.4

6.3.5

6.3.6 6.3.7

6.3.8

6.3.9

6.3.10 Under Policy DEV 45, Archaeology and Ancient Monuments, proposals involving ground works in areas of archaeological importance or potential shown on the proposals map, or concerning individual sites notified to the council by English Heritage of the Museum of London, will be subject to a number of requirements, including archaeological statements and field evaluations, where appropriate. 6.3.11 The site is adjacent to Ropemakers Fields, located at Northey Street, designated as a Public Open Space. 6.3.12 According to Policy OS1, Reservation of sites, those sites shown on the proposals map, and included in Table 3 and the schedules of proposals will be safeguarded as public open space. Within these areas, other uses will not be permitted. 6.3.13 Green chains run across the site adjacent to the intermediate shaft working area. 6.3.14 According to Policy DEV 63, Designation of Green Chains, the council designates the sites shown on the proposals map and the schedules as Green Chains. Within these areas, improved access including links with adjacent pedestrian routes, enhancement of their recreation potential, and the development of their value as natural habitats for wild animal and plant life, will be sought. 6.3.15 Under Policy DEV66, Green Chains and Walkways, the council will specify and develop a network of pedestrian footpaths, based on the green chains and the strategic riverside walkway in conjunction with adjoining boroughs and the London Planning Advisory Committee.

Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

6.3.16 The site is in close proximity to the River Thames, a designated Site of Nature Conservation Importance. 6.3.17 Under Policy DEV 62, Nature Conservation and Ecology, where development proposals would destroy or adversely affect the ecology or special interest of sites of nature conservation importance (see the proposals map and Table 1), the council will seek mitigation measures to be taken, or comparable replacement if the loss is unavoidable. The creation and enhancement of nature conservation features and provision of public access will be sought in new developments where appropriate. 6.3.18 The site is also in close proximity to residential properties. 6.3.19 Policy DEV2, Environmental Requirements, also sets requirements to protect the amenity of residential occupiers, including protection from the effects of development upon pollution, loss of privacy, sunlight or daylight. 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 Tower Hamlets 6.4.2 The council stated that there are high levels of residential accommodation on the water with long-term moorings. The site was used as a construction site for the Limehouse Link road and it is located where Regents Canal connects to the River Thames. English Heritage 6.4.3 English Heritage stated that the site is within the dock entrance and the archaeology on the site would be difficult to mitigate. Environment Agency 6.4.4 The Environment Agency stated that there are options for moving materials, etc, by canal and river, and that British Waterways are looking to increase freight on the canal. It is the case, therefore, that a lot of material could potentially be sent as freight via the canal network, and there is room to stockpile barges. However, there are limits on the size of barges, and the canal route is also used for construction associated with the Olympics. The Environment Agency advised that the site is potentially constrained by the tidal window, but the depth of the river should be sufficient as it was dredged in 1999/2000. There is also the possibility of utilities impacts associated with the site. There will be a need to consider how the route will look with an overflow. The Environment Agency queried the opportunity to flush out the basin area. It will not be possible to overflow into the enclosed water due to the potential for the water quality to deteriorate and twice a day it will be hydraulically locked. Residential moorings and properties are located close to the site and flood defences run around the back of the site. The Rotherhithe tunnel portal is also adjacent to the site. Port of London Authority 6.4.6 The Port of London Authority advised that the site is under the jurisdiction of British Waterways. Transport for London 6.4.7 The network assurance team would seek confirmation of construction traffic, construction traffic routes and possible traffic management requirements. The site is located close to highly sensitive TLRN traffic routes, ie, The Highway and A13DBFO, which is also an Olympic Route Network (ORN) venue route. The area is an extremely busy part of the network. Works would need to be co-ordinated as early as possible with other planned works/events on the network in the area. Residential properties are in close proximity to

6.4.5

Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

the site and noise considerations may lead to working hour restrictions by the local authority. The site is located close to the Rotherhithe Tunnel. 6.4.8 The borough co-ordination team stated that the site appears to be adjacent to the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) infrastructure and in land adjacent to Limehouse Basin. Given the nature of the land, the site is of particular concern for DLR. Furthermore, DLR has recently extended Limehouse Station eastwards towards the proposed shaft site. Other statutory consultees British Waterways 6.4.9 British Waterways advised that there are limitations associated with the use of the site, which include residents located adjacent to the site, the lock is narrow, and there are a marina and boats (leisure and house boats) on the basin. The marina was developed in order to create a 'sense of place'. The development was placed around the basin as part of the regeneration in the early 1990s. British Waterways stated that, technically, it is possible to use the route but it would be difficult to block off the Limehouse Basin because two canals flow into it. Greater London Authority 6.4.10 The Greater London Authority advised that the site is heavily used by boats and includes residential moorings in the basin. 6.5 6.5.1 Planning comments A number of planning and environmental designations and policies are applicable both on and adjacent to the site from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets UDP. These designations and polices have been identified and described in Section 6.3. Of these, those relating to the protection of waterways, conservation and heritage are the most likely to be impacted upon. Proximity to residential properties is also an important consideration at this site. Use of the site would involve at least partial drainage of the basin, which would be in direct conflict with the aims of policies DEV46, Water Protection Areas. Not only is this likely to significantly impact on the character, appearance and openness of the site, but would also result in the substantial loss of a well used marina facility. This policy may require significant mitigation measures or comparable replacement if such a site is lost. The water basin is surrounded primarily by residential properties, the vast majority of which would be located within a five- to ten-metre distance from the working area boundaries of the intermediate shaft site. It is considered that there would be a detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring residential occupiers due to their close proximity to the proposed construction site and the effects are unlikely to be satisfactorily mitigated. This is based on the degree of physical alteration that would have to be made to the basin in order to make it useable for the project, combined with the nature and longevity of the construction works and the orientation and outlook of properties towards the site. Therefore, compliance with Policy DEV2 during the construction phase is considered to be difficult. The current character and appearance of the basin contributes to the setting of the Narrow Street Conservation Area. Use of the site will inevitably have an impact on the existing setting and the degree of impact may be considered unacceptable and unmitigatable. The proposed development would therefore not comply with Policy DEV25. The site is adjacent to an area of public open space, and mitigation against potential noise, dust and traffic impacts may be required. The site is also adjacent to a nature conservation area designation, which covers the entire River Thames. Given the extensive nature of this designation, the purpose of the Thames Tunnel Project to improve the environmental condition of the river, and the siting of the construction works set well back from the protected area, it is unlikely that this designation will be unacceptably impacted upon. A further assessment is made in Section 7.

6.5.2

6.5.3

6.5.4

6.5.5 6.5.6

Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

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 Overall, the site is considered to be suitable as an intermediate shaft site in terms of transport. Access into the site would be possible using an existing access through a private car park, which will require widening. Several on-street parking bays would also require removal and the private parking in the car park would be displaced. Further investigation is required as to whether additional private parking could be provided elsewhere. An alternative access, which would not displace parking, may be able to be taken from Basin Approach directly onto the TLRN (A13), which passes underneath a rail bridge, with no visible restrictions. Access route to the TLRN (A13) is possible. Further consideration of the significance of the 15’6” height restricted bridges on the route to the TLRN (A13) and rail access is required. The route to rail at London Bridge contains many constraints, including passing through the congestion zone and over and under many bridges (with height restrictions on the route to the TLRN (A13)). River access, for importing or exporting materials, is not essential for an intermediate shaft site. There is good potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. On-street parking in the vicinity is restricted to a maximum stay of four hours, although limited parking could potentially be provided onsite. Removal of traffic calming would be required along Narrow Street. Archaeology Based on current information, this site is considered to be suitable as an intermediate site from an archaeological perspective. Although there are currently no records of archaeological remains being present, it is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within this 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. Further research is required to clarify the likely importance of the dock structure. Built heritage and townscape The site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site, in terms of impacts on built heritage and landscape receptors, due to the site location within Limehouse Basin, which is situated within the Narrow Street Conservation Area. As such, the proposals are likely to result in a high degree of change to the character of this area and, in turn, unlikely to preserve or enhance the conservation area in accordance with planning policy DEV25 and English Heritage guidance. The site is also likely to result in direct adverse impacts on the character of the site, local views and the visual amenity of the surrounding residences, as well as potential indirect adverse impacts on the character of the River Thames, especially during construction. Water resources – hydrogeology and surface water In terms of hydrogeology, this site is considered to be suitable, although the construction of the intermediate shaft will take place within Chalk (major aquifer). However, 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 30m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design.

7.2 7.2.1

7.2.2

7.2.3

7.3 7.3.1

7.4 7.4.1

7.5 7.5.1

Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

7.5.2

The superficial deposits at the location comprise alluvium, classified as a minor aquifer, which is likely to be the subject of limited impacts on flow due to the use of a diaphragm wall or caissons. In respect of surface water resources, this site is less suitable because the work is undertaken within the Limehouse Basin. There is a direct pathway for pollution to the water within the basin and also to the River Thames. In addition, there are potential contamination issues associated with draining down and refilling the basin during the construction period. Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) In respect of ecology, the site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site. This is due to its location within the Limehouse Basin Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation and the London BAP priority habitat Canals, which may require compensatory provision for temporary and permanent land-take and possibly arduous post-works restoration requirements. Any works affecting the River Thames are likely to require negotiation with the EA, and mitigation. Flood risk This site is less suitable as an intermediate site because it is not feasible to employ SuDS. In addition, the site is located within Flood Zone 3 (greater than one in 100-year risk of flooding). The site is located within the Limehouse Basin and would require specific mitigation, depending on the method of construction. Air quality Giving consideration to air quality issues, the site is less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site. There are residential properties in very close proximity to the site, therefore there is the potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts could be reduced with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours. Noise The site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site, due to the very close proximity to the nearest residential receptors, which is likely to result in adverse noise impacts. The density of housing is also high and therefore construction would impact on a larger number of receptors. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase is anticipated to be high, and is likely to cause an adverse noise impact on the residential occupiers of properties overlooking Horseferry Road and other residential streets. The proposed concrete batching plant is also likely to result in an adverse noise impact on properties at Berglan Court and Medland House. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers would likely be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Land quality

7.5.3

7.6 7.6.1

7.7 7.7.1

7.8 7.8.1

7.9 7.9.1

7.10

7.10.1 The site is considered to be less suitable with respect to land quality, due to the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. While the site is located within a canal basin, therefore facilitating the dilution of contaminants, its former use as cargo dock could have resulted in contamination of the sediments. In addition, there is potential for offsite contaminants to have impacted on the site, specifically from the lead works, coal stores and wharf operations historically undertaken in the near vicinity of the site. 7.10.2 This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper aquifer and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through groundwater transport.

Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

8 8.1 8.1.1

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Socio-economic profile The site is within the Limehouse ward of Tower Hamlets. Statistics from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of Tower Hamlets, London and England as a whole: Lower rate of economically active people that are full-time employees, and a higher proportion of unemployed people A higher proportion having achieved Level 4 or 5 educational qualifications, although also a slightly higher than average proportion of people with no qualifications at all A higher proportion of young people and people aged 20 to 44, and a lower proportion of those aged 45 and over A mixture of ethnic groups, with a significantly lower proportion of white British people and higher proportion of Asian or Asian British people than in the rest of the borough or England.

8.1.2

However, the site, along with its immediate surroundings, is somewhat isolated from neighbouring areas of the ward and consists of a very specific type of residential typology in London – that of private homes clustered around a marina. The ONS statistics, therefore, may not provide an accurate reflection of the immediate local community. Issues and impacts Due to the proposed location of the engineering works, it appears likely that the majority of the marina would be lost, with the focus of works activities towards the western edge of the site. Use of the site is likely to cause the loss of the existing pontoons containing 90 moorings, meaning alternative facilities would have to be found for the boats currently moored in this location. The dense residential development surrounding the basin edge would likely be significantly affected by noise and the visual impact of proposed works. Much of the residential development around the basin has balconies or windows that overlook the site and therefore, use of the site is likely to impact on the view from these homes, which is probably a substantial element of the experience of living here. The marina is also used as a venue for events, for example a summer festival with craft stalls and performances. In addition to the temporary loss of the marina facility, the use of the basin as an intermediate shaft site is likely to disrupt its use for recreation by walkers, joggers and local people. Limehouse Basin is a key point on the south-eastern stretch of the Regent’s Canal, as this is where the canal meets the River Thames. The Regent’s Canal towpath walk is a well-known, urban nature walk in London, with walkers on this route visiting Limehouse Basin as a key destination. The Cruising Association Members Club may also be affected by use of the site, which may have an impact on community cohesion. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Introduction The site under consideration for an intermediate shaft site is the western part of Limehouse Basin, an enclosed body of water surrounded by high density residential areas on all sides. Part of the basin is used as a marina, containing three mooring pontoons providing a number of berths. Crown Land and Special Land comments British Waterways Board and Transport for London hold freehold interests in the site. 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

8.2 8.2.1

8.2.2 8.2.3

8.2.4

8.2.5

9 9.1 9.1.1

9.2 9.2.1

Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

statutory undertaker. As Thames Water is a statutory undertaker, Section 17 will not apply to London Tideway Tunnels. 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. Contact should be made with the owners as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. 9.3 9.3.1 Land to be acquired The compensation assessment assumes that the majority of the worksite will be acquired temporarily via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above. Part or whole of the most westerly marina mooring pontoon will be permanently acquired to accommodate the permanent operational plant within a structure measuring approximately 40m by 40m. Rights of way will be needed over an area of land between Horseferry Road and the basin. This land is currently used as a residential car park to neighbouring flats. The right of way will be needed during both the works phase and the operational phase. Rights will also be required to construct and operate an overflow culvert from the shaft to the River Thames, shown as passing beneath two blocks of flats in Good Hart Place on the south side of the basin and also beneath the swing bridge over the basin entrance channel. Property valuation comments General 9.4.1 9.4.2 The freehold is owned by Transport for London and the British Waterways Board. There is leasehold interest on the site to British Waterways Marinas Limited. Intermediate shaft 9.4.3 Compensation for the acquisition of new rights is normally based on the diminution in value to the land caused by the acquisition. Compensation is assessed on a market value basis for the permanent acquisition of land. Marina valuations are generally based on accounts, which are not available for this property. Compensation has therefore been assessed using estimated revenue figures. Construction of the overflow culvert beneath residential blocks could lead to significant additional acquisition cost, with the attendant compensation claims, if the buildings had to be demolished. Disturbance compensation comments A claim from the marina for loss of profits and temporary business interruption during the construction phase would be anticipated. Compensation would also be payable for permanent loss of profits in respect of the pontoon berths lost to the permanent structure. Numerous boats would be displaced. These may occupy berths on annual licences but compensation claims may be forthcoming from any owners having longer term berthing agreements. Offsite statutory compensation comments There should be limited potential for offsite statutory compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, as there is unlikely to be any physical interference with public or private property rights. Construction of the overflow culvert through the Good Hart Place courtyard area may lead to temporary loss of access to residential parking spaces and multiple claims for compensation, albeit for relatively modest amounts. Construction of the overflow culvert may also affect the swing bridge where Narrow Street passes over the basin entrance channel. Closure of the bridge for an extended period could lead to Section 10 claims.

9.3.2

9.3.3

9.3.4

9.4

9.4.4 9.4.5

9.5 9.5.1

9.6 9.6.1

9.6.2

Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

9.6.3 9.6.4

The siting of the works during construction should be planned to avoid impeding access to the Regent’s Canal entrance on the north side of the basin. There should also be 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. Site acquisition cost assessment The site acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable, dependent on the costs relating to the overflow culvert where it passes beneath residential blocks. SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE Introduction

9.7 9.7.1

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

10.2.1 This site is not suitable for an intermediate shaft site because of the requirements for extensive enabling and reinstatement works prior to and following construction. The site does not have good vehicular access and a neighbouring building may need to be demolished to create sufficient access to the site. There are residential buildings and other third-party assets in close proximity to the site. The overflow culvert would need to run a significant distance under existing structures as a siphon (which is not desirable) or through demolished buildings to reach the river. 10.3 Planning

10.3.1 This site is considered not suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site. 10.3.2 A series of planning designations are applicable to the site and it is unlikely that any mitigation measures would balance out the cumulative adverse effects of the proposed construction works on this site. 10.3.3 Use of the site will result in temporary loss of a water protection area for a lengthy period of time, only to be followed by the replacement of permanent structures, which may have a visual impact on the appearance and character of the area and reduce the overall size of the marina. 10.3.4 Since the site is bordered by residential properties on all sides, it may not be possible to site the construction works in a location to lessen its potential impact on the surrounding properties and their amenity. Locating the works centrally would increase separation distances, however, it would in turn render a larger proportion of the basin unusable and is likely to have a greater visual impact. 10.3.5 It is considered, from a planning viewpoint, that mitigation is unlikely to sufficiently address the constraints and impacts posed by the use of this site. On this basis, it is considered that the degree of conflict with planning policy and designations is so significant that the site is unlikely to gain planning permission. 10.4 Environment

10.4.1 Overall, the site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site. 10.4.2 The site is suitable from the perspectives of transport, archaeology and hydrogeology. 10.4.3 The site is less suitable from the perspectives of built heritage, townscape, surface water, ecology, flood risk, air quality, noise, and land quality. 10.4.4 Overall, the site is considered to be less suitable and further investigation would be required as to whether built heritage, townscape, surface water, ecology, flood risk, air quality, noise and land quality impacts could all be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations would include the following:

Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T

Built Heritage and Townscape – a high quality scheme design to mitigate the potential for direct impacts on the conservation area and the character of the Limehouse Basin. Flood Risk and Surface Water – measures to protect the site from flooding and to avoid potential for pollution of the Limehouse Basing and the River Thames. Ecology – mitigation for the Limehouse Basin Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation and the London BAP priority habitat Canals. Air Quality – measures to ensure dust is adequately mitigated for the closest receptors. Noise – standard noise barriers are unlikely to be entirely effective and other techniques may be required to reduce construction noise to acceptable levels. Land Quality – any required remediation of contamination (at this moderate risk site) and/or measures to ensure no mobilisation of contaminants retained in situ. 10.5 Socio-economic and community

10.5.1 This site is considered less suitable for use as an intermediate shaft site, as it would appear likely to have significant impacts on the use of the basin as a marina and the surrounding dense residential development, many of which will be difficult to mitigate. 10.5.2 Also, following the use of the site, the need to maintain permanent access and place a concrete structure in the marina will decrease the area of the basin and is likely to reduce the number of pontoons available. Any discussion on temporary relocation, for instance, as a mitigation measure, is likely to be challenging due to the general shortage of moorings on the River Thames in London. Also, the Limehouse Basin moorings are likely to be used by local residents for their pleasure boats, as this offers them an obvious advantage in terms of location. 10.5.3 The use of the site is likely to affect members of the local community and the general public (eg, towpath walkers) who use Limehouse Basin as an urban recreation spot or destination. The unique character of the basin as an urban tranquil space is likely to make the mitigation of any potential partial loss of the basin quite challenging. 10.5.4 Residents of surrounding properties are likely to be affected by the noise and visual impacts, as well as potential partial loss of the marina facility. The dwellings are close to the waterfront and many appear to overlook the basin, and are therefore likely to be severely affected by the works. Mitigation in terms of minimising disruption is likely to be quite challenging, due to the compact arrangement of residential properties around the basin. 10.6 Property

10.6.1 The site is considered less suitable as an intermediate shaft site. 10.6.2 The advantage of the site is that acquisition costs should be acceptable. 10.6.3 Disadvantages include the potential classification of the site as special land, requiring ministerial procedure for acquisition, temporary and permanent disturbance to the marina operation, the potential for high discretionary purchase costs, and the possibility that residential flats might have to be acquired and demolished for the overflow culvert.

Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T - Appendices

APPENDICES

Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – 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 Tower Hamlets online planning applications database Saved policies in the Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan, adopted in 1998

Environment Transport Map of Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) - www.tfl.gov.uk Bus Route Maps: North-east, north-west, south-west, south-east - www.tfl.gov.uk Crossrail Plans - www.crossrail.co.uk/crossrail-bill-documents PTAL scores - Obtained from Table 2.3 information Thames Path map - www.walklondon.org.uk Capital Ring - www.walklondon.org.uk The Lea Valley Walk - www.walklondon.org.uk Cycle Routes - www.sustrans.org.uk and Local Cycling Guides 1-14 Design Manual for Roads and Bridge TD 42/95, Highways Agency Built heritage and townscape 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 Envirocheck

Appendix 1 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 1

Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan - www.lbp.org.uk Tower Hamlets Local Biodiversity Action Plan (2004) 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 Limehouse-basin residential development http://www.limehouse-basin.co.uk/ area.html BWML http://www.bwml.co.uk/marina/11/limehouse+marina/news

Property Mouchel referencing data

Appendix 1 - Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 1

Rating records from VOA Website Promap Multi map/Live maps

Appendix 1 - Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2 – SITE LOCATION PLAN

Appendix 2 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

N

FI D

EN

TI AL

AF T

&

C

O

Area of Main Map

Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

D

R

TOWER HAMLETS S036T

±
0 50 100 200 Metres 300 400

Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way.

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00669 Date : .............2009/11/18 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

SOUTHWARK

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

Title:

APPENDIX 2 S036T SITE SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3 – PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS

Appendix 3 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

ma ntle a ilw dR

Bridge

9.3m

TI AL

Surg ery

EN

WB

Cn

!

!

MP

!
FB

!

!

!

!

!
8.3m

Our La dy's Nurs ery

Reg ents Can al Hous e

FI D

2

Limehouse Station

PLAC E

MILL PLACE
6

er cial Ro ad Lo ck

BRANCH ROAD

N

Chy

Mo P

B dy

Co m m

C

AF T

118 to 182

Lime
Pond

n (Tu n

! el)

!
Und

!
Limehouse Basin

!
FW

!

!

6.1m

Post

R

D

5.9m
BRA NCH ROA D
TCBs

Berglen Court

FW

MP

15

8

Limehouse Basin

IN K

2

Quay
Medland House
46 to 83

Bollards

Pontoons

Pontoons

TOWER HAMLETS
5.9m HORSEFERRY ROAD
46 42

12 to 18

!

!
47 to 52

!
Bol

!

Bol

!

!

4

48 to 11 4

AR

Ionian Building

1 to 138

T

Adriatic Building

A

1 to 57

!
1 to 7

!
Cn

!
Bol

El Sub Sta

!
6.2m

!

NO RT HE

6.6m

!

Cha llen ger Hou se

1 to 14

C

E

PL

O

Y ST RE ET
24

H

D

O

G

45

Lo

CC

ou

25 to 31

Lo cksid

W ar

ck

17to19

1 to 15

6.4m
48

69

Kings Hou se

Water Protection Areas ! Areas of Opportunity

Navigation Light (fixed green)

!

!

Victoria Wharf
MLW

!
Dolphin MLW

!

Bol

!

Pa p er

1 to

P's

Mil l

51

W h ar

!
f
Bollard
1

!

!

!
4.2m

1

Un d

Shingle

! !

!

!

!

!

!

50

Jetty

Bollards

Limehouse Cut

Cn

75

!

!

9

1 to

8

Road Safeguarding Schemes

1 to

67

4.7m

9 to

16

Regeneration Areas

Limehouse Basin Entrance

!

Cn

!

!

!

6.3m

!

!

!

!
1 to

!

!

16

19

FB

2

FS

MLW

5.8m

15

Chinnock's Wharf

Bol

SH OULD

Shingle

Legend

Old Sun Wharf

PH

6.0m
1

20 to 25

Mean High Water

Lamb Court

Ro y Sq ua re

Pon d

Sun Wharf

Chinnocks Wharf

1 to 38

Swing-bridge

ER OF MU TT ON

42

Old Sun Wharf

1 to 36

6.5m

Lo

MLW

10

W S TR E

ET

ew

B

1

d

Vi

e

Bol

AL LE Y

NA R R O

dy

to

C

35

9

9

67 to 75

5.8m
40

55 63

!
El Sub Sta

!

!

!
rt

!
16

!

!

!
48 to 53

!

Que ens

1 to 16

Court

!

7.2m

!

!

!

!

!

1 to 66

!

!

!

!

8

51

53

Bol

Bol

ck

3

Club

Con rad Hou se

1 to 9

1 to 5

er st re o Fo H

!
5.2m

1

1 to 45

LIM

Bollard

!
19 to 39

!
Bollard
40 to 45

!

!
Bol Bol

!
Bol

!
1 to

Quay
10

!
1 to

1 to

Cn
46

5.8m

e ak D r u se Ho

23

y p re O s u se Ho

et F l e se u Ho

10

Gainsborough House

1 to 18

!

1 to 10 Hamilton House

!
1 to 19

!

Imperial House

!

! Victory Place
1 to 6 Madison House

!
1 to 22

!

Oriana House

!

!
4.4m
NO RT HE Y ST RE ET

! El Trfmr
7

32 to 39

40 to 47

!

!
BRIG HTL INGS EA

Princes

!
1

!

16

6

O EH

Un d

US

I EL

NK

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

FB

FB

!

16

1

n Tu

ne

l

Basin Approach

!

!

on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright Lim !Survey and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345

eC FB Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance ous eh

!of this map after alteration, amendment or

CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction 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.

!Date : .............2009/11/25

4.3m

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00893 Projection : .....British National Grid

!

1 to 3
L odge

! Title: !

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

9

11

LB

RO

ER 'S PE MAK

!

21 to 62

S036T

Limehouse Basin

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

74

!
84 to 11 7

!

!

!

!

!

!

97

to

Berglen Court

12

6

64 to

Pond

96

John Scur

r House

&

242 to 262

hous

e Lin

k

!

!
Bol

!
127 to 157

!
IS L
82

7.3m

LI ME HO Tu US nn E el L

!

Bol

!

!

10

to

24

201 to 2 12 301 to 3 12

Ward

401 to 4 12 501 to 5 12

O

101 to 112

183 to 241

!

!

!
1 to 30

!

El Sub Sta

Posts

!

BA S IN

601 to 6 12

A PPR

Viadu c
OA C H

t

!
Posts

!

7

!

628 to 6 34

622a

El Sub Sta

MP

1 to 10

628 to 634

626

31 to

63

608

604

600
61 to 66

598

596

594
9

40

38

590

588

582
30
26

Pipelin e

9.0m

8.6m

ay

ad Vi uc t

cu late dy Im ma Ou r La se RC Ch Limeh ou

Our Lady's Nursery

!

!
AC AY PL NO RW

!
Library

MILL

W HA RF

Rose Court

!

!

!

Area of Main Map

E

LA NE

1a

IS LAND ROW

2a

!
AN D

Legend
R OW

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

!

IS LAND RO W

79

Qu ay
54 to 59

75

0

10

20

±

40

60

80

Metres

ut

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

10 2

60 to 65

PLACE

FIEL DS

APPENDIX 3A S036T SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

8

ma ntle a ilw dR

TI AL

Surg ery

EN

WB

Cn MP

Our La dy's Nurs ery

Reg ents Can al Hous e

FI D

2

Limehouse Station

FB

er cial Ro ad Lo ck

BRANCH ROAD

N

Mo P

B dy

Ward

Co m m

C

401 to 4 12 501 to 5 12

O

183 to 241

El Sub Sta
1 to 30

Posts

BA S IN

AF T

118 to 182

Lime
Pond

n (Tu n

el)

6.1m

Post

R

Limehouse Basin

D

5.9m
BRA NCH ROA D
TCBs

Berglen Court

FW

MP

15

8

Limehouse Basin

2

Quay
Medland House
46 to 83

Bollards

Pontoons

Pontoons
FB
Un d

TOWER HAMLETS
5.9m HORSEFERRY ROAD
46 42

12 to 18

Bol

4

Bol

48 to 11 4

AR

Ionian Building

1 to 138

T

Adriatic Building

A

1 to 57

1 to 7

Cn
61 to

El Sub Sta Bol

O

D

6.2m

NO RT HE

6.6m
Y ST RE ET
24

Cha llen ger Hou se

1 to 14

C

E

PL

H

O

G

45

Lo

CC

ou

25 to 31

Lo cksid

W ar

!

!

!

!

17to19

! !

!

Parks

!

!

Un d

Flood Protection Areas

Navigation Light (fixed green)

Victoria Wharf
MLW

Bol

Pa p er

1 to

P's

Mil l

51

1

W h ar

f
Bollard

Dolphin MLW Shingle

50

Jetty

Bollards

Limehouse Cut

Cn

75

1

1 to

!

8

1 to

67

4.7m

9 to

16

48

Sites of Metropolitan Nature Conservation Importance

1 to 15

6.4m

69

Kings Hou se

Sites of Nature Conservation Importance

Limehouse Basin Entrance

Cn

6.3m

19

16

FB

2

Green Corridor/Chains

FS

MLW

5.8m

15

Chinnock's Wharf

Bol

SH OULD

Shingle

Old Sun Wharf

PH

6.0m
1

20 to 25

!

!

!

!

Lamb Court

Ro y Sq ua re

Mean High Water Open Spaces

Chinnocks Wharf

1 to 38

Swing-bridge
7.2m

ER OF MU TT ON

Pon d

42

Metropolitan Open Land
Old Sun Wharf

ck

1 to 36

6.5m

Lo

MLW

10

W S TR E

ET

ew

B

1

e

Bol

AL LE Y

NA R R O

dy

to

C

35

!

!

9

d

Vi

9

67 to 75

40

Legend
5.8m

55

!
rt
63

! ! !

! ! ! !

El Sub Sta

!
16
48 to 53

Que ens

1 to 16

!

Court

1 to 66

4.2m

8

51

53

Bol

Bol

ck

3

Club

Con rad Hou se

1 to 9

1 to 5

st re o Fo H

5.2m

1

1 to 45

LIM

Bollard

Quay
19 to

1 to 10

39

Bollard

1 to

40 to

45
46

Cn

Bol Bol

Bol

5.8m

1 to

e ak D r u se Ho

23

y p re O s u se Ho

et F l e se u Ho

10

Gainsborough House

1 to 18

1 to 10 Hamilton House 1 to 19

! Imperial ! House !
Victory Place 1 to 6 Madison House 1 to 22

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
7 !

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

! ! ! ! !
4.4m

er

Oriana House

! ! ! !

El Trfmr

NO RT HE
32 to 39

Y ST! ! ! RE ET

! ! ! ! ! !

40 to 47

!

!

! ! ! ! !

Princes

1

16

6

O EH

US

I EL

NK

FB

16

1

n Tu

ne

l

S036T
9

Limehouse Basin

97

to

Berglen Court

FW

12

6

Und

64 to

Pond

96

John Scur

r House

&

242 to 262

hous

e Lin

k

Bol

7.3m
Bol

127 to 157

LI ME HO Tu US nn E el L

IN K

Basin Approach

10

to

24

601 to 6 12

A PPR

Viadu c
OA C H

t

7

Posts

6

Chy

8.3m

PLAC E

MILL PLACE
Rose Court

628 to 6 34

622a

El Sub Sta

MP

1 to 10

628 to 634

626

31 to

63

608

604

600
47 to 52

598
66

596

594

40

38

590

84 to 11 7

588
30
26

Pipelin e

9.0m

8.6m

ay

ad Vi uc t

cu late dy Im ma Ou r La se RC Ch Limeh ou

Our Lady's Nursery

AC AY PL NO RW

MILL

Library

W HA RF

Area of Main Map

E

LA NE

1a

IS LAND ROW

2a

Legend
IS L
82

AN D

R OW

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

IS LAND RO W

79

Qu ay
54 to 59

75

0

10

20

±

40

60

80

Metres

eC FB Mapping by permission of Ordnance usreproduced eho on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright Survey Lim and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

ut

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.

! 4.3m ! ! ! !

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00894 Date : .............2009/11/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS
BRIG HTL INGS EA

10 2

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

60 to 65

PLACE

1 to 3
L odge

Title:

9

11

LB

RO

ER 'S PE MAK

FIEL DS

APPENDIX 3B S036T SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

1 to 8

ma ntle

9.1m

TI AL

Surg ery

EN

WB

Cn MP

Our La dy's Nurs ery

Reg ents Can al Hous e

FI D

Limehouse Station

!
183 to 241

2

FB

er cial Ro ad Lo ck

BRANCH ROAD

N

B dy

Co m m

C

AF T

118 to 182

Lime
Pond

n (Tu n

el)

6.1m

Post

R

Limehouse Basin

D

BRA NCH ROA D

MP

15

2

Quay
Medland House
46 to 83

Bollards

Pontoons

Pontoons
FB
Un d

TOWER HAMLETS
5.9m HORSEFERRY ROAD
46 42

12 to 18

Bol

4

Bol

48 to 11 4

AR

Ionian Building

1 to 138

T

Adriatic Building

A

1 to 57

1 to 7

Cn
61 to

El Sub Sta Bol

O

D

6.2m

NO RT HE

6.6m
Y ST RE ET
24

Cha llen ger Hou se

1 to 14

C

E

PL

H

O

G

45

Lo

CC

ou

25 to 31

Lo cksid

W ar

ck

17to19

Kings Hou se

1 to 15

Archaeological Areas Conservation Areas

Navigation Light (fixed green)

Victoria Wharf
MLW

Bol

Pa p er

1 to

P's

Mil l

51

1

W h ar

f
Bollard

Un d

Dolphin MLW Shingle

Bollard

76

50

Jetty

Bollards

Limehouse Cut

Cn

75

1

9
12

1 to

8

Locally Listed Buildings

1 to

67

!

4.7m

9 to

16

48

!

Listed Buildings

Limehouse Basin Entrance

Cn

6.3m

19

16

FB

2

FS

MLW

5.8m

15

Chinnock's Wharf

Bol

SH OULD

Shingle

Legend

Old Sun Wharf

PH

!

6.0m
1

20 to 25

Mean High Water

Lamb Court

Ro y Sq ua re

Pon d

Sun Wharf

Chinnocks Wharf

1 to 38

Swing-bridge
7.2m

ER OF MU TT ON

42

Old Sun Wharf

1 to 36

6.5m

Lo

MLW

10

W S TR E

ET

ew

B

1

d

Vi

e

Bol

AL LE Y

NA R R O

dy

to

C

35

9

9

67 to 75

5.8m
40

55

rt

63

El Sub Sta

Que ens
48 to 53

1 to 16

Court

1 to 66

6.4m

69

4.2m

8

51

53

Bol

Bol

ck

3

Club

Con rad Hou se

1 to 9

1 to 5

er st re o Fo H

5.2m

1

1 to 45

LIM

Bollard

Quay
19 to

1 to 10

39

Bollard

1 to

40 to

45
46

Cn

Bol Bol

Bol

5.8m

1 to

e ak D r u se Ho

23

y p re O s u se Ho

et F l e se u Ho

10

Gainsborough House

1 to 18

1 to 10 Hamilton House 1 to 19

Imperial House
Victory Place 1 to 6 Madison House 1 to 22

Oriana House
4.4m
NO RT HE Y ST RE ET

El Trfmr
7

32 to 39

40 to 47

Princes

1

16

6

O EH

US

I EL

eC FB Mapping by permission of Ordnance usreproduced eho on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright Survey Lim 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.
4.3m

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00895 Date : .............2009/11/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

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

1 to 3
L odge

Title:

9

11

LB

RO

ER 'S PE MAK

79

NK

to 1

0

FIEL DS

167

FB

16

1

n Tu

ne

l

Basin Approach

21 to 62

S036T
9

Limehouse Basin

40

38

84 to 11 7

8

!

TCBs

!

5.9m

Berglen Court

FW

Limehouse Basin

IN K

74

97

to

Berglen Court

FW

12

6

Und

64 to

Pond

96

John Scur

r House

&

242 to 262

hous

e Lin

k

Bol

7.3m
Bol

127 to 157

LI ME HO Tu US nn E el L

10

to

24

201 to 2 12 301 to 3 12

Ward

401 to 4 12 501 to 5 12

O

101 to 112

El Sub Sta
1 to 30

Posts

BA S IN

601 to 6 12

A PPR

Viadu c
OA C H

t

!
Posts

Mo P

7

!

6

Chy

8.3m

PLAC E

MILL PLACE
Rose Court

628 to 6 34

622a

El Sub Sta

MP

1 to 10

628 to 634

626

!

31 to

63

608

604

600

598

596

594

590

!

Commercial Road Bridge
Pipelin e

a ilw dR

9.3m

588

582
30
26

9.0m

8.6m

ay

!
cu late dy Im ma Ou r La se RC Ch Limeh ou

ad Vi uc t

Our Lady's Nursery

!
Library

AC AY PL NO RW

MILL

Sta El Sub

W HA RF

Area of Main Map
Docklan ds Court

E

LA NE

1a

IS LAND ROW

2a

Legend
IS L
82

4

AN D

R OW

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

IS LAND RO W

79

Qu ay

Ramp

75

10

20

±

40

60

80

Metres

ut

47 to 52

66
10 2

16

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS
BRIG HTL INGS EA

54 to 59 60 to 65

PLACE

APPENDIX 3C S036T SITE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN

1 to 8

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 4

APPENDIX 4 – PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

Appendix 4 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

FI D

EN

TI AL

&

C

O

Area of Main Map

N

AF T

S036T

Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites

D

R

TOWER HAMLETS

0

25

50

±

100

150

200

Metres

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 : .......101PL-SS-00838 Date : .............2009/11/24 Projection : .....British National Grid

SOUTHWARK

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

Title:

APPENDIX 4 S036T SITE AERIAL PLAN

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 4

View of the entrance to Limehouse Basin looking north from Narrow Street.

View of the site looking west towards the boat keepers’ office.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 4

View of the site looking north.

View of the site looking northwest.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 5

APPENDIX 5 – TRANSPORT PLAN

Appendix 5 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

FI D

EN

TI AL

O

&

Legend

Area of Main Map

C

N

AF T

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites TfL Road Network Transport Access Routes TfL DBFO Network

D

R

Height restricted bridge

No visible restrictions on bridge

Thames Path

London Cycle Routes

TOWER HAMLETS S036T

Height restricted bridge
0 40 80 160

±
Meters

240

320

400

Parking

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.

Traffic calmed

Map Ref : ........... 101PL-SS-00787 Date : ................. 2009/11/19 Projection : ......... British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

SOUTHWARK

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

Title:

APPENDIX 5 S036T SITE TRANSPORT PLAN

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 6

APPENDIX 6 – SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN

Appendix 6 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

1
1200 x 825 7064 1232 2201

2
6532 6" WO 3215 WO 4217

3
4307 DM09064 3202 4208 4201 5203 IL-4.11m 17 STEPS IL-1.14m
ESS TCBs

4
3362 5205
Midhurst House

5

Carmine Wharf

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Status:

N
Southwater Close

GEOLOGY

VT

0202 SE

6095 2208 2209

3225 1217

WORK IN PROGRESS
7201
Keyplan:
N

5204 225 5900 WO RE
El Sub

0206 2204 1294 1203 1227 2210 IL5.15m 2214 BS WO DBV235381 5551 5551
7

7207 7206 WO

6854

Ground level 100(m OD + 100)

DRAWING LOCATION

2213 IL-4.61m 5884 3360

4209

Sta

5202B
TCB

7204

6642 3361 4213 6203

7205

93(m OD + 100) Base of London Clay Formation

2221 5742 1205 1222 IL-4.6m 2101 1204 2104 4101 SE FV VT CL10.12m 3357 6121 4215 3354 4214
8.9m
TCBs

Posts

COPENHAGEN PLACE SPS (PRIVATE) LOC CODE NK 6202 HW WO 8201

A

0209

5201B

MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE
8104

4102 SE
Tequila Wharf

SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
St Anne’s Trading Estate

6119 150

Base of Lambeth Group
2985 72(m OD + 100)

BS IL4.91m 1117 1124 1104 DBV467991

IL-4.59m 2105 5115 5114
731

6120 5120 6118

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36.
8105 6117 8103 2987

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

Base of Thanet Sand Formation
WO DBV468047 1288 1116 DBV468033 DBV736960 NF NF 1106 2115 0104 DM09087 0105 0111 IL0.03m 300 IL-4.57m WO DBV467992 WO WO 4" 2110 1290 750
El Sub Sta

1103 IL-4.53m DBV467997 3881 2117 300 DBV467998

2109
Works

59(m OD + 100)

8107 8106

2111 1292

5112 DBV467933 DBV467931 IL0.11m 3101
BROKEN

The Mission

VT CL8.06m IL4.28m ABANDONED 6104 SE WO

VT 5104 IL0.52m WO SE CL8.74m ABANDONED STEPS 6655 IL0.57m WO IL0.72m

6116 DM09069 6115
Cape House

WO 4104 3102 SE DBV467972 6158 SE BF

STEPS IL4.18m
Shelter IL1.93m 5999

STEPS STEPS IL1.82m WO

WO

6103 SE 752 HW VT
Britannia Bridge CL7.86m

7102 WO 2983 7103 7101 WO 7104

8102

Suggested invert level of shaft
5782

1289

49.98(m OD + 100)

8109

8.6m DBV468213

BS FH DBV467978 WO 5116 DBV764762 5822

8.2m

VT 4" EV IL1.03m

IL1.21m

PH

7.9m

8101 DBV011289 8017
War

NOTE:
8024

Bol

6563

x 910

IL-4.53m IL-0.07m 0019

WO

LIMEHOUSE
LS
ST
Our Lady’s Nursery

6001 6"WM
Town Hall

Memorial

1001 SE 505

DM09095
DBV011287

5790 8016 9024

WOWO 1006
Rose Court

Library

FH IL-4.45m

FV

0013 2679 FV

5010

WO
Park Heights Court

Newell House

Limehouse Churchyard

4" ABANDONED
183 to 241

8015 DBV011288

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.

2720
El Sub Sta Posts

IL-0.08m

Nelson’s Wharf
Posts

6002

8007
Rectory

5001
Grosvenor Court

8014
5.5m Limehouse

Norway
242 to 262

LEGEND
FOUL WATER
9003

Wharf

9004 5843

WO
Pond
Lime House Court

Parish Church

7002 LH

St Anne

B

WO 150mm

6.3m

SURFACE WATER
King’s Wharf

WO WO
Post

Pond

Berglen Court

2715
127 to 157

Posts 1 to 6

8009 7001

CLEAN WATER
6.2m
D Fn

7.3m

2681 90mm
The Royal Foundation of St Katharine Bol

WO

Swallow Place

Chalk
King’s Wharf Limehouse Churchyard

8008

9002

GAS

5.9m
TCBs

1917 Berglen Court Limehouse Basin

PH

8906 8905 WO 8907 1041
5.6m

FIBRE OPTICS
Health Centre

NRV

5.6m

6846
MP

WO

TELECOMUNICATIONS

WO

Shallow

1918 Main
Basin Approach

1919
Bollards Pontoons Pontoons

2700 7901

SYNTHETIC GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DERIVED FROM THE BGS 7904 8908 LONDON LITHOFRAME50 MODEL, HISTORICAL 8904 BOREHOLES AND BERRY (1979). PLEASE NOTE, GROUND CONDITIONS MAY 8903 NOT BE USED FOR DETAILED VARY AND THIS DATA SHOULD 8909 8910 ENGINEERING PURPOSES

LOW VOLTAGE CABLES

HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES

Quay

0902
St James’s Gardens

EXISTING TUNNELS
1921
Medland House
SM LB

0903

Shallow

Main

S036T
1 to 18
Bollard

5823 7905
Kiln Court Oast Court
5.1m

2.0m

0917 0921
Quay

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
WATER STORM & FOUL SEWERS - ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS

Gainsborough House

FB

1 to 10 Hamilton House 4.6m

8902 2716 7903 8901 7906

0922 0889

2691
Bollard

Shallow 0802A RE

Main

180mm

2692 2901
HORSEFERRY ROAD

7902 ABANDONED 180mm
Bol

1 to 19
Bol

5.9m

6803

WO 1803 0890 0801A CL6.52m IL-0.37m 1 to 16 2684
Regents Gate House

WO

Imperial House

Cn Bol

5.8m

2715

Cyril Jackson Primary School
(North Building) 4.5m
Posts

Bol

8805 SE

OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS: TELECOMS - ONLY FIBRE OPTIC CABLES - HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES - LARGE BANKS OF LOW VOLTAGE CABLES - LOW PRESSURE ABOVE 300mm DIAMETER - INTERMEDIATE, MEDIUM OR HIGH PRESSURE 200mm

Victory Place

2699
1 to 22

6" 6802 7801
1 to 56

2803
Club

375

7804

1 to 6 Madison House

4.7m

ELECTRICITY

Bol

Oriana House

7802 8803 2724
El Trfmr 4.4m

Brigantine Court
1 to 138

2804
Adriatic Building
El

3804 2695 CL5.32m IL1.79m SE CL4.66m
6.6m

4803A IL1.46m
5.2m

Ionian Building

C
381

0807A 6334

WO

Sub Sta Cn Bol

225

6801 5802 DBV468682 7203 TCBs
Ropemakers Field

GAS

6.2m

6843 4807 WO

ASSUMED ROUTE 225 4808 WO 5808
4.3m

8802 7805
4.4mDBV468681

IL-0.38m
6.4m

2687 CL5.85m
5.8m

Bol

Bol

IL1.79m

2807 5480 2817 3805 2815
MLW Bol

400 8804 5809 SE 4810 3812 3811 CL4.62m IL1.92m
Swing-bridge

6199

IL-0.41m FV

IL1.15m BD STILLING POND IL2.83m IL3.15m
INCREASING FROM 2210 TO 2591

7806
Brewster House

El Sub Sta

4811

2701

Playground

7803

5801
Games Court

Commercial Wharf

London Wharf
Sun Wharf
Mean High Water
Shingle

2808
Chinnocks Wharf

6.5m

8824

3810
El Sub Sta 1 to 66

10 m
Playground
13 to 24

0 SCALE 1 : 1250

100 m

2693
7.2m

8823
8705 ST BS ST
3.6m

3701B
6.0m

2816 3702B

3711

Lamb Court

Old Sun Wharf Chinnock’s Wharf
FS MLW Bol

Playground

6056

5.8m

RE 2696 4702
FB

4705
1

7711 WO
Faraday

to 12

Cn

3710

7702 SU 8732 6919 8701 HW DBV468691

6.3m 6.4m

Limehouse Basin Entrance

4708

5716 5719 SE

2725

House

SE IN FLUSHING INLET IL 2.36
Bollards

4709 WO 4720

5720
FH

7705
6720

PS IL2.38m 4710

25 to 36

8703 8702
4.4m

SU
Boundary Stone

4.7m

Limehouse Cut
Cn P’s

Jetty

5721
4713 2697 2705 WO

8704 WO 6721 5751 7707 SU
4.3m
Shingle

Navigation Light

Victoria Wharf
MLW Bol

SITE BOUNDARY

(fixed green)

6719
Dolphin MLW Shingle Bollard

AB
7701

DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE

IL RS
Dsgnr

GT DS
Chkd

GT CH
Appd

06-11-09 17-07-09
Date

5703 WO

5717 5718
4.2m

6772

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
8738
Iss Description

LB

6722

5702

PROPOSED EDF TUNNEL

Bollard

5701

6381 7704

Childrens Centre

Navigation Light (fixed green)

FH

6965 6604

5695 5152 7602 The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
17 19Location

Code:

OS Reference:

Security Reference:

Drawn By:

D
El Sub Sta

N/A
DBV011550 6721 8603
4.4m

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

Shingle

Project Group:

LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name:

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

8602
Project Name:
Swing Bridge

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

El Sub Sta

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

8601

LIMEHOUSE LINK
8501

SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN S036T
Drawing No.:

8503
PLOTTED ON 13\11\09 BY danny.boxell LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\routewide\100-DL-PNC-S036T-100001.dgn

8502

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

LVHTCABGWF

THVLWFS

0

100-DL-PNC-S036T-100001

1:1250

A1

AB

100

150

SW

TCABVHLWFS

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 7

APPENDIX 7 – CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 7 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 8

APPENDIX 8 – OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 8 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

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 S036T – Appendix 9

APPENDIX 9 – ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLES

Transport Site considerations Access to road network Comments Site accesses onto Horseferry Road through an existing access to a private car park. The access would require widening to be utilised by construction vehicles. The private parking will be displaced by the site access and access will require negotiation with the land owner. Several on street parking bays opposite the access may require removal to allow construction vehicles to turn in and out of the access. Double yellow lines prevent on street parking along the northern and eastern sides of Horseferry Road. Horseferry Road is one-way subject to a 20mph speed limit with street lighting. It has a carriageway width of 7.6m which is reduced to an effective width of 5.4m due to on street parking. 90m visibility out of the site access can be achieved to the west. Access to the A13 (TLRN strategic highway network) is via a 15’6” height restricted rail bridge along all possible routes from the access onto Horseferry Road. The majority of construction vehicles using the route would be able to pass underneath the bridges, although an alternative solution may be required for taller vehicles with abnormal loads. The shortest route with the fewest constraints runs along Horseferry Road onto Narrow Street, then one-way along Spert Street back onto Horseferry Road for access onto Branch Road and the TLRN (A13). The height restricted rail bridge is located on Branch Road approximately 20m south of the junction with the A13. Narrow Street is Mitigation required and conclusions Conclusion: Road access to site possible through existing access to private car park. The private parking will be displaced and some on street parking will require removal to allow use of access by construction vehicles. Negotiation will be needed with owner of car park. Access route to the TLRN (A13) is possible, although all routes require passing underneath a 15’6” height restricted rail bridge which could pose a problem for the largest construction vehicles with abnormal loads. Several speed humps along Narrow Street also require removal for the proposed route using the one-way system along Horseferry Road and Spert Street. The height restricted rail bridge for this route is located on Branch Road approximately 20m south of the junction with the A13. Alternatively, access may need to be taken from the existing access into Basin Approach from the TLRN (A13) which does encounter a rail bridge however with no visible height restriction.

Appendix 9 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Transport Site considerations Comments traffic calmed (speed humps) which would require removal between the junctions with Horseferry Road and Spert Street. Distance to TLRN 0.7km. TLRN in vicinity of site highly sensitive and forms part of Olympic Route Network. An alternative access may be able to be taken from the existing access into Basin Approach from the TLRN (A13). The carriageway width of Basin Approach is 5.8m underneath the rail bridge which has no visible height restriction. Vehicles are able to turn left and right out of this access, but are only able to turn left into the access from the A13. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Site will no longer affect the Limehouse Tunnel as identified in Table 2.3. Access to river Intermediate shaft site – river access not essential as road will be used to transport excavated material to main shaft hub site. Access to London Bridge station uses the same route to the TLRN (A13) and follows the TLRN westbound. The route then turns onto and follows along Butcher Row before turning onto the TLRN (A1203) and continuing westbound onto the A3211 through the congestion zone. Route then passes over Southwark Bridge which has no visible restrictions, continuing along Southwark Bridge Road onto Southwark Street under a rail bridge with no visible restrictions. From Southwark Street, the route follows onto Borough High Street which accesses London Bridge station after passing under a rail bridge with no visible restrictions. River access not required. Excavated material will be transported away by road. Route to potential rail link at London Bridge station contains many constraints and is least suitable. Route runs under and over several bridges with no visible restrictions, as well as through high street areas and the congestion zone in addition to the constraints encountered upon accessing the TLRN (A13). London Bridge station accessible from Borough High Street. It has the potential to be used during the night and off peak, although significant use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Mitigation required and conclusions

Access to rail

Appendix 9 - Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Transport Site considerations Comments The route contains the same constraints as the route to the TLRN (A13), in addition to passing over and under several bridges with no visible restrictions and passing through a high street area and 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. Distance 5.9km to rail access point from shaft site. Parking Some parking proposed on site. Additional parking is unlikely to be able to be provided on site due to the site being located in Limehouse Basin. On street parking is available in the vicinity of the site along Horseferry Road and Narrow Street. On street parking restrictions are MonFri 08:30-17:30 at £3.50/hr for a maximum of 4hrs. This is therefore unlikely to be suitable for workforce. Site will displace parking with the removal of approximately three on street parking bays near the access and the removal of the private parking spaces (6 spaces) within the car park. PTAL 5-6 (high), as identified within Table 2.3. Additional parking for workforce unable to be provided within site boundary. On street parking along surrounding roads will not be suitable for workforce as it only has a maximum stay of 4hrs. Several on street parking bays require removal with alternative parking nearby and private parking within the car park will be displaced by site access. The provision of alternative private parking for the displaced car park bays requires further investigation. Good possibility of workforce being able to use public transport to access site On street parking bays will require removal along with the removal of the speed humps, the widening of the existing access and the construction of an access road into the basin. Mitigation required and conclusions

Public transport accessibility

Site access will require widening to accommodate construction vehicles. Several on street parking bays opposite site access require removal to allow construction vehicles to turn in and out of the site. Traffic calming (speed humps) along Narrow Street require removal between junctions with Horseferry Road and Spert Street.

Appendix 9 - Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Transport Site considerations Comments Access road requires construction into the basin. Summary: Overall, the site is considered to be suitable as an intermediate shaft site in terms of transport. Access into the site is possible using an existing access through a private car park which will require widening. Several on street parking bays will also require removal and the private parking in the car park will be displaced. Further investigation required as to whether additional private parking can be provided elsewhere. An alternative access which would not displace parking may be able to be taken from Basin Approach directly onto the TLRN (A13) which passes underneath a rail bridge with no visible restrictions. Access route to the TLRN (A13) is possible. Further consideration of the significance of the 15’6” height restricted bridges on the route to the TLRN (A13) and rail access is required. Route to rail at London Bridge contains many constraints including passing through the congestion zone and over and under many bridges (with height restrictions on the route to the TLRN (A13)). River access is not essential for an intermediate shaft site. Good potential for workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. On-street parking in the vicinity is restricted to a maximum stay of 4hrs, although limited parking could potentially be provided on site. Removal of traffic calming required along Narrow Street. Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 4
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Designations, including Archaeological Priority Areas Comments The south arm of the site is within the Tower Hamlets Archaeological Priority Area (APA). The rest of the site is undesignated. The 19th century OS maps indicate the site to be almost wholly within the regents Canal Dock. Mitigation required and conclusions N/A

Summary of historical uses

A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.

Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected

No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. The Regents Canal Dock (MLO18402) is the only receptor recorded within the site. The dock was built in 1820 and is still functioning. No other archaeological receptors are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within 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. Construction impact of the Docks may have disturbed medieval or earlier remains. It is possible remains exist below the base of the dock. Borehole data indicates made ground of 2m. 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

Potential receptors of medium value with the potential to be directly affected

Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected

A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.

Extent of existing disturbance

A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Mitigation methods could include: Review/production of existing desk based assessments Production of deposits model

Potential issues

Appendix 9 - Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Comments information it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Mitigation required and conclusions Archaeological monitoring of geo technical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation Summary: Based on current information, this site is considered to be suitable as an intermediate site from an archaeological perspective. Although there are currently no records of archaeological remains being present, it is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within this 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. Further research is required to clarify the likely importance of the Dock structure.

Appendix 9 - Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Designations including Conservation Areas, including trees Comments Listed Buildings Former Railway lookout tower, Grade II: 40m Accumulator tower and chimney, Grade II: 40m Rose Cottage, Grade II: 160 Ratcliffe Cross stairs, Grade II: 245m Railway viaduct to north of Regents Canal Dock between and including branch road bridge and Limehouse cut up to three Colt Street, Grade II: 15m Devonshire Cottage, Grade II: 160m 1-15 Barnes Street, Grade II: 205m Hawthorn Cottage, Grade II: 165m 1A Flamborough Street, Grade II: 140m The Royal Foundation Of St Katherine, Grade II*: 220m 78-86 Narrow Street, Grade II: 230m Drinking fountain, Commercial Road, Grade II: 115m The Grapes Public House, Grade II: 230m 88 Narrow Street, Grade II: 250m Railway Bridge, Commercial Road, Grade II: 135m British Sailors Society, Grade II: 180m Pyramid Monument, Grade II:: 250m 18 Newell Street, Grade II: 200m Garden Wall to former St Anne’s Rectory, Grade II: 150m Railway viaduct to north of Regents Canal Dock, Grade II: 30m Archway to Rotherhithe Tunnel approach, Grade II: 70m Pair of K2 Telephone Kiosks Appendix 9 - Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Mitigation required and conclusions In the case of listed buildings, conservation areas and locally listed buildings, 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 would be required to further determine the likely impact of the development and to inform more detailed mitigation proposals. On the basis of currently available information (July 2009) and on the basis of certain receptors not being present within 250m of S036T Intermediate, mitigation would not be applicable in the case of locally listed parks and gardens and registered historic parks and gardens and protected views.

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments by entrance to Rotherhithe Tunnel, Grade II: 60m Limehouse Town Hall, Grade II: 210m British Waterways Customs House on west quay of Regent's Canal Dock entrance, Grade II: 35m 2-10 Barnes Street, Grade II: 180m Limehouse cut entrance walls, Grade II: 70m Durham Villa, Grade II: 160m 9-16 York Square, Grade II: 220m 1-8 York Square, Grade II: 180m 19-31 York Square, Grade II: 235m Queen’s Head Public House, Grade II: 200m 9-15 Flamborough Street, Grade II: 220m 3-7 Flamborough Street, Grade II: 180m 22-24 Flamborough Street, Grade II: 155m 582-588 Flamborough Street, Grade II: 160m 683-691 Flamborough Street, Grade II: 100m 699-711 Commercial Road, Grade II: 105m 604-608 Commercial Road, Grade II: 50m Gate piers and iron railings at Limehouse District Library, Grade II: 85m Limehouse District Library, Grade II: 75m Church Yard walls, railings, gates and gate piers at St Anne's Church, Grade II: 250m 11-23 Newell Street, Grade II: 210m Locally Listed Buildings 4 to 36 Salmon Lane: 230m 33 to 45 Barnes Street: 240m 1 to 11 Chasely Street: 190m Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments 2 to 12 Chasely Street: 170m 1 Flamborough Street: 130m 2 Flamborough Street: 145m Wall, Flamborough Street: 160m 6 Flamborough Walk: 150m Stepney East Station: 120m 556 Commercial Road: 130m 48 Narrow Street100m Conservation Areas The site is wholly located within the Narrow Street Conservation Area York Square Conservation Area: 50m Lowell Street Conservation Area: 80m Regents Canal Conservation Area: 0m St Anne’s Church Conservation Area: 20m Wapping Wall Conservation Area: 245m Registered Historic Parks & Gardens There are no Registered Historic Parks and Gardens located within 250m of S036T Intermediate. Locally Listed Parks and Gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of S036T - Intermediate. Protected Views There are no protected views within 250m of S025T Intermediate. Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly affected There is potential for two conservation areas to be directly impacted upon as a result of the development proposals. Mitigation may be possible through a carefully considered scheme design. The proposals would need to be of a high quality to preserve or enhance the visual amenity of Narrow Street and Regents Canal Conservation Areas in accordance with English Heritage Guidance. This Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions may be difficult however as the proposals are likely to impose a high degree of change on the character of the Limehouse Basin with the introduction of new structures. This is has the potential to result in a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of both conservation areas. Further desk based assessment would be required to identify the contribution of the Limehouse Basin to the designated areas. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Not Applicable Not Applicable

There is potential for 41 Grade II listed buildings, one Grade II* and three conservation areas to be impacted upon as a result of the development.

Of all the listed buildings identified, only five Grade II listed buildings (the former Railway lookout tower; Railway viaduct to north of Regents Canal Dock; Railway viaduct to north of Regents Canal Dock between and including branch road bridge; and Limehouse; British Waterways Customs House; and the Pair of K2 Telephone Kiosks by the entrance to Rotherhithe Tunnel) are likely to fall within the visual envelope of the development. Any adverse impacts that the development may have on the setting of these listed buildings could be mitigated against through a high quality design scheme and/or screening. Of the three conservation areas identified only two are likely to be within the visual envelope of the development site (York Square Conservation Area and St Anne’s

Appendix 9 - Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Church Conservation Area). The proposals should respect the setting of these two conservation areas which should be achievable through a high quality design scheme and/or screening. In the case of the Wapping Wall Conservation Area the lack of a visual relationship with the site means that mitigation is unlikely to be required. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected There is potential for eleven locally listed building to be impacted upon as a result of the development proposals. The receptors are not within the visual envelope of the development proposals and as such would not require mitigation. Spreading the excavated material around the periphery of the temporary working area could partly reduce the impact on the character of the site and its immediate surroundings during construction. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to enhance character of the Basin and its frontage. Conclusion: Presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings on site would potentially severely impact the character of site, its frontage and the residential streetscape around the Basin. This site is unlikely to be suitable unless extreme care is taken to re-instate its character after construction and carry out appropriate mitigation listed above. During construction, the use of hoardings and

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

Entire site in a Conservation Area, part of the site in Green Chains and Links designation, Metropolitan Open Land and Lee Valley Regional park. The Limehouse Basin including the marina, is considered to be sensitive. Site is surrounded by residential properties, open space to the east with high and low-rise residential properties, mix of residential properties to the north with a creek dividing them, residential properties to the west and south with River Thames further south. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings is likely to result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the Basin and its frontage and temporary, and adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements are likely to result in permanent, adverse direct impacts on the character of the River and its frontage. Loss of some marina bays. Open and immediate views from residential properties

Potential views likely to be affected

Appendix 9 - Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments around the Basin. During construction, views of cranes from the surrounding properties, the River, residential properties along the south bank of the River, and Canary Wharf. Permanent elements visible from surrounding residences. Mitigation required and conclusions appropriate lighting would minimize visual impact, at least for people on lower floors of adjacent residences and users of the walkways adjacent to the construction site. The excavated material could be used as screening by spreading it around the periphery of the temporary working area. Design of top structure, vent column, and electrical kiosk to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant where possible. Integral landscape scheme to reduce visual impact and increase visual amenity. Conclusion: This site, especially during construction, is likely to adversely impact the visual amenity of the surrounding residences. Hence, this site is not suitable. However, adequate new planting could help to protect visual amenity during operation. This site could be suitable only with appropriate mitigation listed above. Any permanent structures would need to be of a high quality design and/or screened to ensure that they preserve or enhance the Regents Canal Conservation Area and the Narrow Street Conservation Area. This may prove to be difficult however because the proposed structures are to be built within Limehouse Basin which is likely to be regarded as a positive feature of both

Particular considerations on sites where new permanent structures are required

Permanent structures at S036T - Intermediate would have a direct impact on two conservation areas and potential indirect impacts on the setting of five Grade II listed buildings and two conservation areas.

Appendix 9 - Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions conservation areas. Due to the site’s proximity to five Grade II listed buildings and two conservation areas it is essential that screening and/or a high quality designed scheme are proposed if the scheme is to go forward. Potential issues The potential issues are the direct impact that the development could have two conservation areas and on views from residential properties around the Basin, and the indirect impacts it may have on another two conservation areas and five Grade II listed buildings. To mitigate against the potential visual intrusiveness of these structures, the scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality to ensure it preserves or enhances the conservation areas in line with planning policy and English Heritage Guidance. This may prove to be difficult due to the location of the site within the Limehouse Basin which may, in its current form, make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the conservation areas. Similar mitigation measures would be required to minimise the impact of the proposals on the setting of five Grade II listed buildings and two conservation areas, although it is recommended that a further desk based assessment be conducted to ascertain this due to the sensitivity of the site.

Summary: The site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site in terms of impacts on built heritage and landscape receptors due to the proposals being located within Limehouse Basin, which is itself located within two conservation areas. As such, the proposals are likely to result in a high degree of change to the character of this area and in turn unlikely to preserve or enhance the conservation area in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. The site is also likely to result in direct adverse impacts on the character of the site, local views, and the visual amenity of the surrounding residences, as well as potential indirect adverse impacts on the character of the Thames, especially during construction.

Appendix 9 - Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Hydrological conditions (Groundwater and Surface Water) (From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river) Comments Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (3 m) London Clay (8 m) Lambeth Group (21 m) Thanet sand (13 m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric Level in Chalk Aquifer: ~ 20mAOD (~24 mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater Monitoring Location EA Hydrometry Sites: TQ37-276 – 1.5 km southwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) Watercourses Within Limehouse Basin and adjacent to River Thames Source Protection Zones (SPZ) and groundwater users SPZ Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA EA Licensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details 9 licensed abstraction borehole within 2 km radius
Licence Numbers: 1. 28/39/39/0195 (1 borehole) 2. 28/39/39/0214 (2 borehole) 3. 28/39/39/0234 (1 borehole) 4. 28/39/42/0048 (3 borehole) 5. 28/39/42/0073 (2 borehole) Locations: 1. 1.72 km northwest of the site 2. 1.19 km northeast of the site 3. 1.46 km southeast of the site 4. 1.77 km southwest of the site 5. 1.54 km southwest of the site Operator: 1. Peninsula Water Limited 2. London Borough Of Tower Hamlets

Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft will be constructed to an invert level of approximately 54.02 mbgl therefore the shaft will be founded in the Chalk. (1) Piezometric head in Chalk will be approximately 30.02 m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design.

A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the 400 days travel times of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100 mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follow;
1. 467 m 2. 90 m 3.250 m 4. 258 m 5. 203 m

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

Appendix 9 - Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments
3. Britannia Hotels Limited 4. London Borough Of Southwark 5. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted Aquifer Unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk 4. Chalk 5. Chalk Abstraction Purposes: 1. Private water supply (general use) 2. Industrial, commercial and public service (municipal groundshorticultural watering and make-up or top up water) 3. Industrial, commercial and public services (hotels, public houses and conference centres- drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 4. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/public services- make-up or top up water0 5. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printing- process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing Abstraction Quantity (annual): 1. 274,500 m3 2. 10,330 m3 3. 78,840 m3 4. 83,804 m3 5. 52,000 m3

Mitigation required and conclusions

Local Authorities (LA) Unlicensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No abstraction borehole within 1 km radius inside Tower Hamlet Council Boundary No abstraction borehole within 1 km radius inside Southwark Council Boundary Borehole locations and depths There are 45 historical records of water wells within 1 km radius. Depth range: 7.31 – 153.01 m This site is located within the Limehouse Basin, a designated water protection area. There is a direct pathway from the site to the Limehouse basin and then on to the River Not applicable

Potential impacts on surface water features

Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines – PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23.

Appendix 9 - Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Thames. 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) and which will need to be dewatered. At shallow depth, the shaft is located in Kempton Gravel 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. See below (likely types of mitigation measures that will be required) Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Likely types of mitigation measures that will be required

Not applicable

Potential issues

Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer. In relation to surface water, there is the potential for pollution during the construction period, as a result of the basin being drained and re-filled. Any residual contamination could contaminate the basin and by extension the River Thames.

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. Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines –PPG1, PPG 5 and PPS23. Construction of a coffer dam would reduce area of basin to be drained.

Appendix 9 - Page 16
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Summary: In terms of hydrogeology, and on the basis of the current information available, this site is considered to be suitable as an intermediate site although the construction of the intermediate shaft will take place within Chalk (major aquifer). However, 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 will be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 30 m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. The superficial deposits at the location comprise Alluvium, classified as a minor aquifer, which is likely to be the subject of limited impacts on flow due to diaphragm wall or caissons. In respect of surface water resources, and on the basis of the current information available, this site is less suitable as an intermediate site because the work is undertaken within the Limehouse Basin. There is a direct pathway for pollution to the water within the Basin and also to the River Thames. In addition, there are potential contamination issues associated with draining down and re-filling the basin during the construction period.

Appendix 9 - Page 17
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Statutory designations Comments Lavender Pond LNR is less than 500m from the site, but on the opposite side of the Thames. Ackroyd Drive LNR is less than 2km from the site. Limehouse Basin is part of London Canals SMI. The basin has direct connectivity to the River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI adjacent to the development site, and is designated as a green chain. Mitigation required and conclusions No impacts likely

Non-statutory designated wildlife sites

London Canals contain a number of uncommon plant species, along with diverse invertebrate, fish and bird species. The construction works will create considerable disturbance and potential pollution within the Limehouse Basin, involving as they do potential infilling of large parts of the basin (or at least extensive piling). Provision of compensatory habitat off site is likely to be required, which may affect feasibility. There may also be arduous post-works restoration required. Detailed aquatic invertebrate and fish investigation are likely to be required. Loss of canal area may require compensatory provision, which may affect feasibility. Negotiation with EA needed over any encroachment into river. Negotiation may be required with the EA, with likelihood of requirement for provision of compensatory habitat off site, which may affect feasibility. There may also be arduous post-works restoration required.

BAP priority habitats

The site occupies part of the London Canals BAP habitat The adjacent Tidal Thames is a London BAP habitat.

protected or otherwise notable species within the Study Area

Detailed aquatic invertebrate and fish investigation likely to be needed in Limehouse Basin.

Potential issues Summary: Overall, and on the basis of the current information available, the site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site. This is due to its location within ‘Limehouse Basin’ Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation and the London BAP priority habitat ‘Canals’, which may require compensatory provision for temporary and permanent land take (potentially involving off-site solutions) and possibly arduous post-works restoration requirements. This is particularly the case since this option seems to require extensive infilling within the basin. Careful work practices may also be required. Any works affecting the River Thames are likely to require negotiation with the EA and mitigation.

Appendix 9 - Page 18
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Flood Risk Assessment Site considerations Flood Risk Zone Comments Flood Zone 3 (1 in 200 year tidal flood extent); the site is not defended. Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible according to table D.2 of PPS25 Not suitable for SuDS as the site is located within the Limehouse Basin The site is within the Limehouse Basin which would require at least partial draining for the work to be undertaken. If the basin is only partially drained, then a cofferdam would be required for construction. Mitigation required and conclusions An FRA is required and the site would have to be defended to at least the 1 in 200 year flood level for the duration of construction. N/A

Assessment of conditions for SuDS Potential issues

An FRA would be required to determine the residual risk. In addition, an evacuation plan would be required in case the cofferdam was to breach.

Summary: This site is less suitable as an intermediate site because the site is not suitable for SuDS. In addition, the site is located within Flood Zone 3 (greater than 1 in 100 year risk of flooding). The site is located within the Limehouse Basin and would require specific mitigation depending on the method of construction.

Appendix 9 - Page 19
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Air Quality Site considerations Existing Air Quality Comments The air quality objectives for NO2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties and a school along Commercial Road (A13) and residential properties within 10m of the site, at the point of site access and along the access route on Horseferry Road and Branch Road. The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A1203 and A13 corridors. See above. There is no data at likely access to A13 and the nearest existing data indicates an existing exceedance of AQLV. The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is moderate. Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. There are relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route the construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works. Additional vehicle emissions have a moderate potential to interfere with local air quality action plan policies. See above. Collect a minimum of 6 months diffusion tube data at site access to the A13 or other point of access to major road network. Minimise HGV movements on the local road network during the peak hour. Standard dust control measures would minimise the effect of fugitive dust on nearby sensitive receptors.

Sensitive Receptors

Existing traffic issues

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

Potential issues

Summary: Giving consideration to air quality issues and based on information available, the site is less suitable for use as an intermediate site. There are residential properties in close proximity to the site, therefore there is the potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts can be reduced with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This can be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.

Appendix 9 - Page 20
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Noise Site considerations Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Comments Information from Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of less than 58 dB LAeq and night-time noise levels of less than 50 dB LAeq at the nearest residential properties located to the site. The facades of residential properties facing the site are likely to experience relatively low daytime and night-time noise levels due to shielding provided by buildings. Noise levels from the Defra noise maps provide an indication of prevailing noise levels only, and would not be employed in any detailed assessments for chosen sites. There are sensitive receptors close to all boundaries of the site. The closest receptors are located at Goodhart Place to the south of the site, Medland House to the south west and Berglan Court to the west. Further residential properties are located at Basin Approach to the north east and Victory Place to the south east. Sensitive receptors at Goodhart Place to the south of the site consist of 4 storey residential dwellings. These are located on boundary of the temporary working area and 8m from the shaft location. Properties at Medland Place to the south east of the site consist of 7 storey residential dwellings and are located approximately 5m from the temporary working area boundary and 20m from the shaft location. Road traffic on local roads and more distant road traffic from the A1203 to the south west, the A101 to the west and the A13 to the north of the site would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. Road traffic on local roads and more distant road traffic from the A1203 to the south west, the A101 to the west and the A13 to the Appendix 9 - Page 21
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable

Sensitive Receptors

Not applicable

Existing traffic issues

Not applicable

Existing sources of significant noise emissions

Not applicable

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Noise Site considerations Comments north of the site would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. There is also a railway located to the north of the site which would contribute to the existing noise climate. Potential issues Construction: The construction period is estimated at 4 to 5 years and working hours would be 24 hours per day Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site. A relatively large number of daily HGV movements are anticipated and would access from Horseferry Road. This has the potential to have an adverse impact on residential receptors overlooking Horseferry Road and other residential streets along the HGV route to the A261. The immediate site area is fairly large and, whilst the shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant central to the site would maximise the distance between them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing will provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 8m and it is unlikely that vibration levels would result in minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case by case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if Appendix 9 - Page 22
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Mitigation required and conclusions

Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Siting of noisy equipment and construction activities as far as is practicable from sensitive receptors. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Noisy construction activities, or activities which may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime hours only to reduce the noise impact during night-time construction.

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Noise Site considerations Comments necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and top chamber should result in adverse noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Summary: Based on the information currently available, the site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site due to the close proximity to the nearest residential receptors which is likely to result in adverse noise impacts. The density of housing is also high and therefore would impact on a larger number of receptors. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase is anticipated to be high and therefore is likely to cause an adverse noise impact to properties overlooking Horseferry Road and other residential streets. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers is likely to be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 23
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site location Grid Reference: 536353, 180963

Current site use

The site comprises Limehouse basin, with three large pontoons and boats moorings within. There is also a small building to the south of the site at the entrance to a swing bridge, lock and canal which also form part of the site, and are connected to the Thames. Flat None identified from site visit.

Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site)

North: Large residential block to the northwest of site. Four residential buildings on Basin Approach with the Docklands Light Railway beyond. Regents Canal starts at Limehouse Basin and runs north from the site. East: Large residential blocks and smaller flats. A vehicle access route runs alongside, adjacent to the basin behind a high wall. Limehouse Cut. South: River Thames. Residential apartments to the southwest immediately adjacent to the basin. West: a 7 storey residential block.

Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata
1

Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (3 m) London Clay (8 m) Lambeth Group (21 m) Thanet sand (13 m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft)

Underlying aquifer classes (Major/Minor/Non-aquifer)

Non-Aquifer: London Clay Minor Aquifer: River Terrace Deposits, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sands Major Aquifer: Chalk River Terrace Deposits - Minor Aquifer 2 High Leaching Potential of Soils (U)

Groundwater vulnerability/ Soil classification (High/Intermediate/Low/Not 2 applicable) Source protection zone details Surface water receptors

Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA Limehouse Basin (onsite) River Thames (35m south)

Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site

Appendix 9 - Page 24
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Land Quality Site history information and historical potentially contaminating activities (based on mapping data) Onsite The site is situated on a canal basin (established in the 17 century) which lies at the base of the Grand Union Canal (Regent's Canal) and Limehouse Cut, with access via lock gates to the River Thames.
th

Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling). th th Throughout the 19 and 20 century the basin was used to land industrial cargo (principally coal) and also received effluent from the industrialised Regents Canal and Limehouse Cut. 1862-1995 The Basin is used as a marina by pleasure craft navigating the canals and the River Thames, the marina itself houses extensive berths. 1996-present A tunnel (Limehouse Link) runs under the north of the basin, 1996-present Offsite Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling), (closest directly adjacent site, north and south), 1896-1898 Infilled land, (adjacent western boundary), 1920-1951 Infilled land, (adjacent northern boundary), 1951 Warehouses, (closest adjacent south of site), 1947-1972 Historical building plans list Electricity substations (closest adjacent, east), 1960-1970 Lead works, (5m northeast), 1862-1972 Railway lines, (closest 6m north), 1862-present Coal stores, (13m southwest), 1862-1895 Timber yard, (15m southeast), 1909-1920 Warehouses, (15m east), 1909-1972 Historical building plans list oil tanks, (closest 22m east), 1966 Foundry, (23m east), 1882 Areas cleared due to enemy action (closest 30m north), 1960-1967 Coal shed, (30m northwest), 1862-1895 Paper mills, (60m southeast), 1909-1972 Forge, (60m southeast), 1862-1895 Timber yard, (60m west), 1862-1895 Numerous tanks – contents unknown in western direction, (closest 60m west), 1949-1966 Electricity works, (80m southeast), 1947-1972 Foundry, (90m southeast), 1862-1895 Timber yard, (115m northeast), 1947-1972 Steam engine works, (120m southeast), 1862-1895 Garage, (130m north), 1969 Electricity works, (155m southeast), 1920 Brewery, (160m southeast), 1909-1920 Brewery, (190m east), 1909-1972 Biscuit works, (200m southeast), 1909-1920

Appendix 9 - Page 25
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Land Quality Pollution incidents to controlled waters Two incidents: Oils - unknown, minor incident, (55m southwest) Oils - unknown, minor incident, (100m east) Landfill sites Other waste sites Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/Depots Contemporary trade entries None None None None No data

Site classification based on above information Activity Potential site contaminants derived from surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site 1) Wharf operations (transport support and cargo handling) 1) Infilled land 2) Warehouse 3) Electricity substations 4) Lead works 5) Rail lines 6) Coal stores 7) Timber yard 8) Oil tanks 9) Foundry Distance and direction to site 1) Onsite and directly adjacent to site 1) Directly adjacent site, north and west 2) Closest adjacent, south 3) Closest adjacent, east 4) 5m northeast 5) 6m north 6) Closest 13m southwest 7) 15m southeast 8) 22m east 9) 23m east Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH

1) Metals, TPH, PAHs 2) Metals, TPH, PAHs, Solvents 3) PCBs 4) Metals, TPH, PAHs 5) Metals, TPH, PAHs 6) Metals, PAHs, Nitrogen compounds, TPH 7) Metals, TPH, PAHs 8) TPH, PAHs, Metals 9) Metals, TPH, PAHs

Identified source-pathwayreceptor risk assessment at CSO construction stage 3 (Conceptual Site Model) Contamination category Conclusion

Source 1: A1, A2, A3, B4 Source 2: D6, E1, F7

Category 2 – Assessed as Medium Risk The site is considered to be less suitable as an intermediate site with respect to land quality, due to the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred. Whilst the site is located within a canal basin therefore facilitating the dilution of contaminants, its former use as cargo dock could have resulted in contamination of the sediments. In addition there is potential for offsite contaminants to have impacted on the site, specifically from the lead works, coal stores and wharf operations historically

Appendix 9 - Page 26
100-RG-PNC-S036T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S036T – Appendix 9

Land Quality undertaken in the near vicinity of the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper aquifer and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through groundwater transport. Notes: 1. From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river.
2.

Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise.
3.

Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathwayreceptors

Appendix 9 - Page 27
100-RG-PNC-S036T-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