Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB
King Edward Memorial Park

Please note: After phase one consultation this site suitability report was reviewed as part of a ‘back-check’. This report was reviewed by each discipline (engineering, planning, environment, community and property), but the report was not updated as the general overall site conclusions remained valid. Further details are provided in the Final Report on Site Selection Process (doc ref: 7.05) that can be found on the Thames Tideway Tunnel section of the Planning Inspectorate’s web site.

100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001 | Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB
King Edward Memorial Park

THAMES TUNNEL

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT S021T AND C29XB
LIST OF CONTENTS

Page Number 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 Purpose and structure of the report Background Consultation 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 6 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 12 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 Introduction Crown Land and Special Land comments

100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 10

Land to be acquired Disturbance compensation comments Offsite statutory compensation comments Site acquisition cost assessment

13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 16 17 18

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-S021T-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-S021T-900001.doc

100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

1 1.1 1.1.1

INTRODUCTION Purpose and structure of the report The Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper (paragraphs 2.3.29 - 2.3.34) outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of shaft sites, and this process also applies to CSO sites. Paragraph 2.3.31 lists the type of general considerations that will be addressed in each site suitability report, but they depend on the relevance to the site and professional judgement made in the assessments. This report was prepared through the assessment of information from the perspective of a number of technical disciplines: Engineering, Planning, Environment, Property and Community. The reports have been prepared on the basis of the information listed in Appendix 1 - Sources of Information, and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to the current stage. The Background Technical Paper provides information on the requirements for different site types, their sizes and typical activities/facilities within the sites. Each site suitability report considers a particular site on its own merits. In addition, an engineering options report was produced. Information from both of these reports will feed into the technical assessment of how well the site may fit in with tunnel design options, ensuring combinations of sites spread across the length of the tunnel route provide a reasonable spatial distribution of sites (that will best assist with the construction of the tunnel, operation and maintenance). This is considered in the Preferred Scheme Report. Background The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: Part 1A - Creation of the long list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites Part 1B - Creation of a short list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of shaft (and CSO) sites - an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of shaft (and CSO) sites - assessment against a list of detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.

1.1.2

1.1.3 1.1.4

1.2 1.2.1

1.2.2

The final part of Stage 1 includes this report. The following is an overall summary of all elements that apply to all the sites on the final short list: Part 1C - Creation of the Preferred List of shaft (and CSO) sites - site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that will result in the Preferred Scheme Report.

1.3 1.3.1

Consultation The Thames Water project team held meetings with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders to review the provisional short list of shaft and CSO sites. All general and site specific comments can be found in a separate report titled Consultation on the Short List of Sites: Consultation Feedback Report. These comments were considered to help determine the final short list of sites, but they were also considered at the optioneering workshops. Further meetings were held with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders between January and March 2010. Comments are included in this report.

1.3.2

Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2

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. The site S021T, otherwise known as King Edward Memorial Park, is a well maintained area of public open space located in Wapping, in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. The park is irregular in shape and has numerous entrances, accessed primarily by The Highway (A1203) and Glamis Road. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. King Edward Memorial Park is a well used and attractive park, with views toward Canary Wharf and across the River Thames to Rotherhithe. The Thames Path runs along the site’s southern boundary. Two-thirds of the park is occupied by a large, informal, grassed area and a wildflower meadow. The remaining third is occupied by recreation areas and facilities, including a multisport court and tennis courts, which are both hard-surfaced. There is also bowling green and a children’s playground. To the north, the site is bounded by a very busy dual carriageway (the A1203), beyond which are three-storey, terraced, residential properties. A block of flats over 20 storeys high is positioned to the northwest corner. The site slopes down from the northeast to the southeast, towards the river, slightly elevating the road above the park. To the east, the site is bounded by 11 storey flats within a block known as Free Trade Wharf. A number of the flats have balconies and habitable room windows overlooking the park. The River Thames is positioned along the southeast boundary directly adjacent to the Thames Path, which forms a paved riverside walking/cycling and seating area. The southwest of the site is bounded by a stepped 1.5 to 2.5m wall with fence and tall foliage, beyond which are climbing and recreation facilities and equipment, including a climbing wall, zip-wire and canoes. Adjacent to the climbing facilities is a two storey building (3-4 Shadwell Pierhead) used as Shadwell Basin Outdoor Activity Centre, and two two-storey, semi-detached, residential properties, both only partially visible beyond the wall and fence. The site is bounded by Glamis Road to the west, and enclosed by a stepped 2-3m brick wall, restricting views of King Edward Memorial Park from the residential properties in Peartree Lane. The dwellings in Peartree Lane are three storeys, and those on the entrance with Glamis Road have partial views of the park from ground windows. The site is covered by various planning and environment designations in the Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan (1998). All the mapped designations are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with an aerial photograph of the site, are attached as Appendix 4.

2.1.3

2.1.4

2.1.5

2.1.6

2.1.7

2.1.8

2.1.9

2.1.10 There is road access to the site via Glamis Road off The Highway (A1203). There is no convenient London Underground access at this site. There is no rail network local to the site. There are no existing wharfage/jetty facilities. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5. 2.1.11 Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: Rotherhithe Tunnel runs under the eastern part of the site from south to northeast A foul sewer 1.245m x 0.813m runs through the western part of the site, just northeast of the proposed shaft location North East Storm Relief 3.454mD sewer through the north-eastern part of the site Various multi-storey buildings around the site Two wells potentially within the site and one well with abstraction license Shadwell Basin and Shadwell Pier are located outside the southern part of the site.

Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

2.1.12 The locations of other third-party assets, such as BT and fibre-optic communication cables, are to be confirmed by further studies and utility searches and may not be shown on the services and geology plan. 2.1.13 Information on the geology specific to this site can be found within the services and geology plan, which is in Appendix 6. This plan shows that the shaft would be founded in Chalk. 2.1.14 It is understood that EDF is planning to build a cable tunnel which would run through the northern outside 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 SO21T is being considered as: a main shaft site an intermediate shaft site with a CSO interception on the North East Storm Relief an intermediate shaft site facilitating a CSO interception on the North East Storm Relief and other CSO connection tunnels (an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities). 3 3.1.1 3.1.2 PROPOSED USE OF SITE – CONSTRUCTION PHASE The proposed construction phase layouts for the shaft sites are located in Appendix 7 – Construction Phase Layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment. The construction phase layout drawings are illustrative and show: the layout as a main shaft site the layout as an intermediate shaft site with CSO interception the layout as an intermediate shaft site with CSO interception, connection tunnel construction and jetty facilities 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. Following consultation feedback, the shaft has been located in the ‘depot’ area of the park in all three scenarios. It is proposed that the overflow culvert to the North East Storm Relief 3.454mD sewer would be constructed in two phases to minimise impact on the park. Temporary footways and pedestrian diversion routes would be provided to ensure that movement around the park to the Thames Path is maintained. 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 3m to 5m high, including silos mobile crane, approximately 30m high gantry crane, approximately 8m high. 3.1.7 A preliminary assessment of the traffic management which would be required is indicated on the temporary traffic management plan in Appendix 5.

3.1.4 3.1.5

3.1.6

Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

3.1.8

Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Construction phase data Main shaft site 6 to 7 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Barge Barge/Road Intermediate shaft site 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Road Road Intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities 4 to 5 years 24 hours Mon to Sun Road/Barge Road/Barge

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

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 structure with openings. The top structure is to provide access and egress into the main shaft and flap valve chamber.
c b

4.1.3 4.1.4

4.1.5

The top structures are envisaged to be finished at a level of 107m tunnel datum (TD) (7mAOD), and since the ground level mean value at this site is 104mTD (4mAOD), the top structures would be raised to approximately 3m above the current ground level. For further information on the generic layout of this top structure, refer to Appendix 8. Hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would be fenced. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1.

4.1.6 4.1.7

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 si te. b It was anticipated that the ventilation column at shaft 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 diffe rence 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-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) frequency of visits 1 daytime visit every six months for electrical/instrument inspection. An additional 1 week maintenance period for tunnel/shaft inspection required per 10 years that could be night/day/weekend working. 1 van visit every six months. An additional 1 week period of 2 to 10 movements per day (estimated several vans and 2 cranes) every 10 years. 4.2 4.2.1 Restoration and after-use The portion of the site not occupied by the permanent works would be restored to its original condition on completion of the construction works. If any buildings were demolished, these would not be reinstated unless required. ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT Access This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2. Road 5.1.2 During the construction phase for the main shaft site scenario, there would be road access from the Highway (A1203) in the north-eastern corner of the park. There is a drop from road level to the park level, but this could be accommodated. Alternative access could be via the existing entrance in the north-western corner of the site. During the construction phase for both the intermediate shaft site scenarios, there would be road access from Glamis Road near its junction with The Highway. During the operational phase for all three scenarios, there would be road access to the hardstanding from Glamis Road adjacent to its junction with Shadwell Pierhead in the southwest corner of the site. Rail 5.1.5 There is no rail network local to this site. River 5.1.6 River access and jetty/wharfage facilities would need to be provided for the main shaft site and intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities scenarios. The positioning of the wharfage would be somewhat restricted by the entrance to Shadwell Basin, which may require a clearance of up to 100m. Due to this potential restriction, the wharfage as shown in Appendix 7 may need to be relocated further downstream. There would also be an impact on river usage/navigation. It would be necessary for this to be examined in detail in the form of a specific risk assessment (including modelling of barge movements), which would require discussions with and approval of the PLA. Construction works considerations No demolition is required. Available data on third-party assets show that the main assets of concern are the Rotherhithe Tunnel, the proposed EDF cable tunnel, the existing foul sewer and two

No of traffic movements

5 5.1 5.1.1

5.1.3 5.1.4

5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2

Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

low-rise buildings south of the shaft location. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. 5.2.3 It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme. Permanent works considerations The top structures to the shaft and flap valve chambers would be 2m above ground level. Health and safety There are no unusual health and safety issues with this site. PLANNING ASSESSMENT Introduction The planning assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Planning applications and permissions Planning context Planning comments. 6.2 6.2.1 Planning applications and permissions An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets online planning applications database identified one planning application submitted within the last five years applicable to the site: Application reference PA/04/01028 was submitted and granted permission in 2004 for the change of use of the former café and public convenience building to an ancillary office for use of Park Management. 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. King Edward Memorial Park is classed as a Local Park in the hierarchy of open space in the UDP. The following policies are applicable to the site. Policy OS1, Local Open Space, states that applicable sites will be safeguarded as public open space. Within these areas, other uses will not be permitted. Policy 0S7, The Loss of Open Space, seeks to prevent the loss of open space, stating planning permission will not normally be given for any development which results in the loss of public or private open space having significant recreation or amenity value. In exceptional circumstances where development is permitted, the council may require that an equivalent or better recreational facility is provided as replacement open space. King Edward Memorial Park is included in Schedule 2 of the UDP, under site reference 138 for proposed upgrade of facilities. The site is almost wholly located within an Area of Archaeological Importance or Potential. Under Policy DEV45, 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 or the Museum of London, will be subject to a number of requirements, including Archaeological Statements and Field Evaluations, where appropriate.

5.3 5.3.1 5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1

6.3 6.3.1

6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4

6.3.5 6.3.6 6.3.7

Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

6.3.8

There are two listed features onsite: the Air Shaft to Rotherhithe Tunnel, Grade II, and the Shadwell Dock Stairs, also Grade II, which are located at the southern boundary of the proposed worksite. Policy DEV39, Development affecting the setting of a listed building, states any development which adversely affects the setting of a listed building, including any landscaped areas or garden areas, will be resisted. This includes subdivision of garden areas within the curtilage of listed buildings.

6.3.9

6.3.10 The site is located wholly within the Wapping Wall Conservation Area. 6.3.11 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. 6.3.12 The site is adjacent to the River Thames, which is designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance and within a Flood Protection Area. 6.3.13 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. 6.3.14 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. 6.3.15 Under Policy DEV62, Nature Conservation and Ecology, where development proposals should destroy or adversely affect the ecology or special interest of sites of nature conservation importance, 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. 6.3.16 The Strategic Riverside Walkway runs along the southern boundary of the site. 6.3.17 Under Policy DEV64, Strategic Riverside Walkway Designation, the council designates the strategic riverside walkway shown on the proposals map. 6.3.18 Policy DEV65, Protection of Existing Walkways, also states that existing walkways will be protected from development which would prevent free public access and/or harm their character. 6.3.19 A Strategic Cycle Route also runs parallel to the walkway. 6.3.20 Policy T22, Strategic Cycle Network, states that cycle routes will be introduced in accordance with LPAC’s strategic network , in liaison with adjoining boroughs and the Lee Valley Regional Park Authority, using, wherever possible, local access roads and the green chain. Provision for cycle lanes and cycle crossings will be made where the cycle routes use the primary or secondary network. 6.3.21 The site is also in close proximity to residential properties. 6.3.22 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.

Page 4
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

London Borough of Tower Hamlets S021T/C29XB 6.4.2 The council states that there are a number of mature trees on the site. There is a high level of ambient noise from The Highway and interface with the Free Trade Wharf. The council considers the park as more important than its official rating in the parks hierarchy (ie, as a ‘major’ rather than ‘local’ park) and its loss would be unpopular, especially as there is a deficiency of open space in the western area of the borough. The park is heavily used by the community in Wapping due to its proximity to the river. Facilities onsite include the Thames Path, picnic areas, football pitch, tennis courts, bowling green and historical terrace. EDF has brought forward development proposals for the northwest corner of the site, but for which the council has not yet agreed. Trees for Cities maintain the park for the council and run programmes/events in the park. The council has long-term aspirations and a recreation strategy for multi-sports provision and would want to avoid development that could prejudice this opportunity. The council also suggested the opportunity to harmonise the after structures with existing onsite structures, such as the Rotherhithe Tunnel air shaft. An area along the western side of the park is leased to a third-party as an operational depot. The council advised that the displacement of open space provision is a key issue. The council is also able to provide further information on the user base of the park, which is very diverse. English Heritage S021T 6.4.5 English Heritage stated that the site is located within the setting of several listed bridges and structures, as well as the basin. C29XB 6.4.6 English Heritage advised that there may be archaeological implications associated with the site. Environment Agency S021T 6.4.7 The Environment Agency advised that there is a high flood defence. The defences could be set back and there is scope for biodiversity enhancements if the wall is reconstructed. C29XB 6.4.8 No comment. Port of London Authority S021T 6.4.9 The Thames Path, which is well used, is located to the front of the site. C29XB 6.4.10 No comment.

6.4.3 6.4.4

Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

Transport for London S021T 6.4.11 The network assurance team would seek confirmation of construction traffic, construction traffic routes and possible traffic management requirements. The site is located near to TLRN traffic routes, ie, The Highway, which is an Olympic Route Network (ORN) venue route. This is an extremely busy part of the network, and works would need to be coordinated as early as possible with other planned works/events on the network in the area. Residential properties are located nearby and noise considerations may lead to working hour restrictions by the local authority. Rotherhithe Tunnel is within close proximity to the site. C29XB 6.4.12 No comment. Other statutory consultees S021T 6.4.13 The Greater London Authority stated that the area has a shortage of open space. C29XB 6.4.14 No comment. 6.5 6.5.1 Planning comments There are several planning designations and policies that are applicable both on and adjacent to the site. These designations and policies have been identified and described in Section 6.3 and, of these, those relating to public open space, heritage, conservation and residential amenity are of the most relevance to the proposed development. King Edward Memorial Park is an attractive and well maintained local park, with numerous sport and recreational facilities, such as tennis courts, children’s play areas and a bowling green. It is a prominent location, directly positioned on the River Thames waterfront, with views over to Canary Wharf and Rotherhithe. If the site were to be used for an intermediate shaft and CSO connection, approximately a quarter of the park would be temporarily lost to the construction working areas. In the case of the intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities and CSO connection option, approximately a third of the park would be temporality lost. In the case of the main shaft, approximately four-fifths would be temporality lost. Although the comparative loss of open space is temporary, the construction works are likely to take place over a considerable period of time and the proportional loss, in the case of the main shaft, is likely to be considered unacceptable. Following consultation feedback, the shaft has been located in the ‘depot’ area of the park for all three scenarios. This location could then be used for the permanent structures and would protect the configuration of the existing areas of hardstanding for a potential future multi-sports facility upgrade. The council is likely to require re-provision of lost open space within the local area in accordance with Policy OS7. This may be problematic, given that the site is within an area of open space deficiency and, particularly in the case of the main shaft, given the scale of re-provision likely to be required. For the intermediate site scenario, the construction works are proposed on the areas of hardstanding and the children’s play park along the western portion of the site. This reduces the amount of green space temporarily lost by the construction works and confines works to one section of the park, providing a more useable remaining area. The overall

6.5.2

6.5.3

6.5.4

6.5.5

6.5.6

Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

integrity, amenity value and continued enjoyment of the remaining open space facilities by existing users is likely to be affected under all three scenarios, and mitigation against potential noise, dust and traffic impacts would be required. The usability of the remaining areas of the park during the construction phase of a main shaft site is questionable. 6.5.7 For both intermediate shaft options, a culvert across the park would be required to intercept the CSO, although this could be conducted in stages to reduce the overall impact of the works. The after-use of the site in relation to above ground structures may also require mitigation, in terms of the continued use of the site for recreation purposes and against visual impacts. Existing pedestrian and cycle routes would be impacted upon and may require temporary diversion.

6.5.8 6.5.9

6.5.10 As the site is within an archaeological priority area, suitable investigation and remediation works would need to be agreed with the LPA in accordance with Policy DEV45. Further appraisal of the archaeological potential on the site is provided in Section 7 of this report. 6.5.11 There are two listed features onsite: the Air Shaft to Rotherhithe Tunnel (Grade II) and the Shadwell Dock Stairs (Grade II), located just at the southern boundary of the site. Given the proximity of the works to these features, there is likely to be an impact on setting, and mitigation would be required. The main shaft is positioned in very close proximity to the listed features and is likely to have a greater overall impact. 6.5.12 The site is also located wholly within the Wapping Wall Conservation Area and there are several mature trees scattered around the site and along its boundaries. Protection and mitigation measures would be required to avoid the potential loss of trees. However, for both the intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities and main shaft site scenarios, there is a higher potential loss of a number of trees and this may have a direct impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area. A detailed heritage and landscape assessment is provided in Section 7 of this report. 6.5.13 The site is within a predominately residential area. The nearest residential properties for all three scenarios are located within Shadwell Pierhead. These dwellings are located approximately 5m from the shaft site working areas. In all instances, these separation distances are unlikely to be acceptable in terms of residential amenity. 6.5.14 The residential properties located on the opposite side of Glamis Road are between approximately 21m and 30m from the all three proposed working areas positioned along the western boundary. This separation distance, with appropriate mitigation, may be considered sufficient to safeguard residential amenity. 6.5.15 Properties along the A1203 are located approximately 50m away from the northern boundary of the intermediate working area, 78m from the intermediate with jetty working area and approximately 55m away from the northern boundary of the main shaft working areas, all separated by The Highway. The trees on the northern boundary of the park provide a green buffer zone between these properties and the working area, therefore reducing potential impacts on residential amenity if retained. 6.5.16 The park is bounded to the east by an 11 storey residential apartment block known as Free Trade Wharf. These apartments are approximately 8m from the proposed location for offices, welfare, canteen and medical facilities for the main shaft. A number of apartments have balconies and habitable room windows directly overlooking the park. This separation distance is unlikely to be considered acceptable in terms of amenity, particularly visual amenity in the case of the main shaft works. 6.5.17 Significant mitigation is likely to be required to avoid impacts on all nearby properties from noise, dust and increased traffic movements, and in order to comply with Policy DEV2. Construction operational hours are likely to be controlled to those normally operated in residential areas. Further consideration and investigation into acceptable mitigation measures, particularly with regards to properties within Shadwell Pierhead and Free Trade Wharf, would be required. 6.5.18 The sites are adjacent to the River Thames, which is designated as a site of nature conservation importance. Given the extensive nature of this designation and the purpose of the Thames Tunnel Project to improve the environmental condition of the river, it is unlikely Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

that this designation would be unacceptably impacted upon, with appropriate mitigation. However, the main shaft site and intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities options propose two large jetty facilities in the river, and the impact of these on the protected area may require further investigation. A detailed assessment is included in Section 7. 7 7.1 7.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL Introduction The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 – Environmental Appraisal Tables. Transport Intermediate with CSO interception (with or without jetty facilities) 7.2.1 The site is suitable for both intermediate with CSO interception and intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities. Access would be provided from Glamis Road and would require the construction of a ramp, the removal of trees and on-street permit parking, and the relocation of a bus stop on Glamis Road. Access to the TLRN is via the signalised junction of Glamis Road with The Highway (A1203). Potential road and rail access routes are suitable for HGVs as the site is adjacent to the TLRN (A1203), which is used to access the rail link at London Bridge Station via a high street area and the congestion zone. The Thames Path would require diversion around the site and internal park paths would require diversion or closure. There is the possibility for the workforce to use public transport to access the site, and some parking could potentially be provided onsite. There is no additional parking available in the vicinity of the site. In the case of the intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities, the site is adjacent to the river, providing good river access and the use of material conveyors and jetties. Main site 7.2.4 This site is suitable as a main shaft site, albeit requiring the construction of a new site access and the removal of park gates. For the main shaft option, it has been assumed that the entire park would be closed for the duration of the construction period. The existing access to the flats would need to be maintained. Potential road and rail access routes are suitable for HGVs as the site is adjacent to the TLRN (A1203), which is used to access the rail link at London Bridge Station via a high street area and the congestion zone. A left in/left out type arrangement would be required for the site access as the TLRN (A1203) is a multilane single carriageway, with high traffic volumes restricting right turns in and out of the site for construction vehicles. The site is adjacent to the river, requiring the construction of two new jetties to transfer excavated and new material to and from the site. The Thames Path would require diversion around the site. There is a possibility for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided onsite for the workforce. There is no available additional parking in the vicinity of the site. Archaeology Based on current information, this site is suitable for use as an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site. Based on the information currently available, archaeological receptors of medium value are present. It is possible that further archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within this site. Further research is required to clarify the likely importance of any remains and the buildings, recorded in the historical record, at this site. While no direct evidence has been revealed, waterlogged remains and peat deposits of high or medium value may also be present. Peat deposits containing archaeological

7.2

7.2.2

7.2.3

7.2.5

7.3 7.3.1

7.3.2

Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

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 that waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present. 7.4 7.4.1 Built heritage and townscape This site is less suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site as they lie within an open space within a conservation area. The proposals are unlikely to preserve or enhance the conservation area in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. Furthermore, the site could potentially result in severe direct adverse impacts on the character of the park, a public open space, and local views, especially during construction. Further desk-based research would be required to decide whether the proposals could feasibly preserve or enhance the conservation area. There is the potential for indirect impacts on one listed building (Shadwell Dock Stairs), for which mitigation in the form of screening would potentially be required. Use of this site as an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site would require the construction of jetties, which might impact upon the character of the site, the river and its frontage, and local views, including those from the surrounding residential area. These impacts could be mitigated through the implementation of a well considered scheme design and landscaping, including reinstatement of the visual amenity of the site. All of these mitigation measures would need to be thoroughly considered, and impacts accurately defined through further assessment, in order to progress this site further. Water resources – hydrogeology and surface water In terms of hydrogeology, this site is suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site. Although the construction would take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within 400 day capture zones of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design, due to the requirement to dewater during construction. There would also be a limited impact on the flow in the shallow aquifer due to the use of a diaphragm wall or caissons. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution. However, standard mitigation for a construction site by a river would be required. Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate with CSO interception 7.6.1 This site is suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception. Ecological surveys would be required, if this site were selected, in order to determine whether trees contain bat roosts, but any mitigation would probably be easy to deliver. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision but this is probably easily provided. If works avoid impacts on the River Thames foreshore, then this site may require only a basic ecological survey, if selected. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main site 7.6.2 This site is less suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities and as a main shaft site. Ecological surveys would be required if this site were selected in order to determine whether trees contain bat roosts, but any mitigation for this would probably be easy to deliver. However, the requirement for jetty construction would lead to a potential temporary and permanent land-take from a site of metropolitan importance. There is also a Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

7.4.2

7.5 7.5.1

7.5.2

7.6

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

potential cumulative effect with other jetty structures in the river. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision but this is probably easily provided. Land-take from the foreshore and river may require sensitive working practices and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working and some compensatory provision. Careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required. 7.7 7.7.1 Flood risk This site is suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or main shaft site because there is space onsite for the provision of attenuation SuDS, although an investigation would be required to determine the suitability for infiltration SuDS. In addition, the site is partially within Flood Zone 1 (less than a one in 1,000 year risk of flooding), and those areas that are within Flood Zone 3 (up to a one in 200 year risk of tidal flooding) are protected to the one in 1,000 year flood level. Air quality This site is less suitable for use as either an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site. There are residential properties in close proximity to the site and therefore there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts could be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This could be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours. Noise This site is less suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site. The distances between the site and the nearest residential receptors are relatively short and adverse noise impacts are likely. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase is anticipated to be high and is likely to cause an adverse noise impact to properties overlooking the A1203. The proposed concrete batching plant is also likely to result in an adverse noise impact at properties. In addition, in the case of the intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities or the main shaft site option, the importing and exporting of materials by barge would also potentially result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near the barge jetties. Perimeter hoarding would reduce the potential noise impact at properties at the nearest residential receptors but would be relatively ineffective at higher floor levels. It is recommended that noisy construction activities, or activities which may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime hours only to reduce the noise impact during night-time construction. Land quality

7.8 7.8.1

7.9 7.9.1

7.9.2

7.9.3

7.10

7.10.1 The site is considered suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main shaft site, as previous uses appear to have been limited to wharf activities and potential coal storage. Also, the distance and nature of potentially contaminating activities in the vicinity of the site are unlikely to have resulted in any significant contamination of the site. 7.10.2 It should be noted, however, that due to the heavy bombing that this area suffered during the war, it is considered prudent that an unexploded ordnance survey is conducted prior to any excavation.

Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

8 8.1 8.1.1

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Socio-economic profile The site is within the Shadwell ward of Tower Hamlets. Statistics from ONS 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward in comparison with the rest of Tower Hamlets, London and England as a whole: Lower rate of economically active, aged people that are full-time employees, and a corresponding 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 children and young people, 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 a higher proportion of Asian or Asian British people than in the rest of the borough or England.

8.1.2

These statistics indicate that in this area, spaces with activities for children are likely to be valued highly by the community. The rich mix of socio-economic and cultural backgrounds suggests a situation where recreational activities and shared open spaces are likely to be important for community cohesion. Issues and impacts The use of the site for both options is likely to have a significant impact on the park and its users. The park appears to be well-kept and has won the Green Flag Award, which recognises the ‘best green spaces’ in the country. Tower Hamlets council works in partnership with the Trees for Cities charity, which means the park is well maintained and planted, with improved landscaping and planting. The park also hosts educational activities and community events through the Trees for Cities Team. Main

8.2 8.2.1 8.2.2

8.2.3

Due to the proposed location of the engineering works for a main shaft site, it appears likely that the park and users of the park would be significantly impacted by the use of the site. The use of the park for this type of site is likely to lead to the temporary loss of tennis courts, a multi-use pitch, a newly installed children’s play area, landscaped gardens and the park maintenance yard. Even temporary loss of these facilities would reduce the number of sports and recreation facilities in the local area; this may affect the health and well-being of the local community. The play area is currently in good condition and appears to be newly installed; therefore the loss of this facility may affect children. The use of the site is likely to disrupt the use of the bowling green within the park. The residential development opposite the site to the north is likely to be affected by the use of the site, amounting to almost complete loss of views over a riverside park for six to seven years. However, due to the four-lane road and tree buffer between the park and the dwellings, any noise impact may be limited. Adjacent to the park to the east is a development of flats, approximately 11 storeys high. Some of these dwellings overlook the site and may be affected by the use of the park as a construction site, including noise and visual impacts. The Shadwell Basin Outdoor Activity Centre appears likely to be affected by the use of the site, particularly if access to the river is restricted by the use of the site and associated jetties. The proposed layout shows the site bordering the south of the park, with the Shadwell Basin Outdoor Activity Centre climbing walls immediately beyond.

8.2.4

8.2.5 8.2.6

8.2.7

Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

8.2.8

The centre uses the Shadwell Basin and slipway access to the River Thames for their activities. It runs activities for young people as well as for adults, and also offers training for water sports instructors. Intermediate and CSO interception with jetty facilities

8.2.9

Due to the proposed location of the engineering works for an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities option and CSO interception, it appears likely that the park and users of the park would be significantly impacted by the use of the site. The use of the park for this type of site appears likely to lead to the temporary partial loss of tennis courts, a multi-use pitch, and park maintenance yard. Access to a newly installed children’s play area is likely to become difficult as a result of this type of site.

8.2.10 The impacts of this type of site would be similar to those noted above for a main shaft site but to a lesser degree. Less than half the landscaped green area in the eastern part of the park would be temporarily lost to works. However, views across the river from the landscaped green area, as well as the Thames Path, would be at least partially blocked by the materials jetties to be used in the construction phase. 8.2.11 The use of the site is likely to disrupt the use of the bowling green and the remaining area of green open space within the site to the east. This impact is likely to be especially acute during the works to connect the CSO, which would require the digging of a culvert across the landscaped area in the park. The permanent access and concrete structure left over is likely to have an impact on the landscape of the park in the operational phase. Intermediate and CSO interception 8.2.12 Due to the proposed location of the engineering works for an intermediate shaft site and CSO interception, it appears likely that the impacts on the park and its users would be very similar to those outlined above. 8.2.13 The size of site working area required for an intermediate site is slightly reduced so it may be possible to avoid disruption to certain facilities, such as the play area, but there are still likely to be significant impacts on the use of the sports and leisure facilities onsite. The adjacent open grassy areas of the park are also still likely to be affected by the use of the site, particularly during the work to connect the CSO. 8.2.14 There appears less potential to impact on the outdoor activity centre due to there not being a requirement for jetty facilities for this type of site; but due to the centre’s proximity to the working site, their activities may still be disrupted. 9 9.1 9.1.1 PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Introduction The site is King Edward Memorial Park and is under consideration for a main shaft, an intermediate shaft with CSO interception chamber and an intermediate shaft with CSO interception chamber with jetty facilities. A large part of the park would be needed for the main shaft construction works, with a more limited area required for an intermediate shaft. The jetty would be on the foreshore, which is Crown Land. The park is a designated open space and contains a number of facilities, such as playgrounds, tennis courts and a bowling green. A small area of the park would be required for the interception chamber, which is located to the north of the site. Crown Land and Special Land comments The land is owned by the Greater London Authority and therefore it may be classified as Special Land under Section 17 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. However, Section 17 does not apply where the body acquiring the land is a statutory undertaker. As Thames Water is a statutory undertaker, Section 17 will not apply to London Tideway Tunnels.

9.1.2

9.2 9.2.1

Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

However, Section 16 will apply and provides that land may not be acquired unless the Minister is satisfied that there will be no detriment to the operations of the owner, or that the land can be replaced. Therefore, the compulsory purchase may be subject to a Ministerial procedure. 9.2.2 The land is public open space and therefore it may be classified as Special Land under Section 19 of the 1981 Act. If this is the case and if an acquisition cannot be agreed with the owner, a special parliamentary procedure may be needed after the Order is confirmed. As the whole Order would be subject to the special parliamentary procedure, not just this site, the project could be delayed by a minimum period of several months in the best case. In the worst case, the Order might be rejected by Parliament, in which case an Act of Parliament would be needed before the Order could come into effect. This could delay the project for a much longer period and even result in the Order failing. Contact should be made with the owner as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. It may also be advisable to consider the inclusion of exchange land in the Order if any is available. The foreshore and river bed, which would be needed for conveyors and jetties for the main shaft site and the intermediate with jetty, are owned by the Crown. Crown Land cannot be compulsorily purchased, therefore there is a risk that this land cannot be acquired. Contact should be made with the owner and the PLA as soon as possible to establish if an acquisition can be agreed. Land to be acquired The compensation assessment assumes that the worksite would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights, for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above in the case of both a main site and an intermediate site. Rights of way to enable access to the above freehold from Glamis Road would also need to be acquired. The operational phase would require the acquisition of a freehold interest in the southwestern part of the park, with dimensions of approximately 40m by 40m. Also, a small area in the north of the site to locate an interception chamber would be required for the intermediate sites. In both cases, an overflow culvert to the River Thames would be required. Rights of way to enable access to the above freehold would also need to be acquired. This is from Glamis Road to the west. General 9.3.5 9.3.6 The land would be reinstated after the works are complete as a part of the engineering work and therefore reinstatement costs are not included in the compensation assessment. Compensation for the acquisition of new rights is normally based on the diminution in value to the land caused by the acquisition. Compensation for the permanent acquisition of land is normally based on market value. However, compensation for the permanent acquisition of unusual types of property, where there is no general market, can be assessed on the basis of the cost of equivalent reinstatement at a new site, but there must be a genuine intention to reinstate. If compensation is assessed on a diminution in value basis for the new rights (temporary occupation during works, access rights during works, access rights for operational purposes) and on a market value basis for the permanent acquisition, the costs are likely to be relatively low and therefore acceptable. If compensation is assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis, the acquisition costs would be significantly higher, but still acceptable. Although finding replacement land may be difficult, compensation has been assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis in order to be prudent.

9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5

9.3 9.3.1

9.3.2 9.3.3

9.3.4

9.3.7

9.3.8 9.3.9

Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

9.3.10 The site has good river access, hence there should be no significant additional costs associated with acquiring rights for material transfer, such as a conveyor. Main site 9.3.11 The acquisition costs for the main site are likely to be acceptable. Intermediate sites with CSO interception chambers 9.3.12 The acquisition costs for the intermediate sites are likely to be acceptable and significantly lower than for the main site, as the intermediate site is significantly smaller. 9.4 9.4.1 Disturbance compensation comments The park includes tennis courts and a bowling green. The works would cause the tennis courts to be unusable, and costs to relocate these should be expected. 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. 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 neighbouring property. There is an increased risk of residential property acquisitions under hardship and discretionary purchase schemes due to the relocation of the site. Considering resale values, the impact upon the overall costs would be minimal. Site acquisition cost assessment The site acquisition costs are likely to be acceptable in respect of both main and intermediate and CSO inspection shaft sites. SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE Introduction

9.5 9.5.1

9.5.2

9.6 9.6.1

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 suitable as either a main shaft site, an intermediate shaft site with CSO interception or an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities and with CSO interception. The site is sufficiently large to readily accommodate the required construction facilities, it has good road access and it has good potential for jetty/wharfage facilities. 10.3 Planning Main shaft site 10.3.1 The site is considered not suitable for a main shaft site. 10.3.2 The site is a vibrant and well maintained public park, hosting a wide variety of sport and leisure activities. Its use as a main shaft site would result in significant loss of public open space and the remaining areas of open space may not be useable, given the level of construction activity proposed and potential associated impacts from noise, dust and traffic

Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

movements. Replacement open space is likely to be required by the council and this may be problematic in this location, due to an existing deficiency and on the scale which would be associated with the main shaft. 10.3.3 The use of the site for the Thames Tunnel Project would also have adverse impacts on trees, the setting and appearance of the conservation area, and listed features. Intermediate shaft site with CSO interception with jetty facilities 10.3.4 This site is considered less suitable for an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities option site plus CSO connection. 10.3.5 Use as an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities plus CSO connection would result in the temporary loss of a third of the public open space, and would impact on the continued integrity and enjoyment of the remaining areas of the park. In both instances, it is likely that replacement open space may be required by the council. 10.3.6 Even though the working areas are located at the west of the site, leaving a more functional portion of the park untouched during construction works, the works are still in close proximity to residential properties and the resulting impact on residential amenity may be unacceptable. 10.3.7 The use of the site is also likely to have adverse impacts on trees, the setting and appearance of the conservation area, and adjacent listed features. Intermediate shaft site with CSO interception 10.3.8 The site is considered suitable for an intermediate shaft plus CSO connection. 10.3.9 The planning considerations identified above are also applicable to the intermediate option and, although the potential impacts are slightly reduced when compared to the intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities option, considerable mitigation measures are still likely to be required. It is recognised that the sewer associated with CSO29 runs under the park and it must be intercepted. Therefore, a compromise, subject to the consideration of a range of appropriate mitigation measures, may be necessary in order to accommodate an intermediate shaft site and CSO interception on this site. 10.4 Environment

10.4.1 Overall, the site may be suitable for the intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities and the main shaft site, although mitigation would be required to enable the site to be used for each of these. 10.4.2 Based on current information, all site options are suitable from the perspective of transport, archaeology, water resources, flood risk, and land quality. 10.4.3 All site options are considered less suitable from the perspective of built heritage and townscape, noise and air quality. 10.4.4 The intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities and the main shaft site are both considered less suitable from the perspective of ecology, due to temporary and permanent land-take from the foreshore within a site of metropolitan importance. However, the intermediate with CSO interception is considered to be suitable from an ecology perspective. 10.4.5 Overall, all sites are considered suitable, subject to further investigation of whether built heritage and townscape, air quality, ecology and noise impacts could be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations would include: Built heritage – further desk-based research to decide whether the proposals could feasibly preserve or enhance the conservation area and Grade II listed buildings Townscape – a high-quality scheme design to minimise impacts on the character of the park and local views

Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

Noise – standard noise barriers are unlikely to be entirely effective, and other techniques may be required to reduce construction noise to acceptable levels Ecology – potential mitigation/compensation solutions to mitigate for loss of BAP habitat (Parks, Squares and Amenity Grassland) Air quality – measures to ensure dust is adequately mitigated for the closest receptors. 10.4.6 In the case of the intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities and the main shaft sites, likely mitigation considerations would also include: Ecology – offsite mitigation/compensation solutions to mitigate for loss of foreshore habitat. 10.5 Socio-economic and community Main shaft site 10.5.1 This site appears not suitable for this site option, based on the current engineering layouts. There are likely to be significant impacts on the park and users of the sports and leisure facilities. Mitigation is likely to involve finding acceptable alternative facilities which are easily accessible to the local community. 10.5.2 There may also be a need to mitigate for any effects on the outdoor activity centre, especially if their access to the river is disrupted. 10.5.3 The park is currently used for events and educational activities, which would be disrupted by the use of the site through loss of amenity space during the operational phase. 10.5.4 Mitigation may also address the treatment of remnant structures, in terms of restoration and after use, so as to complement the park’s landscape. 10.5.5 Limited noise and visual impacts to the residential developments to the north and east of the site are possible. Mitigation is likely to involve minimising disruption from works. Intermediate shaft site with CSO interception with jetty facilities 10.5.6 This site appears less suitable for this site option, based on the current engineering layouts. There are, however, likely to be some impacts on the park and users of the sports and leisure facilities. Mitigation is likely to involve finding acceptable alternative facilities which are easily accessible to the local community. The children’s play area, which appears mostly affected if the site is used as an intermediate shaft with jetty facilities, could potentially be relocated offsite or to the north-eastern corner of King Edward Memorial Park. 10.5.7 Temporary loss of views across the Thames in the operational phase could possibly be mitigated by providing information to park users about the project, the time frame, and information on alternative viewing points in the close vicinity of the site. 10.5.8 There may also be a need to mitigate for any effects on the outdoor activity centre, especially if their access to the river is disrupted. 10.5.9 The park is currently used for events and educational activities, which may be disrupted by the use of the site during the operational phase through partial loss of amenity space, noise and visual disturbance. 10.5.10 Mitigation may also address the treatment of remnant structures, in terms of restoration and after use, so as to complement the park’s landscape. 10.5.11 Limited noise and visual impacts to the residential developments to the north and east of the site are possible. Mitigation is likely to involve minimising disruption from works.

Page 16
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB

Intermediate shaft site with CSO interception 10.5.12 This site appears suitable for this site option, based on the current engineering layouts. 10.5.13 Impacts and mitigation measures related to this type of site would be similar to those noted above (paragraphs 10.5.6 to 10.5.11). 10.5.14 There is likely to be no temporary loss of views from the usable areas of the park in this option. 10.6 Property

10.6.1 The site is considered suitable for all site options, although the potential acquisition risk would be proportionately greater for the larger site area required for an intermediate shaft site with jetty facilities and the main shaft site. 10.6.2 The advantages for all site options are as follows: The acquisition costs should be acceptable The site is relatively undeveloped. 10.6.3 The disadvantages of the site are as follows: The park is likely to be classified as Special Land and special parliamentary procedure may be needed for acquisition, with potential for significant delay to the project.

Page 17
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB - Appendices

APPENDICES

Page 18
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – 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-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – 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 Green Flag Award - http://www.greenflagaward.org.uk/winners/GSP001515 Trees for Cities - http://www.treesforcities.org/page.php?id=202 Shadwell Basin Outdoor Activity Centre - http://www.shadwell-basin.org.uk/index.php Shadwell charity website http://www.justgiving.com/shadwell Tower Hamlets Canoe Club - http://www.towerhamletscanoeclub.co.uk/wiki/THCC

Appendix 1 - Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 1

Property Mouchel referencing data Multimap/Live maps

Appendix 1 - Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2 – SITE LOCATION PLAN

Appendix 2 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

N

FI D

EN

TI AL

&

C

O

Area of Main Map

AF T

Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites Short Listed CSO Sites

D

R

! (
TOWER HAMLETS

CSO (Directly Controlled)

S021T C29XB

CS29X North East Storm Relief CSO

! (
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-00667 Date : .............2009/11/18 Projection : .....British National Grid

SOUTHWARK

Thames Water Utilities
MAJOR PROJECTS

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

Title:

APPENDIX 2 S021T SITES SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3 – PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS

Appendix 3 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

RO AD

39 37

1 to 63

31
51

49
32

65

1 to 4

1b to

33

TI AL

GL AMIS

53

47

55

20 b

11

63

23 35 47

35

57
13

Peabody Estate

EN

FI D

RED CASTL
1 to 12

N

O

C

SHADWELL

LB

&

AF T

THE HIGHWAY

9.7m

9.8m

1 to

SM

16

9

R

D

St Paul's Church

1
2

Dock Cottages
14

12

2

Playground
Pavilion

C29XB
PCs
PEA RTREE LAN E

20

33

Bollards

6.6m Playground Tennis Courts
GLAMIS ROAD

TOWER HAMLETS

21

1

5.7m 5.0m
1
2 3 4

11

Bollard

SH AD W
Jetty Bollard
FW
Und
Bollards

Jetty
FW

FW

5.7m
Und

Brussel s

Wharf
Bollard

1 to 68

Sl ipw ay

Prospect Wharf

Bol

37

WA P PIN G WAL L

El Sub Sta Chy
1 to

The Monza Building

25

Pelican Wharf
Pelican Stairs
M

57

30

Prospect of Whitby
(PH)

Shingle
sly Co ns t&

84 to 13 0

E CLO SE

M
Sub way

M

9.3m

M

M

M

M

M

Monum ent

6.9m
Bol

Playground

Bowling Green

King Edward Memorial Park

King Edward Memorial Park
Pavilion

S021T
Pond

CS29X North East Storm Relief CSO
Mud
Me an g Hi at hW er

! (

5.1m
D Fn

Air Shaft

5.2m

EL L PI ER HE

AD
MLW

Shadwell Dock Stairs
in Sh

Hard

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
Und

Ward B dy
Und

M

HW

Je

tty

v Ri

T er

ha

m

es
oo l

we Lo

rP

Legend
M M
LB Bd y

M M

SOUTHWARK Regeneration Areas
Mixed Uses Water Protection Areas

340

Gordon House

66

74

82

1 to 97

36

9.6m

24

GLAMIS

PLACE

GLAMIS PLACE

M M

Lion Court

M M

M M

5 7 9 11 13

50

64

1 to 63

lk Tarbert Wa
26

Adventure Playground

Sou th Block
1 to 63

1 to 63

45

27

2

NE

S HO

1

East Block

Peabody Estate

w Sh a d

e ll C

en tr e

1 to 63

U SE

West Block

F IE L DS

Sou th Block

Bath Court

M

M

435

M

M M M

M M M

M M M

M M M

e rh Ro th M

ith e

n Tu n

el

M M M

320

9

3

306

er

1

ch

to

an

70

tC

34

38
36
ou rt

El

ta bS Su

18

20
20

24

Area of Main Map

Legend
Bol

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites Short Listed CSO Sites

! (

CSO (Directly Controlled)

0

10

20

±

40

60

80

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. 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.

35
SM

g le

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00887 Date : .............2009/11/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

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

Title:

APPENDIX 3A S021T SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

M ON RE E T ZA ST

NE

RO AD

39 37

1 to 63

31
51

49
32

65

1 to 4

1b to

33

TI AL

GL AMIS

53

47

55

20 b

11

63

23 35 47

35

57
13

Peabody Estate

EN

FI D

RED CASTL
1 to 12

N

O

C

SHADWELL

LB

&

AF T

THE HIGHWAY

9.7m

9.8m

! ! ! ! !

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

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

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

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

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

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
5.0m

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

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

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

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Bol

1 to

SM

16

9

! !

R

D

St Paul's Church

1
2

!

!

! ! ! !

Dock Cottages
14

12

!

2

! Playground ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

! ! !

20

!

!
33

!

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! C29XB ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Bollards

!

!

!

! !

!
! !

!

6.6m !

TOWER HAMLETS

!
21

!
35

!

! ! ! !

!
! ! !

! Playground ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
1

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
2

!
1

!

! !
! !

! !
! !

!
3
11

!
9

5.7m !

!

! !
! !

! !

Bollard

! !

!

!

! !
!

! !
!

! AD! SH W
Bollards

Jetty Bollard
FW
Und

!

!

!
FW

!

Jetty

FW

!

!

5.7m

!

!

!
Brussel s Wharf
Bollard
Sl ipw ay

!

!

!

!
Bol

!

1 to 68

!

Prospect Wharf

!

37

!
WA P PIN G WAL L

!

!

!

El Sub Sta Chy
1 to

The Monza Building

!

!

!

!

25

Pelican Wharf

!

!

57

30

!
Prospect of Whitby
(PH)

!

!

!

!

!

!

Pelican Stairs
M

Shingle !

!

!

84 to 13 0

E CLO SE

9.3m

ent Monum ! !

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

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

6.9m

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

!! ! ! ! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !

!!
! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

!! ! ! ! ! !

Playground

!! ! ! ! ! !

!!
! !

!

!

!

! ! ! ! Pavilion ! ! !

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

!! ! ! Green

Bowling

! ! ! ! King Edward ! Memorial ! ! Park ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!! ! !

!!
! !

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

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

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

!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!
! !

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! King Edward ! ! ! ! ! Memorial Park ! ! ! ! !

!

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! Pavilion ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!

!!
! !

S021T
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!!
! ! ! !
M

!!
! ! !

!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

PCs! !

!

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

! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

Pond

!

! ! !

!

! ! !

!

! ! !

!

! ! !

!

! ! !

!

!

! Tennis ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Courts

CS29X ! ! ! ! ! ! North East Storm Relief CSO
!ean ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
g Hi r !at e ! hW

! (

! Mud ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! !

!

! ! !

!

! ! ! !

!

! ! ! !

!

! ! ! !

!

! ! ! !

!

!

5.1m

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! D Fn ! !

! !
! !

! !
! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

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

! !
! !

! !
! !

! !
! !

! Air ! Shaft ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !
! !

! !
! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

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

!

!

!

! ! !
! ! ! !

! ! !
! !
4

!! ! ! ! ! !

!!! ! ! ! !

!!
! !

! !
! !

! !
! !

! !
! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

! ! !
! ! ! !

!! ! ! ! ! !

!! ! ! ! ! !

!!
! !

!

!

!

! !

! ! ! !

! !3 ! !
! ! !
AD

! ! !
! !

!! ! ! !

!!! ! !

!!
!

! ! 5.2m ! !

! !
!

EL L PI ER HE

Shadwell Dock ! ! ! ! Stairs

! !

! !

! ! !
! !

! ! !
! !

!! ! ! !

!! ! ! !

!!
!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

MLW

!

!Hard

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
Und

! Shadwell ! Entrance !
MLW
Und

!

!

!

!

!

!
Ward B dy

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
M HW

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Und

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Je

tty

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

v Ri

T er

!

ha

m

es!
l oo

Legend
! !
! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

we !Lo

rP

District Park Deficiency
! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Open ! Space ! Improvements ! !

Sites of Nature Conservation Importance
! of Metropolitan ! ! ! ! Sites Nature Conservation Importance ! Protection ! ! Flood Areas ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

SOUTHWARK

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!
sly Co

!
ns t&

LB

Bd

y

!

!

!

!

!

!

340

Gordon House

66

74

82

1 to 97

36

9.6m

24

GLAMIS

PLACE

GLAMIS PLACE

Lion Court

5 7 9 11 13

50

64

1 to 63

lk Tarbert Wa
26

Adventure Playground

Sou th Block
1 to 63

1 to 63

45

27

S HO

1

East Block

Peabody Estate

w Sh a d

e ll C

en tr e

1 to 63

U SE

West Block

F IE L DS

Sou th Block

Bath Court

e Ro th
435

rh ith

e Tu

nne

l

320

306

er

1

ch

to

an

70

tC

34

38
36
ou rt

El

ta bS Su

18

20
20

24

Area of Main Map

Sub way

Legend
Bol

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites Short Listed CSO Sites

!

!

! (

CSO (Directly Controlled)

!

!
0 10 20

±

PEA RTREE LAN E
SM

40

60

80

GLAMIS ROAD

!

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. 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.

!

!

in Sh g le

!

!

!

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00888 Date : .............2009/11/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

!

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

!

!

Title:

!

!

APPENDIX 3B S021T SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

M ON RE E T ZA ST

!

RO AD

39 37

1 to 63

31
51

49
32

65

!

1 to 4

1b to

33

TI AL

GL AMIS

53

47

55

20 b

11

63

23 35 47

35

57
13

Peabody Estate

EN

FI D

RED CASTL
1 to 12

N

O

C

SHADWELL

LB

&

AF T

THE HIGHWAY

9.7m

9.8m

1 to

SM

16

9

R

D

St Paul's Church

!

!!
1
2

Dock Cottages
14

12

2

20

33

Bollards

TOWER HAMLETS

21

1

11

Bollard

Jetty Bollard
FW
Und

FW

Brussel s

Wharf
Bollard

1 to 68

Sl ipw ay

Bol

WA P PIN G WAL L

!
Chy
1 to
15

37

El Sub Sta

The Monza Building

25

Pelican Wharf

57

30

!
(PH)

Prospect of Whitby

!

Pelican Stairs

Shingle
sly Co ns t&

320

!

Playground
Pavilion

C29XB
PCs
PEA RTREE LAN E

6.6m Playground Tennis Courts
GLAMIS ROAD

5.7m 5.0m
1
2 3 4

SH AD W
Bollards

Jetty
FW

5.7m
Und

Prospect Wharf

84 to 13 0

E CLO SE

9.3m

Monum ent

6.9m
Bol

Playground

Bowling Green

King Edward Memorial Park

King Edward Memorial Park
Pavilion

S021T
Pond

CS29X North East Storm Relief CSO
Mud
Me an g Hi at hW er

! (

5.1m
D Fn

!
9 3

Air Shaft

5.2m

EL L PI ER HE

AD
MLW

!
in Sh g le

Shadwell Dock Stairs Hard

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
Und

Ward B dy
Und

M

HW

Je

tty

v Ri

T er

ha

m

es
oo l

we Lo

rP

Legend

Listed Buildings ! SOUTHWARK

Archaeological Areas Conservation Areas

LB

Bd

y

340

Gordon House

66

74

82

1 to 97

36

9.6m

24

GLAMIS

PLACE

GLAMIS PLACE

Lion Court

5 7 9 11 13

50

64

1 to 63

lk Tarbert Wa
26

Adventure Playground

Sou th Block
1 to 63

1 to 63

41

45

27

2

!
Peabody Estate
Sou th Block

NE

S HO

1

!

East Block

w Sh a d

e ll C

en tr e

1 to 63

U SE

West Block

F IE L DS

!

Bath Court

e Ro th
435

rh ith

e Tu

nne

l

306

M

er

1

ch

to

an

70

tC

34

38
36
ou rt

El

ta bS Su

18

20
20

24

22

14

16

Area of Main Map

Sub way

Legend
Bol

Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites Short Listed CSO Sites

! (

CSO (Directly Controlled)

0

10

20

±

40

60

80

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. 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.

35
SM

Map Ref : .......101PL-SS-00889 Date : .............2009/11/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

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

Title:

APPENDIX 3C S021T SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN

M ON RE E T ZA ST

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 4

APPENDIX 4 – PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

Appendix 4 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

FI D

EN

TI AL

C

O

Area of Main Map

N

AF T

Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed Shaft Sites Short Listed CSO Sites

D

R

&

! (
TOWER HAMLETS S021T

CSO (Directly Controlled)

C29XB

! (CS29X

North East Storm Relief CSO
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-00836 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 S021T SITES AERIAL PLAN

Site Suitability Report S021T – Appendix 4

View of the site looking south towards the River Thames.

View of the children’s playground located in the southwestern area of the park.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T – Appendix 4

View of the site looking southeast across the wildflower meadow. Free Trade Wharf is visible in the background.

Appendix 4
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 5

APPENDIX 5 – TRANSPORT PLAN

Appendix 5 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

N
GLAMIS

GLAMIS PLACE
24

5

Lion Court

7

9 11 13

PLACE

Gordon House

16

9

A
SM

to

1

LB

ck Cottages

Playground Bowling
12 2
Pavilion

B

Green

King Edward Memorial Park

PCs

Playground

Tennis Courts
AREA OF ROAD/ FOOTWAY CLOSURE SITE AREA

21

Shaft
AREA OF EXCAVATION (INDICATIVE) ALTERNATIVE ACCESS ROUTE

1

THAMES PATH CLOSURE
Revision History

Iss

Description

Dsgnr

Chkd

Appd

Date

11

AB

SECOND ISSUE FIRST ISSUE

IL MJL

GT AJW

GT MRW

20-04-10 26-08-09

AA

OVERFLOW CULVERT PHASE 1

1 (BUILT IN TWO PHASES TO 2 MAINTAIN THAMES PATH 3 ROUTE)

OVERFLOW CULVERT PHASE 2 (BUILT IN TWO PHASES TO MAINTAIN THAMES PATH ROUTE)

4

Shadwell Dock

SHAD

WEL

L PIE RH

Stairs

INDICATIVE AREA OF EXCAVATION FOR PHASE 2

EAD

Bollar

ds TEMPORARY FOOTWAY
THAMES PATH AND PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION ROUTE THAMES PATH CLOSURE

Hard
MLW
Und

Jetty
The Point, 7th Floor,

FW

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

D
FW

Shadwell Entrance
Un
MLW

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

MJL

LTTDT

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

d

Und

Location / Town: Site Name:

Ward Bdy Und

Project Name:

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

M
Slipw
PLOTTED ON

H

W
10 m 0 40 m

TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN S021T - INTERMEDIATE SHAFT SITE + CSO
Drawing No.:

ay
BY Andy.Purdy LOCATION :

1 to 68

SCALE 1 : 500

Prospect Wharf

21\04\10

Thames Tideway Tunnel X:\Project\371840\CAD\Design Data\CAD Thames\Drawings\Infrastructure\Routewide\100-DE-TRA-S021T-801601.dgn

t Je

ty

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DE-TRA-S021T-801601

1:500

A1

AB

100

150

200mm

C

82

1 to 97
84 to 130

Monument
2. 3.

King Edward Memorial Park

Pavilion

Pond
h W at

D Fn

Air

36

50

64

1 to 63

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

66

74

THIS DRAWING

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

Subway

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNACE DATUM NEWLYN.

NOTES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. TO MAINTAIN CONSTANT ACCESS TO THE THAMES PATH ROUTE, IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE OVERFLOW CULVERT BE BUILT IN TWO PHASES. NO TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT REQUIRED FOR PHASE 1 (WESTERN SECTION OF CULVERT). FOR PHASE TWO (EASTERN SECTION OF CULVERT) SECTION OF THAMES PATH CLOSED, TEMPORARY FOOTWAY AND PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION PROVIDED.

320

PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 7 YEARS (APPROX) PHASE 2 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - 6-7 MONTHS

Playground

Mud
NE PEARTREE LA

er

M
GLAMIS ROAD

ea

n

H

ig

KEY

THAMES PATH AND PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION ROUTE

AREA OF ACCESS ONLY

TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE

35

AREA OF TEMPORARY WORKS

PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION ROUTE

SM

9

3

i Sh ng le

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 6

APPENDIX 6 – SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN

Appendix 6 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

1
81

2
WO 305 IL5.25m

3
7236
FB

4
7106 5370 FLUSHING EYE
FB

5
1273 63mm WO 9112

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
WO DBV207728
Status:

IL-0.42m
Glastonbury Place

4118

381
FB

Corringham House

WO

8106

N

GEOLOGY
8101 NRV NRV WO

9108

4117 7107
FB

1105 1112 5915 2105 WO
11.1m 8 2

7108

WORK IN PROGRESS
Ground level 105(m OD + 100) Club
Works

381 3101

381

305

3103

WO DM09088 WO

Keyplan:

N

Club

Warehouses

6933
1

FH 6809 3104
Collegiate School

8102 6102
FB D Fn FB FB

9107

DRAWING LOCATION

Base of Made Ground
7002 7655 WO 6009 WO 6005
Playground

2108
PH

5716 IL-0.46m

3004

90mm

Ogilvie House

El Sub Sta

8031

100(m OD + 100) and Superficial
WO

5001
6010 5008

99(m OD + 100) Base of London
9016 Clay Formation 9015 IL4.63m 8014 WO 8013 8002 9033 IL4.59m

1001

Collegiate Boys School

IL5.25m
ESS
Stylus House

2641 7007 5760 WO

11.8m

9398

8011

A
6305

3015 WO WO

7312 6380 5007 6129

9032 WO 6004 7001 965 8010 6003
FB FB

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

WO

2011

10.7m

3005 6934
10.8m

4" 3006 ABANDONED 5715

2677 305 9030 Base SE

WO DBV200107 2431
10.9m

1002 WO
SL

2005 IL-0.46m 5006
Thirza House

VT 6593 CL11.63m IL5.23m

5020 229

6545 6002

63mm 63mm

x 610

of Lambeth Group
9014 IL4.1m 7056

73(m OD + 100) RATCLIFF

5025 5018 IL5.21m
11.8m

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNACE DATUM NEWLYN.

Arta

2004
Community Centre

3001

533 3007
Masters Lodge Allotment Gardens

5019

5 STEPS

9007

x 533

Barnardo Gardens

8012
Games Court

8009
Edward Mann Close

DBV209302 WO
10.6m

2435 457

2003 7146 2904
Playground

SE 2670

IL-3.43m SE IL-4.44m DBV471539 9006 6055 Base of Thanet Sand EV WO 60(m OD + 100) VT WO

305 Formation

9012

229 305
11.6m

Barnardo Gardens

WO PH

1902 2902

914 x 610

5888 ST IL5.14m DBV208479 IL-4.25m 6725 LB 5901A IL-4.2m BS WO 11.6m IL5.06m TOP STEP -3.25 DC WO CL11.32m IL5.03m 6905 WO 6553 DBV471568
Warton Court
Games Court

7901
11.9m WO
TCB

2648 900 x 600
10.6m

2373 IL-4.39m
Cycle Path

9.2m

9908A WO

1 to 12

11.2m

WO DBV235203 BS 9907A

IL-4.32m DBV471553

IL-0.47m 2905
Gosling House

14 to 17

RE 1895 IL-4.33m WO 2666 7913 Works

Masters Lodge

Convent

305 3904

1 to 19

3902
Hall

of Mercy

Allotment
Ikon House

Gardens

1 to 19 Ikon House

7.7m

1903 3903 1904 6363 2909
1 to 14 All Saints Court

Suggested invert level of shaft 50.66(m9905A OD + 100)
SE 7101 BS WO VT 8911 SE 8910 5604 7904 SE
Works

9906B

3768

4904
11.2m

11.8m

NOTE:
WO 9904A
St James’s Gardens
War Meml

2634 4901

4903 3901 3905 WO
11.1m

The Highway Trading Centre

IL-4.21m 6904

8909 2667

300

2903 WO 6190 WO WO

WO

WO IL-0.47m
11.7m

IL-4.22m 2444 WO 3906 DBV471429 4905
Playground

5914 5915 6903 6902

WO WO 2907 DBV471440 2802 FH 2436 2801
11.2m
Post IL-4.09m 6347

SU

11.2m

ACIL-4.16m WO
Hall

9903B SE STEPS (3) ABANDONED SE CL7.51m DS
WW IL 3.42

HW IL 2.95

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.

0.6m

2658 6901 VT 5665 WO 7915
Hotel WB

1907

11.3m

7.2m

1801

ABANDONED 1814 WO 20" TRUNK IL-4.09m IL-4.13m 3804
11.0m

3801

Eva Armsby

Glamis Estate

6438

HW IL-2.82m BS IL2.78m WO IL2.92m BS 7.5m IL3.07m WO BS IL3.25m 6837 DBV227232 WO

LEGEND
FOUL WATER

Family Centre

B

DBV471459 IL-4.13m 3803 IL-4.06m 1802 3805

7741 5817 5818
North

6808

SE NRV 9801A CL6.58m CL6.87m IL2.62m 7136 IL2.42m

SURFACE WATER

WO

Block

Works

7815 Shaft 2655

Air

2660 VT CL7.89m IL3.33m

CLEAN WATER

Peabody Estate Peabody Estate

CL10.5m IL4.72m

6809

RE VT CL7.65m IL3.64m
STEPS

7.6m

5668

WO

WO 3806

WO
Adventure Playground

1522
Bath Court

BS IL3.6m WO

7.4m

CL7.74m BS IL3.44m IL3.51m

Chalk
BS
2

GAS
2664 SE

2657 2656
435

5540 7814
IL-2.56 PS IL-2.22m SYNTHETIC GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DERIVED FROM THE BGS LONDON LITHOFRAME50 MODEL, HISTORICAL BOREHOLES 1 to 25 AND BERRY (1979). PLEASE NOTE, GROUND CONDITIONS MAY Keepier VARY AND THIS DATA SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DETAILED Wharf ENGINEERING PURPOSES

FIBRE OPTICS

1803 IL-4.11m 1804 IL-0.52m 3808 SE WO
9.6m

2451

381 3807

5810 305

Lion Court

6813 6810

CL8.05m 7813 IL3.68m

TELECOMUNICATIONS

4802 4803 SE SE

4801 WO

5809

DBV207722

WO 2630 BS VT IL3.93m Shallow Main CL9.22m 9.3m IL3.89m
1600x 940 DC

LOW VOLTAGE CABLES

HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES

IL-0.51m 3709 DBV227172 WO 1705
9.7m 10.4m

2628

WO

381 4701 4709

CL10.89m IL3.79m BS DC 5709 DC
SE 5714

CL9.07m IL3.87m
Shingle

EXISTING TUNNELS

SHADWELL
5841 BS IL4.03m

LB

WO 5711 IL-2.78m CL9.61m 5470 IL3.58m

5710 IL-2.5m

IL3.53m

SE CL9.28m

WO DBV227203
FB

3710

<-- 381
9.8m

1600
BS BS 4710 4702 SE VT CL10.98m IL-0.52m SE CL10.95m IL3.97m

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
Shingle

1706

ABANDONED

Free Trade Wharf

229 BS BS IL4.18m 2456 IL4.13m VT 2701 2702 SE
St Paul’s Church
Rectory

BS 6256 BS IL4.06m 2708 IL4.06m

WO

3701 408

IL4.01m 2627

IL3.79m
Bol

Mud 6.9m

WATER STORM & FOUL SEWERS

- ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS

IL2.73m

Bol

Bol

Jetty

IL-2.31m WO
1

Playground

IL2.58m TB PS

CL6.24m IL2.2m 381 ABANDONED HW
1219 x 813 ABANDONED

OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS: TELECOMS ELECTRICITY
IL-0.46m

King Edward
Dock Cottages

Playground Bowling Green

Memorial Park

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

IL0.65m

IL0.57m 8949 IL0.41m 8416 IL-0.04m WO 2703 WO IL0.31m 2601 BS IL0.29m 2602 VT IL0.2m DP 3606 3601 IL-0.02m 3607 3603
6.6m

Pavilion

HW HW IL-0.53m

ABANDONED

King Edward Memorial Park

IL0.01m

3706 SE
Pavilion

CL5.49m

HW ABANDONED IL-1.25m
PS

C

1601

BS

PCs

S021T

IL-0.55m STEPS ABANDONED VMH ABANDONED IL-0.55m

IL-0.92m STEPS (3) SE CL5.33m IL0.43m SE IL0.5m STEPS (5) IL-1.51m Mud

GAS

Pond

FV FV

BS IL-0.19m
Playground Tennis Courts

SE ABANDONED

5.1m

10 m

0 SCALE 1 : 1250

100 m

BS IL-0.28m
Air
D Fn

VT

Shaft

PROPOSED EDF TUNNEL

Shadwell New Basin
3604

6579

IL-0.34m

BS
5.7m

WO

IL-0.34m BS
5.0m

WO
Bollard Bollards

IL-0.37m WO
5.2m Shadwell Dock Stairs

3605
Jetty

4607
Hard
MLW

Bollard Jetty

AB

DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE

IL RS
Dsgnr

GT DS
Chkd

GT CH
Appd

06-11-09 17-07-09
Date

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Bollards

5.7m

Shadwell Entrance
MLW

Iss

Description

SITE BOUNDARY
9013 WO

Shadwell Old Basin

Prospect Wharf

2"
Bollard

METERED

GLOBE STAIRS INLET
Bol

ABANDONED
Shingle

Hard

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

IL-1.3m IL0.96m

2501A

WO
El Sub Sta

Location Code:

OS Reference:

Security Reference:

Drawn By:

D

2612 6756
Chy

ROTHERHITHE TUNNEL
King and Queen Wharf Globe Wharf

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

6568
The Monza Building

LTTDT
HW
Location / Town: Site Name:

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

2404A 1402C 1404 1405
Riverside Mansions

2403A 5887

CL4.56m
Prospect

x 965 ABANDONED
CL4.64m
of Whitby
(PH)

WO Project Name:

Globe Wharf
2.2m

THAMES TUNNEL
WO
Contract Name:

Pelican Wharf

2940

IL-0.59m

CL2.25m
Pelican Stairs

IL0.09m

IL0.39m WO

WO

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

PELICAN STAIRS INLET ABANDONED Shingle 1406 331 2405B

MLW

9404 IL0.45m 9401 IL0.43m WO IL-1m

SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN S021T
Drawing No.:

4.4m

8402
PLOTTED ON 13\11\09
Prospect

BY

SE danny.boxell

4737
c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100001.dgn

LVHTCABGWF

GTCABVHFWS

0

WO

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100001

1:1250

A1

AB

100

150

SW

THVFWS

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 7

APPENDIX 7 – CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 7 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

9.3m

DRAWING LOCATION

EXISTING NORTH EASTERN STORM RELIEF

A 9.8m
INTERCEPTION CHAMBER MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.

NOTE : 1. ACCESS WILL BE THROUGH ROADS/PATHS IN PARK , WHICH MAY HAVE TO BE STRENGTHEND WIDENED.

500m†

TEMPORARY WORKING AREA 7887m†

King Edward

Playground Bowling
Pavilion

ACCESS

1.5m SQUARE BOX CONNECTION CULVERT

B

KEY:

1000m†

Mud

2

1000m

EXCAVATED MATERIAL, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA

2

1000m SECONDARY CRANE

SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE.

Playground

2

PRIMARY CRANE

1000m

SHAFT SEGMENT STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORAGE AREA.

Courts

2

1000m

D Fn

PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING / OFFICES / WELFARE / CANTEEN & MEDICAL

1000m†

1200m†

SITE BOUNDARY 33085m†

DISCLAIMER:

C 5.7m

INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT, BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT

5.0m
10 m 0 40 m

SCALE 1 : 500 25m I.D. SHAFT

Hard
AB DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE IL DB
Dsgnr

GT RS
Chkd

GT DA
Appd

07.04.10 21.08.09
Date

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

5.7m

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
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: Project Name:

WASTE LONDON N/A

Prospect Wharf

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

Bol

CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT - S021T - (INTERMEDIATE SHAFT SITE + CSO)
Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100202
PLOTTED ON 20\04\10 BY Andy.Purdy LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\Planning-Consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100202.dgn c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

1:500

A1

AB

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

9.3m

DRAWING LOCATION

EXISTING NORTH EASTERN STORM RELIEF

A 9.8m
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 INTERCEPTION CHAMBER

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.

NOTE : 1. ACCESS WILL BE THROUGH ROADS/PATHS IN PARK , WHICH MAY HAVE TO BE STRENGTHEND WIDENED.

1.5m SQUARE CONNECTION CULVERT

King Edward
Playground Bowling
Pavilion

B

TEMPORARY WORKING AREA 10098m† KEY: 3250m†

400m†

Mud

EXCAVATED MATERIAL, STORAGE AND HANDALING AREA

500m† SITE BOUNDARY 33085m† PRIMARY CRANE SECONDARY CRANE SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE.

Playground
ACCESS

SHAFT SEGMENT STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORAGE AREA.

Courts

D Fn

PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING / OFFICES / WELFARE / CANTEEN & MEDICAL

1225m†

EXCAVATED MATERIALS LOADING JETTY

1000m† DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.

C 5.7m

EXCAVATED MATERIALS CONVEYORS

5.0m
10 m 0 40 m

25m I.D. SHAFT

SCALE 1 : 500

NEW MATERIALS JETTY

Hard
AC AB OVERFLOW CULVERT DRAFT - THIRD ISSUE DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE IL DB DB
Dsgnr

GT RS RS
Chkd

GT DA DA
Appd

07.04.10 01.09.09 28.08.09
Date

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

5.7m

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
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: Project Name:

WASTE LONDON N/A

Prospect Wharf

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

Bol

CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT - S021T - INTERMEDIATE WITH JETTY & CSO
Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100212
PLOTTED ON 20\04\10 BY Andy.Purdy LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\Planning-Consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100212.dgn c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

1:500

A1

AC

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

9.3m N
ACCESS
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

SITE BOUNDARY

TEMP WORKING AREA 22028m†

9.8m
DRAWING LOCATION

A
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

750m†

King Edward
1000m†

Playground Bowling
Pavilion

6500m† 500m†

POWER SUPPLY

B

Mud
KEY: 450m† 500m†
2

4500m

EXCAVATED MATERIAL, STORAGE AND HANDLING AREA

Playground Courts
2

4500m

SHAFT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRANE, PRIMARY GANTRY CRANE, SEGMENT LOADING AREA AND SEGMENT STORAGE STOCKYARD

D Fn
2

500m

GROUT BATCHING PLANT AND SILOS

1500m†
2

1500m 4500m† 450m EXCAVATED MATERIAL CONVEYOR SECONDARY CRANE
2 2

TBM WORKSHOP AND TUNNEL MAINTENANCE AREA

TBM MATERIALS AND SPARES STORAGE AREA PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING

EXCAVATED MATERIALS LOADING JETTY

2

1000m

5.7m

750m

OFFICES AND WELFARE

2

500m MATERIAL CONVEYOR

CANTEEN AND MEDICAL

DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT, BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT

10 m GANTRY CRANE 25m I.D SHAFT

0 SCALE 1 : 500

40 m

Hard
150 AC DRAFT-THIRD ISSUE DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE IL RS SS
Dsgnr

GT DS RS
Chkd

GT CH SJW
Appd

07/04/10 17/07/09 10-07-09
Date

5.7m

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
NEW MATERIALS JETTY

AB

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 Prospect Wharf

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:

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

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT S021T (MAIN)
Drawing No.:

PLOTTED ON

07\04\10

BY

Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\Drawings\Planning-Consents\Routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100002.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100002

1:500

A1

AC

100

200mm

C

5.0m

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 8

APPENDIX 8 – OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT

Appendix 8 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

1

2

3

4

5

6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

N
Status:

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

9.3m

DRAWING LOCATION

EXISTING NORTH EASTERN STORM RELIEF

A 9.8m
INTERCEPTION CHAMBER MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345

COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT ACCESS DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.

NOTES : NOTES: 1. 1. HARDSTANDING HARDSTANDINGINIDCATED INDICATEDFULLY FULLYENCOMPASSING ENCOMPASSINGSHAFT SHAFT/ / TOP TOPSTRUCTURE. STRUCTURE.REDUCTION REDUCTIONIN INAREA AREACAN CANBE BECONSIDERED. CONSIDERED. 2. ACCESS OPENING TO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER IS SHOWN INDICATIVELY ONLY. 3. SECONDARY SHAFT TO BE CAPPED OFF AND RETURNED TO EXISTING GROUND LEVEL AND SITE REINSTATED TO ORIGINAL CONDITIONS. THE CAPPED SHAFT IS TO BE VENTED IF NOT BACKFILLED.

PENSTOCK ACCESS

1m SQUARE BOX CONNECTION CULVERT

King Edward
Playground Bowling
Pavilion

B

Mud

25m I.D SHAFT HARDSTANDING

Playground

FENCE

Courts

D Fn
VENTILATION BUILDING 15m X 5m X 5m HIGH 3m x 3m FLAP VALVE CHAMBER @107m (AOD +100m) PERMANENT ACCESS

5.7m
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATION PHASE ARRANGEMENT, BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT 20m X 10m TOP STRUCTURE @ 107m (AOD +100) VENTILATION TOWER 10m HIGH

5.0m
10 m 0 40 m

SCALE 1 : 500

Hard
AC OVERFLOW CULVERT AB DRAFT - THIRD ISSUE DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE IL AP AP
Dsgnr

GT RS RS
Chkd

GT DA DA
Appd

07.04.10 28.08.09 21.08.09
Date

AA DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

5.7m

Shadwell Entrance
MLW
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: Project Name:

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

Prospect Wharf

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

Bol

OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - S021T - (INTERMEDIATE SHAFT SITE + CSO)
Drawing No.:

PLOTTED ON

07\04\10

BY

Andy.Purdy

LOCATION :

Thames Tideway Tunnel

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100203.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100203

1:500

A1

AC

100

150

200mm

C

1
SM

2

3

4

5

16

9

6
1
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK

LB

to

N
Status:

Subway

WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N

9.8m

Monument

6.9m
320

DRAWING LOCATION

A

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

Playground

King Edward
Playground Bowling
12 2
Pavilion

Memorial Park
Green

King Edward Memorial Park

Pavilion PCs

Mud
NE PEARTREE LA

Pond
25m I.D SHAFT HARDSTANDING

B

6.6m
M
20m X 10m TOP STRUCTURE @ 107m (AOD +100)

n ea

H

ig

h

W

at

er

GLAMIS ROAD

Playground

Tennis Courts
FENCE

5.1m

35

21

D Fn

PERMANENT ACCESS

VENTILATION BUILDING 15m X 5m X 5m HIGH

Air Shaft

SM

1

5.7m

11

SHAD

WEL

L PIE R

Stairs

HEAD

Bollar

ds

VENTILATION TOWER 10m HIGH

Hard
MLW
Und
10 m 0 40 m

Jetty

SCALE 1 : 500

FW

FW

5.7m
Un

Shadwell Entrance
MLW

d

Und
AC AB DRAFT-THIRD ISSUE DRAFT - SECOND ISSUE IL RS SS
Dsgnr

GT DS RS
Chkd

GT CH SJW
Appd

07-04-10 17-07-09 10-07-09
Date

Ward Bdy Und

AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description

M
Slipw

H

W

ay

1 to 68

Prospect Wharf

Je

tt

y

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

D

Bol

N/A
Project Group:

-

UBR
Sub Process:

AP

LTTDT

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

PPI N

El Sub Sta

R
Andy.Purdy LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel

iv

WA

WA

er

T
L

h

G

am
er

es
ol

Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:

37

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

LL

Po

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
Drawing Title:

ow

OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT S021T (MAIN)
Drawing No.:

PLOTTED ON

07\04\10

BY

x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\routewide\100-DL-PNC-S021T-100103.dgn

c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008

0

100-DL-PNC-S021T-100103

1:500

A1

AC

100

150

200mm

C

9
1

3

5.0m

2 3 4

5.2m Shadwell Dock

OVERFLOW CULVERT

DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATION PHASE ARRANGEMENT, BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT

Sh in gl e

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 S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

APPENDIX 9 – ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLES

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Access to road network Site accesses directly onto Glamis Road from King Edward Memorial Park. An access would need to be constructed with the removal of mature trees which are situated on the eastern footway of Glamis Road and permit parking (including a coach set-down point). A bus stop that is located at the site of the proposed access would need to be relocated. As part of the access construction, a ramp within the existing park area would need construction due to the level difference between the park Mitigation required and conclusions Site access from park onto Glamis Road would require construction of a ramp due to the level difference, the removal of mature trees on the eastern side of Glamis Road and the removal of on street permit holder parking (including a coach set-down point) on the western side of Glamis Road. The bus stop that is situated at the proposed site access would also require relocation. The Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left except site access located further north on Glamis Road with similar constraints as intermediate with CSO interception site. Mitigation required and conclusions As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left except site access located further north on Glamis Road with similar constraints to intermediate with CSO interception site. Comments Site accesses directly onto the TLRN (A1203) from King Edward Memorial Park via the park gates currently used for pedestrian access. It has been assumed that the entire park would be closed for the duration of the construction. A new wider access would need to be constructed with the removal of the park gates and the access route through the park would require widening. The Thames Path would require diversion. Care should be taken to maintain access to the adjacent flats. The Highway (A1203) forms part of the TLRN and is a street lit single carriageway subject to Main Mitigation required and conclusions Left in/left out type arrangement recommended for the site access as the TLRN (A1203) is a multi lane single carriageway with high traffic volumes making right turns difficult for construction vehicles. Thames Path requires diversion. Conclusion: Road access to site possible for HGVs with the construction of a new site access (wider than the existing pedestrian access) and the removal of park gates. It has been assumed that the entire park would be closed for the duration of the construction. Care should be taken to maintain access to the

Appendix 9 - Page 1
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments and the carriageway. The Thames Path and internal park paths would require diversion around the site. Glamis Road is street lit and subject to a 20mph speed limit. It is also subject to a 7.5 ton weight restriction (except for access). A 15’ 9” height restriction applies on a bridge to the south of the site entrance. However, it is unlikely that any site-related vehicles would travel in this direction. Access to the TLRN (A1203) is via a signalised junction approximately 50 metres north of the proposed access Mitigation required and conclusions Thames Path and several paths within the park would also require diversion. Glamis Road is subject to a 7.5 ton weight restriction, however no visible constraints were identified on the section of Glamis Road that would be used by construction vehicles. Access to the TLRN (A1203) is via the signalised junction to the north of the proposed site access. East and westbound access is Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments a 30mph speed limit. Visibility splays are achievable to 90m in both directions from the site access. It appears to be very difficult to turn right out of the site due to the high traffic volumes along The Highway combined with it being a wide multi lane single carriageway. It is recommended that a left in left out type arrangement should be considered for the site access, although this would make it difficult to travel east from the site. Direct access onto the TLRN (A1203) for travelling westbound. Eastbound vehicles could use Canon Street Road via the A1203 for access onto the TLRN (A13). TLRN highly sensitive. TLRN part of Olympic Route Appendix 9 - Page 2
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Main Mitigation required and conclusions adjacent flats. The Thames Path would require diversion around the site. Site accesses directly onto the TLRN (A1203) and could use a left in/left out type arrangement, as the TLRN (A1203) is a multi lane single carriageway with high traffic levels. In this scenario, eastbound travel from the site vehicles would have to use the TLRN (A1203) westbound (as only left out of access) then travel northbound along Canon Street Road leading onto the TLRN (A13). See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Site would no longer affect the Rotherhithe Tunnel as identified in Table 2.3.

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments point. The Highway (A1203) forms part of the TLRN and is a street lit multilane single carriageway subject to a 30mph speed limit. It is also redroute with no stopping permitted at any time. TLRN in this area highly sensitive and part of Olympic Route Network. Permanent access located on Glamis Road at southwestern corner of park. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5 Mitigation required and conclusions possible via this junction. Conclusion: Road access to site possible for HGVs with the construction of a site access onto Glamis Road. The Thames Path and internal park paths would require diversion. Access to the TLRN (A1203) is via the signalised junction approximately 50 metres north of the proposed site access. The A1203 is a multi-lane single carriageway subject to a 30mph speed limit. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Network. Permanent site access on Glamis Road. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 3
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Access to river Intermediate with CSO interception would not require river access. Excavated material would be transported by road to a main shaft hub site. Mitigation required and conclusions Combined intermediate shaft site and CSO would not require river access. Excavated material would be transported by road to a main shaft hub site. Route to potential rail link at London Bridge station possible although with several constraints. Route runs under and over several bridges although with no visible restrictions, as well as through the congestion zone and a high street area. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Site located adjacent to the river for river access via material conveyors. Thames Path would require diverting. Mitigation required and conclusions Site located adjacent to the river for river access via material conveyors. Thames Path would require diverting. Comments Main shaft site adjacent to river requiring the construction of two new jetties to transfer excavated and new material to and from the site. Thames Path requires diversion. Main Mitigation required and conclusions Site requires the construction of two new jetties to transfer materials via the river. Thames Path requires diversion.

Access to rail

Access to London Bridge station westbound along the TLRN (A1203) and follows 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

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Appendix 9 - Page 4
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments 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. The route passes over and under several bridges with no visible restrictions and 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 4.6km to rail access point from shaft site. Mitigation required and conclusions 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. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 5
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Parking Some parking could be provided within the site boundary for some of the workforce. On street parking is unavailable on nearby surrounding roads as restricted to permit holders only. The Highway is red route. Public transport accessibility PTAL 3-4, as identified within Table 2.3. Mitigation required and conclusions Some parking for workforce could potentially be provided within site boundary for some of the workforce. No alternative on street parking available in the direct vicinity. Possibility for workforce to use public transport to access the site. Any permit parking displaced by the construction of the site access onto Glamis Road would need to be relocated within the area. The bus stop at the As intermediate with CSO interception, see left As intermediate with CSO interception, see left As intermediate with CSO interception, see left As intermediate with CSO interception, see left Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments As intermediate with CSO interception, see left Mitigation required and conclusions As intermediate with CSO interception, see left Comments As intermediate with CSO interception, see left Main Mitigation required and conclusions As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Traffic Management

Construction of the access point onto Glamis Road would require the removal of on street permit parking and a coach set-down point. The bus stop that is located at the point of the proposed access

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Construction of a new access wider than current pedestrian access which requires the removal of park gates. Diversion of Thames Path around the site required. This is a substantial diversion to the path. Thames Path

A new site access with a left in and left out setup (widening existing pedestrian access to park) would require construction. The park gates would need to be removed and the Thames Path also requires diversion.

Appendix 9 - Page 6
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments may need to be relocated. In addition some trees may require removal and a ramp into the site would require construction. Site traffic is unlikely to use Glamis Road to the south of the site access, however putting in place a ‘no left turn’ from the site access is recommended. Diversion of Thames Path around the site required. This is a substantial diversion to the path. Diversion/ closure of the internal park paths is also likely to be required for construction of overflow culvert and Mitigation required and conclusions proposed access point would need to be relocated to allow access to be gained. The Thames Path currently runs through the site and would need to be diverted. Internal park paths would need to be closed or diverted if the park is to remain open to the public during construction. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments in this area very busy. Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 7
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Transport Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments connection culvert. Summary Site is suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception. Access would be provided from Glamis Road and would require the construction of a ramp, the removal of trees and on street permit parking and the relocation of a bus stop on Glamis Road. Access to the TLRN is via the signalised junction of Glamis Road with The Highway (A1203). Potential road and rail access routes are suitable for HGVs as the site is adjacent to the TLRN (A1203) which is used to access the rail link at London Bridge station via a high street area and the congestion zone. The Thames Path would require diversion around the site and internal park paths would require diversion or closure. There is the possibility for the workforce to use public transport to access the site, and some parking could potentially be provided on site for the workforce. There is no additional parking available in the vicinity of the site. The site is suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities for the same reasons as given for the Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. In addition the site is adjacent to the river for good river access and the use of material conveyors and jetties. Site is suitable in transport terms, albeit requiring the construction of a new site access and the removal of park gates. It has been assumed that the entire park would be closed for the duration of the construction period. The existing access to the flats would need to be maintained. Potential road and rail access routes are suitable for HGVs as the site is adjacent to the TLRN (A1203) which is used to access the rail link at London Bridge station via a high street area and the congestion zone. A left in/left out type arrangement would be required for the site access as the TLRN (A1203) is a multi lane single carriageway with high traffic volumes restricting right turns in and out of the site for construction vehicles. Site is adjacent to the river requiring the construction of two new jetties to transfer excavated and new material to and from the site. The Thames Path would require diversion around the site. Possibility for workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided on site for the workforce. There is no available additional parking in the vicinity of the site. Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 8
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Designations, including Archaeological Priority Areas Summary of historical uses Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments The site is within the Tower Hamlets Archaeological Priority Area (APAS). The 19th century OS maps indicate the site to be occupied by a large fish market along the southern edge of the site and numerous other buildings to the north. By the 1930s the buildings are demolished and a park (King Edward Memorial Park) established in the 1940s. This has remained to the present day. No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of Medium value being within the site. Two records exist for the site. A record of post medieval ceramics (MLO 12185) and post hole of possible prehistoric date (MLO7755). Foundations of the 19 century fish market may still exist in the area of the proposed shaft. A number of records for structures and find spots exist for the Thames foreshore to the south and outside the site. Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected Construction impact of potential waterlogged deposits containing archaeological remains may cause dewatering. This potential impact should be considered given 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 12m. 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.
th

Mitigation required and conclusions N/A 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 Potential receptors of medium value 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. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.

Extent of existing disturbance

Appendix 9 - Page 9
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Archaeology Site considerations Potential issues Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Detailed design proposals, and an outline method statement would be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts, and to inform mitigation proposals. With the currently available information it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation methods could include: Review/production of existing desk based assessments Production of deposits model Archaeological monitoring of geo technical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation

Summary

Based on current information this site is suitable for use as an Intermediate with CSO interception, Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a Main shaft site. Based on the information currently available, archaeological receptors of medium value are present. It is possible that further archaeological receptors of high or medium value may be present within this site. Further research is required to clarify the likely importance of any remains and of the buildings, recorded in the historical record, at this site. While no direct evidence has been revealed, waterlogged remains and peat deposits of high or medium value may also be present. 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.

Appendix 9 - Page 10
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Designations including Conservation Areas, including trees Listed Buildings Pelican Stairs, Grade II: 170m B and C warehouse, Metropolitan Wharf, Grade II: 240m A Warehouse, Metropolitan Wharf, Grade II: 230m Wall closing north end of court yard, Grade II: 75m Iron Railings, Wall and Iron gates of St Paul’s Church, Grade II: 120m St Pauls Terrace, Grade II: 60m Stone Stairs, Grade II: 210m London Hydraulic power company station with number 37, Grade II*: 145m East block with attached railings and gatepiers Peabody Estate, Grade II: 80m Free Trade Wharf, Grade II: 150m West block with attached railings and gatepiers Peabody 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 S02IT, mitigation would not be applicable in the case of locally listed parks and gardens and registered historic parks Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left Mitigation required and conclusions As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Appendix 9 - Page 11
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Estate, Grade II: 70m St Mary’s Church, Grade II: 175m St Paul’s Church Shadwell, Grade B (equates to Grade II*): 100m Flagged passage (approaching stone stairs from the highway), Grade II: 210m Prospect of Whitby Public House, Grade II: 145m North block with attached railings and gatepiers Peabody Estate, Grade II: 90m Air shaft to Rotherhithe Tunnel, Grade II: 0m Shadwell dock stairs, Grade II: 1m South block with attached railings and gatepiers Peabody Estate, Grade II: 60m St Paul’s Rectory, Grade II: 170m St Paul’s Church House, Grade II: 145m Locally Listed Buildings Mitigation required and conclusions and gardens and protected views. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 12
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments 387 Cable Street: 170m 432 to 446 Cable Street: 150m Conservation Areas St Paul’s Church Conservation Area: 80m York Square Conservation Area: 240m Wapping Wall Conservation Area: 0m Registered Historic Parks & Gardens There are no Registered Historic Parks and Gardens located within 250m of S02IT. Locally Listed Parks and Gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of S02IT. Protected Views There are no protected views within 250m of S02IT. Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly There is potential for one Grade II listed building and one conservation area to be directly Mitigation should be possible through a carefully considered As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 13
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments affected impacted upon as a result of the development proposals. Mitigation required and conclusions scheme design. The proposed location of any temporary and permanent structures should be away from the listed building to avoid any direct impacts. Any structures that are within the visual envelope of any listed structures would need additional mitigation potentially in the form of screening. Given the proposed location of constructional and operational structures within the site, there would be the potential for setting issues upon the Grade II listed Air shaft to Rotherhithe Tunnel. Screening would be required to mitigate any negative impact their construction would have on the air shaft. The development site is located within Wapping Wall Conservation Area and as such the proposed development would need to be of a high quality to Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 14
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions ensure it preserves or enhances the conservation area in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. This may prove to be difficult however because the structures proposed are to be built on an open recreational space which may make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the conservation area. The development may require the removal of trees from within the site and this would be a material consideration in obtaining consent for the site because of its location within a conservation area. Mitigation in the form of a high quality scheme design (with particular attention paid to the location of constructional and operational features in relation to existing trees on the site) and possible Appendix 9 - Page 15
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions screening is likely to be required. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

There is potential for 21 Grade II listed buildings, two Grade II* (including one Grade B) and two conservation areas to be impacted upon as a result of the development.

Of all the listed buildings identified only two are likely to be within the visual envelope of the site. Of these, the Grade II listed South Block of the Peabody Estate is unlikely to require mitigation as it is physically separated from the development site by the main road whereas the Grade II Shadwell Dock stairs are directly adjacent to the site. Suitable mitigation to reduce the impact of the development upon this receptor could be achieved through a high quality design and/ or screening. The two conservation areas identified would not require mitigation as they are not visible to or from

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Appendix 9 - Page 16
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions the development site. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected There is potential for two locally listed buildings to be impacted upon as a result of the development proposals. The two locally listed buildings do not fall within the visual envelope of the development and as such would not require mitigation. Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to replace lost vegetation and relate to character of the park. The construction occupies a large area of the park and has potential to give rise to a severe, adverse, direct impact on the character of the park. However, the permanent elements are contained to the south side of the park which has a working area to its west side. Hence, this site, however, less suitable could be made As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

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

Site is part of a Conservation Area, it is adjacent to the River Thames which is a Site of Nature Conversation Importance (SNCI) Sensitive site in the King Edward VII Memorial Park. River Thames to the south, residential properties to the west along with the Shadwell Basin, densely built-up residential area to the north, mix of industrial and residential properties to the east. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would potentially result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the park and the circulation routes within it and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on

As for the Intermediate with CSO interception, see left although in addition, the jetties and conveyors protruding into the River would result in a severe adverse impact on the character of the River and loss of mature trees.

As for the Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Appendix 9 - Page 17
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments neighbouring areas. Loss of mature trees and amenity grass. Permanent elements would potentially result in permanent, adverse direct impacts on the character of the park and indirect, adverse impacts on the character of the River and its frontage. Potential views likely to be affected Open views from within the park and higher floors of residential properties to the east and north. Partially interrupted and seasonal views from The Highway, and the River. During construction, views of cranes from within the park, surrounding properties, and Canary Wharf. Views of permanent elements from within the park. Mitigation required and conclusions suitable if the park is reinstated in character postconstruction and appropriate mitigation is carried out for the permanent elements. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimize visual impact. Design of top structure, vent column, and electrical kiosk to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant which could adversely impact the visual amenity, especially from the north side. The permanent elements are screened from the River by a conifer hedge which would be retained.

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left

Appendix 9 - Page 18
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions This site is suitable only if the visual amenity of the park is re-instated post construction and adequate new planting is provided for the same. Particular considerations on sites where new permanent structures are required Permanent structures would potentially have a direct impact on one Grade II listed building and one conservation area and an indirect impact upon two Grade II listed buildings. There is also the potential for permanent structures to impact upon the character of the local townscape character and local views. Any permanent structures would need to be of a high quality design and/or screened to ensure that they preserve or enhance the conservation area and do not have a negative impact on the two Grade II listed structures. This may prove to be difficult however because the structures proposed are to be built on an open recreational space. In their current location the proposed structures within the site do not directly impact on any listed buildings within the development site. The only structure within this site boundary that would be indirectly affected is the Air shaft to Rotherhithe Tunnel whose As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Permanent structures also have the potential to result in an impact upon the character of the site, the River and its frontage and local views, including those from the surrounding residential area, especially during construction. As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 19
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions setting shouldn’t be impacted upon provided there is adequate screening. Potential issues The potential issues are the direct impact that the development could have on one Grade II listed building and one conservation area and the indirect impact it may have on the setting of two listed structures. There is the potential to mitigate these impacts through the screen design and/or screening. In their current location, the structures have no direct impact on any receptors except for one conservation area. The site has potential indirect impacts on two listed buildings. To mitigate 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 area in line with planning policy and English Heritage Guidance. This may prove to be difficult due to the location of the site within an open space which may make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the conservation area. As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. There is also the potential for the development to impact upon the character of the site, the River and its frontage and local views, including those from the surrounding residential area. There is some potential to mitigate these impacts through the screen design and/or screening. As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. In addition, mitigation in the form of the scheme design and landscaping (with new planting and screening) would be required to mitigate impacts upon the local townscape character. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 20
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Built Heritage and Townscape Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Summary Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

This site is less suitable for an Intermediate with CSO interception as it lies within an open space within a conservation area. The proposals are unlikely to preserve or enhance the conservation area in accordance with planning policy and English Heritage guidance. Furthermore, the site could potentially result in severe direct adverse impacts on the character of the park, a public open space, and local views, especially during construction. Further desk based research would be required to decide whether the proposals could feasibly preserve or enhance the conservation area. There is the potential for indirect impacts on one listed building (Shadwell dock stairs) which mitigation in the form of screening would potentially be required.

The site is less suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or as a main site for the reasons given for the intermediate with CSO interception, (see left). In addition, use of this site as an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a main site would require the construction of jetties, which may impact upon the character of the site, the river and its frontage, and local views, including those from the surrounding residential area. These impacts could potentially be mitigated through the implementation of a well considered scheme design and landscaping, including reinstatement of the visual amenity of the site. All of these mitigation measures would need to be thoroughly considered, and impacts accurately defined through further assessment.

Appendix 9 - Page 21
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – 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. Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (5m) London Clay (1m) Lambeth Group (26m) Thanet sand (13m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric Level in Chalk Aquifer: ~ -22mAOD (~27 mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater Monitoring Location EA Hydrometry Sites: TQ37-268 – 1.95km southeast of the site (water levels to Nov 2007) TQ37-276 – 849m southwest of the site (water levels to March 2009) Watercourses 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 10 licensed abstraction borehole within 2 km radius
Licence Numbers: 1. 28/39/39/0002 (1 borehole) 2. 28/39/39/0195 (1 borehole) 3. 28/39/39/0214 (2 borehole)

Mitigation required and conclusions The shaft would be constructed to an invert level of approximately 54.34mbgl therefore the shaft would be (1) founded in the Chalk. Piezometric head in Chalk would be approximately 27.34m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design.

A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the 400 days travel times of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows:
1. 150m 2. 467m 4. 90m 4.250m

Appendix 9 - Page 22
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments
4. 28/39/39/0234 (1 borehole) 5. 28/39/42/0048 (3 borehole) 6. 28/39/42/0073 (2 borehole) Locations: 1. 1.81km northwest of the site 2. 1.42km northwest of the site 3. 1.76km northeast of the site 4. 1.99km southeast of the site 5. 1.35km south of the site 6. 1.35km southeast of the site Operator: 1. Mars Pension Trustees Limited 2. Peninsula Water Limited 3. London Borough Of Tower Hamlets 4. Britannia Hotels Limited 5. London Borough Of Southwark 6. Harmsworth Quays Printing Limited Abstracted Aquifer Unit: 1. Chalk 2. Chalk 3. Chalk 4. Chalk 5. Chalk 6.Chalk Abstraction Purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public service (drinking, cooking, sanitary, 5. 258m 6. 203m

Mitigation required and conclusions

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

Appendix 9 - Page 23
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations
washing) 2. Private water supply (general use) 3. Industrial, commercial and public service (municipal groundshorticultural watering and make-up or top up water) 4. Industrial, commercial and public services (hotels, public houses and conference centres- drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 5. Amenity (industrial/commercial/energy/public services- make-up or top up water0 6. Industrial, commercial and public services (paper and printingprocess water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing Abstraction Quantity (annual): 1. 28,185m3 2. 274,500m3 3. 10,330m3 4. 78,840m3 5. 83,804m3 6. 52,000m3

Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

Local Authorities (LA) Unlicensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Tower Hamlet Council Boundary No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Southwark Council Boundary Borehole locations and depths There are 40 historical records of water wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 7.31 – 215.95m Not applicable

Appendix 9 - Page 24
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Water Resources - Hydrogeology and Surface Water Site considerations Potential impacts on surface water features Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality) Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments The site is located adjacent to the River Thames. The site is behind flood defences so the pollution risk is through drainage to the Thames. An impact on groundwater at depth is likely since the shafts would be constructed in Chalk (major aquifer) which would need to be dewatered. At shallow depth, the shaft is located in Alluvium which is classified as a minor aquifer. Limited impact on shallow aquifer if water is excluded from the excavation by diaphragm wall or caissons. Mitigation unlikely to be required as construction of the shafts would not take place within the 400 day capture zone of licensed abstractions. The shafts would be excavated in Chalk below the piezometric head, therefore dewatering would be required during construction. Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer. Mitigation required and conclusions Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines –PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23. See below (likely types of mitigation measures that would be required)

Likely types of mitigation measures that would be required Potential issues

Not applicable

Piezometric head in Chalk to be considered as part of geotechnical design. The issue of the appropriate disposal of discharges from dewatering to be considered. Impact on and mitigation for shallow aquifer would depend on construction design.

Summary

In terms of hydrogeology, this site is suitable for an intermediate with CSO interception, Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or a Main shaft site. Although the construction would take place within Chalk (major aquifer), the site does not lie within 400 day capture zones of licensed abstractions. No long-term impact on the Chalk aquifer is expected, although temporary dewatering would be required during the construction phase. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 27m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design, due to the requirement to dewater during construction. There would also be a limited impact on the flow in the shallow aquifer due to the use of a diaphragm wall or caissons. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable because there is no direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution. However, standard mitigation for a construction site by a river would be required.
(1)

Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum.

Appendix 9 - Page 25
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Statutory designations Lavender Pond LNR is 1km distant, but on the opposite side of the Thames. Ackroyd Drive LNR and Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park LNR are within 2km. Non-statutory designated wildlife sites Site is close to the River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI Site is within 20m of Shadwell Basin site of local importance Construction of the overflow culvert affecting the Thames would potentially require extensive restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case they might require compensatory habitat provision. Construction of the overflow culvert affecting the Thames would require extensive restoration and negotiation with the EA. In the worst case they might require compensatory habitat provision. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision but this is probably easily provided. As Intermediate with CSO interception River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI would be impacted by the construction of the required jetty. As for the Intermediate with CSO interception, see left, although more extensive mitigation is likely to be required to offset the impacts of the jetties. Mitigation required and conclusions No likely impact Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left Mitigation required and conclusions No likely impact

BAP priority habitats

The adjacent Tidal Thames is a London BAP habitat.

As Intermediate with CSO interception Mudflats and the Tidal Thames would be impacted by the construction of the required jetty.

As for the Intermediate with CSO interception, see left, although more extensive mitigation is likely to be required to offset the impacts of the jetties.

The site area comprises ‘Parks, Squares and Amenity Grassland’ habitat prioritised in the London BAP.

Appendix 9 - Page 26
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Protected or otherwise notable species within the Study Area There is a possibility that trees present may contain roosting bats. Mitigation required and conclusions Survey and possible mitigation required if trees are suitable for bats, but mitigation is likely to be easy to deliver. Careful placement of lighting to minimise illumination of surrounding habitat is likely to be required. Construction of the overflow culvert affecting Thames would require detailed aquatic invertebrate and fish investigation. Controls may need to be placed on piling operations close to the river bank. Negotiation with EA required. N/A The cumulative impact of all jetties proposed within the scheme may increase flow velocity in the river with effects on juvenile migratory fish Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments As for Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. In addition, foreshore and river may have value for fish and uncommon invertebrates. Mitigation required and conclusions As for Intermediate with CSO interception, see left although more extensive mitigation is likely to be required to offset the impacts of the jetties. No overflow culvert shown in plans, however the construction of jetties would require detailed aquatic invertebrate and fish investigation.

Site has low potential to support reptile species. No direct impacts on aquatic ecology receptors, although any piling close to the river bank could result in impacts on fish in the River Thames.

Potential issues

No further issues identified

Consideration needs to be given to the cumulative impacts on hydrodynamics with reference to known critical flow velocities for fish. Not considered significant at a site specific level

Summary

This site is suitable for an Intermediate with CSO interception. Ecological surveys would be required if this site were selected in order to determine whether trees contain bat roosts but any mitigation would probably be easy to deliver. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision but this is probably easily provided. If works avoid

This site is less suitable as an Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities and as a Main shaft site. Ecological surveys would be required if this site were selected in order to determine whether trees contain bat roosts but any mitigation for this would probably be easy to deliver. However, the requirement for jetty construction would lead to a potential

Appendix 9 - Page 27
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities / Main Comments Mitigation required and conclusions

impacts on the River Thames foreshore, then this site may require only basic ecological survey if selected.

temporary and permanent landtake from a Site of Metropolitan Importance. There is also a potential cumulative effect with other jetty structures in the river. Loss of parkland habitat may require limited compensatory provision but this is probably easily provided. Landtake from the foreshore and river may require sensitive working practices and there may also be a need for seasonal restrictions on working, and some compensatory provision. Careful negotiation with the EA is likely to be required.

Appendix 9 - Page 28
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Flood Risk Assessment Site considerations Flood Risk Zone Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments The northern section of the site is located within flood zone 1 (less than a 1 in 1000 year risk of flooding) and the southern part of the site is located within Flood Zone 3 (1 in 200 year tidal flood extent) but Defended to the 1in1000year flood level – there is a residual risk of a breach for which mitigation would need to be considered as part of the FRA Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible according to table D.2 of PPS25 Assessment of conditions for SuDS Potential issues Summary There is sufficient space on site for SuDS however the superficial geology means that infiltration SuDS may not be suitable. Further investigation would be required. N/A N/A Mitigation required and conclusions An FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site.

N/A

This site is suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception, Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or Main shaft site because there is space on site for the provision of Attenuation SuDS although further investigation would be required to determine the suitability for infiltration SuDS. In addition, the site is partially within flood zone 1 (less than a 1 in 1000 year risk of flooding) and those areas that are within Flood Zone 3 (up to a 1 in 200 year risk of tidal flooding) are protected to the 1 in 1000 year flood level.

Appendix 9 - Page 29
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Air Quality Site considerations Existing Air Quality Sensitive Receptors Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main Comments The air quality objectives for NO2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties along The Highway (A1203). There are residential properties approximately 15m from the site at Shadwell Pierhead. For the main shaft site, there are residential properties approximately 10m to the east of the site at Free Trade wharf. Existing traffic issues Existing sources of significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring Potential issues The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A1203 corridor. See above. There is no data at likely access to A1203 and the nearest existing data indicates 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. Summary 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 A1203 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.

This site is less suitable for use as either an intermediate with CSO interception, intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or Main shaft site. There are residential properties in close proximity to the site and therefore there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust during construction to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts could be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas of already poor air quality. This could be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.

Appendix 9 - Page 30
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) 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 residential properties closest to and facing the site are likely to experience low-moderate daytime and night-time noise levels due to their distance from the A1203. 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. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Main Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable

Appendix 9 - Page 31
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Sensitive Receptors There are sensitive receptors close to all boundaries of the site. The closest receptors are located on Shadwell Pierhead to the south and Glamis Place to the north. Further residential properties are located at Peartree Lane to the west and Free Trade Wharf to the east. Sensitive receptors on Shadwell Pierhead to the south consist of 2 storey residential dwellings. Properties on Glamis Place to the north of the site consist of 3 storey residential dwellings. Properties at Free Trade Wharf to the east of the site consist of 8 storey residential dwellings. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. The closest receptors are located on Shadwell Pierhead to the south, Free Trade wharf to the East and Glamis Place to the north. Main Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable

Appendix 9 - Page 32
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Existing traffic issues Road traffic on local roads and the A1203 to the north of the site would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. Road traffic on local roads and the A1203 to the north of the site would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. There are no railway lines or significant industrial noise sources noted in the immediate surrounding area. 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 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 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 As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Construction: The construction period is estimated at 6 to 7 years and working hours would be 24 hours per day Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left.. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable Comments As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Main Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable

Existing sources of significant noise emissions

Not applicable

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left.

Not applicable

As Intermediate with CSO interception, see left.

Not applicable

Appendix 9 - Page 33
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments surrounding the site. A relatively high number of daily HGV movements are anticipated and would access the site direct from the A1203. This has the potential to have an adverse impact on residential receptors overlooking the A1203. 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 Mitigation required and conclusions boundary noise fences. Noisy construction activities, or activities which may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime hours only to reduce the noise impact during nighttime construction. Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site. A relatively high number of daily HGV movements are anticipated (as for the intermediate with CSO interception shaft) A relatively large number of daily barge movements are also anticipated. The site area is large in size and, whilst the shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Appendix 9 - Page 34
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Mitigation required and conclusions

Comments sensitive receptors surrounding the site. A relatively high number of daily HGV movements are anticipated (as for the intermediate with CSO interception shaft) A relatively large number of daily barge movements are also anticipated. The site area is large in size 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

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments would provide useful noise mitigation from some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 5m, 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 Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments 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 would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration comments as for the Intermediate with CSO interception shaft, see left. Operation: As for the intermediate with CSO interception, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Comments the distance between them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration comments as for the Intermediate with CSO interception shaft, see left. Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Operation: As for the intermediate with CSO interception, see left.

Appendix 9 - Page 35
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception 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 This site is less suitable as an Intermediate with CSO interception site. The distances between the site and the nearest residential receptors are relatively short and therefore adverse noise impacts are likely. 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 the A1203. Perimeter hoarding would reduce the potential noise impact at properties at the nearest residential receptors but would be relatively ineffective at higher floor levels. It is recommended that noisy construction activities, or activities which may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime hours only to reduce the noise impact during night-time construction. Land Quality Site considerations Intermediate with CSO interception/Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities/Main This site is less suitable as an intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities for the same reasons as given for the intermediate with CSO interception site, see left. In addition, the importing and exporting of material by barge would also result in an adverse impact on residential receptors located near to the barge jetties. As Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Appendix 9 - Page 36
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Site Location Current Site Use Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Grid Reference: 535500, 180708 Large well maintained Public Park. Two thirds large informal grassed areas & wild flower meadow. One third formal designated recreation areas and facilities including multi-sports court & tennis courts (both hard surfaced), bowling green and children’s playground. Children’s playground equipment looks relatively new.

Topography Field Evidence of Contamination (ie visual/olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site)

Site slopes from A1203 to River Thames in a north-westerly to south-easterly direction. None

North: Site bounded by a very busy dual carriage way (A1203) beyond which are 3-storey terraced residential properties fronting the A1203 and 20+ storey block of flats (most likely to be council) to the northwest corner. The site slopes northeast to southeast towards the river slightly elevating the road above the park. East: 11 storey (most likely to be private) residential apartment block known as Free Trade Wharf directly bounds the east of the site. A number of the apartments have balconies and habitable room windows which overlook the proposed site. South: The River Thames is positioned along the southeast boundary directly adjacent to a paved riverside walking/ cycling and seating area which is included as part of the site. The southwest of the site is bound by a stepped 1.5-2.5m wall with mounted fence and tall foliage. Beyond which are numerous climbing and recreation facilities and equipment including a climbing wall, zipwire, canoes. Adjacent to the climbing facilities is two-storey building nos. 3- 4 Shadwell Pierhead used as Shadwell Basin Outdoor Activity Centre and two 2-storey semi-detached residential properties both only partially visible beyond the wall and fence. West: The site is bound by Glamis Road, which itself is bound by a stepped 3-6m brick wall restricting views of King Edward Memorial Park from the residential properties in Peartree Lane. The dwellings in Peartree are 3-storey, and those on the entrance with Glamis Road have partial views from ground windows of the park.

Geological and Hydrogeological Information

Appendix 9 - Page 37
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Geological Strata 1 (Thickness) Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Superficial Geology and Made Ground (5 m) London Clay (1 m) Lambeth Group (26 m) Thanet sand (13 m) Chalk Non-Aquifer: London Clay Minor Aquifer: River Terrace Deposits, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sands, Harwich Formation, Major Aquifer: Chalk River Terrace Deposits - Minor Aquifer / London Clay – Non aquifer High Leaching Potential of Soils (U)
2

Underlying Aquifer Classes (Major/Minor/Non-Aquifer)

Groundwater Vulnerability/ Soil Classification (High/Intermediate/Low/ Not Applicable) Source Protection Zone Details Surface Water Receptors

Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA Site located adjacent to the River Thames and partially below mean high water level.

Relevant Information within a 250m radius of the site Site History Information and Historical Potentially Contaminating Activities (based on mapping data) On-site Unknown filled ground (pit, quarry etc.) no mapping dates Coal storage 1882 Residential housing 1882 – 1955 Wharf, (transport support cargo and handling) 1882 – 1995 Air shafts 1938 – 1951 The site encompasses King Edward memorial Park to the east of the site, and tennis courts, a bowling green and football

Appendix 9 - Page 38
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

pitch to the west of the site 1955 – 2009 Off-site Discharge consent (sewage, River Thames) (0.2m northeast) 1987 Wharf, (transport support cargo and handling) (closest 2m east) 1882 – 1899 Areas cleared due to enemy action (Nearest 14m west, four from 18m west) no mapping dates Potential Tanks (closest 18m north) 1949 Oil Storage (25m east) no mapping dates Underground Fuel Tanks (27m west) no mapping dates Metal casting/Foundry (87m north) 1882 Electricity sub station facilities (closest 99m northwest) no mapping dates Discharge consent (undefined) (108m south, River Thames) 1986 Hospital (135m northeast) 1898 – 1951 Petrol pump (151m northwest) no mapping dates Oil industry (185m southwest) 1971 Tanks (unknown) (196m southwest) 1966 – 1971 Oil, petroleum and gas refining and storage (223m north) 1882 Oil and Lead works (237m east) no mapping dates Pollution Incidents to Controlled Waters Nine: Miscellaneous – unknown, minor incident (20m south – in River Thames) Chemicals – unknown, significant incident (32m south – in Shadwell Basin) Oils – unknown, minor incident (40m south – in Shadwell Basin) Miscellaneous – urban runoff, minor incident (90m northwest) Miscellaneous – natural, minor incident (96m southeast Shadwell Basin) Oils – unknown, significant incident (97m southwest Shadwell Basin)

Appendix 9 - Page 39
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Chemicals – unknown, minor incident (120m south – in River Thames) Miscellaneous – natural, major incident (192m west Shadwell Basin) Oils – unknown, minor incident (230m southeast – in River Thames) Landfill Sites Two: Historic Landfill (unknown waste) (50m west) pre 1974 Historic Landfill (unlicensed) (150m southwest) no mapping dates Other Waste Sites One: Registered waste transfer site (187m east), no restrictions on source of waste, listed as very small (<10,000 t/yr), Licence elapsed Registered Radioactive Substances Fuel Stations/Depots Contemporary Trade Entries None None None

Site classification based on above information Activity Potential Site Contaminants derived from surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) Potential Site Contaminants derived from 1) Wharf (Transport support and cargo handling) 2) Made Ground from historic filling activities 3) Potential coal storage 1) Sewage (discharge consent) 2) Potential Tanks Distance and direction to site 1) On-site 2) On-site, directly adjacent to site. 3) On site 1) 0.2m northeast 2) closest located 18m north Appendix 9 - Page 40
100-RG-PNC-S021T-900001.doc

Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, Nitrogen compounds, TPH, PAHs, Solvents 3) PAHs, TPH 1) Metals, Nitrogen compounds, TPH, PAHs 2) TPH, Metals, PAHs, Solvents

Site Suitability Report S021T and C29XB – Appendix 9

Noise Intermediate with CSO interception Site considerations Comments off-site sources and transported to site Identified Source-PathwayReceptor risk assessment at CSO construction stage (Conceptual Site Model)
3

Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Comments

Main Mitigation required and conclusions

Mitigation required and conclusions

3) Oil storage 4) Underground Fuel Tanks Source 1: A1, A2, A3, B4, C1, C5 Source 2: D6, E1, F7

3) 25m east 4) 27m west

3) TPH, Metals, PAHs 4) TPH, Metals, PAHs

Contamination Category Summary

Category 1 – Assessed as Low Risk The site is considered suitable as an Intermediate with CSO interception, Intermediate with CSO interception and jetty facilities or Main shaft site as previous uses appear to have been limited to wharf activities and potential coal storage. Also, the distance and nature of potentially contaminating activities in the vicinity of the site are unlikely to have resulted in significant contamination of the site. It should be noted, however, that due to heavy bombing that this area suffered during the war, it is considered prudent that an unexploded ordnance survey is conducted prior to any excavation.

Notes

1. From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river. 2. Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise. 3. Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathway-receptors

Appendix 9 - Page 41
100-RG-PNC-S021T-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