PEIR Main Report Vol27 Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Preliminary environmental information report
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station site assessment

Main tunnel reception site
Regulations 2 and 10 of the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009
Thames Tunnel
Phase two consultation documentation

General
Your guide to phase two consultation Why does London need the Thames Tunnel? Feedback form Equalities form Customer overview leaflet
Technical documents
Air management plan Book of plans Code of construction practice Part A: General requirements Consultation strategy and statement of community consultation Design development report Draft waste strategy Interim engagement report Needs Report Phase two scheme development report Preliminary environmental information report Report on phase one consultation Background technical paper Site selection methodology paper
Project information papers

Build Changes Consultation Design Environment Funding Managing construction Odour Options Overflow Regulatory framework Route and tunnel alignment Route to consent Settlement Site selection Timing Transport
Site information papers

Abbey Mills Pumping Station Acton Storm Tanks Albert Embankment Foreshore Barn Elms Beckton Sewage Treatment Works Bekesbourne Street Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore Carnwarth Road Riverside Chambers Wharf Chelsea Embankment Foreshore Cremorne Wharf Depot Deptford Chrurch Street Dormay Street Earl Pumping Station Falconbrook Pumping Station Greenwich Pumping Station Hammersmith Pumping Station Heathwall Pumping Station Jews Row King Edward Memorial Park Forehore King Georges Park Kirtling Street Other works Putney Bridge Foreshore Shad Thames Pumping Station Victoria Embankment Foreshore
Thames Tunn
Thames Tunnel Preliminary environmental information report

List of contents Non technical summary Part A: Preliminary project information Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4 Volume 5 Volume 6 Volume 7 Volume 8 Volume 9 Volume 10 Volume 11 Volume 12 Volume 13 Volume 14 Volume 15 Volume 16 Volume 17 Volume 18 Volume 19 Volume 20 Volume 21 Volume 22 Volume 23 Volume 24 Volume 25 Introduction Proposed development Alternatives Scoping Opinions and technical engagement Assessment methodology Project-wide assessment Acton Storm Tanks CSO interception and main tunnel reception site Hammersmith Pumping Station CSO interception site Barn Elms CSO interception site Putney Bridge Foreshore CSO interception site Dormay Street CSO interception and connection tunnel sequential drive site King Georges Park CSO interception and connection tunnel reception site Carnwath Road Riverside main tunnel drive and reception, and connection tunnel reception site Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO interception site Cremorne Wharf Depot CSO interception site Chelsea Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Kirtling Street main tunnel double drive site Heathwall Pumping Station CSO interception site Albert Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Victoria Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore CSO interception site Chambers Wharf main tunnel drive and reception and connection tunnel reception site King Edward Memorial Park Foreshore CSO interception site Earl Pumping Station CSO interception site Deptford Church Street CSO interception site
Part B: Preliminary site information
Page i
Volume 26 Volume 27 Volume 28
Greenwich Pumping Station CSO interception and connection tunnel drive site Abbey Mills Pumping Station main tunnel reception site (this document) Beckton Sewage Treatment Works site
Page ii
Thames Tunnel Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station site assessment
List of contents
Page number
1 2
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Site context ....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 2.2 Site location ............................................................................................. 2 Environmental context ............................................................................. 2 Overview.................................................................................................. 4 Operation ................................................................................................. 5 Construction ............................................................................................ 7 Design development and on site alternatives ........................................ 10 Base case .............................................................................................. 11 Introduction ............................................................................................ 12 Proposed development .......................................................................... 12 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 14 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 14 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 18 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 21 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 22 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 23 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 25 Introduction ............................................................................................ 26 Introduction ............................................................................................ 27 Proposed development .......................................................................... 27 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 28 Baseline ................................................................................................. 31 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 38
Proposed development.................................................................................... 4 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Air quality and odour ..................................................................................... 12 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9
5 6
Ecology - aquatic ........................................................................................... 26 5.1 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Ecology terrestrial....................................................................................... 27
Page iii
6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 10 10.1 10.2
Operational assessment ........................................................................ 41 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 41 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 42 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 44 Introduction ............................................................................................ 45 Proposed development .......................................................................... 45 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 46 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 47 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 62 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 65 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 65 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 67 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 69 Introduction ............................................................................................ 70 Proposed development .......................................................................... 70 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 70 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 71 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 78 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 82 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 83 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 84 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 85 Introduction ............................................................................................ 86 Proposed development .......................................................................... 86 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 87 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 89 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 90 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 96 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 98 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 99 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 101 Introduction .......................................................................................... 102 Proposed development ........................................................................ 102
Historic environment ..................................................................................... 45
Land quality .................................................................................................... 70
Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 86
Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 102
Page iv
10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 11 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 12 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 12.9 13 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9
Assessment methodology.................................................................... 102 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 103 Construction assessment .................................................................... 106 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 112 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 112 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 113 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 114 Introduction .......................................................................................... 115 Proposed development ........................................................................ 115 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 116 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 118 Construction assessment .................................................................... 129 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 137 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 137 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 138 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 142 Introduction .......................................................................................... 143 Proposed development ........................................................................ 143 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 148 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 149 Construction assessment .................................................................... 154 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 161 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 165 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 168 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 171 Introduction .......................................................................................... 172 Proposed development ........................................................................ 172 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 173 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 174 Construction assessment .................................................................... 177 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 181 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 182 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 184 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 186
Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 115
Transport ...................................................................................................... 143
Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 172
Page v
14
Water resources surface .......................................................................... 187 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 Introduction .......................................................................................... 187 Proposed development ........................................................................ 187 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 189 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 189 Construction assessment .................................................................... 191 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 193 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 194 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 194 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 194 Introduction .......................................................................................... 195 Policy considerations ........................................................................... 196 Regulatory position .............................................................................. 196 Assessment of flood risk ...................................................................... 199 Flood risk design and mitigation ....................................................... 206 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 208
15
Water resources flood risk ....................................................................... 195 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6
Appendices ........................................................................................................... 210 Appendix A Historic environment ....................................................................... 212 Appendix B Land quality...................................................................................... 228 Appendix C Noise and vibration ......................................................................... 230 Appendix D Townscape and visual ..................................................................... 231 Appendix E Water resources - groundwater ...................................................... 234 Glossary ................................................................................................................ 248 References ............................................................................................................ 263
Page vi
List of figures
Page number
Vol 27 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan ........................................................................ 2 Vol 27 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental setting ................................................................. 2 Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1 Construction - site setup and shaft construction ......................... 4 Vol 27 Figure 3.1.2 Construction - other structures and secondary lining ................. 4 Vol 27 Figure 3.1.3 Permanent works layout ............................................................. 4 Vol 27 Figure 4.4.1 Air quality monitoring locations ................................................. 16 Vol 27 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology phase 1 habitat survey ............................ 32 Vol 27 Figure 7.4.1 Historic environment features map ........................................... 48 Vol 27 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses.................................... 72 Vol 27 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality borehole locations ................................................ 75 Vol 27 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites ............. 77 Vol 27 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration receptors ................................................... 89 Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context ....................................................... 104 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual development pattern and extent .... 118 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation .... 118 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape and visual open space types .......................... 119 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual transport network .......................... 119 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape character areas ................................................. 120 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations ........................ 125 Vol 27 Figure 12.2.1 Transport construction traffic routes .................................. 144 Vol 27 Figure 12.2.2 Transport construction lorry profile .................................... 146 Vol 27 Figure 12.4.1 Transport - site plan.............................................................. 150 Vol 27 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk EA flood zones .................................................. 202 Vol 27 Figure 15.4.2 Flood risk flood extents...................................................... 202
Page vii
List of tables
Page number
Vol 27 Table 3.3.1 Working hours ........................................................................... 10 Vol 27 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station ............... 11 Vol 27 Table 4.3.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement ......................... 14 Vol 27 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations ................................ 15 Vol 27 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - measured PM10 concentrations............................... 15 Vol 27 Table 4.4.3 Air quality - additional monitoring locations................................ 16 Vol 27 Table 4.4.4 Air quality background pollutant concentrations ........................ 16 Vol 27 Table 4.4.5 Air quality receptors - construction ............................................ 17 Vol 27 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts at ground level - operation ................................. 21 Vol 27 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts at buildings - operation ...................................... 21 Vol 27 Table 4.8.1 Air quality assessment summary - construction......................... 23 Vol 27 Table 4.8.2 Odour assessment summary - operation ................................... 24 Vol 27 Table 6.3.1 Terrestrial ecology notable species surveys .............................. 29 Vol 27 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology - phase 1 habitat survey .............................. 32 Vol 27 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology assessment summary - construction ........... 42 Vol 27 Table 7.4.1 Historic environment receptors .................................................. 61 Vol 27 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment effects construction .................................. 64 Vol 27 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment construction assessment.......................... 67 Vol 27 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land use summary .......................... 72 Vol 27 Table 8.4.2 Land quality -geology and hydrogeology ................................... 74 Vol 27 Table 8.4.3 Land quality ground investigation data ...................................... 76 Vol 27 Table 8.4.4 Land quality environmental records and waste sites ................. 77 Vol 27 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts - construction ........................................... 81 Vol 27 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptors -construction .......................................... 81 Vol 27 Table 8.5.3 Land quality effects - construction ............................................. 81 Vol 27 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts - operation ................................................ 82 Vol 27 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptors - operation ............................................. 83 Vol 27 Table 8.6.3 Land quality effects-operation................................................... 83 Vol 27 Table 8.8.1 Land quality assessment - construction ..................................... 84 Vol 27 Table 8.8.2 Land quality assessment - operation ......................................... 84 Vol 27 Table 9.4.1 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor locations ........................ 89 Vol 27 Table 9.4.2 Airborne noise assessment categories - construction ............... 90
Page viii
Vol 27 Table 9.5.1 Noise at AM01 Three Mills Wall - construction ......................... 91 Vol 27 Table 9.5.2 Noise at AM02 6 Riverside Road - construction ........................ 92 Vol 27 Table 9.5.3 Noise at receptor AM03 Abbey Lane - construction .................. 92 Vol 27 Table 9.5.4 Noise at AM04 4 Crows Road - construction ............................. 93 Vol 27 Table 9.5.5 Vibration at buildings / structures -construction ......................... 94 Vol 27 Table 9.5.6 Vibration and human response - construction ........................... 95 Vol 27 Table 9.5.7 Noise and vibration effects - construction .................................. 96 Vol 27 Table 9.6.1 Airborne noise operation........................................................... 97 Vol 27 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration effects - operation ...................................... 98 Vol 27 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration construction assessment............................ 99 Vol 27 Table 9.8.2 Noise and vibration operational assessment ........................... 100 Vol 27 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economic receptors ...................................................... 106 Vol 27 Table 10.5.1 Socio-economics construction effects ................................... 111 Vol 27 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economics construction assessment ........................... 113 Vol 27 Table 11.3.1 Townscape and visual technical engagement ....................... 116 Vol 27 Table 11.4.1 Townscape open space type and distribution ........................ 119 Vol 27 Table 11.4.2 Townscape sensitivities to change ........................................ 124 Vol 27 Table 11.4.3 Visual viewpoints sensitivities to change ............................... 128 Vol 27 Table 11.5.1 Townscape character area effects - construction .................. 132 Vol 27 Table 11.5.2 Viewpoint effects - construction ............................................. 136 Vol 27 Table 11.8.1 Townscape construction assessment .................................... 138 Vol 27 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment construction assessment ........................ 140 Vol 27 Table 12.2.1 Transport - site construction traffic details ............................. 144 Vol 27 Table 12.2.2 Transport construction worker numbers ............................. 147 Vol 27 Table 12.3.1 Transport stakeholder engagement .................................... 148 Vol 27 Table 12.4.1 Transport bus service frequency ........................................ 150 Vol 27 Table 12.4.2 Transport - receptors ............................................................. 154 Vol 27 Table 12.5.1 Transport construction vehicle movements ........................ 157 Vol 27 Table 12.8.1 Transport construction assessment ....................................... 168 Vol 27 Table 12.8.2 Transport operational assessment ........................................ 170 Vol 27 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater methods of construction ................................... 172 Vol 27 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater anticipated ground conditions/ hydrogeology ... 174 Vol 27 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater receptors .......................................................... 177 Vol 27 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts - construction ..................................... 179 Vol 27 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptors -construction ................................... 180
Page ix
Vol 27 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater effects - construction ........................................ 180 Vol 27 Table 13.6.1 Groundwater impacts - operation .......................................... 181 Vol 27 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater effects -operation ............................................. 182 Vol 27 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater assessment summary - construction ................ 184 Vol 27 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater assessment summary - operation .................... 185 Vol 27 Table 14.4.1 Surface water receptors......................................................... 190 Vol 27 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk existing and post development runoff rates onsite 205 Vol 27 Table 15.5.1 Runoff rates and preliminary attenuation volumes................. 207
Page x
List of abbreviations AADT ACE AM AOD APZ AQEG AQMA AQO ARS ASR ASSI ATC ATD AURN BAP BGS BMWP BOD BPIP BPM BS CABE CAMS CCI CCSS CCTV CDA CEMP CIRIA CLR CoCP CoPA CROW CSO Annual Average Daily Traffic Arts Culture and Entertainment Morning Above Ordnance Datum Archaeological Priority Zone Air Quality Expert Group Air Quality Management Area Air Quality Objective Artificial Recharge Scheme Aquifer Storage and Recovery Area of Special Scientific Interest Automated Traffic Counter Above Tunnel Datum (defined at ~100m AOD) Automatic Urban and Rural Network Biodiversity Action Plan British Geological Survey Biological Monitoring Working Party Biochemical Oxygen Demand Building Profile Input Programme Best Practicable Means British Standard Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy Community Conservation Index Community Consultation Strategy Closed Circuit Television Critical Drainage Area Construction Environment Management Programmes Construction Industry Research and Information Association Contaminated Land Report Code of Construction Practice Control of Pollution Act Countryside and Rights of Way Combined Sewer Overflow
Page xi
dB dB LAeq,T
Decibel a equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified time period T Department for Culture, Media and Sport Development Consent Order Department for Communities and Local Government Department for Culture media and Sport Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Department for Transport Development Management Plan Development Management Policies Document Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Dissolved Oxygen Development Plan Document Digital Terrain Mapping Environment Agency European Commission Ecological Impact Assessment Estimated Vibration Dose Value European Economic Area Environment Food and Rural Affairs Committee English Heritage Environmental Health Officer Environmental Impact Assessment European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme English Nature Environment Protection Agency Earth Pressure Balance Earth Pressure Balance Machine Equality Impact Assessment Environmental Quality Standard Environmental Statement European Union Frequently Asked Questions Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness, Receptor
Page xii
DCMS DCO DCLG DCMS Defra DfT DMP DMPD DMRB DO DPD DTM EA EC EcIA eVDV EEA EFRA EH EHO EIA EMEP EN EPA EPB EPBM EqIA EQS ES EU FAQ FIDOR
FRA GARDIT GI GiGL GIS GLA GLHER GQA GSHP GWB GWMU H2S ha HA HDV HEA HER HGV HIA HIAB HPA HQ HRA HTC HWR IEEM IEMA IMD IPC Iron Age JNCC kg km kVA
Flood Risk Assessment General Aquifer Research Development and Investigation Team Ground Investigation Greenspace Information for Greater London Geographical Information System Greater London Authority Greater London Historic Environment Record General Quality Assessment (EA water quality classification) Ground Source Heat Pump Groundwater Body: distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer or aquifers Ground Water Management Unit Hydrogen sulphide hectares Highways Authority Heavy Duty Vehicle Historic Environmental Assessment Historic Environment Record Heavy Goods Vehicle Health Impact Assessment Hydrauliska Industri AB Company Health Protection Agency Headquarter Habitats Regulations Assessment Hammersmith Town Centre Hazardous Waste Regulations (2005) Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment Index of Multiple Deprivation Infrastructure Planning Commission 600 BC AD 43 Joint Nature Conservation Committee kilograms kilometre kilo watt amperes
Page xiii
kW l/d l/s LA LAARC LAQM LAQN LB LBAP LDF LGV LHA LMB LNR loWR LSB LtB LTI LTT LUL LVMF m m AOD m ATD m/s MAGIC Mbgl MEICA Ml/d MoD MOL MOLA NE NESR NCR
kilowatt litres per day litres per second Local Authority London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre Local Air Quality Management London Air Quality Network London Borough Local Biodiversity Action Plan Local Development Framework Light Goods Vehicle Local Highway Authority Lambeth Mottled Beds Local Nature Reserve List of Wastes Regulations 2005 Lower Shelly Beds Laminated Beds London Tideway Improvements London Tideway Tunnels London Underground Limited London View Management Framework metre metres above Ordinance Datum (see AOD) metres above temporary datum, (see ATD) metres per second Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside Metres below ground level Mechanical Electrical Instrumentation Controls Automation Megalitres per day (million litres per day) Ministry of Defence Metropolitan Open Land Museum of London Archaeology Natural England North East Storm Relief National Cycle Route
Page xiv
NGR NMR NNR NO2 NOx NPPF NPS NRMM NSIP NSRA NTS OCU Ofwat OS OUE PAH PCB PEI PEIR PEL PICP PIP PLA PM PM10 PPC PPE PPG PPS PPV PRoW PS pSPA PWS RAMS
National Grid Reference National Monuments Record National Nature Reserve Nitrogen dioxide Oxides of nitrogen National Planning Policy Framework National Policy Statement Non Road Mobile Machinery Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project National Small-bore Rifle Association Non Technical Summary Odour Control Unit The Water Services Regulations Authority Ordnance Survey European Odour Unit Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Polychlorinated Biphenyl Preliminary Environmental Information Preliminary Environmental Information Report Probable Effect Levels Pollution Incident Control Plan Project Information Paper Port of London Authority Afternoon Particles on the order of ~10 micrometers or less Pollution Prevention and Control Personal Protective Equipment Pollution Prevention Guidance Planning Policy Statement Peak Particle Velocity Public Rights of Way Pumping Station Potential Special Protected Area Public Water Supply Risk Assessment Method Statement
Page xv
RAMSAR RB RBKC RBMP RDB RHS RPG RSPB RDB RTC RTD SA SAC SAM SCI SCL SFRA SI SINC SMI SNCI SO2 SoCC SPA SPD S-P-R SPZ SR SRN SSR SSSI STW SUDS SWMP
The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Royal Borough Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea River Basin Management Plans Red Data Book Royal Horticultural Society Regional Planning Guidance Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Red data book Real Time Control River Terrace Deposits Sustainability Appraisal Special Area of Conservation Scheduled Ancient Monument. More commonly referred to as Scheduled Monument Statement of Community Involvement Sprayed Concrete Lining Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Statutory Instrument Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan Importance Site Nature Conservation Importance Sulphur dioxide Statement of Community Consultation Special Protection Area Supplementary Planning Document Source-pathway-receptor Source Protection Zone Storm Relief Strategic Road Network Site Suitability Report Site of Special Scientific Interest Sewage Treatment Works Sustainable (Urban) Drainage Systems waste - Site Waste Management Plan
Page xvi
SWMP t TA TAS TBC TBM TDP TEBP TEL TfL TFRM TH TLRN Tpa TPO TT TTQI TTSS TWU UDP UK UKHO UMB UPN UWWTD UWWTR UXO VDV VNEB OA WCA WEEE WFD WIA WRAP WSI
water Surface Water Management Plan tonne Transport Assessment Thames Archaeological Survey To be confirmed Tunnel Boring Machine Thames Discovery Programme Thames Estuary Benthic Programme Threshold Effect Levels Transport for London Tideway Fish Risk Model Tower Hamlets Transport for London Road Network tonnes per annum Tree Preservation Order Thames Tunnel Thames Tideway Quality Improvements Thames Tideway Strategic Study 2005 Thames Water Utilities Unitary Development Plan United Kingdom United Kingdom Hydrographic Office Upper Mottled Beds Upnor Formation Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations Unexploded Ordnance Vibration Dose Value Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area Wildlife and Countryside Act Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive Water Framework Directive Water Industry Act 1991 Waste Resources Action Programme Written Scheme of Investigation
Page xvii
WWT ZTV ZVI
Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust Zone of Theoretical Visibility Zone of Visual Influence
Page xviii
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station
Section 1: Introduction
1
1.1.1 1.1.2
Introduction
This volume presents the preliminary environmental information for the Thames Tunnel proposals at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. This document reports the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the Thames Tunnel project at Abbey Mills. The planned activities to assist in completing the environmental impact assessment (EIA) include: a. Conclude baseline environmental surveys b. Confirm final design, informed by, amongst other things, feedback from public consultation c. Undertake design of possible mitigation to address adverse effects.
1.1.3
Once complete, the findings of the EIA will be reported in full in the Environmental Statement which will be submitted with the consent application This volume describes the site and environmental context in Section 2.2. The proposed development including construction and operation is described in Section 3.1 Section 3.3. The design evolution for this site is set out in Section 3.4. Finally, Section 3.5 (base case) refers to other development schemes which have been submitted or with extant planning approval within or in proximity to the site. The development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would consist of a reception shaft that would receive the TBM from Chambers Wharf. The works would also provide a connection tunnel between the Thames Tunnel and Lee Tunnel. There are no new CSO interceptions required at this site since the Abbey Mills CSO would be intercepted by the new Lee Tunnel, currently under construction. A description of the Thames Tunnel is included in Volume 2. This includes the planning context for the project as well as local planning policies relevant to this site. The alternatives which have been considered are described in Volume 3. Scoping and technical engagement is covered in Volume 4, while Volume 5 sets out the technical assessment methodology. A project-wide assessment is provided in Volume 6. The remaining Volumes 7 to 28 contain the site specific assessments.
1.1.4
1.1.5
1.1.6
Page 1
Section 2: Site context
2
2.1
2.1.1
Site context
Site location
The site is located in the London Borough (LB) of Newham. It comprises an area of Thames Water operational land at Abbey Mills Pumping Station covering an area of 2.6ha. The site is shown in Vol 27 Figure 2.1.1. Vol 27 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan (see Volume 27 Figures document)
2.1.2
The site is within the operational pumping station and is bounded to the north by operational infrastructure and buildings. To the west, the site is bounded by the Prescott Channel and allotments, and to the south east by the Channelsea River and Abbey Creek. The surrounding land is predominantly industrial with residential areas to the north of the site. Land 70m west of the site, known as Three Mills Islands, comprises a landscaped grassed area and warehouses including Three Mills studio. To the east of the site beyond the Channelsea River is an area of disused land and the Channelsea Business Centre, located on Canning Road. Access to the site is from the A11 via Abbey Lane, Gay Road and the existing road within the site. The closest rail and London Underground station to the site is West Ham, approximately 1km to the east of the site. Stratford rail, London Underground and DLR station is approximately 1.5km away. A network of Public Rights of Ways (PRoW), cycleways and footpaths border the site. To the west, a PRoW runs along the eastern margin of the Three Mills Wall River to Three Mills Island. The PRoW continues along the Prescott Channel (via a bridge) at the southern boundary of the site. Located on the eastern margin of the site, adjacent to the Channelsea River and Abbey Creek, is a permissive footpath. North of the pumping station lies the Greenway, which is a PRoW (footpath and cycleway) and Metropolitan Open Land. Within the site there is mainly vacant hardstanding. The Lee Tunnel shaft construction site is located to the north east of the site.
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.2
2.2.1
Environmental context
Environmental designations for the site and immediate surrounds are shown in Vol 27 Figure 2.2.1. Vol 27 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental setting (see Volume 27 Figures document)
2.2.2
The site is inland and lies adjacent to the tidal navigational River Lee. The surrounding watercourses (Prescott Channel, Channelsea River and Abbey Creek) are designated as Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs). The area immediately to the south of the existing pumping station is located within the Lee Valley Regional Park boundary.
Page 2
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 2.2.3
Section 2: Site context
Several listed buildings are located north of the site within the pumping station complex including the Grade II* listed original pumping station, Station A. The site falls within the Three Mills Conservation Area and Lee Valley Archaeological Priority Area. There are no tree preservation orders (TPOs) on the site. The site is not within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) although the local roadside monitoring (Cam Road, approximately 1km north of the site) indicates exceedences of the NO2 Designations annual mean objective. Previous site investigations show the wider Abbey Mills Pumping Station site to have been impacted with heavy metals and hydrocarbons. The site therefore has a high potential for contamination to be present. Local geology comprises 9m Superficial deposits and made ground, 5m London Clay (unproductive strata), 1m Harwich Formation, 17m Lambeth Group (secondary aquifer), 13m Thanet Sand (secondary aquifer), and with chalk at depth (principal aquifer). The site is located in defended Flood Zone 3 (tidal River Thames, River Lee and tributaries). Defences have a 1 in a 1000 year standard of protection; therefore, flood risk at the site is the residual risk from defence breach or overtopping.
2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6
2.2.7
2.2.8
Page 3
Section 3: Proposed development
3
3.1
3.1.1
Proposed development
Overview
The development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would consist of a reception shaft that would receive the TBM from Chambers Wharf. The works would also provide a connection tunnel between the Thames Tunnel and Lee Tunnel. There are no new CSO interceptions required at this site since the Abbey Mills CSO would be intercepted by the new Lee Tunnel, which is currently under construction. Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1-Figure 3.1.4 show the demolition and site clearance, construction phasing and permanent works plans. Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1 Construction - site setup and shaft construction Vol 27 Figure 3.1.2 Construction - other structures and secondary lining Vol 27 Figure 3.1.3 Permanent works layout (see Volume 27 Figures document)
3.1.2
3.1.3
Construction of the main works at this site is scheduled to commence in mid 2018 (Year 1) and be completed by 2022, taking approximately four years. Early works, such as utility connections and diversions may be undertaken in advance of the main works. The site would be operational in 2023. Further detail of the programme is described in Section 3.3 a. Year 1 Site setup (approximately 4 months) b. Years 1 to 2 - Shaft construction (approximately 18 months) c. Years 2 to 3 Secondary lining (approximately 9 months) d. Years 3 to 4 Construction of other structures (approximately 7 months) e. Year 4 Completion of works and site restoration (approximately 6 months). f. System-wide commissioning would take place following site restoration and is not included in the above programme.
3.1.4
The following lists the structures required at this site a. An underground shaft with ground level access cover(s) b. Air management structures comprising access cover(s), an air inlet structure and a ventilation column c. A connection culvert to the ventilation duct being provided as part of the Lee Tunnel project
d. Underground culverts for ventilation of the shaft and pits and ducts for cables and hydraulic pipelines e. Permanent restoration of the temporary construction site comprising levelling, infilling and making good, and landscaping works to incorporate maintenance vehicle hardstanding and access to chamber covers.
Page 4
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 3.1.5 3.1.6
Further details of these elements are given in Section 3.2 and 3.3 where these are relevant to the technical assessments that follow. The following facilities would be required: a. Gates to site entrance and exit b. Hoardings and other means of enclosure, barrier or screening c. Office and welfare accommodation and facilities d. Workshops and stores e. Plant and machinery f. Power generation plant and lighting g. Highways access and internal site roads h. Material storage and handling areas and treatment facilities i. j. Bentonite plant, power supply, and cage laydown area The carrying out or maintenance of other such works
3.1.7
Further details of these facilities and the relevant phases are given in Section 3.2 and 3.3 where these are relevant to the technical assessments that follow.
3.2
3.2.1
Operation
Once developed the Abbey Mills Pumping Station shaft would be connected to the tunnel from Chambers Wharf and connect the Thames Tunnel to the Lee Tunnel
Permanent structures
3.2.2 A plan of the permanent structures is appended Vol 27 Figure 3.1.3. The area of operational land required by the project is less than that required for the construction phase. The land which is not required for Thames Tunnel operational purposes would revert to other Thames Water operational uses. Once constructed and operational there would remain on site the structures listed in the following sections. The design and finishing proposed for the above ground features would be further developed during the period up to the application. Shaft 3.2.5 The shaft would have an internal diameter of 20m and would be approximately 67m deep. The Abbey Mills Pumping Station shaft (Thames Tunnel shaft) would be constructed on the line of the main tunnel that would run from Chambers Wharf to the Lee Tunnel at Abbey Mills (Shaft F). It would be a reception shaft for one of the main tunnel drives. Interception chambers and culverts 3.2.6 No interception works are required at this site as at this site as the Abbey Mills CSO would be intercepted by the Lee Tunnel, currently under construction.
3.2.3 3.2.4
Page 5
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Tunnel 3.2.7
Once constructed a short connection tunnel would connect the existing Lee Tunnel shaft to the Thames Tunnel shaft at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Ventilation structures
3.2.8
The active ventilation structure is being provided by the Lee Tunnel project. The Thames tunnel project would connect to this system. The ventilation plant provided through the Lee Tunnel project consists of six 5m3/s fans feeding three odour control units (OCUs) each with a capacity of 10m3/s. An air duct from the Lee Tunnel Shaft F would connect to this plant. On construction of the Thames Tunnel shaft, adjacent to Shaft F, these air ducts are to be augmented to capture air from both shafts. The ventilation and odour control plant is adequately sized to cater for air from both tunnel shafts. Additional equipment associated with the Abbey Mills shaft (Thames Tunnel shaft) would be as follows: a. modified below ground air ducts b. high pressure release vent 4m high c. d. an air inlet structure 1m high a bypass ventilation column 8m high
3.2.9
3.2.10
The Lee tunnel shaft also projects out above ground level by approximately 4m and there are a series of ventilation columns associated with the shaft. Electrical kiosk
3.2.11
Electrical equipment would be housed within buildings being provided by the Lee Tunnel project. Paved areas
3.2.12 3.2.13
The area around the shaft would be finished with hardstanding to allow crane access to the covers on top of the shaft. The area within the pumping station would be returned to hardstanding to provide continued operational access within the pumping station.
Access and maintenance works

3.2.14 Access to the Thames Water Abbey Mills Pumping Station site would continue from the A11 via Abbey Lane and the existing road within the site. Access would be required for a light commercial vehicle on a six monthly maintenance schedule. This would be carried out during normal working hours. Additionally once every ten years, more significant maintenance work would be carried out. This would be carried out in normal working hours.
3.2.15
3.2.16
Page 6
3.3
3.3.1
Construction
The construction works at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would encompass an area south of the existing Thames Water pumping station (within the boundary of the pumping station). Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1 - Figure 3.1.3 show the demolition and site clearance and construction phasing to be undertaken at the site. The methods, order and timing of the construction work outlined herewith are indicative only, but representative of a practical method to construct the works and suitable upon which to base this assessment. It is recognised that, following further design development and selection of contractors, alternate methodology and scheduling may be proposed. The following sections describe: a. construction works including construction of the shaft, tunnel and processes and working methods to be applied b. access and movement c. reinstatement and commissioning d. construction programme and working hours
3.3.2
3.3.3
Code of construction practise

3.3.4 3.3.5 All works would be undertaken in accordance with the Thames Tunnel Code of Construction Practice (a draft is appended to Volume 2). The Code sets out a series of measures to protect the environment and limit disturbance from construction activities as far as reasonably practicable. These measures would be applied throughout the construction process at this site and any measures particularly relevant to particular phases of construction are highlighted below.
3.3.6
Construction works
3.3.7 The following physical construction works are described: a. Site setup (see Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1) b. Shaft construction (see Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1) c. Tunnelling d. Secondary lining (see Vol 27 Figure 3.1.1) e. Completion of works and site restoration Site setup 3.3.8 Prior to the main construction works commencing the site boundary would be established and secured. The boundary would be built to an appropriate height for the site. The worksite area would be coordinated with the Lee Tunnel designs and permanent layouts.
Page 7
A concrete batching facility would be set up on site for main tunnel and shaft secondary lining works. Welfare and office facilities would also be set up. Shaft construction The shaft would be constructed by diaphragm wall techniques and have a cast in situ secondary lining. Plant and material storage areas for shaft and tunnel connection works, excavated material handling area and delivery vehicle turning area would be set up on site. Major plant required for the diaphragm wall works include craneage, clamshell grab, diaphragm wall rig, bentonite silos, water tanks, mixing pan, compressor, air receiver, excavator and dumper. The first stage in the construction of each panel of diaphragm wall would be the excavation and setting of inner and outer guide walls. These guide walls would provide a secure supports between which excavation for the diaphragm walls would be undertaken. During excavation the void would be filled with bentonite for ground support and steel bar reinforcement cages are lowered in before concrete is pumped into the base of the wall to create a panel. This process would be repeated to create a full circle The diaphragm wall would be taken to a depth suitable to reduce the flow of water into the shaft. Grouting at the toe of the diaphragm wall may also be required to reduce the flow of water. The shaft excavation commences after the diaphragm walls are complete. The working platform and the guide walls would be broken out, and the shaft excavated exposing the walls. The excavator would load shaft skips hoisted by crawler crane, depositing excavated material within the excavated material handling area. A steel reinforced concrete base plug would be formed at the base of the shaft. Tunnelling The tunnel connecting the new Abbey Mills shaft to the existing Lee Tunnel shaft would be constructed using spray concrete lining techniques with dewatering and ground treatment as required. Provision is being made by the Lee Tunnel to accommodate the new tunnel. The tunnel connection would require taking the Lee Tunnel out of operation for a period of approximately three months. The shaft would also be used to receive the TBM driven from Chambers Wharf. A temporary cradle would be constructed to receive the TBM. A tunnel portal with a reception seal would be formed in the shaft lining. The portals would consist of a cast in situ concrete portal tied to the shaft lining. Secondary lining On completion of the tunnel excavation works the main tunnel would have a 300mm thick secondary cast in-situ reinforced concrete lining.
3.3.10 3.3.11
3.3.12
3.3.13
3.3.14
3.3.15
3.3.16
3.3.17 3.3.18
3.3.19
Page 8
Completion of works and site restoration

3.3.20 On completion of the civils works the permanent works area would be graded and a high grade capping concrete and paved surface constructed where required.
Access and movement

3.3.21 3.3.22 For the purposes of this report a one vehicle movement is defined as a single lorry accessing and then egressing the site. The highest lorry movements at the site would occur during shaft sinking works excavation. The daily vehicle movements, averaged over a one month period, would be 110HGV movements per day. Peak vehicle movements would be associated with shaft construction. The site would be accessed and egressed via the A11 - High Street, and locally via Abbey Lane and Gay Road. The access point would be via a left turn from Gay Road onto the existing road within the site and egress via a right turn onto Gay Road. During construction the access would be overseen by a site security guard. A traffic management plan for the site is being prepared. Barging has not been assessed at this site, since at present it is thought unlikely to be feasible. Should barging be judged feasible in future and if the option is included for this site, the effects of barging and any related infrastructure would be assessed in the ES.
3.3.23
3.3.24 3.3.25
Reinstatement and commissioning

3.3.26 3.3.27 Once the main elements of construction are completed, the final landscaping works would be undertaken. Testing and commissioning would also be undertaken once construction is complete. For the purposes of this assessment, completion of the commissioning stage represents the end of construction and the commencement of the operational development.
Construction programme and working hours

Construction programme 3.3.28 3.3.29 Construction activity would peak during shaft construction. Construction at this site is anticipated to take approximately four years and would involve the following steps (with some overlaps): a. Year 1 Site setup (approximately 4 months) b. Years 1 to 2 - Shaft construction (approximately 18 months) c. Years 2 to 3 Secondary lining (approximately 9 months) d. Years 3 to 4 Construction of other structures (approximately 7 months) e. Year 4 Completion of works and site restoration (approximately 6 months).
Page 9
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station f.
System-wide commissioning would take place following site restoration and is not included in the above programme.
Working hours 3.3.30 The following working hours set out in the table below would apply for the construction at this site. Vol 27 Table 3.3.1 Working hours Overall construction works Standard working hours Consist of: Core working hours Extended standard working hours core working hours mobilisation period maintenance and support period.
08:00 to 18:00 Weekdays 08:00 to 13:00 Saturdays These are intermittent and are required to cover certain construction activities that require more than the standard working hours to be completed. 18.00 to 22.00 Weekdays 13.00 to 17.00 Saturdays
Mobilisation period
Up to 1 hour before and after the Core Working Hours 07:00 to 08:00 and 18:00 to 19:00 Weekdays 07:00 to 08:00 and 13:00 to 14:00 Saturday
Maintenance and support period
13:00 to 17:00 Saturdays 10:00 to 16:00 Sundays 24 hour working. Monday to Sunday.
Main tunnel secondary lining works (if required) Continuous working
3.4
3.4.1
Design development and on site alternatives

The design presented here was completed in advance of the completion of all surveys and technical studies. The final design may alter significantly in response to this as well as feedback from phase two consultation. The design of the proposals at this site has developed, as described in the table below, since phase one consultation.
3.4.2
Page 10
Vol 27 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station Design development Shaft size has changed from approximately 25m internal diameter to 20m. Ventilation columns now proposed for the Thames Tunnel project shaft. 3.4.3 Reason Design development as a result of change in tunnel drive direction. Following further modelling and the modified scheme-wide air management proposals.
Further information on how the design has evolved at this site is included in the Design Development Report, which is also available as part of phase two consultation. Design development information, and the reasons for the choice of the final design at this site, including environmental design factors, will also be provided in the ES.
3.4.4
3.5
3.5.1
Base case
The assessment undertaken for this site takes account of relevant development projects which have been submitted or with extant planning permission. Because of the other developments the future environmental conditions within and around this site irrespective of the Thames Tunnel are likely to change. This is termed the base case. The Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tideway Quality Improvement (TTQI) projects (improvement works at Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Long Reach and Riverside Sewage Treatment Works) will be operational by the time construction of the Thames Tunnel commences. The base case would therefore be the water quality in the Tideway with the TTQI projects and the Lee Tunnel in place. The projected spill volumes and spill frequencies for the baseline conditions for the Thames Tunnel (which is with the improvements applied to the STWs, and the Lee Tunnel in place) would still not be a sufficient level of CSO control to meet the UWWTD (see also Volume 2, Section 2.6). The base case also assumes that by 2022 the Sugar House Lane development has been built out. This development is located west of the pumping station and includes 480 homes and commercial use.
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5.5
Page 11
Section 4: Air quality and odour
4
4.1
4.1.1
Air quality and odour

Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant air quality and odour effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. The proposed development has the potential to affect local air quality and odour due to: a. Construction traffic using local roads (air quality). b. Emissions from construction plant (air quality). c. Construction-generated dust (air quality). d. Operation of the tunnel (odour).
4.1.2
4.1.3
Each of these is considered within the assessment. This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment, and sets out what will be provided in the ES when the full assessment is available. Operational air quality effects from transport have been scoped out of the assessment due to the very limited number of maintenance visits required and hence the low number of associated vehicular movements.
4.1.4
4.2
4.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to air quality and odour are as follows.
Construction
Road traffic 4.2.2 4.2.3 During the proposed construction period, there would be construction traffic movements in and out of the site. The highest number of construction lorry movements at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site would occur during shaft sinking works excavation (Year 1 of construction). The peak number of vehicle movements at that time would be 110 lorry movements per day averaged over a one month period. This is based on all materials being transported by road. The construction traffic routes for the key material supply stages, traffic management and access to the site can be found in the Section 12 of this volume. River barges 4.2.5 4.2.6 All transport would be by road. Construction plant There are a number of items of plant to be used on site that may produce emissions that could affect local air quality.
4.2.4
Page 12
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Construction dust 4.2.7
Activities with the potential to give rise to dust emissions from the proposed development during construction are as follows: a. Site preparation and establishment. b. Materials handling.
4.2.8
The potential for these processes to impact at sensitive receptors is dependent on many factors including the following: a. Location of the construction site. b. Proximity of sensitive receptors. c. Extent of any intended excavation. d. Nature, location and size of stockpiles and length of time they are on site. e. Occurrence and scale of dust generating activities; necessity for onsite concrete crusher or cement batcher. f. Number and type of vehicles and plant required on site. g. Potential for dirt or mud to be made airborne through vehicle movements. h. Weather conditions.
4.2.9
Appropriate dust and emission control measures are included in the draft CoCP in accordance with the London Councils Best Practice Guidance 1. Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce air quality impacts include measures in relation to vehicle and plant emissions, measures to reduce dust formation and resuspension, measures to control dust present and to reduce particulate emissions. These would be observed across all phases of demolition and construction.
Operation
4.2.10 With the ventilation building at Abbey Mills, three odour control units (OCUs), each with a capacity of 10m3/s, would treat the air with treated air released from three vents. An air flow greater than the total capacity of 30m3/s is expected to occur for 12 hours in a typical year. This excess air from the Thames Tunnel shaft would be released through an independent 8m high by-pass vent stack on the roof of the shaft, while the excess air from the Lee Tunnel shaft would be released through a compound stack that would also accommodate the vents serving the three OCUs. The ventilation plant would operate continuously while the tunnel system is empty releasing treated air at a reduced rate of 15m3/s. In a Typical Year, treated air would be released from the OCU stacks for 99.9% of the year with only 12 hours when the plant capacity is exceeded and the excess air is released through the bypass vent stack (over 12 separate events). This information on the ventilation structure was used in the dispersion model to assess odour dispersion at the site.
4.2.11
4.2.12
Page 13
4.3
4.3.1
Assessment methodology Scoping and engagement

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below. Vol 27 Table 4.3.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Newham Comment Monitoring locations Odour complaints LB Newham Odour assessment should be against a benchmark of 1.5ouE/m3 at the boundary of the site Response Locations agreed with Pollution Control Officer. Sent through by Principal Environmental Health Officer. The odour assessment is being undertaken against this benchmark.
Baseline
4.3.2 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Construction
4.3.3 The construction phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Operation
4.3.4 The operational phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Assumptions and limitations

4.3.5 For the purposes of this assessment it has been assumed that background odour concentrations are negligible as there have been very few (two) complaints recorded in the surrounding area over recent years. This assumption will be supported by baseline hydrogen sulphide monitoring currently being undertaken at all sites (in August 2011 with repeat monitoring to be undertaken in Autumn 2011).
4.4
Baseline conditions Local air quality

Pollutant concentrations
4.4.1 4.4.2
The current conditions with regard to local air quality are best established through long-term air quality monitoring. As part of their duties under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 local authorities, especially in urban areas where air quality is a significant
Page 14
issue, undertake long-term air quality monitoring within their administrative areas. 4.4.3 There is one continuous monitoring station and two diffusion tube sites which collect data pertinent to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site and associated construction traffic routes. They are all operated by LB Newham. Data for the monitoring sites are contained in Vol 27 Table 4.4.1 (NO2) and Vol 27 Table 4.4.2 (PM10) for the years 2007 to 2010. Vol 27 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations Monitorin g Site Site Type Annual Mean (g/m3)
2010* 2009 2008 2007
4.4.4
Number of Exceedences of Hourly Standard

2010* 2009 2008 2007
Continuous Monitoring Sites Cam Road (NM2) Cam Road (21) West Ham Town Hall (5) Roadside 54 53 NM 54 38 4 NM 23
Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites Roadside Urban backgroun d 46 52 50 54 52 50 54 53 NM NM
* - Data not fully ratified. NM indicates not measured. Emboldened figures indicate an exceedence of the objective / limit value which is 40g/m3 for the annual mean and 200g/m3 for the hourly mean which can be exceeded 18 times per year.
4.4.5
The NO2 monitoring at all sites indicates exceedences of the annual mean NO2 standard (40g/m3) even at the urban background site (West Ham Town Hall) which records similar concentrations to the roadside sites. The number of exceedences of the hourly standard at Cam Road indicates that the hourly objective was achieved in 2009, but exceeded in 2007 and 2010 (no data were available for 2008). Vol 27 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - measured PM10 concentrations Annual Mean (g/m3)
Monitoring Site Cam Road (NM2)
Site Type Roadside
Number of Exceedences of Daily Standard
2010* 2009 2008 2007 2010* 2009 2008 2007 27X 27 28 30 12X 10 19 38
NM indicates not measured. X Data capture of 76% * 2010 data not fully ratified. Emboldened figures indicate an exceedence of the objective which is 40g/m3 for the annual mean and 50g/m3 for the daily mean which can be exceeded 35 times per year
4.4.6
The PM10 monitoring indicates that the annual mean standard (40g/m3) has been met for the last four years. The measured number of exceedences of the daily mean standard between 2007 and 2010 indicate
Page 15
that the daily objective (more than 35 exceedences of the daily standard) was exceeded in 2007, but met in the years 2008-2010. 4.4.7 As a result of previous exceedences of air quality objectives, LB Newham has declared the area adjacent to the main roads in the Borough an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) for NO2 and PM10. The site is not located in the AQMA, although the High Street (A11) to the north of the site is within an AQMA. In addition to the local authority monitoring, locations for diffusion tube monitoring has been proposed as part of the project to monitor NO2 concentrations in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This monitoring comprises five diffusion tubes based at the locations detailed in the table below. A triplicate site has been established next to a continuous monitoring station in Putney for bias adjustment purposes. All identified existing and new sites relating to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site (as well as other sites where they are in close proximity) are shown in Vol 27 Figure 4.4.1. Vol 27 Figure 4.4.1 Air quality monitoring locations (see Volume 27 Figures document) Vol 27 Table 4.4.3 Air quality - additional monitoring locations Monitoring Site Abbey Lane (AMPS1) Abbey Lane (AMPS2) A11 High Street (AMPS3) A12 Blackwall Tunnel Approach (AMPS4) A12 Blackwall Tunnel Approach (AMPS5) 4.4.9 Grid Reference 538585, 183323 538442, 183404 538147, 183398 537638, 183179 538025, 182867
4.4.8
This monitoring will be used in conjunction with existing local authority monitoring to define the baseline situation and also to provide input to model verification. A full baseline will be reported in the ES. In addition to monitoring data, an indication of baseline pollutant concentrations in the vicinity of the site can also be obtained from looking at background data on the air quality section of the Defra website. Mapped background pollutant concentrations are available for each 1km by 1km grid square within every local authoritys administrative area for the years 2008 to 2020 2. The background data relating to the site are given in the table below for 2010 (baseline year). Vol 27 Table 4.4.4 Air quality background pollutant concentrations Pollutant NOX (g/m3) NO2 (g/m3) PM10 (g/m3)
* Annual mean for 1km grid squares centred on 538500, 183500
4.4.10
2010 58.2 34.9 22.6
Page 16
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Receptors 4.4.11
The site is located in a mixed use area comprising residential properties, allotments and a school. The closest residential receptors are located to the north-west of the site in Riverside Road, 30m from the site boundary. The London School of Performing Arts and some commercial/office premises are located to the south-west of the site on Three Mills Island, 75m from the site boundary. There are allotments located adjacent to the western site boundary. All these receptors are relevant, albeit with different levels of sensitivity, to the emissions sources identified in the local air quality assessment. The sensitivity of identified receptors has been determined using the criteria detailed in Volume 5 this identifies their sensitivity in relation to both local air quality and dust nuisance, as shown in the table below. These receptors are relevant to the assessment of emissions from construction road traffic and construction plant, as well as the assessment of construction dust. Vol 27 Table 4.4.5 Air quality receptors - construction Receptors (relating to all identified emissions sources) Residential properties Value/sensitivity and justification
4.4.12
Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. High sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure is relevant for the hourly mean standards. Low sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. High sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure is relevant for the hourly mean standards. Low sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance.
Commercial/offices
London School of Performing Arts
Allotments
Odour
4.4.13 No odour complaints have been made to the local authority in this area during the last five years 3. Complaints in the Thames Water database have been reviewed within a radius of 500m from the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site boundary which identified two complaints. Of the two complaints, the first in 2005, related to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station and the second, in 2010, related to odour from the general sewerage system.
Page 17
The nearest sensitive receptors are described in para. 4.4.11 above. For the purposes of the odour assessment, the sensitivity of these receptors has been determined in accordance with the criteria in Volume 5 which indicates that the residential properties are of high sensitivity whilst the commercial/office premises, London School of Performing Arts and allotments are of medium sensitivity.
4.5
4.5.1
Construction assessment Construction base and development cases

The peak construction year (Year 1 of construction) is used as the year of assessment for construction effects (road transport, construction plant and construction dust) in which the development case will be assessed against the base case to identify likely significant effects for the Thames Tunnel project. The base case conditions for the construction assessment year will change from the current conditions due to modifications to the sources of the air pollution in the intervening period. For road vehicles, there will be an increase in the penetration of new Euro emissions standards to the London vehicle fleet between the current situation and future years. The uptake of newer vehicles with improved emission controls should lead to a reduction in NO2 and PM10 concentrations over time. However, the uptake of newer vehicles has not improved NO2 concentrations significantly in the last ten years in London, so as a worst case the NOx contribution from diesel vehicles was assumed to be the same for Euro 1 to 5 vehicles in line with Defra advice 4. Reduced emissions from the introduction of Euro 6 diesel vehicles in the future and the ongoing tightening of Euro standards for petrol engined vehicles will reduce the base case concentrations when compared to the 2010 baseline. Other emissions sources should also reduce due to local and national policies. Therefore, the non-road sources of the background concentrations used in the modelling will be reduced in line with Defra guidance LAQM.TG(09) 5. It is noted that the local air quality assessment does not specifically consider the Sugar House Lane development (see Section 3.5) as the development is further from the site than other assessed residential and commercial receptors.
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.5.4
4.5.5
Construction assessment area

4.5.6 The assessment area for the local air quality study covers a square area of 650m by 850m centred on the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This assessment area is used for the assessment of road transport, construction plant and construction dust and has been selected on the basis of professional judgement to ensure that the effects of the site are fully assessed. A distance of 200m is generally considered sufficient to ensure that any significant effects are considered the selected assessment area exceeds this by some margin.
Page 18
Construction effects
Emissions from road traffic 4.5.7 Road traffic is likely to affect local air quality in two ways: from emissions from the construction traffic; and from increased emissions from other road vehicles due to congestion or re-routing due to lane closures. A qualitative assessment of road traffic effects has been undertaken for this assessment. When traffic surveys are complete, a more detailed quantitative assessment using air quality modelling will be undertaken, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. Based on professional judgement for the purposes of this assessment, it is however considered that the impacts due to construction traffic are expected to be small (ie, a small magnitude of change according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5) due to the small number of additional lorry movements anticipated during construction. The residential properties and school have a high sensitivity to local air quality (as identified in Vol 27 Table 4.4.5). The likely significance of the effect of construction traffic for the residential properties is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria in Volume 5). Given its distance from the site, the London School of Performing Arts and the other commercial/office premises are unlikely to be affected by the emissions from road traffic, so the significance of effect is likely to be negligible. At the allotments, which have a low sensitivity to local air quality, the significance of effect is likely to be negligible. Emissions from plant 4.5.11 Construction plant is likely to affect local air quality in two ways: from direct exhaust emissions; and from construction dust associated with the use and movement of the plant around the site. This part of the assessment considers exhaust emissions while construction dust from plant movement is considered in the following section. Emission factors are being assigned to each item of plant. More data are being gathered regarding the operation of these items of plant in terms of expected usage through the construction phase. A qualitative assessment has been undertaken. Modelling is currently being undertaken, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. Based on professional judgement for the purposes of this assessment, it is considered that the impacts due to construction plant are expected to be small (ie, a small magnitude of change according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5), given the localised nature of the emissions. Compared to the traffic flows in the surrounding area, the amount of plant and their emissions are likely to have a negligible impact. At the residential properties and the London School of Performing Arts, which have a high sensitivity to local air quality, the likely significance of the effect of construction plant is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria in Volume 5). At the allotments and commercial/office premises,
4.5.8
4.5.9
4.5.10
4.5.12
4.5.13 4.5.14
4.5.15
Page 19
which have a low sensitivity to local air quality, the significance of effect would be negligible. Construction dust 4.5.16 4.5.17 Construction dust would be generated from both on-site activities and from road vehicles assessing and servicing the site. Dust sensitive receptors have been identified in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site in accordance with the methods detailed in Volume 5, as described in Vol 27 Table 4.4.5. In line with the London Councils guidance 6, the site has been categorised using the criteria given in Volume 5 which takes into account the area taken up by the development and the potential impact of the development on sensitive receptors close to the development. The specific site details relating to the site with respect to the criteria set are: a. Site would have a maximum construction area of approximately 26,000m2. b. The project is a non-residential development. c. 4.5.20 4.5.21 Main construction at the site would last approximately four years. d. There are likely intermittent impacts on identified sensitive receptors. On this basis, the development has been classified as a high risk site. The receptor sensitivity is identified as medium for residential properties, the school, commercial/office premises and allotments (as identified in Vol 27 Table 4.4.5). As the residential properties and the allotments are both within 50m of the site boundary, the likely significance of the effect of construction dust is deemed to be a moderate adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). The significance of the effect of construction dust on the London School of Performing Arts and the commercial/office premises, which are within 100m of the site boundary, is deemed to be minor adverse. These effects would be reduced by the implementation of the measures contained in the CoCP (see Section 4.2). This would result in a minor adverse effect at residential properties and allotments within 50m of the site and a negligible effect at the school and commercial/office premises. Overall construction effects 4.5.23 When considering the overall local air quality construction effects (ie, effects from construction road traffic and plant), it is concluded that the overall significance of effects is likely to be minor adverse at residential properties and the London School of Performing Arts, and negligible at the allotments. With regard to construction dust, the likely significance of effects is minor adverse at residential properties and at the allotments, which are both within 50m of the site boundary. The London School of Performing Arts and the commercial/office premises are further from the site boundary (75m), so the significance of the effects is likely to be negligible.
4.5.18
4.5.19
4.5.22
4.5.24
Page 20
On this basis no significant construction effects are predicted.
4.6
4.6.1 4.6.2
Operational assessment Operational base and development cases

The assessment undertaken for a typical use year (as described in Volume 5 applies equally to all operational years. Base and development cases have been developed for modelling purposes. Base case conditions have been assumed to be the same as baseline conditions with respect to background odour concentrations as no change in background odour concentrations is anticipated.
Operational assessment area

4.6.3 Odour dispersion modelling was carried out over an area of 1,300m by 1,000m centred on the site. The assessment area was selected on the basis of the potential maximum extent of the impact area.
Operational effects
4.6.4 Vol 27 Table 4.6.1 shows the predicted maximum ground level odour concentrations at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. These are the highest concentrations that could occur at the worst affected ground level receptor at or near the site in a typical year. In accordance with the odour criterion set by the Environment Agency and in the draft NPS 7, results are presented for the 98th percentile of hourly average concentrations in the year (or the 176th highest hourly concentration in the year) and the number of hours in a year with concentrations above 1.5ouE/m3. The number of hours with concentrations above 1.5ouE/m3 gives an indication of the number of hours in a year that an odour might be detectable at the worst affected receptor. The table also identifies the magnitude of the identified impacts in accordance with the criteria detailed in Volume 5. The tables below gives similar results for the predicted impacts at the worst affected buildings, where concentrations at ground level and at height have been considered. Vol 27 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts at ground level - operation Year Typical Maximum at ground level locations* 98th percentile 0.2 (ouE/m3) No. of hours > 10 1.5ouE/m3 Impact magnitude and justification Negligible 98th percentile concentration is less than 1ouE/m3
4.6.5
*beyond site boundary
Vol 27 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts at buildings - operation Year Typical Maximum at buildings* 98th percentile < 0.1 Impact magnitude and justification Negligible
Page 21
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Year Maximum at buildings* (ouE/m3) No. of hours > 1.5ouE/m3
* beyond site boundary
Section 4: Air quality and odour Impact magnitude and justification 98th percentile concentration is less than 1ouE/m3
4.6.6
The maximum 98th percentile concentration beyond the site boundary was predicted to be 0.2ouE/m3 at the allotments which is well within odour criterion set by the Environment Agency and Defra at 1.5ouE/m3. The highest 98th percentile concentration at a building beyond the site boundary would be 0.1ouE/m3. This represents a negligible impact. Odour at various heights at buildings was also assessed. The results are shown in *beyond site boundary for the building with the largest impact. Odour would be above 1.5ouE/m3 at the worst affected building beyond the site boundary for four hours in the year.
Vol 27 Table 4.6.2
4.6.7 4.6.8
4.6.9
With regard to the significance of effects at ground level and building locations, given that the predicted odour concentrations at all locations and at buildings do not exceed the 98th percentile criterion of 1.5ouE/m3, it is considered that an overall significance effects would be negligible in relation to the site. No significant effects are therefore predicted in relation to odour.
4.7
4.7.1
Approach to mitigation Construction

All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to air quality and odour are summarised in Section 4.2. No mitigation is required.
Operation
4.7.2 No mitigation is required.
Page 22
4.8
Vol 27 Table 4.8.1 Air quality assessment summary - construction Effect Minor adverse None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Residential properties (within 50m) Minor adverse Negligible None required None required
Local air quality - effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions
Effects from construction dust
Minor adverse Negligible
Allotments (within 50m)
Local air quality - effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Minor adverse Negligible None required None required
Minor adverse Negligible
London School of Performing Arts Negligible Negligible
Local air quality - effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions
None required None required
Negligible Negligible
Commercial/offices
Local air quality - effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Negligible
None required
Negligible
Page 23
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Vol 27 Table 4.8.2 Odour assessment summary - operation Effect Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible None required None required None required Negligible Negligible Negligible None required Negligible Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Residential properties
Odour
Allotments
Odour
London School of Performing Arts
Odour
Commercial/offices
Odour
Page 24
4.9
4.9.1
Assessment completion
The following work is required in order to complete the local air quality and odour assessment for the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site: a. Diffusion tube monitoring will be set up to monitor NO2 concentrations at five sites in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This monitoring will be used to provide a baseline to the assessment and as an input for model verification. b. For the assessment of road traffic emissions, air quality modelling will be undertaken to predict the effects on local air quality. c. The nature, quantities and operation of the construction plant is being finalised. The appropriate emission factors will then be applied to the plant in order to initialise the modelling work. These models will then be run and the effects of construction plant on local air quality predicted.
d. The assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. e. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for air quality and odour within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
Page 25
Section 5: Ecology - aquatic
5
5.1
5.1.1
Ecology - aquatic
Introduction
This section presents the approach to the assessment of effects on aquatic ecology receptors. For the purposes of the assessment of the Thames Tunnel scheme aquatic ecology includes plants and animals that live in and depend on the tidal River Thames and its tidal tributaries (known collectively as the Thames Tideway). The topic includes the habitats, mammals, fish, invertebrates and algae which occur in the Thames Tideway in the vicinity of the site. Aquatic ecology was scoped into the assessment for the Abbey Mills site at the scoping stage on the basis that there would be temporary and permanent landtake associated with wharfage structures in the Channelsea River. However, since Phase one consultation, the drive strategy has changed and Abbey Mills is no longer a main drive site. There would be a 20m diameter shaft and a connecting tunnel to the Lee Tunnel located within the area already occupied by the Lee Tunnel works. No in-river works are now anticipated since any excavated material from the works would be removed by road. The interception of the CSO at this site is being undertaken as part of the Lee Tunnel. Therefore the proposed works at this site (Section 3) do not include interception of the CSO and operational effects would not arise. No significant effects on aquatic ecology are therefore anticipated for either construction or operation. Thus aquatic ecology is not considered further for this site. Effects on terrestrial ecology receptors such as habitats, birds, mammals and invertebrates are assessed under Terrestrial Ecology in Section 6 of this volume. Project-wide effects on aquatic ecology arising from this and other sites for the Thames Tunnel are addressed in Volume 6 (Project-wide).
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
Page 26
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial
6
6.1
6.1.1
Ecology terrestrial
Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant terrestrial ecology effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. Likely significant effects on aquatic ecology are considered in Section 5. Elements of the proposed works that have particular relevance to terrestrial ecology comprise site clearance, piling, and wider construction activities. The assessment of terrestrial ecology during operation was scoped in for the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site at the scoping stage. Operational activity would be limited to occasional maintenance works with occasional visits to the site by maintenance workers and their vehicles. Once every ten years there would be maintenance activities involving mobile cranes for a short duration. No adverse effects are anticipated as a result of the operation phase. Thus the operational phase is not considered further in this assessment.
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.2
6.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to terrestrial ecology are as follows.
Construction
a. Site mobilisation including clearance activities commencing in the first year of construction. b. Noise, lighting, construction workers and vehicle movement, and vibration associated with construction activities. 6.2.2 The site would typically be under construction during standard working hours only. However, some activities, such as the diaphragm wall works, are likely to require extended standard working hours, as described in 3. Code of Construction Practice 6.2.3 Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce terrestrial ecology effects include those that would ensure that terrestrial ecology receptors are appropriately managed during construction. The document sets out procedures that would be adhered to both scheme wide and at individual sites. The draft CoCP outlines that where appropriate, works would be undertaken in compliance with legislation, and with due regard to relevant nature conservation policies and guidance, including the Mayors Biodiversity Strategy 8 and local Biodiversity Action Plans. Each site would have an Ecological Management Plan, which would detail the approach to management of effects on ecological receptors with reference to the results of the terrestrial ecology assessment. Where species are protected by specific legislation, approved guidance would be followed,
6.2.4
Page 27
appropriate mitigation would be proposed and any necessary licences or consents obtained. 6.2.5 Measures not specifically outlined under the ecology section of the draft CoCP are also of relevance, for example the management of noise and vibration, and water resources.
6.3
6.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. This includes biodiversity technical workshops with statutory consultees. No site specific comments have been received relating to terrestrial ecology.
Baseline
6.3.2 Baseline data collection has followed the methodology detailed in Volume 5. Baseline data presented within this assessment is derived from a desk study, the Phase 1 Habitat Survey and preliminary wintering bird and bat triggering surveys. All subsequent survey data will be reported in the ES. In summary the following baseline data has been reported: a. Desk study including data base searches (for ecological records within a 2km radius from the site boundary, which is the industry standard), web-based searches and review of existing available documents in relation to protected and notable species and habitats. Desk study data within 500m of the site are reported here as the works are unlikely to affect species and designated sites beyond this distance. Records dated prior to 2000 have not been included as the information since this date provides the most appropriate data to assess the site baseline conditions. b. A Phase 1 Habitat Survey was undertaken on 7th December 2010 following the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey Methodology 9. The survey included the site and any adjacent habitat considered to be potentially affected by the proposed works. c. Wintering bird surveys were undertaken in December 2010, and January, February and March 2011. The survey visits included the site and adjacent habitat considered, using professional judgement, to be potentially affected by the proposed works. These surveys will resume in October 2011 at the start of the next winter season.
6.3.3
d. A Bat triggering survey (comprising an initial survey using remote recording equipment (Anabat detectors)) was undertaken to determine whether subsequent activity/dawn surveys were required. This was carried out in May 2011. The survey area includes the site and adjacent features that are assessed (using professional judgement) to be potentially affected by the project. Further surveys were required and preliminary results of the bat triggering surveys have been provided.
Page 28
The surveys identified as required from the Phase 1 survey are bats, breeding birds, wintering birds, black redstart, invasive plants, notable plants, otter, water vole, reptiles and invertebrates. The species surveys identified as being required following the desk study and Phase 1 Habitat Survey have commenced and are detailed in the table below. The results of these surveys will be assessed and reported in the ES. Vol 27 Table 6.3.1 Terrestrial ecology notable species surveys Survey Otter and water vole survey Bat activity and dawn surveys Survey area The survey area will include watercourses adjacent to the site Around suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site The survey area includes the site and adjacent features that are assessed to be potentially affected by the project. Around suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site Suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site Within suitable habitat within the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site boundary. Around suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site The survey area will include all habitat within the proposed works area Timing One visit between June and September 2011 June to October 2011
6.3.5
Completion of wintering bird surveys
One visit in October 2011 and one visit in November 2011
Breeding bird survey
Three visits between April and July 2011.
Black redstart survey
Five fortnightly visits from mid-April to mid July 2011 Ten days between June and September 2011 Four visits once a month between May and September 2011 One visit between June and August 2011
Reptile surveys
Invertebrate survey
Botanical survey
Page 29
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Survey Invasive plant survey Survey area
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial Timing One visit in August 2011
The survey area and areas within 10m of the site boundary
Construction
6.3.6 The methodology employed for the terrestrial ecology assessment of construction effects is detailed in Volume 5 and is based on IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) 10. The following ecological receptors are included in the assessment: a. Habitats b. Otter and water vole c. Bats d. Black redstart e. Breeding birds f. Wintering birds g. Reptiles h. Invertebrates i. 6.3.7 Notable plants The potential presence of Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) noted in Vol 27 Table 6.4.1 is not considered within the assessment as measures to eradicate and control this, and other invasive species, prior to construction commencing are contained within the CoCP. The findings of the mapping survey will be reported in the ES. There are five designated sites within 500m of the site. Due to the localised nature of the proposed works and the isolation of the designated sites from the proposed works, no effects have been identified. Therefore, designated sites are not considered further in the assessment. As contaminated runoff and atmospheric pollution would be controlled through the implementation of the CoCP, no likely significant effects are anticipated on ecological receptors. Therefore, this is not considered any further in the assessment. The assessment year for construction is the start of site preparation works in construction Year 1. Site clearance has already been undertaken for the Lee Tunnel project at Abbey Mills. Cleared areas will be replaced with buildings and structures by the start of the proposed project construction. Assuming that the remainder of the site and any nearby designated sites would continue to be managed as they are at present, then the base case is considered to be the same as the current baseline conditions, as described in Section 6.4.
6.3.8
6.3.9
6.3.10
6.3.11
Page 30

6.3.12 It is assumed for the purposes of assessment that the current site management regime of the site would continue. The assessment assumes that the measures within the CoCP would be implemented as part of the development, and that surveys have and will be undertaken at appropriate times of the year. It is assumed for planning at this stage that there would be no river works including no use of barges. No other site specific limitations or assumptions have been identified.
6.4
6.4.1
Baseline
The following section sets out the baseline conditions for terrestrial ecology receptors at the site and surrounds, including their value.
Designated sites
On site 6.4.2 The River Thames and Tidal Tributaries SINC (Grade Mi) is partially located within the site along the western and southern boundaries. The site comprises foreshore habitat and river channel. . Surrounding area 6.4.3 Bow Back River SINC (Grade B ii) is adjacent to the west of the proposed development boundary and is of district (medium) value. It comprises a series of artificial channels and adjacent wasteland supporting a good diversity of plants and fish. The Greenway and Old Ford Nature Reserve SINC (Grade Bii) runs adjacent to the north of the site and is of district (medium) value. The Greenway supports populations of uncommon plants and invertebrates. The nature reserve is of notable value for birds and butterflies. Railside Land in Newham SINC (Grade Bii) runs approximately 50m south of the site boundary and is of district (medium) value. It comprises important strips of undisturbed habitat for birds, reptiles, mammals and invertebrates. The Lee Valley SINC (Grade Mi) is located approximately 290m west of the site. It comprises a variety of landscapes and open spaces, from industrial heritage sites and nature reserves, to a 0.4ha (1,000 acre) country park and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This site is of county (medium) value. Bromley-by-Bow Gasworks Wood SINC (Grade Bii) is located approximately 360m south of the site. It comprises an area of woodland. This site is of district (medium) value. Due to the localised nature of the proposed works and the location of the designated sites in relation to the proposed works, no effects have been identified. Therefore, designated sites are not considered further in the assessment.
6.4.4
6.4.5
6.4.6
6.4.7
6.4.8
i ii
SINC (Grade M) = Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade M of Metropolitan importance) SINC (Grade B) = Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade B of Borough importance)
Page 31
Habitats
6.4.9 The site includes a number of London BAP habitats. The Prescott Channel and River Lee form part of London BAP habitat Rivers and Streams. The foreshore on the Lee consists of BAP priority habitat Mudflats. Habitats on site comprise London BAP habitat Built up Areas and Gardens, and Parks, Squares and Amenity Grassland. The habitats recorded within the survey area during the Phase 1 Habitat Survey on 7th December 2010 are detailed in Vol 27 Table 6.4.1 and shown on Vol 27 Figure 6.4.1. Vol 27 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology phase 1 habitat survey (see Volume 27 Figures document) 6.4.11 Target notes (TN#) are indicated on this figure and are referred to within the text below. Vol 27 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology - phase 1 habitat survey Habitats Hard standing Habitat Description A large proportion of the survey area comprises hard standing vehicle routes, pathways and parking areas. The main Abbey Mills Pumping Station buildings are located in the north of the survey area. The survey area includes a disused property with associated outbuildings, which are located within close proximity to the main pumping station building. The units are constructed out of a variety of building materials in differing states of repair. In addition to the original buildings, a newer set of units is present in the centre of the survey area. These comprise steel framed industrial buildings. Amenity grassland (off site but within the pumping station site boundary) Scattered trees Areas of mown amenity grassland are located around the survey area; predominantly at the main entrance into the grounds of the pumping station in the north west. On site: Scattered trees are located predominantly around the edge of the proposed works area. Off site but within the pumping station site boundary: Numerous trees are planted around the site for ornamental purposes and are generally mature in age. An avenue of London plane
6.4.10
Buildings (off site but within the pumping station site boundary)
Page 32
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Habitats
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial Habitat Description
Platanus acerifolia trees, for example, is present along the access roads into the site. Other mature trees include poplar Populus sp., located to the east and west of the main pumping station building. Dense continuous tree-lines are also located around the site boundary. Trees are considered to be of value for roosting bats (TN1 and TN2). Semi-improved grassland A vegetated bund is located within the southern part of the survey area, approximately south and east of the hardstanding. The top of the bund is approximately 2m above the rest of the site level and is relatively undisturbed. The majority of the bund area comprises semiimproved grassland. Dense continuous scrub is located primarily along the extent of the earth bund. Species include bramble Rubus fruticosus and buddleia Buddleja davidii. A log pile was located to the north of the site to the rear of buildings in this area (TN3). Located to the west of the survey area are allotment gardens, which are currently in use. The Prescott Channel, Channelsea River and the Abbey Creek run adjacent to the survey area in the east, south and west. These areas have exposed mud flats at low tide and marginal and bank-side vegetation including swamp.
Scrub and ruderal vegetation
Log pile Allotment gardens (off site) Running water and intertidal
Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica was identified in two areas during the survey visit. The main area was to the rear of buildings in Other the east of the survey area (TN4), the second location was in an area of dense scrub to the (includes areas north west (TN5). In both locations, the both within the proposed works site extent of the Japanese knotweed was relatively large. and off site but within the pumping In addition, Japanese knotweed is present station site alongside the Channelsea River to the south boundary) of the survey area. Another area of Japanese knotweed was also identified in the west of the site. It is understood that this area is undergoing treatment to eradicate it.
Page 33
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station On site 6.4.12
The scattered trees include some native species and are generally mature in age. These trees have limited intrinsic value and are not UK or London BAP priority species. Therefore, the trees on site are considered to be of local (low) value. Scrub and ruderal vegetation are not BAP priority habitats. The habitat is considered to be of local (low) value. Japanese knotweed (a noxious and invasive plant) was identified on site. This is considered to be of negative value at the local (low) level. This is not considered further within this assessment as the eradication and control of such invasive species would be managed by the measures set out in the CoCP, as discussed in para. 6.3.7. Surrounding area The habitat within the Abbey Mills Pumping Station boundary, but outside of the proposed works area, includes a combination of mature trees, semiimproved grassland, scrub and ruderal vegetation and amenity grassland as well as buildings. This remaining habitat is considered to be of local (low) value. The black poplar Populus nigra betulifolia has been recorded in the north east corner of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This tree is a London BAP priority species and is considered to be of county (medium) value. The surrounding habitat includes designated sites, valued as detailed in para.s 6.4.3 - 6.4.5.
6.4.13 6.4.14
6.4.15
6.4.16
6.4.17
Notable species
6.4.18 Species surveys were undertaken by Scott Wilson Group Plc. (hereafter Scott Wilson) between 2005-2008 at Abbey Mills for the Lee Tunnel ES 11. This data provides general background information and is summarised below, along with results of the current data search. Otter and water vole On site 6.4.19 No records of otters Lutra lutra or water voles Arvicola amphibius have been identified in relation to the site during the desk study. However, habitat is present on site that is considered suitable for supporting this species. The current status of the site and value for otters and water voles will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.4.20 No records of otters or water voles have been identified in relation to the surrounding area during the desk study. However, habitat is present that is considered suitable for supporting this species. The current status of the surrounding area and value for otters and water voles will be assessed and reported in the ES.
Page 34
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Bats On site 6.4.21
Scott Wilson11 recorded small numbers of common pipistrelle bats Pipistrellus pipistrellus within dense scrub and ruderal vegetation at the toe of the site and near the raised footpath at the north of the site. No bat roosts were specifically identified on the site. Full baseline data and valuation will be assessed and reported in the ES, but triggering surveys carried out in May 2011 have suggested the presence of high levels of bat activity, limited to foraging, involving at least two species (common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus). Surrounding area Habitat adjacent and near to the site may support bats. The baseline and value of the bat resource in the surrounding area will be assessed and reported in the ES. Black redstart On site
6.4.22
6.4.23
6.4.24
Scott Wilson11 recorded no black redstart Phoenicurus ochruros on site. However, habitat is present on site that is considered suitable for supporting this species. The current status of the site and value of black redstart will be assessed and reported ES. Surrounding area No records of black redstart have been identified within 500m of the site. However, habitat is present within the surrounding area that is considered suitable for supporting this species. The current status of the site and value of black redstart will be assessed and reported in the ES. Breeding birds On site
6.4.25
6.4.26
Scott Wilson11 recorded the following birds on site: a. Canada goose Branta Canadensis (Green status) b. Lesser black backed gull Larus fuscus (Amber statusiii) c. Feral pigeon Columba livia (Green status) d. Woodpigeon Columba palumbus (Green status) e. Great spotted woodpecker Dendrocopus major (Green status) f. Wren Troglodytes troglodytes (Green status) g. Dunnock Prunella modularis (Amber status, UK and London BAP species)
The UK's birds can be split into three categories of conservation importance - red, amber and green. Red is the highest conservation priority, with species needing urgent action. Amber is the next most critical group, followed by green. (http://www.rspb.org.uk. Page last updated on Monday 7 March 2011).
iii
Page 35
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station h. Robin Erithacus rubecula (Green status) i. j. k. l. Blackbird Turdus merula (Green status)
Whitethroat Sylvia communis (Amber status) Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita (Green status) Blue tit Parus Caeruleus (Green status)
m. Great tit Parus major (Green status) n. Jay Garrulus glandarius (Green status) o. Magpie Pica pica (Green status) p. Carrion crow Corvus corone corone (Green status) q. Greenfinch Sylvia atricapilla (Green status) r. s. 6.4.27 Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis (Green status) Linnet Carduelis cannabina (Red status, UK and London BAP species)
The majority of these records were from the eastern boundary of the site and from former scrubland at the southern end. Few birds were identified around buildings on site. Starling Sturnus vulgaris was identified flying over the site, along with linnet. Both of these species have a red conservation status, due to decline in populations, and are UK and London BAP species. Incidental bird records during the 2010 Phase 1 Habitat survey include great spotted woodpecker Dendrocopus major, snipe Gallinago gallinago (Amber status), mistle thrush Turdus viscivorus (Amber status) and chaffinch Fringilla coelebs (Green status). Full baseline data and the value of the breeding birds resource will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area The habitat adjacent to the site has the potential to support notable populations and/or assemblages of breeding bird species. The status and value of breeding birds will be assessed and reported in the ES. Wintering birds On site
6.4.28
6.4.29
6.4.30
6.4.31
6.4.32
Incidental bird records during the 2010 Phase 1 walkover include great spotted woodpecker and snipe (Amber status). The status and value of wintering birds will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area The foreshore to the River Thames within and adjacent to the site has the potential to support notable populations and/or assemblages of wintering bird species. From preliminary wintering bird survey results, a total of 43 species of wintering bird were recorded at the site between December 2010 and March 2011. The highest maximum count was 341 individual birds. The most notable was the high numbers of the following species:
6.4.33
Page 36
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station a. Gadwall Anas strepera (Amber Listiii) b. Teal Anas crecca (Amber List) c.
Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (Amber List)
d. Pochard (Amber List) e. Little grebe (Amber List) f. Kestrel Falco tinnunculus (Amber List) g. Water rail (Green List) h. Snipe (Amber List) i. j. k. l. 6.4.34 Green sandpiper Tringa ochropus (Amber List, WCA 1981 Schedule 1 Part 1 species) Kingfisher (Amber List, WCA 1981 Schedule 1 Part 1 species) Meadow pipit (Amber List) Chiffchaff (Green List)
m. Linnet (Green List) The foreshore to the adjacent watercourses has the potential to support notable populations and/or assemblages of wintering bird species. The status and value of wintering birds will be assessed and reported in the ES. Reptiles On site 6.4.35 Surveys undertaken by Scott Wilson11 between 2005 and 2008 did not identify any reptiles on the Lee Tunnel site. However, habitat remains within the Thames Tunnel site that has potential for reptiles. Full current baseline data and value for reptiles will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.4.36 The habitat adjacent to the site has potential for reptiles. Full baseline data and value for reptiles will be assessed and reported in the ES. Terrestrial invertebrates On site 6.4.37 A total of 96 species were recorded during surveys undertaken by Scott Wilson between 2007 and 200811. This included one Red Data Book 12 species. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species provides taxonomic, conservation status and distribution information on plants and animals that have been globally evaluated using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. This system is designed to determine the relative risk of extinction, and the main purpose of the IUCN Red List is to catalogue and highlight those plants
Page 37
and animals that are facing a higher risk of global extinction. There are also six Nationally Notable iv species and six species of Local importance v. 6.4.38 Several unusual and scarce species were found, including: a. Asiraca clavicornis; a nationally scarce plant hopper b. Bruchus atomarius; a nationally scarce seed beetle c. 6.4.39 Kalcapion semivittatum; a nationally scarce weevil d. Phytoecia cylindrical; a nationally scarce long-horn beetle. Full current baseline data and value for invertebrates will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.4.40 Full baseline data and value for terrestrial invertebrates will be provided in the ES. Notable plants On site 6.4.41 Surveys by Scott Wilson11 did not identify any notable plants at Abbey Mills. No other records of notable plants have been identified. However, habitat is present on site which has the potential to support notable plant species. The current status of the site and value for notable plant species will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area The current status of the surrounding area and value for notable plant species will be assessed and reported in the ES.
6.5
Construction assessment
Habitats On site
6.5.1
Site clearance would result in the loss of semi-improved grassland (local (low) value), scrub and ruderal vegetation (local (low) value). It is considered probable that this would be significant at the local level (minor adverse effect). Surrounding area No significant effects have been identified that would affect habitat in the surrounding area (negligible).
6.5.2
Relates to species which are found in between 16 and 100 hectads of the Ordnance Survey National Grid. v Referring to species found in between 101 and 300 hectads of the Ordnance Survey National Grid.
iv
Page 38
Notable species
Otters and water voles On site 6.5.3 The works may result in habitat loss where the river banks are to be affected and inland where otter couches/laying up areas may be affected. The significance of effects on otters and water voles will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.4 The works may result in temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of construction workers and machinery during construction to water voles and otters using the adjacent intertidal habitat. The magnitude of the effects would depend on the timing of works. The significance of effects on otters and water voles on the site will be assessed and reported in the ES. Bats On site 6.5.5 There is likely to be temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance to bats roosting and foraging on site from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of people and machinery during works. The magnitude of effects on bats will be provided in the ES. The loss of potential bat foraging habitat and disturbance may be significant. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.7 Disturbance effects on bats roosting and foraging in adjacent habitat may be significant and will be assessed and reported in the ES. Black redstart On site 6.5.8 There is likely to be temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of people and machinery during construction to black redstarts using the buildings on site for nesting and perching habitat, and foraging around the site. The magnitude of the effects would depend on the timing of works. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.9 Disturbance effects on black redstart, if present, may be significant and will be assessed and reported in the ES. Breeding birds On site 6.5.10 Possible effects on birds include the following:
6.5.6
Page 39
a. Permanent habitat loss on site as a result of construction activities could lead to a reduction in available nesting and foraging habitat for a range of bird species that are listed on UK and London BAPs. The loss of bird nesting habitat of local (low) value may be significant. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. b. Temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of construction workers and machinery during construction to breeding birds using the site trees and buildings as nesting and perching habitat, and foraging around the sewage treatment works site. Displacement of birds may render a small area of nesting habitat unsuitable to birds. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.11 The significance of effects on the surrounding area will be assessed and reported in the ES. Wintering birds On site 6.5.12 The works may result in temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of construction workers and machinery during construction on site to wintering birds using the site for refuge. Surrounding area 6.5.13 There is likely to be temporary (medium term) adverse disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of construction workers, machinery during construction on site to wintering birds using the adjacent intertidal habitat for refuge and feeding purposes. Disturbance effects on wintering birds using the adjacent riparian habitat may be significant and will be assessed and reported in the ES. Reptiles On site 6.5.14 Effects on reptiles, where present, include habitat loss and temporary (medium term) disturbance from noise, lighting, vibration and movement of people and machinery during works. The works could also create a barrier to movement for any reptiles. These effects may be significant. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.15 The significance of effects on reptile populations in the surrounding area will be assessed and reported in the ES. Invertebrates On site 6.5.16 Permanent habitat loss on site as a result of construction activities could lead to a reduction in habitat for a range of invertebrate species. The loss
Page 40
of habitat of local (low) value may be significant. The significance of effects will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.17 The significance of effects on invertebrate populations in the surrounding area will be assessed and reported in the ES. Notable plants On site 6.5.18 Works may result in the loss of notable plant species from the site. The significance of effects on notable plants on site will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.19 No effects on notable plants adjacent to the site are anticipated.
6.6
6.6.1
Operational assessment
As described in para. 6.1.3, there are not anticipated to be significant operational effects on terrestrial ecology therefore this has not been assessed.
6.7
6.7.1

The ecological management plan described in the CoCP will include longterm management of habitats and species on site post-construction. It would be prepared following planning approval and prior to commencement of works on site. In addition to measures detailed in the CoCP, the following measures are likely to be required: a. Disturbance minimisation measures, specific to the site and the faunal species identified during the surveys, eg, site lighting scheme. b. Habitat creation and translocation of any species such as reptiles from the works area. c. Mitigation specific to bat roosts, if present. d. Mitigation specific to water vole burrows or otter holts, if present. e. Habitat creation for invertebrates and notable plants. f. Mitigation specific to wintering birds. g. Replacement planting for habitat lost during the works.
6.7.2
Page 41
6.8
Assessment summary
Construction
Significance of effect Probable site level (minor adverse effect) Probable site level (minor adverse effect) Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Replacement planting Enhancements through wildflower seeding Mitigation Significance of residual effect Probable site level positive (minor beneficial effect) Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Subject to survey results Subject to survey results
Vol 27 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology assessment summary - construction
Receptor
Description of effect
Habitats
Semi-improved grassland
Permanent loss on site
Scrub and ruderal vegetation
Permanent loss on site
Notable species
Otters and water voles
Loss of habitat on site
Disturbance from noise, lighting and vibration on and adjacent to the site Subject to survey results Subject to survey results
Bats
Loss of foraging resource on site
Subject to survey results Subject to survey results
Disturbance from lighting, noise and vibration on and adjacent to the site
Potential loss of onsite roost/s
Subject to survey results
Page 42
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Significance of effect Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Description of effect
Birds (breeding, wintering and black redstart)
Loss of a nesting habitat on site
Disturbance from lighting, noise and vibration on and adjacent to the site. Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results
Reptiles
Loss of a reptile habitat on site
Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results Subject to survey results
Disturbance from lighting, noise and vibration on site
Barrier effect to the movement of reptiles across the site
Invertebrates
Loss of invertebrate habitat on site
Notable plants
Loss from site.
Page 43
6.9
6.9.1
Surveys for bats, black redstart, wintering birds, breeding birds, invertebrates, otters, water voles, reptiles and flora are ongoing in 2011 as summarised in Vol 27 Table 6.3.1. The data from these surveys will be used to inform the ES and an assessment of effects on ecological receptors will be undertaken. Where required, appropriate mitigation to avoid or minimise impacts to terrestrial ecological receptors will be developed in consultation with stakeholders and a final assessment will be made of the significance of any residual effects to ecological receptors. Consideration will be given to biodiversity enhancement measures in consultation with stakeholders. Where possible, these mitigation and enhancement measures will be embedded in the project design.
6.9.2
Page 44
Section 7: Historic environment
7
7.1
7.1.1
Historic environment
Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant effects on heritage assets at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. These are aspects of the historic environment which are considered to be significant because of their historical, evidential, aesthetic or communal interest (these terms are defined in Volume 5). These might comprise below or above ground archaeological remains, buildings, structures, monuments or heritage landscapes within or around the site 13. This section should be read in conjunction with Volume 6, which sets the site in its broad topographic, geological, archaeological and historical context and discusses the project-wide landscape and topic themes in respect of the historic environment. These themes are only touched upon briefly here where they are relevant to the site, to avoid repetition.
7.1.2
7.2
7.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to the historic environment are as follows.
Construction
7.2.2 Those aspects of construction with specific relevance to the historic environment assessment, and which could lead to effects on heritage assets, are: a. Enabling works including site preparation, construction of office, welfare and storage facilities and the diversion of existing services. b. Permanent works comprising the construction of a shaft and above ground ventilation structures. 7.2.3 Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce impacts on the historic environment include protective measures where appropriate such as temporary support, hoardings, barriers and screening around heritage assets within and adjacent to work sites, and advance planning of plant and working methods for use where heritage assets are close to work sites, or attached to structures within work sites. The CoCP also includes provisions for the contractor to prepare a site specific Heritage Management Plan.
Operation
7.2.4 No direct disturbance to heritage assets is anticipated during the operational phase and consequently no likely significant effects on heritage assets are predicted. Direct operational effects on heritage assets have therefore been scoped out. In terms of effects on the historic setting of heritage assets, whilst operational effects were originally scoped out of the assessment, it has since been agreed with English Heritage that indirect effects on the setting
7.2.5
Page 45
of heritage assets during the construction and operational phases should be covered for the project as a whole. However, at Abbey Mills no assessment of operational setting effects is considered necessary. This is because the operational structures would be small scale in nature and would be set amongst larger ventilation infrastructure (implemented by the Lee Tunnel works) and the wider industrial nature of the pumping station, and screened from the listed pumping station structures by a modern building within the pumping station complex. Similarly it is not considered that there would be likely significant effects on the setting of heritage assets during the construction phase, but this will be reviewed through the ongoing EIA process, with an assessment included in the ES if appropriate.
7.3
7.3.1
Assessment methodology
Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site relating to the historic environment.
Baseline
7.3.2 The baseline methodology follows that set out in Volume 5, and includes a desk based assessment, consultation on a broad range of archaeological, documentary and cartographic sources, along with a site walkover survey. The results of geotechnical investigations, some of which were archaeologically monitored, have also been incorporated. A 500m buffer around the full Thames Water Abbey Mills Pumping Station site comprises the study area used for the assessment and is considered through professional judgement to be most appropriate to characterise the historic environment potential of the site. There are occasional references to assets beyond the study area where appropriate, for example, where such assets are particularly important and/or where they contribute to current understanding of the site and its environs.
7.3.3
Construction
7.3.4 7.3.5 The construction phase methodology follows the methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. Likely significant effects on the historic environment could arise throughout the construction phase from activities likely to remove, disturb or alter above ground or buried heritage assets, as a result of enabling or construction works. As noted above indirect effects on the setting of heritage assets arising during the construction phase are not relevant at this site, so are not considered further. The methodology has been informed by an understanding of the nature and extent of proposed ground disturbance, in relation to known or potential heritage assets. The base case (future baseline) during the construction phase will be the same as at present. Archaeological remains are a static resource, which have reached equilibrium with their environment and do not change (ie, decay or grow) unless their environment changes as a result of human or natural intervention.
7.3.6
Page 46
Similarly no direct changes in the condition of above ground heritage assets are anticipated for the assessment period.

7.3.7 Volume 5: Methodology sets out the generic assumptions and limitations of the assessment. In summary, the main limitation is the nature of the archaeological resource (buried and not visible) and acknowledgement of the difficulty of attempting to predict the presence/extent, date, nature, survival and significance of possible, previously unrecorded, buried heritage assets, based on a desk based study and site visit. The deep alluvium on the site and the overlying made ground means that early archaeology will be deeply buried. Notwithstanding this limitation, the assessment presented here is robust, based on reasonably available information, and conforms to the requirements of local and national guidance and planning policy (as detailed in Volume 5). Typically, appropriate standard archaeological prospection and evaluation techniques are utilised post-consent to reduce the uncertainties inherent in any desk based study, as part of an overall EIA mitigation strategy (see Mitigation section below for the proposed mitigation at this site).
7.3.8
7.4
7.4.1
Baseline conditions
The following description of baseline conditions comprises seven subsections which set out: a. A description of historic environment features, with an introduction to the features map (which shows the location of known historic environment features within the 500m buffer study area around the site) and the study area; b. A description of statutorily and locally designated assets within the site and its vicinity (ie, within a 100m radius of the site); c. A description of the site location, topography and geology to set the context of the site;
d. A summary of past archaeological investigation within the study area, providing an indication of how well the area is understood archaeologically. e. A summary of the archaeological and historical background which sets out what is known about the site and its environs. f. A statement of significance for above ground assets within and around the site, describing the features which contribute to their significance.
g. A discussion of potential for buried heritage assets, taking account of factors affecting survival, and a statement of their potential significance. 7.4.2 The majority of the site is currently a work site with machinery and excavated material and for this reason the site walkover survey did not access the site. The inspection included the area of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station on the 18th March 2011 (which contains a number of
Page 47
listed buildings). The light and weather conditions were overcast and raining. The northern half was viewed from the road and comprised open hardstanding with portacabins. The central section was viewed through a fence and comprised open ground with mounds of excavated material. It was not possible to access the southern half as the public footpath along Channelsea River was closed off, although it is known that the area has machinery and is in use as a works compound associated with the Lee Tunnel works. The ongoing EIA will determine the amount of ground disturbance associated with the Lee Tunnel works.
Historic environment features

7.4.3 The historic environment features map (Vol 27 Figure 7.4.1) shows the location of known historic environment features within the 500m buffer study area around the site, compiled from the baseline sources set out in the topic specific methodology in Volume 5. These historic environment features have been allocated a unique historic environment asset reference number (HEA 1, 2, etc), which is listed in the gazetteer in Appendix A.4. Vol 27 Figure 7.4.1 Historic environment features map (see Volume 27 Figures document) 7.4.4 Where there are a considerable number of listed buildings in the study area, only those within the vicinity of the site (ie, 100m) are included on the map and in the gazetteer.
Designated assets
Statutory designations 7.4.5 The site and its immediate vicinity (ie, within a 100m radius) do not contain any designated (statutorily protected) heritage assets, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or registered parks and gardens. The site lies 130m to the southwest of a complex of listed buildings (HEA 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33 and 34) forming part of the 19th-century Abbey Mills Pumping Station (HEA 26). One of these buildings; the main Abbey Mills Pumping Station building (HEA 34) is Grade II* listed. The rest are Grade II listed. Local authority designations 7.4.7 The site lies within a vast Archaeological Priority Area which covers the alluvial floodplain of the River Lee and the valley sides, which have potential for prehistoric and later activity. The site lies within the Three Mills Conservation Area. There are no locally listed buildings within the site. There are two locally listed buildings within the study area: The Still, 3 Mills Distillery (HEA 54), 180m to the west of the site, and the Lockkeepers Cottage on Blaker Road (HEA 53), 470m to the northwest of the site. Known burial grounds 7.4.9 There are no known burial grounds within the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site or adjacent to it.
7.4.6
7.4.8
Page 48
Site location, topography and geology

Site location 7.4.10 The site is bounded by the main Abbey Mills Pumping Station complex to the north and northeast, Abbey Creek to the east, Channelsea River to the south and Prescott Channel to the west. The site lies 2.1km to the north of the River Thames and is surrounded by numerous channels which form part of the River Lee. Topography 7.4.11 7.4.12 The site is located on the alluvial floodplain, the top of which is naturally flat, and any variations in level ground will be artificial. Ground level within the site is fairly flat, with some slight variation. The northern part of the site lies at 105.7m ATD (above Tunnel Datum; the equivalent of 5.7m Ordnance Datum) and rises to 106.1m ATD in the centre of the site. Ground level in the south is at 105.2m ATD. The eastern edge of the site lies at 105.3m ATD and the western edge lies at 105.8m ATD. In the centre of the site are two large artificially raised areas. The top of the northern mound lies at 108.5m ATD while the southern mound lies at 108.2m ATD. Geology 7.4.14 The site is situated in an area of alluvial deposits overlying sand and gravel deposits associated with the River Lee and its network of channels (British Geological Survey digital data). The Lee is a major tributary of the Thames with the confluence of the two rivers some 3 km downstream to the south of the site. The site is situated more or less in the centre of the floodplain and the Kempton Park and Taplow terrace gravels, which form the valley sides, are located 300m to the east and 400m to the west of the site. The presence of high ground so close to the river would be advantageous for settlement and for people exploiting the rivers resources. The geology of the river terrace will also have influenced the development of agriculture in the area as soils developing on sand and gravel deposits are permeable and well drained, making them ideal for early agricultural development Past geotechnical investigations are widely distributed across the site, and these provide borehole logs that are modern and detailed. A selection of these were utilised in a previous geoarchaeological assessment of the site (HEA 1) by Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) and it is from this assessment that information has been taken for this section of the report. The site lies on Holocene (10,000BC to present) alluvium, above gravel deposits associated with Devensian (Ice Age) river environments, which were deposited around 14,000 years ago. The underlying gravels slope from west to east from a maximum of 100.3m ATD in the west dropping away to a minimum of 98.0m ATD in the east, where they have been removed by the scouring of a former river channel along the line of the Channelsea river, which runs down the eastern edge of the project. The gravels also slope southwards towards the Thames. Approximately 300m
7.4.13
7.4.15
7.4.16
Page 49
from the southern boundary of the site the gravels lie relatively flat at 100.0m ATD. Past archaeological investigations indicate that the top of the natural alluvium (the pre-industrial landsurface) lies at 102.0m ATD (HEA 1). 7.4.17 The alluvium (largely silty clays and peats) as noted in the boreholes varies in thickness between 0.0m and 4.0m. The variation is due to truncation, disturbance and redeposition of alluvial deposits by dredging and other activities along the river channels. The top of the alluvium has been noted as high as 104.0m ATD, suggesting that the alluvium at this location has been redeposited and dumped on top of the pre-industrial landsurface. The thickness of made ground overlying the alluvium also varies by up to 5m across the site, and is generally thicker in the southern half of the site. The surface of the made ground varies from around 105.0m to 106.0m ATD and slopes down in an easterly direction toward the Channelsea River to 104.0m ATD. It should be noted that a large 50m (north to south) by 100m (east to west) area of truncation exists in the northern half of the site, 80m southwest of Abbey Mills Pumping Station (HEA1). Following the deposition of the underlying gravel deposits during the last Ice Age, relative sea level (RSL) began to rise. Initially the higher gravel deposits would have provided opportunities for exploitation, settlement and possibly agriculture within the river floodplain. Later the continuing rise of sea level caused rising river levels along the Thames and its tributaries and resulted in inundation and waterlogging of previously dry landsurfaces as drainage became impeded and the Lee was backed-up by the rising Thames. The waterlogging and inundation led to the accumulation of peats and later deposition of the silty clays in the late Bronze (1,000600 BC) and Iron Ages (600 BCAD 43) or the early Roman period. Initially peats filled the channels and the marginal areas along the river and silty clays subsequently built up as accretionary deposits in times of later floods. At the bottom of the sequence evidence of the occupation of higher gravel areas may be present below the alluvium. Later archaeological remains, potentially including waterlogged wood, may be present in the peat, with evidence of subsequent historic periods located within the silty clay flood deposits, which also have potential for palaeoenvironmental evidence of past natural environments.
7.4.18
7.4.19
Past archaeological investigations within the study area

7.4.20 Several archaeological investigations have taken place within the study area. One of these investigations took place within the site. This comprised a geoarchaeological assessment of geotechnical boreholes by Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) in 2009 (HEA 1). This identified an area of low-lying migrating channel deposits along the line of the Abbey Creek with high levels of natural gravel deposits in the north (in the area of the main pumping station) and lower lying gravels to the south. A number of archaeological investigations have been carried out in the study area around the site, which have revealed evidence of multi-period
7.4.21
Page 50
activity. The closest to the site is an excavation at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station, 80m to the east of the site (HEA 30), in 1994. This revealed post-medieval features and finds associated with the pumping station. 7.4.22 Extensive excavations at Stratford Market Depot (HEA 19), 460m to the northeast of the site, revealed a multi-phase settlement with prehistoric finds and features, Roman remains, Saxon pottery and later medieval pits and graves, and post-medieval industrial remains. Investigations undertaken 370m to the north of the site (HEA 52) as part of the Olympics development revealed evidence of prehistoric activity beneath substantial Victorian dumping. In the 1970s and 1990s, excavations at the site of the medieval Stratford Langthorne Abbey (HEA 10), 310m to the northeast of the site, recorded structural remains of the abbey buildings. Undated burials and medieval footings associated with the abbey were found during work 520m to the northeast (HEA 12); part of the abbey cemetery was excavated 370m to the north east (HEA 8), and further structural remains of abbey buildings recorded 510m to the northeast (HEA 18). An evaluation 440m to the northwest (HEA 51) of the site revealed postmedieval revetments and structural remains. The results of these investigations, along with other known sites and finds within the study area, are discussed by period, below.
7.4.23
7.4.24
7.4.25 7.4.26
Archaeological and historical background of the site

7.4.27 The following section presents a chronological summary of the archaeological and historical background of the site, drawing on the information collated above. Prehistoric period (700,000 BCAD 43) 7.4.28 Following the end of the Ice Age, river levels began to rise, but the Lee valley would have continued to provide a valuable resource for hunting, fishing and communication. The river levels had yet to cause extensive flooding of the low lying gravels and peat deposits had yet to form. Higher gravel islands within the floodplain would have been particularly valued and evidence of Mesolithic activity would be located at the alluvial gravel interface, at the base of the alluvium. A few residual Mesolithic flints were found during excavations at the Stratford Market Depot, 460m to the northeast of the site (HEA 19). During the Neolithic (40002000 BC) farming developed, communal monuments began to be constructed and forests were cleared for cultivation. Sea levels continued to rise and gravel islands would have been increasingly isolated during the Bronze Age. Early agriculture may have taken place, with arable crops on the nearby river terraces and higher gravel islands in the river floodplain and animals pastured in the wetter swampy areas where peat was developing. To effectively exploit these varied environments, Bronze Age (2000600 BC) populations constructed trackways, platforms and other timber structures that facilitated access across waterlogged areas and also provided a context
7.4.29
Page 51
for ritual activities, such as the deposition of metal, stone and wooden artefacts. These structures are often locate within the peat deposits and at the interface of the peat and silty clay, where they are well persevered. The archaeological evaluation which formed part of the Olympic Development in 2007 (HEA 52), 370m to the north of the site, found prehistoric flint debitage (waste materials from flint tool manufacture), Neolithic pottery, animal remains and a possible wooden stake structure, sealed beneath substantial dumps of late 19th century and later made ground. 7.4.30 During the later Bronze Age and Iron Age (600 BCAD 43) the increasingly wet environment of the Lee Valley allowed the construction of crannogs (dwellings set on piles driven into marginal wetland). Small assemblages of artefacts dating to this period have been recovered during the archaeological fieldwork in the northern part of the study area. The excavations at Stratford Market Depot, 460m to the northeast of the site (HEA 19), recorded ditches probably forming part of a field system dating from the late Bronze Age or early Iron Age, and in use until the Roman period, with a possible peak of activity in the middle to late Iron Age. A dense area of features (pits, postholes, hut-gullies and ditches) on the east bank of the Channelsea River indicated a multi-phase settlement. Additionally a wooden structure was recorded during archaeological investigation (HEA 52), 370m to the north of the site. The structure is possibly Iron Age or later. In summary, the area of the site would have been attractive for later prehistoric settlement, on any gravel highs, along with exploitation of the numerous channels and wetland resources for a range of predictable resources. Such remains would be buried within and at the base of the alluvium. Roman period (AD 43410) 7.4.32 The city of Londinium was founded around AD50, 6km to the southwest of the site. The Roman road to Camulodunum (Colchester) lay 1km north of the site. It left Londinium at Aldgate and was the route to East Anglia, crossing the River Lee at Old Ford, 1.4km to the northwest of the site 14. In addition to roads, the development of Londinium as a trading port would also have meant an increase in river traffic along the Thames and its tributaries, including the Lee. A small settlement may have developed at the crossing of the Lee at Old Ford, 1.4km northwest of the site, but Roman occupation has also been found during excavations at Stratford Market Depot, 460m to the northeast of the site (HEA 19). Here possible early Roman features were sealed by a layer of ploughsoil, which was in turn cut by late Roman postholes and two slots, possibly for a timber building. It is not known to what degree Roman activity or settlement may have extended along the fringes of the river, which would have remained a valuable resource for food and pasture, exploited by any farmsteads located on the dry gravels to the east. The Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER) records the chance find of a Roman coin (HEA 41), 470m to the west of the site. Sea and river levels continued to
7.4.31
7.4.33
7.4.34
Page 52
rise in the Roman period, and even those formerly dry islands may have become inhospitable for occupation which is likely to have moved to the nearby gravel terraces. Evidence of occupation is therefore unlikely to be present within the site, although there may be remains of exploitation of the marshland resources, along with revetments, jetties and hulked boats, buried within the silty clay deposits of former river channels. Early medieval (Saxon) period (AD 4101066) 7.4.35 The River Lee is first mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for the year AD 894, when Alfred is reputed to have trapped the Danes there by cutting a series of channels, lowering the water level and grounding their ships. The many tidal channels of the Lee may have originated as mill streams, which are documented from the 11th century onwards 15. The site lay within the ancient Saxon manor of Hamme, first mentioned in AD 958 when King Edgar granted land to Ealdorman Athelstan of East Anglia. The Hamme name refers to an area of low-lying pasture, and much of the land lay in marshland below the level of ordinary spring tides 16. The main settlement probably grew up in the vicinity of the later medieval village of West Ham, 875m to the northeast of the site 17. The 12th-century parish church of All Saints was probably built on the site of an earlier church 18, and would have formed the focus of the settlement. A few residual sherds of Early (AD 410700) to Middle Saxon (AD 700 850) pottery were found during excavations at Stratford Market Depot, 460m northeast of the site (HEA 19). A Saxon-type spearhead was found in a later ditch on this site, and another has been recorded as a chance find in Canning Road, 170m to the east of the site (HEA 24). Alluvial deposits of an early medieval date were recorded during an archaeological investigation (HEA 52), as part of the Olympic Development in 2007, 370m to the north of the site. These deposits are thought to be consistent with a mill working site. A single sherd of pottery, possibly dated to the end of this period, was recorded during an archaeological watching brief at the Bridport Site (HEA 39) at three mills 330m to the west of the site. Throughout this period the site lay at some distance from the known settlements, and on the floodplain of the Lee valley. Water levels continued to rise and the river channels may also have shifted across the valley floor. The site would have been unsuitable for permanent occupation and was probably located within marshland used for rough grazing. Later medieval period (AD 10661485) 7.4.39 According to Domesday Book (AD 1086), the manor (estate) of Hamme was held by Aethelstan before the Conquest (AD 1066), and afterwards was given by King William to be held jointly by Robert Gernon and Ranulph Peverel 19. By the 12th century it had been divided into a number of smaller estates. The primary settlement of the manor remained in the vicinity of the parish church, on the eastern side of the Lee valley, 875m to the northeast of the site. In AD 1135, William de Montfitchet, successor to half of the manor, granted his lordship to his newly-founded abbey of St Mary Stratford
7.4.36
7.4.37
7.4.38
7.4.40
Page 53
Langthorne, which was built 310m to the northeast of the site (HEA 10). Initially of the Order of Savigny, in 1147 the abbey was incorporated into the Cistercian Order. Severe flooding in the late 14th century possibly resulted in the temporary abandonment of the abbey. It was restored under the patronage of Richard ll (AD 137799), and included a cloister to the south of the church, a mill, bakehouse and kiln. Archaeological investigations at Bakers Row, 310m to the northeast of the site (HEA 10), recorded a moat which defined the east side of the abbey precinct. This may have been constructed to improve drainage, as it was regularly re-cut during the medieval period. Other parts of the abbey complex have been recorded in a number of archaeological investigations in the vicinity (HEA 8, HEA 12 and HEA 18). The GLHER also records the location of chance finds of objects probably associated with the abbey. A crystal relic, a small onyx seal, and a medieval silver ring were all found near Bakers Row, 480m to the northeast of the site, as the abbey foundations were being removed in the 18th and 19th centuries (HEA 11). 7.4.41 To the west the river banks were likely to have continued to be used for the construction of water mills. The GLHER records the site of a later medieval water mill (HEA 40), 370m to the west of the site. It is likely that widespread marshland drainage and reclamation also took place in the later medieval period. This initially took the form of drainage channels and embankments that served as river walls around parcels of land. The purpose would have been primarily economic, to provide goodquality grazing for livestock and fertile land for crops 20. During this period, the site lay within reclaimed marshland, possibly held by the abbey of Stratford Langthorne, and used for grazing or cultivation. Post-medieval period (AD 1485present) 7.4.43 The site lay within reclaimed former marshland throughout this period. Stratford Langthorne abbey, 310m to the northeast of the site (HEA 10), was formally surrendered to the Crown in 1538, during the Dissolution, and its abbot and community of fourteen monks were granted pensions. In 1539, the abbey passed to Sir Peter Meautis or Mewtas 21; the majority of the buildings were demolished, although a few parts were converted to private domestic use and survived until the 18th or 19th centuries. In the 19th century a number of industries developed in the Lee valley. In 1854, the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway was opened, running 40m to the southeast of the site, on the eastern bank of the Channelsea. It was a joint venture by the London and Blackwall and Eastern Counties railways. The mid-19th century saw a series of public health crises in London, arising from the problems of waste disposal in the metropolis, which had grown rapidly in size and population in the preceding decades. Schemes were devised for main sewers on three levels to drain into the Thames, at Becton on the north side of the river and Erith on the south. The initial construction of the Northern Outfall Sewer, which passes directly to the north of the site, took place in the late 1850s and early 1860s, and was overseen by Joseph Bazalgette, Chief Engineer for the Metropolitan Board of Works22. In 2007, parts of the sewer and associated structures were
7.4.42
7.4.44
7.4.45
Page 54
the subject of a standing structure survey in advance of redevelopment (HEA 14). Pumps assisted the flow of waste at strategic points. The richly decorated Abbey Mills Pumping Station (HEA 26) was built in 1865 8, 160m to the northeast of the site. The Abbey Mills Pumping Station is discussed in more detail below, whilst Bazalgettes works form a projectwide theme, which is discussed in more detail in the route overview, Volume 6. 7.4.46 Rocque's map of 1746 (Appendix A) is a small scale map that shows general topographic detail, main settlements and main roads. The map shows the site within a reclaimed part of Stratford Marsh, and was probably used for pasture. To the east of the site is a channel (now known as the Channelsea) which forms part of the Lee. The Lee remained a significant source of power for mills and the location of The Three Mills, 280m west/southwest of the site (HEA 25), is shown on Rocques map. The main settlement of Stratford was developing along the main road (now the High Street) 410m to the northwest of the site. Development also took place around the old abbey complex on the eastern bank of the Channelsea 370m to the northeast of the site. Chapman and Andrs map of 1777 (Appendix A) is a small scale map that shows no change within the site, although a river wall flood defence is shown running along the eastern edge of the site along the bank of the Channelsea. The Ordnance Survey 1st edition 25:mile map of 186295 (Appendix A) shows the site within Stratford Marsh and Abbey Meads, within open reclaimed former marshland covered by drainage ditches. A river flood defence embankment is shown along the southern edge of the side. The map shows the Northern Outfall Sewer to the north of the site, the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway to the southeast of the site, and the Three Mills industrial complex to the southwest. From this time, industry came to dominate the area, particularly noxious processes which required good supplies of water. The Ordnance Survey 2nd edition 25:mile map of 18968 (Appendix A) shows Gas Works to the north of the site, Brick Works and Chemical Works to the east and a distillery to the west/southwest of the site. This map is also the first cartographic source to depict the Abbey Mills Pumping Station to the north of the site, along with several other pumping station buildings (some of which are still extant). These included the B Station (HEA 27), a store building (HEA 29), a pair of chimneys (HEA 32) and the former Superintendents House (now offices) (HEA 33). However within the site there is no change. The Ordnance Survey 3rd edition 25:mile map of 190920 (Appendix A) shows that the central part of the site comprised allotment gardens. Other than this there is no change within the site. The Ordnance Survey 1:10,000 scale map of 195496 (Appendix A) shows that the Prescott Channel has been constructed along the southwestern edge of the site. The drainage ditches shown on earlier maps are no longer present but other than this there is no change within the site. Later maps show no change within the site.
7.4.47
7.4.48
7.4.49
7.4.50
7.4.51
Page 55
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station The current site 7.4.52
The southern half of the site is a construction/works site. It was not accessed for the site walkover survey. A topographic survey indicates the presence of two large mounds of excavated material in the southern area of the site. The northern part of the site comprises a hardstanding for a car park and storage area.
Statement of significance: above ground heritage assets

Introduction 7.4.53 In accordance with the national policy set out in PPS5, the following section provides a statement based on professional and expert judgement on the likely significance (which is a reflection of the value or importance) of heritage assets, derived from the perceived historical, evidential, aesthetic and communal value. These terms are defined in Volume 5. As discussed in para. 7.4.2, the majority of the site is currently a work site with machinery and excavated material and for this reason the site walkover survey did not access the site. From historic maps, aerial photographs and views of the northern and central parts of the site from the periphery, it is thought that there are currently there are no permanent structures above ground within the site. The site lies entirely within Three Mills conservation area, which includes the Abbey Mills Pumping Station complex, 130m to the northeast, and an important tidal reed bed and wetland along the northern bank of the Channelsea River 23. The conservation area is an asset of high significance, derived from the evidential, historical, aesthetic and communal values. Within the study area 7.4.56 The Abbey Mills sewage pumping station complex lies 130m to the northeast of the site. All of the statutorily designated heritage assets within this complex are on the Heritage at Risk register 24. The first pumping station, known as Station A (HEA 31), within the Abbey Mills area, was constructed in 18651868 and is considered an asset of high significance, retaining historical, evidential, aesthetic and communal value. Commonly known as the cathedral of sewage, Station A was statutorily designated Grade II* in November 1974. The pumping station was designed to pump the contents of the Low Level Sewer No 1 to the Northern Outfall Sewer; allowing gravity to wash the flow towards Barking, where it was discharged west of Barking Creek into the Thames 25. The area to the north of the River Thames was to have three main sewers, and the south bank of the River Thames to have two. Station A (HEA 31) (Appendix A), was purported to be designed by Charles Driver (18321900) who was an expert in the manufacture and design of cast iron. The castiron decoration takes the form of acanthus leaves, lilies and roses (Appendix A) and the interior, along with the Greek cross plan and religious connotations may have been an attempt to raise the appearance of the building above its function. The building is of two storeys, with a slate mansard roof, central dome and octagonal lantern
7.4.54
7.4.55
7.4.57
7.4.58
Page 56
and is formed of yellow stock brick with red and blue brick and stone dressings. The original beam engines were removed in the 1930s. 7.4.59 The exotic oriental design of the pumping station 26 disguised the very functional aspect of the eight beam engines whose purpose was to lift the low level sewage some 36ft to the level of the Northern Outfall Sewer. Huge embankments were constructed in this area to house the sewer system, to allow the Northern Outfall Sewer to discharge into the River Thames by gravity, and also as the various railway lines, waterways and roads, combined with the marshy nature of the land, caused particular engineering difficulties for Bazalgette. The greenway path now runs along the top of this embankment. Overflow weirs were constructed to dump excess storm water into the Channelsea River. These weirs are located close to the site, but outside it to the northeast. At Old Ford by the River Lee in 1866, a cholera epidemic had caused considerably illness and death. After the pumping station became operational, there were no further epidemics of cholera in London. The sewer system assisted with the change of scientific opinion from the concept that miasma (bad odours or poor air) caused diseases, to the awareness that some epidemics were associated with drinking dirty water. The group of buildings around Station A are also statutorily designated heritage assets. The stores building, to west of pumping station, is designated Grade II (HEA 29). Constructed around the same time as Station A, in 1865, it was part of the original group of buildings located on the site as part of Bazalgettes scheme. It has been specifically listed for group value with the main pumping station. It is single storey with a slate roof, formed of grey brick with a red band and stone dressings. Access is via a large round arched central doorway with panelled door. This asset is of high significance. To the northwest and southeast of Station A, lie the bases of a pair of former chimney stacks (HEA 32), statutorily designated Grade II. The two ornate chimney stacks were originally 220ft in height and could be seen from across London. However, the chimneys were considered a risk in the World War II and were consequently demolished, leaving only the bases extant. These elaborate bases (Appendix A) are formed of yellow stock brick battered plinths, with pedimented porches and central round arched entrances. The stacks were octagonal with elaborate diaper work. Again, this asset is included for group value due to its relationship with Station A, and is of high significance. A further building constructed at the same time as the main pumping station is that of the former superintendents house, now offices, (HEA 33). This is part of the original group of buildings associated with Bazalgettes planed sewer system. The listing description identifies its chief reason for listing (Grade II), as its group value with the main pumping station. Constructed in 1865, it is of two storeys in yellow brick and is three windows wide, with red brick and stone dressings 27. This asset is of high significance. As the population of London increased, so Abbey Mills Pumping Station expanded. B station (HEA 27), is a statutorily designated Grade II and
7.4.60
7.4.61
7.4.62
7.4.63
7.4.64
Page 57
was constructed in 18911896 by designs prepared under Sir Maurice Fitzmaurice, engineer for the LCC. It was initiated in 1891 to enhance the capacity of the original Bazalgette scheme, and in particular to cater for flows from the Isle of Dogs. This single-storey rectangular building is formed of white stock brick with red and blue brick and stone dressing, with a hipped slate roof with lantern at ridge. The design of this building was sympathetic to Drivers original pumping station and closely followed Station As architectural style. The list entry also highlights the strong visual group value of this asset 28. This building is of high significance. 7.4.65 Improvement works at the pumping station continued, and C station, with associated valve house, was constructed in 19101914 (HEA 28). It is statutorily designated Grade II, is considered of high architectural quality, and enhances the group value of the historic buildings in Abbey Mills (Appendix A). Designs for this building were prepared under George W. Humphreys, an engineer for the LCC, as additional flows in the new Low Level No 2 Sewer made C station a necessity. The architectural style of this building is more restrained than its predecessors, but it retains strong aesthetic, historical, evidential and group value and is of high significance 29. No 116130 Abbey Lane (HEA 16) are four pairs of semidetached houses and were constructed for the employees of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station (Appendix A). Constructed in 1865, they are strikingly formed of twostoreys in grey brick with roundarch windows with detail picked out in red and black brick. Cherry, OBrien and Pevsner30 suggest they are generously spaced for their date of construction. They are a statutorily designated Grade II heritage asset and have a high significance due to their high aesthetic, medium historical, evidential and communal values. All of the above buildings are located within the Three Mills conservation area which highlights the distinctive character of the area around the pumping station. Channelsea River Bridge is statutorily listed Grade II (HEA 2). This bridge was designed in 18911894 under Maurice Fitzmaurice, an engineer for the LCC. It was reconstructed in 19001902 and was widened to support a further two 9ftdiameter sewers (Appendix A), to make five in total running across the Channelsea River. The bridge retains historic and evidential value, relating to the history of the growth of London in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It also has group value in relation to Abbey Mills Pumping Station. This asset is of high significance. Northeast of the site lies the engine house of West Ham Pumping Station, which is a statutorily designated Grade II heritage asset (HEA 3). The engine house was constructed in 1897 to designs by engineer Lewis Angell. It is a large, grey brick structure in a free classical style 31 and is currently being used as a training centre. The internal workings of this building are of particular interest, and the beam engines were built by Lilleshall Co. in 1895 and installed in 1900. They were listed as fine examples of late 19th century steam technology 32. The building is
7.4.66
7.4.67
7.4.68
7.4.69
Page 58
included on English Heritages Buildings at Risk Register. This building retains high significance, derived from its historical and evidential value. 7.4.70 There are a number of other groupings of heritage assets within the vicinity of the site, characterising the industrial nature and history of this area, including gasworks (HEA 2023) and mill structures (HEA 3638). These assets are considerable distance from site and are not considered relevant to the current study and are not considered further.
Statement of significance: buried heritage assets on the site

Introduction 7.4.71 The following section discusses past impacts on the site which are likely to have compromised asset survival (generally from late 19th and 20th century developments, eg, building foundations or quarrying), identified primarily from historic maps, the site walkover survey, and information on the likely depth of deposits. In accordance with PPS5, this is followed by a statement on the likely potential for and significance of buried heritage assets within the site, derived from current understanding of the baseline conditions, past impacts, and professional judgement. Factors affecting survival 7.4.73 Considering the deep sequent of deposits, 19th century and later made ground, and up to 4.0m of alluvium, along with the absence of building development within the site as noted on historic maps, the survival of early archaeological remains within the alluvium on the site (ie, prehistoric and Roman remains) is likely to be high. Although the extent of ground disturbance/ground raising within the site as a result of recent works is not currently known, (see para. 7.4.2 regarding site access), it is unlikely to have been deep enough to have removed remains within the alluvium. The 50m by 100m area of truncation (an intervention which may have removed part or all of the archaeological sequence) in the northern part of the site, is known from a previous archaeological investigation (HEA 1). Allotments shown on the OS 3rd edition map in the first half of the 20th century, along with the services within the site, will have caused superficial disturbance to a depth of 1.01.5m below ground level. This may have potentially truncated any post-medieval remains/reclamation dumps within the Made Ground, but is unlikely to have had an impact upon deeper (earlier) remains. Asset potential and significance 7.4.76 The following statement of asset significance takes into account the levels of natural geology at the site and the level and nature of disturbance and truncation. Palaeoenvironmental 7.4.77 The site has a high potential to contain palaeoenvironmental remains. The alluvial deposits recorded across the site form the floodplain
7.4.72
7.4.74
7.4.75
Page 59
sequence and are well known from this part of the Thames and the Lee. Elsewhere these deposits have been shown to hold a record of environmental change and the evolving floodplain geomorphology stretching back to the Late Glacial period. The peat deposits have the potential to preserve a range of palaeoenvironmental proxy indicators (such as pollen or plant macro fossils), which if present can be utilised to reconstruct the past palaeoecology of the floodplain and environments within which prehistoric occupation occurred. Any fluvial and estuarine deposits also have the potential to preserve palaeoenvironmental remains (ostracods, foraminifera, diatoms) which can be utilised to reconstruct the past fluvial regimes and indicate the onset of tidal inundations and the transition to an estuarine river environment. Such remains would be of low or medium significance depending on their nature and degree of preservation. This would be derived from the evidential value of such remains. Prehistoric 7.4.78 The site has high potential to contain archaeological remains dating to the prehistoric period. Archaeological investigations within the study area to the north and northeast of the site, suggests that there was probably an occupation site on the east bank of the Channelsea during this period, Mesolithic, Neolithic and early Bronze Age occupation of dry areas within the site is possible, and later crannog sites may also be present. Evidence of settlement would be of moderate or high asset significance. Other prehistoric remains might include trackways, platforms or boats, which could be well preserved within the alluvium and peat deposits. Such features, based on their evidential value, are considered to be of high significance. Roman 7.4.79 The site has low potential for archaeological remains dating to the Roman period. There is archaeological evidence of Roman activity 460m to the north of the site. During the high river levels of the Roman period, the site is unlikely to have been considered suitable for occupation, but there is some potential for riverside and floodplain features such as trackways, platforms, fish traps or hulked vessels within the deeper alluvial and peat deposits. Such features, based on their evidential value, are considered to be of high significance. Early medieval 7.4.80 The site has a low potential for archaeological remains dating to the early medieval period. Archaeological remains within the study area dating to the early medieval period comprise isolated or residual finds, of low asset significance, as derived from their evidential value. The site lay at some distance from known settlements, and was likely to have been located within marshland, possibly used for seasonal pasture. Later medieval 7.4.81 The site has a moderate potential for archaeological remains dating to the later medieval period. The site lay 310m to the southwest of the Abbey of Stratford Langthorne precinct, within marshland owned by the abbey. It is
Page 60
believed that parts of the marshland was drained and reclaimed during this period, and so it is possible that archaeological features (ie drainage ditches, riverwalls etc) associated within the phase of development lie within the site. Such features, based on their low evidential value, are considered to be of low significance. Post-medieval 7.4.82 The site has a moderate potential for archaeological remains dating to the post-medieval period. Eighteenth century maps show a river wall running along the eastern edge of the site and drainage ditches crossing other parts of the site (these are potentially of medieval origin). The remains of these features, based on their evidential value, would be of low significance.
Summary of asset significance

7.4.83 The table below provides a summary of the known or likely historic environment assets at the site. Vol 27 Table 7.4.1 Historic environment receptors Receptor (Asset) Three Mills Conservation Area High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains High potential for prehistoric settlement remains High potential for remains of prehistoric trackways or boats Low potential for Roman remains Low potential for isolated, residual early medieval remains Moderate potential for later medieval remains of agricultural features or evidence of reclamation High potential for postmedieval drainage features and river wall Asset type Above ground/within the site Buried/within the site Significance (value) High Low or medium
Buried/within the site
Medium or high
High
Buried/within the site Buried/within the site
High Low
Low
Low
Page 61
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Receptor (Asset) Low potential for unknown unidentified remains (unknown asset significance) Asset type
Section 7: Historic environment Significance (value) Uncertain (low to high)
Buried/ within the site
7.5
Construction assessment Above ground heritage assets

Within the site
7.5.1
No construction effects on above ground heritage assets within the site have been identified. Within the study area No construction effects on above ground heritage assets within the study area outside the site have been identified.
7.5.2
Buried heritage assets

Enabling works 7.5.3 Enabling works comprise those works necessary to prepare the project for construction. Works of particular relevance to this assessment are summarised at the start of this section. The proposal and magnitude of impact is described initially below, with the resulting effects on the various buried heritage assets discussed at the end of the section: a. The construction of the works compound is likely to entail preliminary site stripping and levelling, assumed for the purposes of this assessment to extend to a depth of up to 0.2mbgl. Where higher areas of ground are present, these are likely to be levelled. Site fencing will be erected, supported by timber posts in concrete foundations. Office, storage and welfare facilities will be constructed upon pad foundations assumed for the purposes of this assessment to extend to a depth of up to approximately 1 mbgl. These works would have a localised impact on any archaeological remains within the made ground. This would locally reduce the significance of the asset to negligible. b. The enabling works would entail the diversion of existing services and the construction of new service trenches approximately 12m deep, as assumed for the purposes of this assessment. These works would have an impact on any archaeological remains within the made ground and would locally reduce the significance of the assets to negligible. 7.5.4 The impact of these works would depend on the date of the made ground. If the made ground is entirely modern, there would be no archaeological impact. The pre-industrial ground surface is believed to be located at 102.0m ATD or 2.04.0mbgl and up to 6.0m below the top of the mounds
Page 62
within the site. Even if the made ground contains archaeological remains, it is therefore likely that these works would only have an impact on postmedieval remains of low asset significance. This would result in a minor adverse effect. Construction works 7.5.5 The construction of the shaft and de-watering wells (within the perimeter of the shaft) would remove any remaining archaeological remains within their footprints. The significance of affected assets would be reduced to negligible, constituting a high magnitude of impact for these assets. The connecting tunnels between the shaft and the proposed new Thames tunnel and the existing Lee Tunnel shaft would have no impact on archaeological remains as these works would be carried out at a level too deep to have any archaeological impact. The construction of the shaft could have an impact upon various different types of archaeological assets within the site, and, as with the enabling works, the environmental effect would depend upon the significance of the assets removed: a. There is a high potential for palaeoenvironmental remains of low or medium asset significance. Localised removal of such remains would comprise a minor adverse effect in view of the likely extensive area of such remains, ensuring that most remains would not be removed. b. There is a high potential for prehistoric settlement remains of medium or high asset significance. Removal of these remains would comprise a moderate or major adverse effect. c. There is a high potential for prehistoric remains of high asset significance. Removal of these remains would constitute a major adverse effect. d. There is a low potential for Roman remains of high asset significance. Localised removal of these remains, if present, would potentially comprise a major adverse effect. e. There is a low potential for isolated, redeposited early medieval remains or low asset significance. The removal of such remains would constitute a minor adverse effect. f. There is a moderate potential for later medieval remains of low asset significance. Removal of such remains would comprise a minor adverse effect. g. There is a high potential for post-medieval remains of low asset significance. Removal of such remains would comprise a minor adverse effect. h. There is a low potential for possible, previously unrecorded remains of unknown asset significance. This could be low to high, depending on the nature, date, extent and survival of the remains. Removal of such remains would comprise a minor to major adverse effect, depending on asset significance.
7.5.6
7.5.7
Page 63
Significance of environmental effect

7.5.8 The table below summarises the magnitude of impact upon known and possible historic environment assets at the site (above ground and buried), during the construction phase, and the resulting environmental effect. This is the effect prior to the implementation of an agreed mitigation strategy. Vol 27 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment effects construction Asset (resource) High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains (Low or medium asset significance) High potential for prehistoric settlement remains (Medium or high asset significance) High potential for remains of prehistoric trackways or boats (High asset significance) Low potential for Roman remains (High asset significance) Low potential for isolated, redeposited early medieval remains (Low asset significance) Moderate potential for later medieval remains of agricultural features or evidence of reclamation (Low asset significance) High potential for postmedieval drainage features and river wall (Low asset significance) Impact (magnitude, and justification) Effect (prior to mitigation) Minor adverse
Moderate or major adverse
High Removal of assets within the shaft. Significance of the asset locally reduced to negligible
Major adverse
Major adverse (unlikely)
Minor adverse (unlikely)
Minor adverse High Removal of assets within the shaft and possibly in areas of temporary works. Significance of the asset reduced to negligible
Minor adverse
Page 64
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Asset (resource) Low potential for unknown unidentified remains (Unknown asset significance)
Section 7: Historic environment Impact (magnitude, and justification) Effect (prior to mitigation) Uncertain (minor to major)
7.6
7.6.1
No direct disturbance to heritage assets is anticipated during the operational phase and consequently no likely significant effects on heritage assets are predicted. Direct operational effects on heritage assets have therefore been scoped out.
7.7
7.7.1

Mitigation measures required are detailed below.
Above ground heritage assets

7.7.2 No adverse construction effects on above ground assets have been identified and so no mitigation is required.
Buried heritage assets

7.7.3 Based on this assessment, no heritage assets of very high significance are anticipated that might merit a mitigation strategy of permanent preservation in situ. It is therefore considered that the adverse environmental effects of the proposed development could be successfully mitigated by a suitable programme of archaeological investigation before and/or during construction, to achieve preservation by record (through advancing understanding of asset significance). The assessment presented here has identified likely significant effects on buried heritage assets resulting from ground works. Mitigation requirements would be informed by selective site based assessment. This could include a variety of techniques, such as geotechnical investigation, geoarchaeologcial deposit modelling, archaeological test pits and trial trenches. This evaluation would enable a more targeted and precise mitigation strategy to be developed for the site post-consent and in advance of construction. Subject to the findings of any subsequent field evaluation post-consent and prior to the start of construction, mitigation of the adverse effects upon archaeological remains within the site is likely to include the following: a. An archaeological watching brief during demolition and construction to mitigate the impacts on 19th century remains, of low significance. b. Due to the depth of alluvium on the site, mitigation of the impacts of deeper proposed excavations on palaeoenvironmental and
7.7.4
7.7.5
Page 65
prehistoric remains would only become feasible following the insertion of the perimeter walls/shaft segments of each construction (ie, the shaft). Targeted archaeological investigation would proceed as the ground within the perimeter walls/shaft segments is excavated downwards. 7.7.6 Both evaluation and mitigation would be carried out in accordance with a scope of works (Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI)) which will be agreed with statutory consultees prior to conducting any archaeological fieldwork prior to or during construction, to ensure that the scope and method of fieldwork are appropriate to satisfy requirements of the planning application outcome.
Page 66
7.8
Vol 27 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment construction assessment Significance of effect Minor adverse Environmental sampling during archaeological investigation Archaeological investigation and recording to form preservation by record Mitigation Residual effect Negligible
Assessment summary
Construction
Asset (receptor)
High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains (Low or medium asset significance) Moderate or major adverse Major adverse
High potential for prehistoric settlement remains (Medium or high asset significance)
Negligible
High potential for remains of prehistoric trackways or boats (High asset significance) Major adverse (unlikely)
Negligible
Low potential for Roman remains (High asset significance)
Negligible Negligible
Low potential for isolated, redeposited early medieval remains (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Archaeological investigation and Minor adverse (unlikely) recording to form preservation by record
Moderate potential for later medieval remains of agricultural features or evidence of reclamation (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Negligible
High potential for post-medieval drainage features and river wall. (Low asset significance)
Watching brief during temporary and Negligible shallow works to form preservation by record
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 67
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Significance of effect Uncertain (minor to major adverse) Archaeological investigation and recording to form preservation by record Negligible Mitigation Residual effect
Asset (receptor)
Low potential for unknown unidentified remains (Unknown asset significance)
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 68
7.9
7.9.1
In terms of desk based sources, the outstanding information that will contribute to the EIA baseline comprises the results of any further geoarchaeological monitoring of geotechnical boreholes (clarifying depth and nature of deposits). If feasible, a site walkover survey will be carried out within the site. Effects of ground settlement resulting from deep constructions within the site, other than the tunnel itself (this will be discussed in Volume 6: projectwide effects) will be considered in the EIA and reported in the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment, the mitigation approaches for the historic environment within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
7.9.2
7.9.3 7.9.4
Page 69
Section 8: Land quality
8
8.1
8.1.1
Land quality
Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant land quality effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This should be read in conjunction with Section 13 (Groundwater), Section 14 (Surface water), Section 5 (Aquatic ecology) and Section 6 (Terrestrial ecology).
8.1.2
8.2
8.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to land quality are as follows: A slurry tunnel boring machine will be received at Abbey Mills from Chambers Wharf. The base of the main shaft is within the Chalk, so dewatering and/or ground treatment will be required within the Lambeth Group/Thanet Sand/Chalk. As the shaft is to be founded within the permeable Chalk horizon and it is unlikely that full cut-off will be achieved by the diaphragm walls at depth, it is therefore anticipated that eight dewatering wells, drilled from ground level, will be required to allow the base slab excavation and construction. The plan shown in Vol 27 Figure 2.1.1 provides an indicative extent and layout of the construction site and further details on the construction are provided above in Section 2. Construction workers involved in intensive below ground works are high sensitivity receptors. Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP which aim to substantially reduce risks associated with construction activities include: a. the remediation of the site so it is fit for purpose (where required) b. the use of appropriate PPE as well as training and welfare for construction staff c. confined space working measures where applicable d. the employment of UXO specialist advice.
8.2.2
8.2.3
8.2.4
8.2.5
8.2.6
The CoCP includes measures to minimise the migration of dusts during construction activities. These include the use of wheel washing at site entrances, damping down during dry weather and covering and safe storage of potentially contaminating materials (if any).
8.3
8.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken.
Page 70
Land quality impacts may also arise during the operational phase of the project, principally through leakage or accidental discharge of sewage to ground. Consideration of this issue was scoped out of the EIA within the EIA Scoping Report but is included here on the basis of comments received in response to that document.
Construction and operation

8.3.3 8.3.4 The construction/operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

8.3.5 The assumptions and limitations associated with this study are presented in Volume 5. There are no site specific assumptions and limitations for the Abbey Mills site
8.4
8.4.1
Baseline conditions Current conditions

Baseline conditions have been determined for the development confines and for a distance of up to 250m beyond (in order to take into account off site contamination sources and receptors). The baseline data is sourced from the Thames Tunnel Geographical Information Systems (GIS) database, including historic maps and environmental records, together with a walkover survey and stakeholder consultation. A full list of the data sets drawn upon in this assessment is presented in Volume 5 methodology.
8.4.2
Site walkover
8.4.3 A contaminated land specialist undertook a site walkover on 4th November 2010. Since then site clearance has taken place as part of the Lee Tunnel project. Site walkover notes are presented in the accompanying Appendix B. No obvious potential contaminative sources were identified during the walkover survey, although some of the excavated material was noted to contain fragments of tarmac and ash, which can represent a source of heavy metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbon contamination. It is understood that stands of Japanese Knotweed have been identified at the site by previous surveys although these were not recorded as part of the land quality walkover.
8.4.4
8.4.5
Site history and surroundings with potential for contaminants

8.4.6 Vol 27 Table 8.4.1 provides a summary of the site history, including potentially contaminative activities and principal contaminants of concern in and around the site. The table was produced following inspection of the historic mapping dating from the late 19th century to the present day held by the project, together with the site walkover.
Page 71
Items in the table are also shown in Vol 27 Figure 8.4.1. Vol 27 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses (see Volume 27 Figures document) Vol 27 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land use summary
Ref On-site 1
Item
Inferred date of operation c1860spresent
Potentially contaminative substances associated with Item Heavy metals, arsenic, free cyanide, nitrates, ammonium, phosphates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons, PCBs, pathogens Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, selenium, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, PAHs, phenols, acetones, aromatic hydrocarbons, PCBs, dioxins, furans Monoaromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX), PAHs, n-alkanes (C5-C20), MTBE, lead Monoaromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX), PAHs, n-alkanes (C5-C20), MTBE, lead, tar, phenolic compounds, ammoniacal liquors, cyanide. PAHs, heavy metals, phenols, sulphates, fuel oil, lubricating oil, greases, PCBs, solvents, asbestos, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, sulphates VOC, TPH, heavy metals, ethanol/methanol, ammonia, chlorinated alkalis, benzene, toluene, ethybenzene and xylenes Heavy metals, arsenic, selenium, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, PAHs, phenols, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, organotin compounds Heavy metals, arsenic, sulphides, asbestos, acetone, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, tars,
Sewage pumping station
Off-site 2
Chemical works (200m east)
c1869-c1951
Abbey Marsh Oil Works (155m east) Abbey Creek Naptha Works (75m south east)
c1869-c1896
c1869-c1882
Railway (55m south)
c1869-c1920
Three Mills Distillery (30m west) Blue works (200m west)
c1896-c1995
c1896-c1951
Asphalt works (225m west)
c1896-c1946
Page 72
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Ref Item Inferred date of operation
Section 8: Land quality Potentially contaminative substances associated with Item phenolic compounds, ammoniacal liquors, cyanide. Oil/fuel hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, organolead compounds. cyanides, ammonia, phenols, heavy metals and asbestos. Contents unknown Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Dyes, paints, solvents, hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Use unknown VOC, TPH, heavy metals, ethanol/methanol, ammonia, chlorinated alkalis, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes
Gas works (85m south)
c1896-present
10 11
Tanks (50m south) Metal works (185m north)
c1916-c1948 c1916-c1948
12 13
14
15 16
Printing works (175m north) Engineering works (220m north west) Engineering works (240m west) Factory (205m west) Distillery (240m west)
c1916-c1948 c1948-c1965
c1969-c1920
c1969-c1970 c1995-present
8.4.8
In summary the site was first developed as a sewage pumping station as part of Joseph Bazalgettes London sewerage upgrades in the 1860s and has been in use to the present day. It previously continued chimneys as part of the previous steam power system. The surrounding area has a long history of industrial usage including gas works, chemical works and various engineering operations. Geology and hydrogeology Data from British Geological survey, the published geological map of the area and logs from boreholes excavated as part of previous investigations of the site indicates the geological succession summarised in Vol 27 Table 8.4.2. Controlled waters (ie, surface water and groundwater) can potentially represent a pathway for the spread of mobile contaminants as well as being a sensitive environmental receptor. The Environment Agency (EA) Aquifer Designation maps have been used to classify the geological units according to their aquifer status which is also presented in the table below.
8.4.9
8.4.10
8.4.11
Page 73
The site is classified by the EA as not being within a source protection zone for groundwater that is extracted for potable supply.
Vol 27 Table 8.4.2 Land quality -geology and hydrogeology Geological unit/ Description Approximate Hydrogeological strata depth below classification ground level (m) Made Ground Largely comprises sandy 0-0-4.0 Unclassified gravely silt with local gravels of brick, concrete and flint. Alluvium Soft and firm sandy 4.0-5.0 Secondary slightly gravely clay with (undifferentiated) occasional shell Superficial Aquifer fragments River Terrace Medium dense to dense 5.0-8.5 Secondary Deposits to dense sand and gravel (undifferentiated) (predominantly quartz Superficial Aquifer sand and flint gravel). London Clay Locally silty and sandy 8.5-13.6 Unproductive Strata clay Harwich Formation Sand and shelly Secondary A 13.6-14.5 sandstone Bedrock Aquifer. Lambeth Group (Upper Shelly Beds) Lambeth Group (Upper Mottled Beds) Lambeth Group (Laminated Beds) Lambeth Group (Lower Shelly Beds) Lambeth Group (Lower Mottled Beds) Lambeth Group (Upnor Formation) The Lower and Upper Mottled Beds are mottled or multicoloured, stiff or very stiff fissured clay, compact silt, and dense or very dense sand. The Upper Shelly Beds is mainly a grey shelly clay, occasionally dominated by sand and shelly limestone. The Laminated Beds consists of thinly interbedded fine- to medium-grained sand, silt and clay. The Lower Shelly Beds is a dark grey to black clay with abundant shells. It may also be Shelly sand and thin limestone bands. The Upnor Formation comprises dense glauconitic sand with 14.5-16.5 Hydrogeological classification varies the upper part which is formed from clays can be classified as unproductive strata. The lower, granular part is a Secondary A Bedrock Aquifer
16.5-17.5
17.5-20.0 20.0-22.5
22.5-24.0
24.0-31.0
Page 74
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Geological unit/ strata Description Approximate depth below ground level (m) 31.0-43.5
Section 8: Land quality Hydrogeological classification
Thanet Sand Formation
rounded black gravel. Generally dense glauconitic silty fine sand with occasional rounded flint gravel.
Principal Bedrock Aquifer where in continuity with underlying Chalk
Chalk Group
The Bullhead beds at the base comprise rounded cobbles of flint, deposited unconformably on the eroded surface of the Chalk Weak fine grained 43.5+ limestone with nodular and tabular flints.
Principal Bedrock Aquifer
Unexploded ordnance 8.4.13 During World Wars I and II, the London area was subject to extensive bombing and in some cases bombs failed to detonate on impact. During construction works, unexploded ordnance or bombs (UXO) are sometimes encountered and require safe disposal. A desk based assessment for unexploded ordnance (UXO) threat was undertaken for ground investigation works at the proposed development site. The UXO assessment report reviews information sources such as the Ministry of Defence (MoD), Public Records Office and the Port of London Authority. The report establishes that the nearby areas suffered severe bomb damage during the 1940 to 1941 bombing campaign. Taking into account the findings of this study and the known extent of the proposed works, it was considered that there is an overall medium/high threat from UXO at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. Thames Tunnel ground investigation 8.4.16 8.4.17 The following section summarises the soil, soil gas and groundwater testing undertaken as part of the Thames Tunnel Ground Investigation. Boreholes SR3001 and SR3002 are both located on the site as shown on Vol 27 Figure 8.4.2. Vol 27 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality borehole locations (see Volume 27 Figures document) 8.4.18 The results of the soil analyses from the ground investigation (see table below) have been compared against human health screening values and to PLA Approved Sediment Quality Guidelines. Coastal and estuarine
8.4.14
8.4.15
Page 75
Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) criteria are used to assess contamination of the shallow aquifer as it is in continuity with adjacent tidal watercourses; and drinking water standards have been used to assess the deeper aquifer. Vol 27 Table 8.4.3 Land quality ground investigation data Borehole nos. SR3001 Soil testing No contaminants above human health screening values in the six samples tested. Groundwater testing One standpipe in the Lambeth Group (Upper Shelly Beds) and one in Chalk. Contaminants in exceedance of assessment criteria: Benzene = 0.1mg/l (EQS Limit = 0.03 mg/l) Zinc = 6.87mg/l (EQS Limit = 0.04mg/l) Copper = 0.011mg/l (EQS limit = 0.005mg/l) One standpipe in the Lambeth Group (Lower Mottled Beds) and one in Chalk. Contaminants in exceedance of assessment criteria: Benzene = 0.1mg/l (DWS Limit = 0.001 mg/l)
SR3002
No contaminants above human health screening values in the one sample tested.
8.4.19
In summary the testing to date shows elevated concentrations of benzene, copper and zinc in groundwater at the Abbey Mills site. Other ground investigations Additional documents have also been reviewed as part of the baseline work for Abbey Mills, namely: Phase 1 Contaminated Land Assessment (Faber Maunsell, June 2007) and a Phase 2 Contaminated Land Assessment (Scott Wilson, May 2008). These contaminated land assessments were undertaken for the West Ham Flood Alleviation Scheme which involved constructing a tunnel shaft (T1) on the Abbey Mills site in 2009. Elevated levels of aromatic hydrocarbons in groundwater were found in the north-eastern part of the site, primarily in the Harwich Formation and Lambeth Group, but also in the Gravels and, to a lesser degree, in the Thanet Sands. Elevated levels were not encountered in the monitoring of the boreholes installed within the Chalk.
8.4.20
8.4.21
Page 76
Elevated levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), namely benzene, toluene and xylene, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were also found to be present within the groundwater in the Harwich formation but were not found within the Lambeth Group. The Phase 2 Contaminated Land Assessment identified hydrocarbon odours within soil samples of Made Ground and Alluvium at Abbey Mills near the proposed site of the Lee Tunnel shaft (to the east of the Thames Tunnel worksite). However, none of the chemical test results showed significant concentrations of hydrocarbons. Groundwater hydrocarbon contamination has previously been identified near the West Ham Flood Alleviation Sewer Shaft T1 at Abbey Mills, primarily in the Harwich Formation and Lambeth Group. Other environmental records Details of environmental records for the vicinity of the site held by the Environment Agency and other bodies were obtained from the Thames Tunnel GIS which is partially sourced from Landmark Information Group. Significant records are discussed in further detail after the summary table below. Items in the table are also shown in Vol 27 Figure 8.4.3. Vol 27 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites (see Volume 27 Figures document) Vol 27 Table 8.4.4 Land quality environmental records and waste sites
8.4.23
8.4.24
8.4.25
Activity Licensed Industrial Activities Hazardous Substance Sites Pollution incidents to controlled water Waste Treatment and Disposal Sites Landfill sites Industrial authorisations (IPPC, COMAH, PPC) Past Potential Contaminated Uses Licensed Abstractions 8.4.26
On-site 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Within 250m of site boundary 0 1 3 0 1 0 18 1
Within a 250m radius of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, GIS mapping has identified one notification of an installation that involves hazardous substances. This is on the site of the gas works to the north of the proposed site. There is also one historical landfill site adjacent to the gas works.
Page 77
GIS mapping has also identified three pollution incidents to controlled water within the 250m radius of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. There is one licensed abstraction to the south east of the site at the position of the Anjuman e-Iscahul Muslimeen Mosque. It is known through other work undertaken recently at Abbey Mills that both abstraction boreholes owned by the mosque have been backfilled but they retain the licence and may construct new abstraction boreholes in the future. There are 18 sites located within the 250m radius that are identified as having past industrial uses by the available GIS data. From an analysis of the historical mapping data, it can be inferred that the past industrial uses can be attributed to various industries highlighted in the historical map review. These include former chemical works, gas works, asphalt works, various unspecified works, wharves and the sewage pumping station. Contaminants typically associated with these types of industries are identified in Vol 27 Table 8.4.4. Technical engagement The Contaminated Land Officer at the Local authority, Newham Borough Council, was contacted about the proposed works and although some information was provided, none was directly relevant to this project.
8.4.28
8.4.29
8.5
8.5.1 8.5.2
Assessment year: construction For land quality, the assessment is based on the likely baseline conditions which will be experienced on commencement in Year 1 of construction. In view of the likely capital maintenance projects at Abbey Mills together with the Lee Tunnel works, which are both likely to include some land remediation, if required, in advance of Year 1 of construction, it is anticipated that land quality baseline conditions are likely to improve slightly from those described above by the commencement of the construction.
Development of conceptual model

8.5.3 A key element of the preliminary risk assessment for land quality is the development of source-pathway-receptor conceptual model which aims to understand the presence and significance of potentially complete pollutant linkages. The methodology for undertaking this analysis is provided in Volume 5. The following section outlines the sources, pathways and receptors which are relevant to the land quality assessment at the site. Sources of contamination 8.5.6 8.5.7 The following sources of contamination have been identified: On site a. Metals and hydrocarbon contamination of the made ground b. Hydrocarbon contamination of the groundwater in the Harwich Formation and Lambeth Group
8.5.4 8.5.5
Page 78
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station c. Possible unexploded ordnance d. Japanese Knotweed. 8.5.8 Off site
a. Historic and present industrial facilities (including gas works, depots, substations and printing works). Pathways 8.5.9 The following pathways for contamination have been identified: a. human uptake through: ingestion of exposed contaminated soils during construction; inhalation of soil/dust, volatilised compounds or ground gas via migration through permeable strata and conduits b. dermal contact with exposed soils during construction c. horizontal and vertical migration of leachable contaminants via groundwater within the alluvium and River Terrace Deposits
d. vertical migration of contaminants along preferential pathways created by excavation of diaphragm wall e. direct contact of soils with construction materials f. gas/vapour migration through pipes/foundations, along piles and into structures g. direct contact with, and spread of, Japanese Knotweed rhizomes Receptors 8.5.10 The following receptors for contamination have been identified: a. Construction workers b. Off-site receptors nearby residents and workers c. Future site users d. Built environment e. Controlled waters - surface water f. Controlled waters - groundwater in upper and lower aquifers g. Terrestrial ecology 8.5.11 8.5.12 The sensitivity of the land quality receptors are defined in Vol 5 Table 7.4.2. The following section discusses the potential impacts on receptors as a result of the existing land quality conditions at the site. Impacts and effects upon construction workers 8.5.13 Construction workers may be in contact with soils or other contaminated materials during demolition, groundworks and shaft excavation works and therefore there is the potential for human uptake (via ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact) of contaminants, although any effects are likely to be short term only.
Page 79
Overall the magnitude of the impact is likely to be negligible, resulting in a slight effect (not significant). The sensitivity of the land quality receptors are defined in Vol 5 Table 7.4.2. Impacts and effects upon off-site receptors The construction works may result in the creation of new pathways for contaminants to migrate to adjacent sites eg, via wind-borne dust during excavated material handling and storage. Thus whilst the sensitivity of adjacent industrial and residential sites is low to high, the impact from this will be negligible resulting in a negligible to slight effect (not significant). Impacts and effects upon built environment High levels of certain contaminants, if contained within subsurface materials, can lead to impacts on the built environment (both existing and proposed), including chemical attack on buried concrete structures and the permeation of water supply pipelines. Additionally detonation of potential unidentified, buried UXO could represent a risk during construction. The built environment is a low to moderate sensitivity receptor and following the proposed measures, such as site investigation, UXO surveys and remediation, the magnitude of impact is considered to be negligible, giving a negligible effect (not significant). Impacts and effects on controlled waters - groundwater The site is underlain by the River Terrace Deposits which represents the upper aquifer and is classified as a Secondary Aquifer and is a moderate sensitivity receptor. The Lower aquifer although a Secondary Bedrock aquifer is believed to be in hydraulic continuity with the underlying Chalk and hence forms part of the Lower Aquifer and thus is a high sensitivity receptor. For the assessment of the effects to groundwater reference should be made to Section 13. Impacts and effects on controlled waters surface water For impacts and effects to surface water reference should be made to Section 14. Impacts and effects on terrestrial ecology A stand of Japanese Knotweed was identified previously on the site. Japanese Knotweed is an invasive species and it is an offence under the Countryside and Wildlife 1981 to cause the spread of this plant. Further discussion on the impacts is presented in the terrestrial ecology Section 6. The following tables summarise the land quality impacts, receptor sensitivity and effects for construction.
8.5.16
8.5.17
8.5.18
8.5.19
8.5.20
8.5.21
8.5.22
8.5.23
8.5.24 8.5.25
Page 80
Vol 27 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts - construction Impact Health impact on construction workers Magnitude, and justification Negligible CoCP measures such as use of correct PPE, safety briefings and remediation of contaminated soils reduce impacts substantially.
Health impact on off-site receptors Negligible - CoCP measures such residents and workers as dust suppression, correct storage of potentially contaminated materials, wheel washing at site entrance reduce impacts substantially. Damage to built environment existing structures Negligible - CoCP measures such as UXO specialists employed to advise staff reduce impacts substantially. Negligible - measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and reduce impacts substantially.
Damage to built environment proposed Structures
Vol 27 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptors -construction Receptor Construction workers Off-site receptors Built environment - existing Built environment - proposed Value/sensitivity and justification High intensive below ground construction Low to high mixture of industrial and residential properties Low infrastructure Low infrastructure
Vol 27 Table 8.5.3 Land quality effects - construction Effect Slight effect on construction Workers Slight effect on off-Site receptors Negligible effect on built environment - Existing Negligible effect on built environment - proposed Significance, and justification Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
Page 81
8.6
8.6.1
Operational effects could theoretically include potential exposure to end users from contaminated soils and for the leakage of sewage from the shaft into the surrounding soils Impacts and effects on future site users The future site users include maintenance workers who would be working on the site occasionally and other staff within the Abbey Mills facility. Given the nature of their work on the site, they are considered here to be low sensitivity receptors. The principal risk would relate to exposure to previously contaminated soils and groundwater (via ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation pathways). Contaminated soils and groundwater will be assessed and dealt with as part of the construction works and accidental leakage will be reduced by operational control systems. Given the application of these measures, a negligible impact to the identified receptors is predicted, resulting in a negligible effect (not significant). Impacts and effects upon built environment The principal impact relates to the potential for the degradation of new structures by attack from deleterious substances which may in turn reduce the integrity of the structure (and could promote leakage of sewage through the walls of the shaft). All below ground structures will be required to be ventilated due to the gassing nature of the tunnel contents, therefore any additional minor ingress of land gas or vapours will be mitigated. The built environment is a low sensitivity receptor and with the inclusion of the proposed measures such as soil remediation, the impact is low, resulting in a negligible effect overall (not significant). The following tables summarise the land quality impacts, receptor sensitivity and effects for operation. Vol 27 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts - operation Impact Health impact on site end users Magnitude, and justification Negligible design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and provision of capping layers as appropriate. Below ground structures will require to be ventilated due to gassing nature of tunnel contents. No above ground structures. Damage to built environment Proposed Structures Negligible - design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils, concrete mix design and ventilation reduce
8.6.2
8.6.3
8.6.4
8.6.5
8.6.6
8.6.7
Page 82
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Impact Damage to built environment Existing Structures
Section 8: Land quality Magnitude, and justification impacts substantially. Negligible - design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils, reduce impacts substantially.
Vol 27 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptors - operation Receptor Site end users Built environment - existing Built environment - proposed Value/sensitivity and justification Low industrial/infrastructure end use Low industrial/infrastructure Low industrial/infrastructure
Vol 27 Table 8.6.3 Land quality effects-operation Effect Negligible effect on end users Negligible effect on built environment existing Negligible effect on built Environment proposed Significance, and justification Not significant Not significant Not significant
8.7
8.7.1
Approach to mitigation
Construction The assessment has not identified the need for further site specific mitigation measures during the construction phase. Operation The assessment has not identified the need for further site specific mitigation measures during the operational phase.
8.7.2
Page 83
8.8
Significance Not significant Not required Not required Not required Not required Not significant Not significant Not significant Mitigation
Assessment summary
Residual significance No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Vol 27 Table 8.8.1 Land quality assessment - construction
Receptor Construction workers
Effect Slight effect on construction workers
Off-site receptors residents and workers
Slight effect on off-site receptors
Built environment existing
Negligible effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed
Negligible effect on built environment - proposed
Vol 27 Table 8.8.2 Land quality assessment - operation Significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Mitigation Not required Not required Not required Residual significance No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Receptor Site end users
Effect Negligible effect on End Users
Built environment existing
Negligible effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed
Negligible to slight effect on built environment proposed
Page 84
8.9
8.9.1 8.9.2 8.9.3 8.9.4
New data from site investigations (including new boreholes and foreshore samplings) will be reviewed and the baseline updated as required. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for land quality within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES. Impacts on groundwater, surface water and aquatic ecology will be assessed and reported in the ES.
Page 85
Section 9: Noise and Vibration
9
9.1
9.1.1
Noise and vibration

Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant noise and vibration effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This section includes an assessment of the following: a. noise and vibration from the construction site activities b. noise from construction traffic on roads outside the site c. noise and vibration from the operation of the site.
9.1.2
9.1.3
The tunnel drive for the main tunnel terminates at this site. Noise and vibration from the tunnelling activities associated with the main tunnel are considered in Volume 6.
9.2
9.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to noise and vibration are as follows. Construction Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce noise and vibration impacts include: a. careful selection of construction plant (conforming to the relevant SI), construction methods and programming b. equipment to be suitably sited so as to minimise noise impact on sensitive receptors c. use of site enclosures, and temporary stockpiles, where practicable and necessary, to provide acoustic screening
9.2.2
d. choice of routes and programming for the transportation of construction materials, excavated material and personnel to and from the site e. careful programming so that activities which may generate significant noise are planned with regard to local occupants and sensitive receptors 9.2.3 9.2.4 It has been assumed for the purposes of this assessment that the hoarding height would be 2.4m at this location. Where the need for additional noise control measures (beyond standard best practicable means measures described in the CoCP) has been identified, these have not been assumed for the purposes of the assessment. Where that the assessment indicates that these are likely to be required, this information has been added to the section on mitigation. Noise-related environmental design measures incorporated in the CoCP have been assumed for the purposes of the assessment.
9.2.5
Page 86
The construction works at this location would involve the following stages: a. Enabling works b. Shaft sinking (including driven sheet piling) c. Completion work (including landscaping, and construction and fit-out of permanent facility).
9.2.7 9.2.8
The above-ground works (activities a-b) have the potential to create airborne noise and vibration impacts. Activities b and c have the potential to generate groundborne noise and vibration impacts, namely from vibratory compaction and breaking out. Sheet piling methods are proposed at this location for a very short duration to exclude ground water seepage into the shaft. This has not been quantitatively assessed as it is considered no significant effects would arise from these activities owing to the distance to the closest receptors and the assumed short durations of the works involved. Information for activity c is not available at this stage of the design so these works have not been assessed. However, these activities are assumed to be much smaller in scale than the rest of the works and would not involve heavy construction operations. The Phase two consultation logistics strategy considers the removal and delivery of material by road. Construction traffic would use the main strategic road network (A11) via Abbey Lane and Gay Road to transport materials and equipment to and from the site. Estimated vehicle movement numbers are presented in Section 3. The potential for extended working hours has been proposed to complete major concrete pours; however it is assumed that these events will occur only a small number of times during the construction process and have not been included within this assessment. The potential for 24-hour working has been proposed during the construction of the connection tunnel, however this work would be carried out below ground-level and as such it is considered that noise from these activities would not cause any disturbance. However, the potential for any associated activities at surface levels would be examined further in the ES when more information is available. Operation The permanent installation would include above ground ventilation equipment. This plant equipment would be required to operate under various different scenarios dependent on the flow of water into and along the tunnel, with the potential to operate at any time of the day or night. The plant installed has the potential to create noise and vibration impacts.
9.2.9
9.2.10
9.2.11
9.2.12
9.2.13
9.3
9.3.1
Scoping and consultation Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site in relation to noise and vibration.
Page 87
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Baseline 9.3.2
The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Construction The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. At this location, the construction activities have been assessed over the period of four years. Baseline noise levels have not yet been measured, and as such the assessment has been carried out based on all residential receptors being in the most sensitive assessment category according to BS5228 33. For non-residential receptors, comparison has been made to the noise levels reported from road traffic in the Defra London Noise Maps34. The level reported in these maps is based on an average over a longer period (7am to 11pm) than the standard (core) construction hours at this location, which is likely to be lower than the measured noise level, and therefore a worst case vi. The noise level has been assumed to be the lowest value in the reported range (with a facade correction). The noise levels reported in this document are indicative of the noise climate; however they are not intended to be used to indicate noise levels at a specific receptor. These noise levels will be updated with the measured data during the ES. Operation The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
9.3.3
9.3.4 9.3.5
9.3.6
9.3.7

9.3.8 The assessment of noise from construction activities is not based on the measured ambient noise levels, as baseline data is at present unavailable. A programme of baseline measurements is currently in progress and data will be collected in line with the methodology in Volume 5. The ES will make use of this data to forecast the change in noise levels. The assessment has been based on the worst case scenario for residences, where all residences fall into the most sensitive category. Noise-related environmental design measures have been assumed as defined in the CoCP. The assessment of construction traffic effects has been based on predicted numbers of construction traffic movements (presented in Section 3), using professional judgement at this stage. This assessment will be revisited and presented in the ES upon receipt of baseline traffic data. The assessment has been carried out based on the assumption that the noisiest two activities within any one stage could potentially occur onsite
9.3.9 9.3.10
9.3.11
vi
See 9.2.11 and 9.2.12 for a discussion of 24 hour and extended working.
Page 88
simultaneously for the duration of the stage. This is an extremely conservative approach, as the activities are unlikely to last the duration of any one stage. At the current level of construction planning, this is considered a reasonable assumption and would be refined as the construction methodology develops.
9.4
9.4.1
Baseline conditions
This section reviews the setting and receptor characteristics of the site for the purposes of this assessment. The site is located within the Abbey Mills pumping station site, within the LB of Newham. The site is bounded by the Channelsea River and the Prescott Channel to the east, south and west and the rest of the Abbey Mills site to the north. The nearest residences to the development are two storey residential houses on Riverside Road to the northwest. To the west there are house boats at Three Mills Wall, to the northeast there are two storey residential premises on Abbey Lane and to the south there are two storey residential premises on Crows Road beyond the Channelsea River and the railway line. The residential properties selected for the noise and vibration assessment are identified in Vol 27 Table 9.4.1. These are shown in plan view in Vol 27 Figure 9.4.1 and are selected to be representative of the range of noise climates where sensitive receptors are situated around the site. The approximate numbers of properties affected at each of these locations is indicated in Vol 27 Table 9.4.1. Beyond these receptors there are other residential locations which are screened from the site by intervening buildings. Vol 27 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration receptors (see Volume 27 Figures document)
9.4.2
9.4.3
9.4.4
The site is dominated by road traffic noise from the A11 and railway noise.
Receptor sensitivity
9.4.5 The noise sensitive receptors have been assessed according to their sensitivity, using the methodology outlined in Volume 5 Section 2.3. The sensitivities of all assessed receptors are presented in the table below. All residential receptors have been assessed as having a high sensitivity. Vol 27 Table 9.4.1 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor locations Ref Receptor addresses Building use Sensitivity No. of noise sensitive properties/ areas 10 16
9.4.6
AM01 AM02
Three Mills Wall house boats 6 Riverside Road
Residential Residential
High High
Page 89
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Ref Receptor addresses Building use
Section 9: Noise and Vibration Sensitivity No. of noise sensitive properties/ areas 16 4
AM03 AM04 9.4.7
Abbey Lane 4 Crows Road
Residential Residential
High High
The criteria for determining the significance of noise effects from construction sources are dependent upon the existing ambient noise levels. As measured ambient noise levels are currently not available, the lowest assessment category has been assumed for all residential receptors. The assessment noise threshold levels for the receptors near Abbey Mills are as shown in Vol 27 Table 9.4.2. As described in the assessment methodology, this follows the ABC method for determining construction noise significance defined in BS 5228:2009 (Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites). Vol 27 Table 9.4.2 Airborne noise assessment categories construction Ref Noise sensitive receptor Ambient noise level, rounded to nearest 5dBLAeq2 Assessment category1 Significance criterion threshold level1, dBLAeq, 10hour 65 65 65 65
AM01 AM02 AM03 AM04

1
2
Three Mills Wall house boats 6 Riverside Road Abbey Lane 4 Crows Road
A A A A
From ABC method BS5228:2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites Baseine measurement data not available for this assessment
9.5
9.5.1 9.5.2

Noise levels for the base case assessment are expected to be as per 2011 noise levels. Where there is a variation in the conditions in the first year of construction, it is likely that the noise levels would increase compared to the measured data from 2011 (due to natural traffic growth and the potential for additional construction noise from adjacent developments), and as such an assessment based on data from 2011 would be worst case. It is not considered that there are any other circumstances at this location that
Page 90
would cause the baseline noise levels at the receptor locations to change significantly between 2011 and the first year of construction. 9.5.3 For vibration, it is considered that the levels of vibration around the site are low at present, and they are unlikely to change between the present time and the future base case. The development case is therefore assumed to be the base case plus any additional noise and vibration sources associated with the construction phase.
9.5.4
9.5.5 Predictions of construction noise have been carried out based on information available to date and presented in Section 3. Noise measures incorporated in the CoCP have been assumed for the purposes of the assessment. At some locations, the top floors may directly overlook the site despite the site hoarding. Construction noise 9.5.7 The results of the assessment of construction noise are presented in Vol 27 Table 9.5.1 to Vol 27 Table 9.5.4. Three Mills Wall house boats 9.5.8 The house boats at Three Mills Wall are permanent moorings and are therefore assessed in the same manner as other residential receptors, this receptor is representative of approximately ten dwellings. The assessment does not predict construction noise levels greater than the impact criterion proposed at any floor on the property and therefore no impact is identified. Vol 27 Table 9.5.1 Noise at AM01 Three Mills Wall - construction Receptor No. of noise Value/sensitivity sensitive properties 10 High Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq Approx. activity duration, months 9 15
9.5.6
9.5.9
Three Mills Wall house boats Activity Construction noise level1, dBLAeq
Enabling Works Shaft Sinking

1
50 52
65 65
Construction noise only
Page 91
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 6 Riverside Road 9.5.10 9.5.11
The properties on Riverside Road are two storey houses and the rear faade of the properties faces the development. The assessment does not predict construction noise levels greater than the impact criterion proposed at any floor on the property and therefore no impact is identified. Vol 27 Table 9.5.2 Noise at AM02 6 Riverside Road - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 16 Construction noise level1, dBLAeq Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
6 Riverside Road Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq Approx. activity duration, months 9 15 9 15
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking 1st Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
1
55 58 60 63
65 65 65 65
Abbey Lane 9.5.12 The properties on Abbey Lane are two storey houses, the rear faades of which face towards the site. Residences are screened from site activities by existing buildings. The assessment does not predict construction noise levels greater than the impact criterion proposed at any floor on the property and therefore no impact is identified. Vol 27 Table 9.5.3 Noise at receptor AM03 Abbey Lane - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 16 Construction noise level1, Significance criterion Value/sensitivity
9.5.13
Abbey Lane Activity
High Magnitude/ justification
Page 92
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station dBLAeq
Section 9: Noise and Vibration threshold level2, dBLAeq Excess above criterion, dBLAeq Approx. activity duration, months 9 15 9 15
1
2
46 49 46 49
65 65 65 65
Assumed ambient level equivalent to Category A values
4 Crows Road 9.5.14 The properties on Crows Road are two storey houses the rear faades of which face the site. Residences are screened from site activities by existing buildings. The assessment does not predict construction noise levels greater than the impact criterion proposed at any floor on the property and therefore no impact is identified. Vol 27 Table 9.5.4 Noise at AM04 4 Crows Road - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 4 Construction noise level1, dBLAeq Significance criterion threshold level2, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
9.5.15
4 Crows Road Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq Approx. activity duration, months 9 15 9 15
1
2
50 53 50 53
65 65 65 65
Assumed ambient level equivalent to Category A values
Page 93
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Construction traffic 9.5.16
Baseline traffic data collection is ongoing and is thus not reported, and therefore it is not possible to calculate the change in noise level that will arise at the identified receptor locations. A qualitative assessment has therefore been undertaken to consider the likelihood of a significant impact given current traffic levels. Given the anticipated traffic flows on Gay Road, it is considered unlikely that an impact would be created at properties on this road. This will be assessed in greater detail in the ES once further information is available. Construction vibration
9.5.17
9.5.18
The assessment of construction vibration considers events which have the potential to result in damage to buildings or structures and human response to vibration separately using different parameters. The assessment of potential construction vibration impacts at adjacent buildings / structures has been assessed using the predicted Peak Particle Velocity (PPV); the results from the assessment are presented in the table below. Vol 27 Table 9.5.5 Vibration at buildings / structures -construction Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted PPV across all activities, mm/s) <0.5 Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification
9.5.19
AM01
Three Mills Wall house boats
High
No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic
AM02
6 Riverside Road
<0.5
High
AM03
Abbey Lane
<0.5
High
AM04
4 Crows Road
<0.5
High
Page 94
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted PPV across all activities, mm/s)
Section 9: Noise and Vibration Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification
damage 9.5.20 At all residential receptors, the distance of the construction works from the receptor is larger than the range of validity for the method. In practice, the levels of vibration would be lower than these levels. The assessment of potential construction vibration impacts due to human response at neighbouring receptor has been assessed using the predicted Vibration Dose Value (VDV); the results from the assessment are presented in the table below. Vol 27 Table 9.5.6 Vibration and human response - construction Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted VDV across all activities, m/s1.75) 0.01 Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification
9.5.21
AM01
High
No impact; Below low probability of adverse comment No impact; Below low probability of adverse comment No impact; Below low probability of adverse comment No impact; Below low probability of adverse comment
AM02
6 Riverside Road
0.01
High
AM03
Abbey Lane
0.01
High
AM04
4 Crows Road
0.01
High
Page 95
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Summary of construction effects 9.5.22
Vol 27 Table 9.5.7 outlines the assessed significance of effects from all sources of noise and vibration based on the extent of impacts identified above. As described in the general methodology Volume 5 Section 2, the significance of noise effects is based on the predicted impact and other factors, ie the total noise level relative to the significance threshold, the numbers and types of receptors affected and the duration of impact. The significance of vibration effects is assessed on the magnitude of exposure relative to guidance thresholds for disturbance as well as other factors including the number of affected receptors and their uses. Vol 27 Table 9.5.7 Noise and vibration effects - construction Ref Receptor Significance, and justification Noise AM01 Three Mills Wall house boats AM02 6 Riverside Road AM03 Abbey Lane AM04 4 Crows Road Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Vibration Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
9.5.23
9.6
9.6.1
Operational assessment Operational base and development cases

As discussed in Section 9.5.1, there is likely to be only a small variation in baseline noise levels between 2011 and the future base case year. The noise levels measured in 2011 are therefore likely to form the basis of a conservative assessment, as road traffic noise levels would increase along with traffic increases. For vibration, no change is assumed between the present time and future base case.
9.6.2
Operational effects
9.6.3 Noise control measures would be included on all plant items as part of the design process to limit noise increases to within appropriate noise limits to avoid disturbance. These limits will help inform the ongoing design of the project, will be relative to the existing background noise levels at each receptor using the methodology in BS4142 (1997) 35 and will be established in negotiation with the local authority to ensure the limits proposed are acceptable and achievable. Discussions with the local authority are ongoing and will be presented in the ES. It is not possible to quantify the overall change in noise level until this process is complete. However, it is considered that it will be possible to control noise emissions to within appropriate noise limits defined by the local authority to prevent significant effects.
Page 96
The table below contains a summary of the assessment results for operational noise. Vol 27 Table 9.6.1 Airborne noise operation Ref Receptor Impact Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification H Change in ambient subject to local authority limits - no adverse impact Change in ambient subject to local authority limits - no adverse impact Change in ambient subject to local authority limits - no adverse impact Change in ambient subject to local authority limits - no adverse impact
AM01
Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142 Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142 Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142 Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142
igh
AM02
6 Riverside Road
High
AM03
Abbey Lane
High
AM04
4 Crows Road
High
9.6.6
As part of the operation of the tunnel, there would need to be routine but infrequent maintenance carried out at the site. This is described further in Section 3. A crane would be required for 10 yearly shaft inspections. This would be carried out during normal working hours, using equipment which is likely to increase ambient noise levels. Given the infrequency of this operation, it is considered that a significant noise effect would not occur. Routine inspections, lasting approximately half a day, would occur every three to six months and would not require heavy plant. As this would be carried out during the daytime with minimal noisy equipment operating over short periods of time, it is considered that further assessment of noise generated by this activity is not required.
9.6.7
9.6.8
Page 97
As no impacts have been identified from the operation of the site, no significant effects have been identified (see table below). Vol 27 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration effects - operation Ref Receptor Significance, and justification Noise from surface site ventilation plant AM01 Three Mills Wall house boats AM02 6 Riverside Road AM03 Abbey Lane AM04 4 Crows Road Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Noise from maintenance operations. Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
9.6.10
At this location, no significant effects are predicted at any of the receptors. This is subject to the equipment being specified with appropriate noise control measures to ensure that the targets in BS4142 are met as outlined in Volume 5, Section 2.
9.7
9.7.1 9.7.2

All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to noise and vibration are found in Section 9.2. No significant effects as a result of construction have been identified and therefore no additional mitigation is proposed at this location.
Operational
9.7.3 No significant effects as a result of the operation of the site have been identified; hence no additional permanent noise mitigation is required at this location.
Page 98
9.8
Vol 27 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration construction assessment Significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required Mitigation Residual significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
Assessment summary
Construction
Receptor
Effect
Noise
Vibration
6 Riverside Road
Noise
Vibration
Abbey Lane
Noise
Vibration
4 Crows Road
Noise
Vibration
Page 99
Operation
Vol 27 Table 9.8.2 Noise and vibration operational assessment Significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required Mitigation Residual significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
Receptor
Effect
Noise
Vibration
6 Riverside Road
Noise
Vibration
Abbey Lane
Noise
Vibration
4 Crows Road
Noise
Vibration
Page 100
9.9
9.9.1
The completion of the assessment to an appropriate level of detail is subject to further information on baseline and construction ambient noise levels and road traffic counts. When the transport analysis is complete this will be assessed and any effects identified in the ES. The level of detail of the site assessment reflects the available information on methods and programme. The next stage of the assessment work will be more detailed in profiling the variation in construction noise levels across the programmes of work and the range of receptors at each surface site. As the illustrative construction methodology develops more indepth assessment work for the EIA will allow more detailed mitigation design. Following the development of more refined mitigation design as described above, it will be possible to carry out a more detailed assessment of residual effects. The effectiveness of more specific mitigation measures will be fully assessed and reported in the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for noise and vibration within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
9.9.2
9.9.3 9.9.4
9.9.5 9.9.6
Page 101
Section 10: Socio economics
10
10.1
10.1.1
Socio-economics
Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant socio-economic effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This section does not include consideration of operational phase effects in socio-economic terms for the following reasons: a. The design, size, and location of the operational structures would likely result in the permanent take up of less than 0.1ha of land within an existing operational Thames Water Pumping Station which is not publicly accessible. b. Potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts during the operational phase are likely to be relatively modest and able to be readily mitigated. As a result, they are unlikely to cause deterioration in the amenity experienced by sensitive receptors.
10.1.2
10.2
10.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to noise and vibration are as follows. Construction Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to limit, and in some cases eliminate, any likely significant air quality, noise, vibration, and visual effects could also reduce socio-economic impacts, particularly amenity impacts. Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual contain detail on the type of measures that may be employed. The proposed works would take place within the surrounding land of Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Both construction-related activities and traffic (including lorry movements) could result in amenity effects being experienced by a range of sensitive receptors in proximity to the proposed activities. Operation As described in para. 10.1.2, the assessment of operational effects was scoped out.
10.2.2
10.2.3
10.2.4 10.2.5
10.2.6
10.3
10.3.1
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There are no site specific comments from consultees for this site for socio-economics.
Page 102
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Baseline 10.3.2
The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations this site. Construction The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below: a. The assessment years used to consider the potential for socioeconomic effects have covered the period from the establishment of the site and ending approximately four years later.
10.3.3

10.3.4 The following assumptions and limitations apply to the findings presented within this assessment: a. Construction traffic may also contribute to a reduction in residential amenity. Baseline traffic data is still being collected and so this has not been taken into account in the assessment. This will be looked at in more detail in the ES once further information is available. b. Preliminary technical assessments of potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects, and associated design and mitigation measures, have been undertaken by each of those topic areas (see Sections 4, 9 and 11 respectively). The socio-economic assessment has been informed by the preliminary findings of these topic assessments.
10.4
10.4.1
Baseline conditions
Business activity on-site The site is located on an area of land within the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site and is flanked to the south, east and west by watercourses and to the northeast by operational infrastructure and buildings. Business activity off-site Approximately 220m to the northeast of the proposed works site, beyond the Channelsea River, is the Channelsea Business Centre. The Centre contains, amongst other occupiers, the Kingsland College of Business Studies, within a six storey office building. Taking into account the nature and location of businesses at the Channelsea Business Centre, the businesses are generally considered to have either no or very limited susceptibility to impacts that may arise as a result of the project. They are therefore not considered to be at risk of significant effects as a result of the proposed development. As such, these businesses are not considered further within this socio-economic impact assessment. Beyond the Prescott Channel watercourse, to the west of the proposed works area are the Three Mills Studios. The Studios provide over 9,000m2 of filming space for film and television productions, a media village
10.4.2
10.4.3
10.4.4
Page 103
providing production support services, and a restaurant. There are three buildings used by the studio ranging from two to three storeys in height. The Studios are currently owned by the Olympic Legacy Company following a transfer of ownership from the London Development Agency in 2010. 36 10.4.5 The Studios contain a restaurant, which is located in the building on the western side of the premises approximately 150m from the Pumping Station area. There is no direct view of the site from this building. The other two buildings, containing filming space, are located somewhat closer to the site beyond a line of mature trees on the west bank of the Prescott Channel. On the basis that two of the studio buildings are located within short distances of the site and the nature of activities taking place, it is considered that occupants and users of Three Mills Studios could have a medium sensitivity to amenity-related effects. Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 presents a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context (see Volume 27 Figures document) Footpath 10.4.8 A privately-owned footpath, where public use is permitted, runs adjacent to the south and southwestern boundary of the proposed works area. It approaches from the west by crossing the lock at the barrage over the Prescott Channel from where it travels south along the western boundary of the proposed works area, turning around to an easterly direction following the Channelsea River from where it joins the Greenway at Canning Road. This section of the footpath forms part of a larger section of path which is currently closed but will be reinstated as part of the Lee Tunnel project. Therefore current usage levels are not known. Although the footpath would continue to be permitted for public use wherever possible (once re-opened following the completion of the Lee Tunnel construction works), it is understood that the owners of the footpath are not under an obligation to continue to permit public use of the route. As such, impacts on the footpath are not considered any further within this socio-economic impact assessment. Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. West Ham Allotments 10.4.12 To the west of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station, abutting the Prescott Channel, are a number of allotments used by members of the West Ham Allotments Society. The Society is an independent organisation providing 24 allotment plots for use by people of all ages from within the LB Newham and neighbouring Boroughs.
10.4.6
10.4.7
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11
Page 104
There are currently no vacant plots and thus the allotments are considered to be well-used. With regard to the sensitivity of users to any impacts or changes which would reduce or affect access to an open space and the recreational opportunities it affords, the following factors are worth considering. a. The allotments provide opportunities (in terms of leisure) for users to experience amenity similar to that provided by green open space, although such opportunities are physically restricted by the division of plots and the nature of activities that take place within the allotments. b. The closest alternative space providing such recreational amenity, (ie, allotment plots), are approximately 2km from the site at St. Marys Road in Plaistow. They are managed by LB Newham. As of July 2010, there were over 900 people on the waiting list for an allotment in the Borough. 37
10.4.15 10.4.16
Taking account of the above, it is considered that sensitivity of allotment users to any changes in functionality or amenity is medium. See Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Abbey Lane Sure Start Childrens Centre To the north of the development on Abbey Lane is a Sure Start Childrens Centre operated by LB Newham. Like other Childrens Centres in the Borough, the centre provides year-round, one-stop shops for a range of services that support parents, expectant parents and young children. As well as these services the Abbey Lane facility is accessible for wheelchair users and visually impaired persons. 38 The centre is located on the access/egress road to the Pumping Station and proposed site. It is expected that design and construction management measures to be implemented both through the CoCP and Traffic Management Plan would ensure that any potential risk for users of this facility are carefully managed and controlled for. As such, there are unlikely to be any significant effects on users of Abbey Lane Sure Start Childrens Centre and it is thus not considered further within this socioeconomic impact assessment. See Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Residential The closest dwellings to the proposed site are located on Bisson Road and Riverside Road to the north of the site. The dwellings have private gardens which back onto the allotment gardens. Dwellings are comprised of a mix of terraced and semi-detached houses, generally of two storeys in height. There are also two storey dwellings on Crows Road to the south of the proposed site, beyond the Channelsea River and railway lines. In terms of the potential sensitivity of the occupants of the dwellings in the area, it is considered that residents are likely to be vulnerable to changes in amenity arising from the construction process. This is due to the fact
10.4.17
10.4.18
10.4.19
10.4.20
10.4.21
Page 105
that residents cannot easily take steps to avoid any in combination amenity effects that may arise. Residents are likely to be less sensitive to any noise disturbance during the day and more sensitive during the evening and at night-time, particularly during sleeping hours. The sensitivity of residents to amenity impacts may be mediated by character and mix of uses currently existing in the area. Taking these factors into account it is considered that the residents are likely to have a medium level of sensitivity to any adverse amenity impacts that may arise as a result of the construction process. 10.4.22 See Vol 27 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Summary 10.4.23 A summary of receptors as described in the baseline and their sensitivity is provided in the table below. Vol 27 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economic receptors Receptor Occupants and employees of Three Mills Studios Users of West Ham Allotments Value/sensitivity and justification Medium nature of activities taking place; proximity of two of the Studio buildings to the site Medium proximity of allotments to the site; lack of availability of allotments within Borough Medium proximity to site; residents less able to avoid effects but less sensitive during the day when the effects will be experienced
Residents of nearby properties
10.5

Base Case
10.5.1
For this site, the base case year is Year 1 of the construction works. This is the year when site establishment is proposed to commence and marks the start of the assessment period for socio-economic effects. It is assumed that the base case would remain largely the same as the site baseline conditions, with the following exceptions a. Construction works for the Lee Tunnel would have been completed with the result that some additional structures to those found already at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would be in place to the east of the proposed site. b. A request for a scoping opinion has been submitted for a mixed-use redevelopment (residential dwellings and business space) to the northwest of the site on Sugar House Lane. It is assumed for the base
10.5.2
Page 106
case position that, if consented, this scheme would be under construction. 10.5.3 There may be changes in the number and type of businesses located in the surrounding area, eg, businesses may open or close and sites that are currently occupied may become unoccupied. It is not possible however to forecast this with any accuracy and therefore this cannot be taken into account in the assessment. Other than the above, it is assumed that the base case would be largely the same ie, the socio economic conditions at the site would remain the same as existing conditions. Development Case 10.5.5 Under the development case, it is expected that the following changes to the baseline would occur: a. A portion of land to the southwest of Abbey Mills Pumping Station (within the Pumping Station grounds) would be temporarily used for the duration of the construction works. 10.5.6 Other than the above, it is assumed that the development case would be largely the same ie, the socio economic conditions at the site would remain the same as existing conditions.
10.5.4
Amenity effects on business activities 10.5.7 Air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction works and construction related traffic may potentially act individually or in combination with one another to reduce the environmental amenity experienced by businesses in the nearby vicinity. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the likely significant air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on nearby business receptors, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. No air quality or construction dust receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to users and employees of businesses. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that it is not likely that there will be any significant effects from construction air quality and dust issues on businesses. b. No noise and vibration receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to the businesses. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that it is not likely that there will be any significant effects from construction noise and vibration issues on businesses. c. No visual receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to the businesses.
10.5.8
Page 107
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual. The above assessment indicates that there are not likely to be any significant air quality, construction dust, noise, vibration or visual effects on the businesses as a result of the proposed construction works. It is likely that the layout of the surrounding area and the distance and physical features between the site and the commercial premises, together with the nature of the businesses concerned, means that there is little or no likelihood of any potential amenity impacts resulting in significant effects on the businesses. On the basis of these factors, it is considered that overall, the magnitude of impacts on business activities (Three Mills Studios) at this location is likely to be negligible. Taking account of the negligible magnitude of the impact and the medium sensitivity of the business and its employees to changes in amenity, it is considered that the effect on business users could potentially be negligible and therefore not significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Amenity effects on allotment users Air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction works and construction related traffic may potentially act individually or in combination with one another to reduce the environmental amenity experienced by nearby allotment users. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the likely significant air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on nearby allotments, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality effects are likely to be negligible and construction dust effects are likely to be minor adverse. b. No noise and vibration receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to users of the allotments. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that there will not be any significant effects from construction noise and vibration issues on the allotments. c. No visual receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to users of the allotments.
10.5.11
10.5.12
10.5.13
10.5.14 10.5.15
10.5.16
10.5.17 10.5.18
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual. The above findings have been taken into consideration in undertaking a preliminary assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on allotment receptors below. This preliminary assessment balances the above findings considering the contribution that each assessed element (eg, the quality of the air, levels of construction dust) makes to a receptors overall experience of amenity, together with other
Page 108
considerations presented below. For instance, allotment users are likely to be less concerned with visual impacts than passive recreational users of other types of open space. 10.5.19 Although the construction period would last for a medium term period of approximately four years, impacts such as construction dust are considered likely to rise and fall as different activities of the construction process take place, and also vary according to the seasons and prevailing weather conditions, particularly rainfall in the case of dust impacts. Given the above factors, it is considered overall that the impact magnitude is likely to be low. Taking account of the low magnitude of the potential impact and the medium sensitivity of allotment users, it is considered that the overall effect on allotment users is likely to be medium term minor adverse and therefore not significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Amenity effects on nearby residential amenity 10.5.22 Air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction works and construction related traffic may potentially act individually or in combination with one another to reduce the environmental amenity experienced by nearby residents living in proximity to the site on Bisson Road, Riverside Road and Crows Road, and potentially northwest of the site on Sugar House Lane. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the likely significant air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on nearby residential receptors, the following points summarise the preliminary findings of the assessments: a. Air quality and construction dust effects are likely to be minor adverse and are therefore likely to result in a significant effect on residents. b. Noise effects on residents have been assessed as not likely to be significant at either of the two residential receptors identified. Vibration (human response) effects are also not likely to be significant at either of the residential receptors, for the duration of the construction period. c. 10.5.24 10.5.25 Visual receptors were identified as being moderate adverse at one of two residential receptors and minor adverse at the other receptor.
10.5.20 10.5.21
10.5.23
For further information refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual. The above findings regarding air quality, dust, noise and vibration effects have been taken into consideration in undertaking the assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on residential receptors below. The preliminary findings of the assessment balance the above findings considering the contribution that each assessed element (eg, the quality of the air) makes to a receptors overall experience of amenity, together with other considerations presented below.
Page 109
In terms of the physical extent of impacts, the layout of the surrounding area means that there is limited screening (particular in winter) between the site and residences, particularly for those closer the site. The scale of the residential development would mean that any potential amenity impacts are only likely to affect a relatively small number of dwellings. Also, as is the case for users of the allotments, impacts would last for a medium term period of approximately four years. Given the above factors, it is considered that the impacts are likely to be of low magnitude. Taking account of the likelihood for a low magnitude of impact and the medium sensitivity of residents, it is considered that the overall effect on residents could be minor adverse and therefore not significant. It is stressed that these are preliminary findings at this stage. Summary The preliminary findings of the above assessment of potential construction phase socio-economic impacts and effects are summarised in the tables below.
10.5.27
10.5.28 10.5.29
10.5.30
Page 110
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Vol 27 Table 10.5.1 Socio-economics construction effects Magnitude Negligible no significant effects. Negligible - not significant Significance
Impact
Sensitivity
Amenity impacts on businesses amenity (outline findings)
Medium nature of activities taking place; proximity of two of the Studio buildings to the site Low predicted to be minor adverse construction dust effects and no other significant effects. Potential for medium term impacts, but likely to vary according to the nature of construction activities and seasonal variations (rainfall in particular). Low minor adverse air quality and construction dust effects, moderate visual effects from one viewpoint and minor adverse effects from the other. A limited number of residents could be directly affected given the physical relationship of surrounding residential development. Impacts would be limited to working hours and are likely to occur sporadically and infrequently.
Amenity impacts on allotment users amenity (outline findings)
Medium lack of availability of allotments within Borough
Minor adverse - not significant
Amenity impacts on nearby Medium residents residential amenity (outline less able to avoid findings) effects but less sensitive during the day when the effects would be experienced
Minor adverse - not significant
Page 111
10.6
10.6.1
As per para. 10.1.2, this assessment has been scoped out.
10.7
10.7.1

The above assessment has arrived at a preliminary finding that there are not likely to be any significant adverse effects (that is major or moderate) in the construction phase that would require mitigation.
Operational
10.7.2 As per para. 10.1.2, no significant operational effects were scoped in for consideration during the scoping stage and thus there are no effects in the operational phase that would likely require mitigation.
Page 112
10.8
Vol 27 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economics construction assessment Significance Negligible not significant Minor adverse not significant Minor adverse not significant None required None required None required Mitigation Residual significance Not significant Not significant Not significant
Assessment summary
Receptor
Effect
Occupants and employees of Three Mills Studios
Amenity impacts on businesses amenity (outline findings)
Users of allotments
Amenity impacts on allotment users amenity (outline findings)
Residents of nearby properties
Amenity impacts on nearby residential amenity (outline findings)
Page 113
10.9
10.9.1
Further review of baseline data by other EIA topics to enable the updating of the indicative assessment of adverse amenity (individual and in combination) effects. This data is likely to include: a. Details of baseline and base case air quality levels at the site b. Additional details of baseline and base case ambient (and other) noise levels at the site c. Details of baseline and base case visual conditions at the site
10.9.2
Pending the results of reassessments by other EIA topics, it is likely that updates to the baseline data and results of the indicative individual and in combination assessments would be made for the following: a. Amenity effects on businesses b. Amenity effects on allotment users c. Amenity effects on nearby residents
10.9.3 10.9.4
Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for socio economics within the project, if applicable, will be finalised and reported in the ES.
Page 114
Section 11: Townscape and visual
11
11.1
11.1.1
Townscape and visual

Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant townscape and visual amenity effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. The assessment describes the current conditions found within the area the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation and their interrelationships within the built environment, and the changes that would be introduced as a result of the proposed development. The assessment also identifies mitigation measures where appropriate. Townscape and visual assessments are made up of two separate, although linked, procedures; the townscape baseline and its analysis contribute to the baseline for visual amenity. Each section of the assessment is structured so that townscape aspects are described first, followed by visual. The operational structures are small scale in nature and would be set amongst larger ventilation infrastructure (implemented by the Lee Tunnel works) and the wider industrial nature of the pumping station. Given this the operational townscape and visual assessment has been scoped out (as per page 591 of the Scoping Report).
11.1.2
11.1.3
11.2
11.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to the townscape and visual assessment are as follows. Construction The method of construction for the proposed development is described in Volume 2. The peak construction phase for this topic relates to the time when the shaft is being constructed, involving the presence of cranes at the site and the export of material by road. For this site, this equates to Year 2 of construction, within a total construction period of approximately four years. Similar effects would arise during the secondary tunnel lining, which would occur during Year 4 of construction. The site would be typically under construction during standard working hours only. However, some activities, such as the diaphragm wall works, are likely to require extended standard working hours, as defined in Section 3. The specific construction activities which may give rise to effects on townscape character, tranquillity and visual receptors are: a. vehicular construction access to the site off Gay Road, using the same access as the Lee Tunnel works, which are currently underway; b. establishment of 2.4m high hoardings around the boundary of the construction site, following the same alignment as the Lee Tunnel works; c. use of cranes during shaft sinking and secondary lining of the tunnel;
11.2.2
11.2.3
Page 115
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station d. provision of welfare facilities; and e. lighting of the site when required. 11.2.4
Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce townscape and visual impacts include appropriate use of capped and directional lighting, only when required.
11.3
11.3.1 11.3.2
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. In addition to the formal scoping process, the LB of Newham, LB of Tower Hamlets and English Heritage have been consulted on the detailed scope of the townscape and visual impact assessment, including the number and location of viewpoints at this site. All consultee comments specific to this site are presented in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.3.1 Townscape and visual technical engagement Organisation LB of Newham Comment The section should include an assessment of strategic view implications and should include both the temporal and spatial periods, and a suitable landscape mitigation strategy. Response Strategic view implications have considered in the assessment, with reference to viewpoints agreed with all key stakeholders. The construction phase assessment has considered effects arising throughout the construction period, across the site and surrounding area. Operational effects are considered to be negligible, and are therefore scoped out as described in para. 11.1.3. A suitable landscape mitigation strategy is being developed and will form part of the project design. These have been included in the visual assessment (shown on Vol 27 Figure 11.5.6).
LB of Newham
Provided further detailed comments on proposed viewpoints, requesting additional viewpoints Reference made to pre-scoping communication on viewpoints. Confirmed acceptance of the
LB of Tower Hamlets
Details of viewpoint locations have been provided to LBTH.
English Heritage
NA
Page 116
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Organisation Comment proposed viewpoints. Baseline 11.3.3
Section 11: Townscape and visual Response
The assessment area, defined using the standard methodology provided in Volume 5, is indicated by the extent of the drawing frame on Vol 27 Figure 11.5.1 to Vol 27 Figure 11.5.6. The scale of the assessment area has been set by the maximum extent of the ZTV. The methodology for establishing the townscape and visual baseline follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 6. With specific reference to the Abbey Mills site, baseline information has been gathered through a review of: a. The adopted development plans for the LB of Newham, and the neighbouring LB of Tower Hamlets; and b. The Three Mills Conservation Area and Sugar House Lane Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Management Proposals, produced by the LB of Newham. Construction
11.3.4 11.3.5
11.3.6
The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. The peak construction phase for this topic would be in Year 2 of construction, when the shaft would be under construction, cranes would be present at the site and material would be being taken away by road. This has therefore been used as the assessment year for townscape and visual effects. The intensity of construction activities would be during Year 4 of construction, during the secondary lining of the tunnel, involving import of materials by road. For the purposes of the construction phase assessment, it is assumed that the Lee Tunnel will be complete, including any landscape design proposals that formed part of the project. Assumptions and limitations For this site, there are no site specific townscape and visual assessment limitations beyond the generic ones listed in Volume 5. Assumptions made on the base case for the construction phase assessment are described in para. 11.3.8. These assumptions are based on known planning applications and planning policy within the assessment area, interpreted using professional judgement to understand what the base case may be in Year 2 of construction without the project (ie the do nothing scenario).
11.3.7
11.3.8
11.3.9 11.3.10
Page 117
11.4
11.4.1
Baseline conditions Townscape baseline

The proposed development is located within the boundaries of the existing Thames Water owned Abbey Mills Pumping Station, and comprises an area of land to the south west of the recently built Pumping Station F. The surrounding townscape is predominantly industrial to the north, east and south, also with residential areas to the east and northwest of the site. Physical elements The physical elements of the townscape in the assessment area are described below. Topography The site is located on a relatively low lying flat plateau between the Prescott Channel and Channelsea River, with no notable topographic features. To the north east of the site, there is an elevated pedestrian and cycle route (the Greenway) that is built on an embankment above the Northern Outfall Sewer. Land use The site is located within the confines of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, surrounded by industrial areas to the north, east and south. The western edge of the site, along Prescott Channel, is flanked by Three Mills Green, a public open space. The area to the north west of the site is residential. Further to the east, beyond industrial units and railway sidings bordering the site, the townscape is predominantly residential. Development patterns and scale Vol 27 Figure 11.4.1 illustrates the pattern and scale of development within the assessment area and also indicates building heights. Vol 27 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual development pattern and extent (see Volume 27 Figures document)
11.4.2
11.4.3
11.4.4
11.4.5
11.4.6
Within the assessment area, the townscape is dominated by large scale industrial premises set amongst large areas of hardstanding and railway sidings. The area is dissected by a number of watercourses, influencing the street and building pattern. The residential areas to the north west and east of the site are dominated by two to four storey 20th century terraces with private rear gardens. Vegetation patterns and extents Vol 27 Figure 11.4.2 illustrates the pattern and extent of vegetation, including tree cover, within the assessment area. Vol 27 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation (see Volume 27 Figures document)
11.4.7
Page 118
Vegetation within the assessment area is concentrated along the watercourses, including the Channelsea River and Abbey Creek (east of the site), Prescott Channel (west of the site), Three Mills Wall River (further west of the site) and the River Lee. The watercourses are typically lined with belts of mature trees, particularly on the boundaries of Three Mills Green to the west of the site. The railway to the south of the site is also lined with mature trees and shrubs, creating a dense green corridor. Open space distribution and type Vol 27 Figure 11.4.3 illustrates the distribution of different open space types within the assessment area, indicating all relevant statutory, nonstatutory and local plan designations. Vol 27 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape and visual open space types (see Volume 27 Figures document)
11.4.9
11.4.10
The two key open spaces within the assessment area are Three Mills Green, to the west of the site, and The Greenway, a linear pedestrian and cycle route to the north of the site. The residential area to the north west of the site has several small open spaces. These open spaces are described in more detail in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.4.1 Townscape open space type and distribution Open space The Greenway Distance from site 0m N Character summary Linear pedestrian and cycle route on top of an embankment enclosing the Northern Outfall Sewer. The route is predominantly hard surfaced but intermittently lined with mature trees and shrubs. Medium sized public park and open green space comprising amenity grassland with belts of mature trees around the boundary. Small public open green space comprising amenity grassland adjacent to Bisson Road. Small public open green space comprising amenity grassland and seating adjacent to Riverside Road.
Three Mills Green
50m W
Bisson 200m Road Open NW Space Riverside 50m NW Road Open Space Transport routes 11.4.11
Vol 27 Figure 11.4.4 illustrates the transport network within the assessment area, including cycleways, footpaths and Public Rights of Way. Vol 27 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual transport network (see Volume 27 Figures document)
11.4.12
The site is located in an area dominated by railway infrastructure, including the District Line railway to the south of the site, the Jubilee line to
Page 119
the east and a large area of railway sidings to the north east. Manor Road, to the east of the site, represents the only strategic, heavily trafficked route in the area. The remainder of roads are either used for access to the industrial areas, with relatively high levels of HGV traffic, or narrow residential streets with relatively light flows of traffic. 11.4.13 The site is surrounded by designated cycle routes, including along The Greenway to the north. Site character assessment 11.4.14 The site is located in the southern part of the existing Abbey Mills Pumping Station compound. It is currently characterised by a flat, cleared construction site, forming the site working area and access route for the Lee Tunnel. Due to the current nature of the site as a construction compound, there are no notable components of the townscape. The site is located within Three Mills Conservation Area. The condition of the townscape within the site is poor, being used at present as a construction site for the Lee Tunnel works. Therefore, there is good potential for enhancement given the close proximity to surrounding residential and open space uses. The site has a low level of tranquillity due to the level of construction currently underway for the Lee Tunnel scheme. Despite the site being industrial in nature, and at present being used as a construction site, it is valued at the Borough level by virtue of the conservation area designation and the setting it provides to a number of notable listed buildings. The low level of tranquillity and poor condition of the site at present, despite the Borough level value of the townscape, means that it has a low sensitivity to change. Townscape character assessment 11.4.19 The Townscape Character Areas surrounding the site are identified on Vol 27 Figure 11.4.5. Townscape character areas are ordered beginning to the north of the site and continuing around the site in a clockwise direction. Each area is described below. Vol 27 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape character areas (see Volume 27 Figures document) Abbey Mills Pumping Station 11.4.20 This area is set within the operational compound of Abbey Mills Pumping Station, dominated by the Grade II* listed pumping house and the more recent Pumping Station F. The remainder of the area is characterised by areas of hardstanding and some intermittent vegetation, particularly along boundaries. The buildings and landscape within the area are in a fair condition. The utility and industrial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of substantial vegetation or open space means that the area has a low level of tranquillity.
11.4.15
11.4.16 11.4.17
11.4.18
11.4.21 11.4.22
Page 120
The area has limited townscape value by virtue of the industrial and commercial land uses, and lack of any amenity space. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited value of the area, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. Stratford Market Depot This area is characterised by large commercial and industrial warehouses, offices, yards and areas of hardstanding including railway sidings alongside the Jubilee Line. The area has a notable absence of trees or vegetation, apart from within currently disused plots of land (which are hoarded off) and along The Greenway and a footpath that runs through the centre of the area. The buildings and landscape within the area are in a fair condition. The industrial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of trees or open space means that the area has a low level of tranquillity. The area has limited townscape value by virtue of the industrial and commercial land uses, and lack of any amenity space. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited value of the area, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. Plaistow Residential This character area is dominated by 20th century two to four storey residential terraces, laid out as a series of cul-de-sacs off Manor Road. The western boundary of the area is formed by the Jubilee Line railway. The Greenway and District Line dissect the residential area from east to west. Trees and vegetation within the area are concentrated along the railway lines and the route of The Greenway, although private gardens also create green corridors. The pattern of development is influenced by the infrastructure that surrounds and dissects the area, and is largely inward looking in character. The landscape, buildings and public realm within the area are well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Despite the presence of the railway line along the western boundary of this area, the townscape has moderate levels of tranquillity due to the residential character and the inward looking character of the area. The townscape of the character area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the area. Due to the local level value attributed to the townscape, inward looking nature of the built environment and moderate levels of tranquillity, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. Canning Road Industrial This area is characterised by a large expanse of brownfield land adjacent to the Channelsea River, but also incorporates the six storey high Brit College in the north east corner of the area, and the predominantly single
11.4.25
11.4.26 11.4.27
11.4.28 11.4.29
11.4.30
11.4.31 11.4.32
11.4.33 11.4.34
11.4.35
Page 121
storey prefabricated building of the Masjid-e-Ilyas London Tablighi Markaz mosque in the centre of the area, off Canning Road. 11.4.36 There are commercial and industrial warehouses, offices, yards and areas of hardstanding including railway sidings alongside the Jubilee Line. The area has a notable absence of trees or vegetation, apart from within currently disused plots of land (which are hoarded off) and along the Greenway and a footpath that runs through the centre of the area. The buildings within the area are in a fair condition, although the cleared site is in a poor condition. The largely disused nature of the area, albeit adjacent to two busy railway lines, means that the area has a moderate level of tranquillity. The area has limited townscape value by virtue of the disused nature of the majority of the site. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited value of the area, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. West Ham Commercial and Industrial 11.4.41 This area is characterised by a number of large warehouses, areas of hardstanding and access roads associated with the Royal Mail East London Distribution Centre, alongside seven large gasometers surrounded by open green space dominated by mature trees and shrubs. The area is bounded to the north by the District Line railway, and to the east by the Jubilee Line and West Ham Station The buildings and landscape within the area are in a fair condition. The industrial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of trees or open space means that the area has a low level of tranquillity. The area has limited townscape value by virtue of the industrial and commercial land uses, and lack of any amenity space. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited value of the area, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. Three Mills Studios 11.4.46 This area is part of an island within Three Mills Conservation Area, designated by the LB of Newham. The area is dominated by the former distillery complex, which now forms part of the Three Mills Studios. The area is bounded to the north by Three Mills Green public open space, to the east by the Prescott Channel, to the south by Channelsea River and to the west by the River Lee and Three Mills Wall River. The area is publicly accessible, forming part of a pedestrian link along the numerous watercourses. Vegetation is restricted to the riverbanks with the majority of the area hard surfaced, although there are mature trees along the south eastern fringe of the Three Mills Studios. The landscape, buildings and public realm within the area are well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good.
11.4.37 11.4.38 11.4.39 11.4.40
11.4.42 11.4.43
11.4.44 11.4.45
11.4.47
Page 122
The commercial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of trees or open space means that the area has a low level of tranquillity. The townscape of the character area is valued at the Borough level, by virtue of the conservation area designation. Due to the good condition and Borough level value of the townscape, this character area has a high sensitivity to change. Pudding Mill Lane Industrial This area is characterised by one and two storey large commercial and industrial units with associated car parking, access roads and infrastructure. The area is bounded by Three Mills Wall River to the east. The buildings and landscape within the area are in a fair condition. The industrial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of trees or open space give the area a low level of tranquillity. The area has limited townscape value by virtue of the industrial and commercial land uses, and the lack of any amenity space. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited value of the area, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. Three Mills Green This area is part of an island within Three Mills Conservation Area, designated by the LB of Newham. The area comprises a medium sized public park characterised by amenity grassland surrounded by bands of mature trees along the boundaries of the open space. The space is currently undergoing regeneration to include an events area, sculpted viewing terrace, ping pong tables and a petanque court. The character area includes twelve permanently moored residential boats on the Three Mills Wall River, on the western edge of the character area. The landscape within the area is well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Despite surrounding industrial uses, the park has a relatively high level of tranquillity due to the density of mature planting, scale of open space and enclosure provided from surrounding development. The townscape of the character area is valued at the Borough level, by virtue of the conservation area designation. Due to the good condition and Borough value of the townscape, and high levels of tranquillity, this area has a high sensitivity to change. Sugar House Lane Conservation Area This area comprises Sugar House Lane Conservation Area, designated by the LB of Newham. The area comprises large 19th and 20th century industrial buildings on an informal layout that reflects the piecemeal nature of the development of the area. The height and scale of buildings varies considerably, from one to five storeys high and from small individual buildings and deep plan modern industrial sheds. Vegetation is limited to
11.4.49 11.4.50
11.4.51
11.4.52 11.4.53 11.4.54 11.4.55
11.4.56
11.4.57 11.4.58
11.4.59 11.4.60
11.4.61
Page 123
the eastern boundary of the area, along the River Lee, and there are no public open spaces in this character area. 11.4.62 Due to the presence of a number of disused plots and an abundance of industrial waste and fly tipped material, the buildings and townscape are in a poor condition. The industrial use of the area, dominance of hardstanding and general absence of trees or open space give the area a low level of tranquillity. The townscape of the character area is valued at the Borough level, by virtue of the conservation area designation. In summary, although the townscape is valued at the Borough level, the low level of tranquillity and poor condition of the character area give it a low sensitivity to change. Three Mills Wall River Residential 11.4.66 This character area is dominated by 20th century two and three storey residential terraces, and semi-detached properties. The area also includes two 21 storey tower blocks towards the northern end of the character area and a Royal Mail delivery office. There are also two small open green spaces within this character area, characterised by open amenity grassland. Vegetation is limited to private rear gardens. The area is inward looking in character. The landscape, buildings and public realm within the area are well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Despite the presence of industrial uses around this area, the townscape has moderate levels of tranquillity due to the residential character and inward looking nature of the area. The townscape of the character area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the area. Due to the local level value attributed to the townscape, inward looking nature of the built environment and moderate levels of tranquillity, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. The sensitivity to change of the townscape character areas is summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.4.2 Townscape sensitivities to change Townscape character area The site Abbey Mills Pumping Station Stratford Market Depot Plaistow Residential Canning Road Industrial West Ham Commercial and Industrial Three Mills Studios Sensitivity Low Low Low Medium Low Low High
11.4.63 11.4.64 11.4.65
11.4.67 11.4.68
11.4.69 11.4.70
11.4.71
Page 124
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Townscape character area Pudding Mill Lane Industrial Three Mills Green Sugar House Lane Conservation Area Three Mills Wall River Residential
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Low High Low Medium
Visual baseline
11.4.72 Vol 27 Figure 11.4.6 indicates the location of viewpoints referenced below. All residential and recreational receptors have a high sensitivity to change, and transport receptors have a medium sensitivity to change. Appendix D1 contains illustrative winter photographs from selected viewpoints (the ES will include winter and summer photos for each character area and viewpoint). Vol 27 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations (see Volume 27 Figures document) Residential 11.4.73 Residential receptors have a high sensitivity to change, as attention is often focused on the townscape surrounding the property rather than on another focused activity (as would be the case in predominantly employment or industrial areas). The visual baseline in respect of residential receptors (represented by a series of viewpoints, agreed with consultees) is described below. Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences along the northern end of Gay Road 11.4.74 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential properties along the northern end of Gay Road, close to the junction with Abbey Lane. The view is characterised by an existing entrance gate into Abbey Mills Pumping Station, with Pumping Station F visible beyond. The overhead electricity pylon also forms a dominant component in the foreground of the view. The site is visible in the background of the view. Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane, close to The Greenway 11.4.75 This viewpoint is representative of the oblique view from residential properties on Abbey Lane, to the east of The Greenway. The view is characterised by boundary walling and vegetation to industrial plots to the north. The oblique view down Abbey Lane is framed by The Greenway, which bridges over the road. The site is not visible from this location. Recreational 11.4.76 Recreational receptors (apart from those engaged in active sports) generally have a high sensitivity to change, as attention is focused on enjoyment of the townscape. Tourists engaged in activities whereby attention is focused on the surrounding townscape also have a high
Page 125
sensitivity to change. The visual baseline in respect of recreational receptors, including tourists, is discussed below. Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway over Channelsea River 11.4.77 This viewpoint is representative of the view recreational users of The Greenway experience, as the route passes over the Channelsea River. Views towards the site are partially obstructed by boundary walling along The Greenway. Views over the boundary parapet encompass the existing buildings within the pumping station compound, including the distinctive Pumping Station F building in the middle ground of the view. The existing buildings and mature vegetation along Channelsea River largely obscure views towards the site. Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from The Greenway over the District Line 11.4.78 This viewpoint is representative of the view recreational users of The Greenway experience, as the route passes over the District Line railway. Views towards the site are partially obstructed by the six storey Brit College building in the middle ground of the view, with the existing pumping station buildings in the background of the view. Mature vegetation along Channelsea River further obscure views towards the site. Viewpoint 2.3: View south west from the footpath along Channelsea River 11.4.79 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of footpath alongside Channelsea River on the eastern edge of the site. The view is focused on the river corridor, which is lined with mature vegetation on both banks. Views towards the site are largely obscured by this mature vegetation along the site boundary. Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel 11.4.80 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of footpath that runs around the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel. The view is focused on the river corridor and the riverside path, which is characterised by mature vegetation and largely obstructs views towards the site. The Pumping Station F building is intermittently visible through the belt of mature vegetation. Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green adjacent to the Prescott Channel 11.4.81 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of Three Mills Green, on the footpath at the eastern edge of the park which leads to the footbridge over the Prescott Channel. The view is dominated by the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, which is at present bounded by a steel palisade fence alongside a public path. The cleared construction site is highly visible in the foreground of the view, alongside Pumping Station F which forms a dominant component in the middle ground. Views of the site are unobstructed from this location.
Page 126
Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the south western corner of Three Mills Green 11.4.82 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of Three Mills Green, on the footpath at the south western entrance to the park. The foreground of the view is characterised by the open grassland and belts of mature trees within the park itself. The wider view towards the site is characterised by the steel palisade boundary to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, with the cleared construction site highly visible beyond. Pumping Station F forms a dominant component in the background of the view. Views of the site from this location are partially filtered by mature planting along the eastern edge of Three Mills Green. Viewpoint 2.7: View west from the River Lee footpath close to Three Mills Studios 11.4.83 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of the footpath along the River Lee, close to the Three Mills Studios. The foreground of the view is characterised by the Three Mills Studios buildings, with Three Mills Green visible beyond. Views towards the site are partially obscured by buildings along Three Mill Lane, and partially by mature vegetation along the boundaries of Three Mills Green, particularly along the Prescott Channel. Viewpoint 2.8: View south west from the northern entrance to Three Mills Green 11.4.84 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of Three Mills Green, on the footpath at the northern entrance to the park. The foreground of the view is characterised by the open grassland and belts of mature trees within the park itself. The wider view towards the site is characterised by allotments and the steel palisade boundary to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, with the cleared construction site highly visible beyond. Pumping Station F forms a dominant component in the background of the view. Views of the site from this location are partially filtered by mature planting along the eastern edge of Three Mills Green. Viewpoint 2.9: View south west from the bridge at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River 11.4.85 This viewpoint is representative of the view for pedestrians crossing the footbridge over the Prescott Channel, close to the confluence with Three Mills Wall River and also the northern entrance to Three Mills Green. The view is a linear view down the Prescott Channel, framed by dense vegetation along both banks. To the north of the view, residential properties along Bisson Road and visible beyond the riverside vegetation. To the south of the view, Three Mills Green is visible beyond the mature belt of trees. The site is visible in the background of the view, partially obscured by mature vegetation within allotments close to the site. Transport 11.4.86 People travelling through an area generally have a medium sensitivity to change, although it is often the means that by which the greatest numbers of people view the townscape.
Page 127
Viewpoint 3.1: View west from the western end of the West Ham District Line platform 11.4.87 This viewpoint is representative of the oblique view from people using the eastbound District Line platform at West Ham Underground station, towards the western end of the platform. The view is an oblique linear view down the railway, characterised by the large disused space in the middle ground of the view and dense vegetation along Channelsea River in the background, largely obscuring views of the existing site. The sensitivity to change of the viewpoints is summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.4.3 Visual viewpoints sensitivities to change Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences along the northern end of Gay Road Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane, close to The Greenway Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway over Channelsea River Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from The Greenway over the District Line Viewpoint 2.3: View south west from the footpath along Channelsea River Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green adjacent to the Prescott Channel Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the south western corner of Three Mills Green Viewpoint 2.7: View west from the River Lee footpath close to Three Mills Studios Viewpoint 2.8: View south west from the northern entrance to Three Mills Green Viewpoint 2.9: View south west from the bridge at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River Transport Viewpoint 3.1 View west from the western end of the West Ham District Line platform Medium High High High High High High Sensitivity
11.4.88
High High High High High
Page 128
11.5
11.5.1
Effects during the construction phase would be temporary, although would be medium term in nature due to the duration of construction and necessary phasing of the proposed development. The proposed phasing of the development would result in intense periods of activity within relatively quieter phases. Construction phase site assessment Direct effects on the townscape of the site would arise from road transport, erection of site hoardings and construction activity associated with the construction of the shaft and ventilation equipment, and secondary lining of the tunnel. The establishment of the site would not involve any clearance works as the site has been cleared in advance by the Lee Tunnel works. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium, principally due to the intense level of activity during construction. The baseline section describes this area as having a low level of tranquillity due to the level of construction associated with the Lee Tunnel scheme. Due to these works being anticipated to be complete before Year 1 of construction, the site would be likely to have a moderate level of tranquillity due to the relatively quiet nature of the open site, moderated by the presence of nearby industries. The moderate level of tranquillity at the site would be substantially altered due to the introduction of construction vehicles, plant equipment and high levels of activity. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be high. The medium magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of the site to change, means that the effect of the proposed construction activity on the townscape resource of the site would be of minor adverse significance. Construction phase townscape assessment Abbey Mills Pumping Station
11.5.2
11.5.3
11.5.4
11.5.5
The proposed site forms part of the immediate setting for this character area. The setting would be altered by the presence of cranes, intensity of construction activity and the frequency of vehicular movements. However, the nature of the works would be generally typical of the immediate setting of this character area, thereby minimising the magnitude of change. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which would be altered to a limited extent by the nearby presence of construction activity. The magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be low. The medium magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the effect of the proposed construction activity on Abbey Mills Pumping Station would be of minor adverse significance. Stratford Market Depot The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely inward looking, set behind The Greenway and unlikely to
11.5.6
11.5.7
11.5.8
Page 129
be substantially affected by construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. 11.5.9 The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change, given the careful routing of construction traffic set against the existing presence of HGV movements. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Stratford Market Depot. Plaistow Residential 11.5.11 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely inward looking, set behind the Jubilee Line railway and unlikely to be indirectly affected by construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change, given the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Plaistow Residential. Canning Road Industrial 11.5.14 The proposed site forms part of the setting for this character area. The setting of the area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes. They would be apparent above the line of mature vegetation along the eastern boundary of the site on the banks of the Channelsea River. The remainder of construction activity would be obscured by this riverside vegetation, and would not alter the setting of this area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Canning Road Industrial. West Ham Commercial and Industrial 11.5.17 The proposed site forms part of the setting for this character area. The setting of the area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes, apparent above the line of mature vegetation along Channelsea River and the District Line railway. The remainder of construction activity would be obscured by these belts of vegetation, and would not alter the setting of this area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low.
11.5.10
11.5.12
11.5.13
11.5.15
11.5.16
Page 130
The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change, given the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on West Ham Commercial and Industrial. Three Mills Studios The proposed site forms part of the wider setting for this character area. The setting of the area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes, apparent above the line of mature vegetation along both banks of the Prescott Channel. The remainder of construction activity would be largely obscured by these belts of vegetation, and would not substantially alter the setting of this area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to substantially change, given the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means that the effect of the proposed construction activity on Three Mills Studios would be of minor adverse significance. Pudding Mill Lane Industrial The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely inward looking and unlikely to be substantially affected by construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change, given the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Pudding Mill Lane Industrial. Three Mills Green The proposed site forms a part of the setting of this character area. The presence of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity would affect the eastern setting of this open space, although the magnitude of change would be reduced by the presence of vegetation along both banks of the Prescott Channel. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The area has a high level of tranquillity at present, which would be affected by the intense nature of construction activities at the site, but is moderated to a degree by the presence of intervening vegetation and
11.5.19
11.5.20
11.5.21
11.5.22
11.5.23
11.5.24
11.5.25
11.5.26
11.5.27
Page 131
noise attenuation barriers. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be medium. 11.5.28 The medium magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means that the effect of the proposed construction activity on Three Mills Green would be of moderate adverse significance. Sugar House Lane Conservation Area 11.5.29 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely inward looking and unlikely to be substantially affected by construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to change, given the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means that the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Sugar House Lane Conservation Area. Three Mills Wall River Residential 11.5.32 The proposed site forms part of the wider setting for this character area. The setting of the area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes. They would be apparent beyond the vegetation, buildings and structures within the pumping station boundary, and road transport along Gay Road. The remainder of construction activity would be largely obscured by these intervening structures, and would not substantially alter the setting of this area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity at present, which would be affected to a limited extent by increased HGV movements arising from import and export of materials. Therefore, the magnitude of change on tranquillity is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means that the effect of the proposed construction activity on Three Mills Studios would be of minor adverse significance. The assessment of townscape effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.5.1 Townscape character area effects - construction Townscape character area The site Abbey Mills Pumping Station Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Low Low Medium Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse
11.5.30
11.5.31
11.5.33
11.5.34
11.5.35
Page 132
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Townscape character area Stratford Market Depot Plaistow Residential Canning Road Industrial West Ham Commercial and Industrial Three Mills Studios Pudding Mill Lane Industrial Three Mills Green Sugar House Lane Conservation Area Three Mills Wall River Residential
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Low Medium Low Low High Low High Low Medium Negligible Negligible Low Low Low Negligible Medium Negligible Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse Negligible Moderate adverse Negligible Minor adverse
Construction phase townscape assessment night time effects 11.5.36 During construction of the shaft, there are likely to be limited effects on night time character due to the proposed limit of 12 hour working at the site, with occasional extended standard working hours to facilitate construction of the diaphragm walls. However, this would mean that there would be some lighting of the site in the early morning and evening during winter. Effects on night time character will be considered in the ES. Construction phase visual assessment Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences along the northern end of Gay Road 11.5.37 Views from residences towards the site would be affected during construction. The foreground of the view would be affected by the presence of site hoardings, entrance gates and HGV traffic, importing and exporting material. Construction activity and cranes within the site would be visible in the background of the view, partially obscured by existing buildings and structures within the pumping station boundary. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane, close to The Greenway 11.5.39 Views from residences towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the visibility of road transport importing and exporting materials to and from the site. Construction activity at the site itself would not be
11.5.38
Page 133
visible from this location. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. 11.5.40 The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway over Channelsea River 11.5.41 Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the visibility of cranes, partially obscured by vegetation along Channelsea River and buildings within the pumping station boundary. Other construction activities would be largely obstructed by the intervening vegetation and buildings. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from The Greenway over the District Line 11.5.43 Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the visibility of cranes, partially obscured by Brit College, vegetation along Channelsea River and buildings within the pumping station boundary. Other construction activities would be largely obstructed by the intervening vegetation and buildings. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.3: View south west from the footpath along Channelsea River 11.5.45 Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the intermittent visibility of cranes, above the line of mature vegetation along Channelsea River. Other construction activities would be entirely screened by the intervening vegetation and buildings. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel 11.5.47 Views from this location towards the site would be affected by the intermittent visibility of cranes, above the line of mature vegetation along Channelsea River, and the intermittent visibility of other construction activities through the same vegetation, in close proximity to the viewpoint. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium.
11.5.42
11.5.44
11.5.46
Page 134
The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green adjacent to the Prescott Channel
11.5.49
Views from this location towards the site would be substantially affected by the high visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially filtered by intermittent vegetation along the western boundary of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be high. The high magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of major adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the south western corner of Three Mills Green
11.5.50
11.5.51
Views from this location towards the site would be affected by the visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially filtered by mature vegetation along the eastern boundary of Three Mills Greens and intermittent planting on the western boundary of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.7: View west from the River Lee footpath close to Three Mills Studios
11.5.52
11.5.53
Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the intermittent visibility of cranes, above the line of mature vegetation along the Prescott Channel. Other construction activities would be entirely screened by the intervening vegetation and buildings. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.8: View south west from the northern entrance to Three Mills Green
11.5.54
11.5.55
Views from this location towards the site would be affected by the visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially filtered by mature vegetation along the eastern boundary of Three Mills Greens and intermittent planting on the western boundary of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance.
11.5.56
Page 135
Viewpoint 2.9: View south west from the bridge at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River 11.5.57 Views from this location towards the site would be affected by the visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially filtered by mature vegetation along the eastern bank of the Prescott Channel and intermittent planting on the western boundary of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means that the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View west from the western end of the West Ham District Line platform 11.5.59 Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent by the intermittent visibility of cranes, above the line of mature vegetation along the Channelsea River. Other construction activities would be entirely screened by the intervening vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor means that the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. The assessment of visual effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 11.5.2 Viewpoint effects - construction Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences along the northern end of Gay Road Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane, close to The Greenway Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway over Channelsea River Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from The Greenway over the District Line Viewpoint 2.3: View south west from the footpath along Channelsea River High Low Minor adverse Minor adverse Minor adverse High Medium Moderate adverse Minor adverse Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
11.5.58
11.5.60
11.5.61
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
Page 136
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Viewpoint
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Medium Moderate adverse
Viewpoint 2.4: View north from High the footpath at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green adjacent to the Prescott Channel Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the south western corner of Three Mills Green Viewpoint 2.7: View west from the River Lee footpath close to Three Mills Studios Viewpoint 2.8: View south west from the northern entrance to Three Mills Green Viewpoint 2.9: View south west from the bridge at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River Transport Viewpoint 3.1 View west from the western end of the West Ham District Line platform Medium High
High
Major adverse Moderate adverse Minor adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse
High
Medium
High
Low
High
Medium
High
Medium
Low
Negligible
11.6
11.6.1
The operational structures are small scale in nature and would be set amongst larger ventilation infrastructure (implemented by the Lee Tunnel works) and the wider industrial nature of the pumping station. Given this the operational townscape and visual assessment has been scoped out (as per page 591 of the Scoping Report).
11.7
11.7.1

Measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to townscape and visual amenity are summarised in Section 11.2. In addition, a process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to reduce adverse effects arising during construction. Significant adverse effects arising during construction cannot be further mitigated because the scale of construction activities, primarily the height of cranes, and also construction deliveries, would obstruct views and adversely alter the townscape character. Therefore no further mitigation measures are proposed.
Page 137
11.8
Vol 27 Table 11.8.1 Townscape construction assessment Significance Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse Negligible Moderate adverse Negligible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Effect
The site
Change to character due to road transport, site hoardings and the intensity of construction activities.
Abbey Mills Pumping Station
Change to setting due to the presence of cranes, intensity of nearby construction activity and frequency of vehicular movements.
Minor adverse
Stratford Market Depot
No significant effects.
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse
Plaistow Residential
Canning Road Industrial
West Ham Commercial and Industrial
Not required Not required Not required Not required
Three Mills Studios
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes.
Pudding Mill Lane Industrial
Negligible Moderate adverse Negligible
Three Mills Green
Change to setting due to the presence of cranes, construction activity and site hoardings.
Sugar House Lane Conservation Area
No mitigation possible Not required No mitigation possible Not required
Page 138
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Significance Minor adverse No mitigation possible Minor adverse Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Effect
Three Mills Wall River Residential
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes and road transport.
Page 139
Vol 27 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment construction assessment Effect Significance Mitigation Residual significance Moderate adverse Minor adverse
Receptor
Residential Visibility of site hoardings, road transport and background views of cranes and construction activity. Minor adverse No mitigation possible Moderate adverse No mitigation possible
Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences along the northern end of Gay Road
Viewpoint 1.2: View west from Visibility of road transport. residences along Abbey Lane, close to The Greenway Visibility of cranes. Minor adverse Minor adverse Minor adverse Moderate adverse
Recreational Minor adverse
Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway over Channelsea River Visibility of cranes.
Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from The Greenway over the District Line Visibility of cranes.
Minor adverse
Viewpoint 2.3: View south west from the footpath along Channelsea River Visibility of cranes.
Minor adverse
Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel
No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Major adverse No mitigation possible
Moderate adverse
Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green adjacent to the Prescott Channel
Visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity.
Major adverse
Page 140
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Effect Visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially obscured by planting. Visibility of cranes. Minor adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Moderate adverse No mitigation possible Moderate adverse Minor adverse Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the south western corner of Three Mills Green
Viewpoint 2.7: View west from the River Lee footpath close to Three Mills Studios Visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially obscured by planting. Visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity, partially obscured by planting.
Viewpoint 2.8: View south west from the northern entrance to Three Mills Green
Moderate adverse Moderate adverse
Viewpoint 2.9: View south west from the bridge at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River Background visibility of cranes. Negligible
Transport Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 3.1 View west from the western end of the West Ham District Line platform
Page 141
11.9
11.9.1
The baseline data collection is complete for this site, aside from establishing a baseline for the night time character of the assessment area. The ES will include the summer baseline for each of the character areas and viewpoints. It will also include winter and summer photos for each character area and viewpoint. The study area for the assessment will be reviewed for the ES, based on the findings of this assessment. It may be appropriate to reduce the study area to focus the assessment on likely significant effects. The construction assessment will be completed, including an assessment against the night time baseline. Ongoing work will be undertaken throughout the assessment process to identify design measures which may increase the possibility of creating beneficial effects from the proposed scheme in operation. Where possible, these will be embedded in the proposed development. Residual effects remaining after mitigation measures have been identified will be identified and recorded. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES.
11.9.2
11.9.3 11.9.4
11.9.5 11.9.6
Page 142
Section 12: Transport
12
12.1
12.1.1 12.1.2
Transport
Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant transport effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. The site has the potential to affect transport in the following ways: a. Effects on pedestrian routes. b. Effects on cycle routes. c. Effects on bus routes and patronage. d. Effects on London Underground and National Rail services. e. Effects on river services and patronage. f. Effects on car and coach parking. g. Effects on highway layout, operation and capacity.
12.1.3 12.1.4
Each of these effects is considered within the assessment for both construction and operational phases of the project. This section details the site-specific findings for the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. As detailed in Volume 5, the transport assessment also comprises assessment at Borough (sub area) and project-wide levels these assessments are contained in Volume 6. More detailed analysis of all three levels of assessment (site-specific, Borough level and projectwide) will be presented in the Transport Assessment which will be submitted as part of the application. This assessment provides a commentary on the anticipated transport effects of the project. When baseline data collection and analysis is complete a full quantitative transport assessment will be carried out. The assessment and mitigation text contained within this section is therefore based on professional judgement using available information at the time of writing.
12.1.5
12.2
12.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to transport are as follows.
Construction
12.2.2 Construction details for the site relevant to the construction transport assessment are summarised in the table below.
Page 143
Vol 27 Table 12.2.1 Transport - site construction traffic details Description Assumed peak period of construction lorry movements Assumed average peak daily construction lorry vehicle movements Types of lorry requiring access Assumption Year 1 of construction 110 movements per day (55 two-way lorry trips) Excavation lorries Concrete lorries Rebar lorries Office lorries Pipe/Track/Oils lorries Grout/Materials lorries
Note: a movement represents a one way trip.
12.2.3
Vehicle movements would take place during the typical day shift of ten hours on weekdays (08:00 to 18:00) and five hours on Saturdays (08:00 to 13:00) with up to one hour before and after these hours for mobilisation of staff. Mobilisation may include: loading; unloading; and arrival and departure of workforce and staff at site and movement to and from the place of work. During construction it is assumed for the purposes of this assessment that all materials would be transported by road. Abbey Mills would not be considered as practical for river usage due to difficulties in ensuring a reliable day-to-day operation at a location with a very limited tidal window for movements. The site would be a main tunnel reception shaft and so the number of vehicle movements is low compared to a drive sites. Lorry routing during construction phasing Site traffic would egress the site from Gay Road and route along Abbey Lane to Stratford High Street (A11). It would then route west along the A11 and continue to the north and south along the A12. A number of vehicles would also continue west along the A11 to the A1202 where they would route north. The reverse route would be applied for vehicles accessing the site. Vol 27 Figure 12.2.1 indicates the construction traffic routes for access to/from the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. Construction routes are being discussed with Transport for London and the Local Highway Authority (LHA). Vol 27 Figure 12.2.1 Transport construction traffic routes (see Volume 27 Figures document)
12.2.4 12.2.5
12.2.6
12.2.7
Page 144
The histogram in Vol 27 Figure 12.2.2 Transport construction lorry profile 12.2.8 below shows that peak activity at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site would occur in Year 1 of construction. This peak aligns with the overall project-wide construction year of 2019.
Page 145
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Vol 27 Figure 12.2.2 Transport construction lorry profile
Note: Figure shows indicative volumes and movements based upon assumed timings for the works. It is not a schedule and remains subject to change.
Page 146
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Construction workers 12.2.9
The construction site is expected to require a maximum workforce of approximately 45 people at any one time. The number and type of workers is shown in the table below. Vol 27 Table 12.2.2 Transport construction worker numbers Contractor Staff 08:00-18:00 20 Labour 08:00-18:00 20 Client Staff 08:00-18:00 5
12.2.10
It is difficult to predict with certainty the direction that workers would arrive/depart to and from the site. Staff could potentially be based in the local area or in the wider Greater London area and are unlikely to have the same trip attraction to primary routes as construction lorries. The method of distribution of worker trips on the transport networks, including the public transport services, is to be agreed with the Local Highway Authority (LHA) and Transport for London (TfL). Code of construction practice Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce transport impacts include measures in relation to HGV management and control such as specific vehicle routes to sites and holding areas for construction vehicles. They also include provision for management plans in relation to construction worker journeys to and from the site. The implementation of these measures has been assumed for the assessment of construction effects.
12.2.11
12.2.12
12.2.13
Operation
12.2.14 The operational structure would be located within the existing Abbey Mills Pumping Station in the southern area of the site beneath a newly constructed hard standing area. Access for maintenance vehicles would be via the existing access to the Pumping Station on Gay Road. Access would be required for a light commercial vehicle on a three to six monthly maintenance schedule. Additionally there would be more significant maintenance visits every ten years which would require access to enable two cranes to be brought to the site, which may require temporary suspension of on-street parking in the vicinity of the site. Visits to the works constructed under the Thames Tunnel project would be combined with those for the works constructed under the Lee Tunnel project, and so the only additional vehicle movements anticipated are those where visits become extended to an additional day. This is expected to be the case only for the major ten year maintenance visits.
12.2.15 12.2.16
Page 147
12.3
12.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below. It is noted that it was reported in the Scoping Report that operational traffic effects were scoped out of the EIA. However, while the environmental effects associated with transport for the operational phase are not expected to be significant or adverse, the Transport Assessment which will accompany the ES as part of the application, will examine the operational phase in order to satisfy the relevant stakeholders that technical issues have been addressed (for example, those associated with access for maintenance activities). As this also allows conclusions in relation to environmental effects to be drawn, these have been included in this assessment for completeness. Vol 27 Table 12.3.1 Transport stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Newham Comment The assessment should include any interaction with Crossrail construction traffic where the two project programmes overlap. The assessment should include arrangements for dealing with construction excavated material, in particular maximising the use of waterborne transport for muck away, and the import of construction materials where possible. The assessment should address minimising impacts on local residents, particularly in respect of parking arrangements and highway routes used for site access. Travel Plans should be included. Response Noted. The topic methodology already takes account of major new development as part of the assessment. Noted. The Transport Assessment work both informs the logistics strategy and assesses the proposed strategy for the purposes of the application. The topic methodology already envisages addressing effects related to changes to parking, access routes and associated facilities. This forms part of the environmental design of the project, including management processes for construction activity, and is a consideration in determining
12.3.2
LB Newham
LB Newham
LB Newham
Page 148
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Organisation LB Newham Comment The Construction Management measures contained within the Construction Management Plan for the Lee Tunnel works at Abbey Mills should be utilised for the Thames Tunnel works providing they are proven to work. If construction vehicles are to access the site arriving westbound on the A12 a safety impact assessment must be carried out to determine whether the A12/Abbey Lane junction needs to be realigned.
Section 12: Transport Response mitigation required. The Lee Tunnel Construction Management Plan is currently being agreed. The Plan will be followed for the Thames Tunnel works where appropriate. Construction vehicles are not currently expected to route westbound along the A12 to the junction with Abbey Lane.
Transport for London
Baseline
12.3.3 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Construction
12.3.4 The construction phase methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Operation
12.3.5 The operational phase methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

12.3.6 The assumptions and limitations made for the transport assessment are as listed in Volume 5. Site specific assumptions and limitations for the site will be provided in the ES when the detailed assessment is presented. The preliminary assessment findings reported are qualitative and based on professional judgement.
12.3.7
12.4
12.4.1 12.4.2
Baseline conditions
The site can be accessed from the A11 via Abbey Lane and Gay Road. The surrounding land use is predominantly industrial, with residential areas to the north of the site. The nearest residents are situated on Gay Road. The following sub-sections describe the baseline conditions of the site in relation to pedestrians, public transport and highways. Sensitive receptors
12.4.3
Page 149
in the vicinity of the site are also identified. Vol 27 Figure 12.4.1 shows the Transport Site Plan. Vol 27 Figure 12.4.1 Transport - site plan (see Volume 27 Figures document)
Pedestrian routes
12.4.4 12.4.5 There are footpaths in place along both sides of Gay Road and Abbey Lane which vary in width from 2m to 3.3m. A zebra crossing is in place on Abbey Lane approximately 250m from the site access which links the residential units on the south-eastern side of the road to the park area on the north-western side. This crossing point includes a central pedestrian refuge, dropped kerbs and tactile paving. A signalised pedestrian crossing exists at the junction of Abbey Lane and Stratford High Street (A11). The crossing on Stratford High Street is staggered due to the width of the carriageway and is in place on the north eastern side of the junction. A pedestrian refuge is in place in the middle of the carriageway which includes dropped kerbs and tactile paving. Pedestrian guardrail is in place at the Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street junction to ensure that the designated crossing points are used.
12.4.6
12.4.7
Cycle routes
12.4.8 A designated cycle route runs along Abbey Lane and continues east and south where it follows the banks of the River Lee and runs adjacent to the south-eastern boundary of the Pumping Station site. There is also a designated cycle route along Bisson Road which links to Three Mill Lane and continues to Bromley-by-Bow underground station.
12.4.9
Bus routes
12.4.10 The site is classified as having a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 3 to 4 which indicates that public transport provision in the vicinity is moderate to good. There are bus stops located on both sides of Stratford High Street. The nearest northbound bus stop is located approximately 480m from the site access while the nearest southbound bus stop is approximately 320m from the site access. These stops service routes 25, 108, 276, 425 and D8. Vol 27 Figure 12.4.1 shows the location of the bus stops in the vicinity of the site. The destinations and frequency of the routes are detailed in the table below. Vol 27 Table 12.4.1 Transport bus service frequency
Route Number Distance from site (metres) and Location of Bus Stop Origin - Destination AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour
12.4.11
12.4.12
25
500m -
Hainault Oxford Circus
Page 150

Distance from site (metres) and Location of Bus Stop
Route Number
Origin - Destination
AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour
25 108 108 276 276 425 425 D8 D8

Total
Abbey Lane 475m Abbey Lane 500m Abbey Lane 475m Abbey Lane 475m Abbey Lane 500m Abbey Lane 475m Abbey Lane 500m Abbey Lane 475m Abbey Lane 500m Abbey Lane
Oxford Circus - Hainault Stratford Bus Station Lewisham Bus Station Lewisham Bus Station Stratford Bus Station Stoke Newington Common Gateway Surgical Centre Gateway Surgical Centre Stoke Newington Common Kenninghall Road Stratford Bus Station Stratford Bus Station Kenninghall Road Isle of Dogs Asda Stratford Bus Station Stratford Bus Station Isle of Dogs Asda
7 10 10 6 6 5 5 5 5
66
Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail stations

12.4.13 Pudding Mill Docklands Light Rail (DLR) Station is located approximately 1.1km to the north-west of the site and services routes from Stratford to Lewisham. Stratford Station is located approximately 1.5km north-east of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station and services the DLR, London Underground and London Overground and National Rail. The station has recently undergone an upgrade, in advance of the Olympics, which allows it to accommodate up to 120,000 per hour. The DLR routes from its terminus at Stratford to Lewisham with trains departing at six minute intervals in the AM and PM peak periods. Stratford Underground Station services the Central Line and Jubilee Line and routes from Epping to Ealing Broadway via central London. The frequency of trains for Epping is between five and ten minutes in peak periods and for Ealing Broadway is between three to five minutes. The London Overground runs from Stratford to Richmond and Clapham Junction. Trains run to these destinations approximately every fifteen minutes in the AM and PM peak periods. National Rail services from Stratford route to London Liverpool Street, Shenfield, Norwich, Colchester and Richmond. In the AM and PM peak hour trains to central London run approximately every three to five
12.4.14
12.4.15 12.4.16
12.4.17
12.4.18
Page 151
minutes. There are two trains in the AM peak hour and three trains in the PM peak hour from Stratford Rail Station to Norwich and four trains in the AM peak hour and five trains in the PM peak hour from Stratford to Colchester. 12.4.19 West Ham Underground and Rail Stations are located 1km east of the site. The Underground station services the District and Hammersmith and City Lines. The West Ham Rail Station services Fenchurch Street Station and Shoeburyness with trains operating at a frequency of approximately fourteen minutes and ten minutes to Fenchurch Street in the AM and PM peak hours respectively and at a frequency of approximately ten minutes and fifteen minutes to Shoeburyness in the AM and PM peak hours respectively. Trains on the District and Hammersmith and City Lines operate at a frequency of two to four minutes in the AM and PM peak hours.
12.4.20
12.4.21
River services
12.4.22 12.4.23 There are no wharefage/jetty facilities in the immediate vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. The nearest pier to the site is at Canary Wharf, approximately 5.1km to the south.
Parking
Existing on-street car parking 12.4.24 There is on-street parking located on both sides of the majority of Abbey Lane and Gay Road which is subject to a controlled parking zone (CPZ). The CPZ operates from Monday to Friday from 10:00 to 12:00. No on-street parking is permitted along Stratford High Street. From observations, there appears to be a considerable amount of spare capacity within the on-street parking on Abbey Lane during off peak hours. There is no coach parking in the immediate vicinity of the Pumping Station, with the nearest being on Bridge Road approximately 1.3km from the site. Existing off-street / private car parking 12.4.28 There is a Tesco multi-storey car park located at Hancock Road, approximately 1km to the west of the site, which is open from 07:00 to 22:00 Monday to Saturday and 10:00 to 16:00 on Sundays. There is no parking charge for store customers. LB Newham has a multi-storey car park located opposite Stratford Bus Station which operates on a 24 hour basis Monday to Sunday. There is a charge of 2 per hour and a maximum charge of 25 per day. The capacity of this car park is 675 spaces and it is approximately 0.9km from the site.
12.4.25 12.4.26 12.4.27
12.4.29
Page 152
Highway network
12.4.30 Abbey Lane is a single carriageway two-way road that links Stratford High Street to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station. There are a number of traffic calming measures along Abbey Mills including speed humps and a traffic calming island. A speed limit of 30mph is imposed on Abbey Lane. Gay Road is also a single carriageway two-way road with a speed limit of 30mph. Stratford High Street is a dual carriageway that routes west/east and forms part of the TLRN. It accommodates a high volume of traffic and is subject to an 18 tonne weight limit and speed limit of 30mph.
12.4.31 12.4.32
Survey data
Description of surveys 12.4.33 Baseline survey data for the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site were collected in May to July 2011 to establish the existing transport movements in the area. Manual and automated traffic surveys were undertaken to establish specific traffic, pedestrian and cycle movements including turning volumes, queue lengths, saturation flows, degree of saturation and traffic signal timings. The following junction survey was undertaken in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site to understand highway operation in the area. a. A11 Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane. 12.4.35 Pedestrian and cycle surveys were undertaken in the following locations: a. Pedestrian route from Bisson Road across Prescott Channel. b. Pedestrian route from Gay Road to Willis Road. c. 12.4.36 Junction of Abbey Lane / Abbotsbury Close east to west. d. Junction of Abbey Lane / Abbotsbury Close north to south. A parking survey was undertaken in the roads surrounding the site to establish occupancy of on-street parking spaces on the following roads: a. Abbey Lane b. Godfrey Street c. Abbotsbury Close d. Britten Court e. Gay road f. Delius Grove g. Riverside Road h. Streimer Road i. j. k. Leggatt Road Bisson Road Claypole Road
12.4.34
Page 153
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Results of surveys 12.4.37
Data obtained from the surveys were being processed at the time of writing and will be reported fully in the ES.
Data from third party sources

12.4.38 Data in relation to traffic flows, public transport services and patronage and accidents has been sourced from TfL and were being processed at the time of writing. It will be reported fully in the ES.
Transport receptors and sensitivity

12.4.39 The receptors and their sensitivities in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site are summarised in the table below. The transport receptor sensitivity is defined as high, medium or low using the criteria detailed in Volume 5. As the assessment undertaken is judgement based (rather than being based on quantitative analysis), it has not been possible to identify the effects at individual receptors. A commentary is however provided on the effects upon individual receptor groups; namely pedestrians and cyclists in the local area and users/operators of the local bus services, rail network, river services, parking and local highway network. A full assessment will be provided in the ES. Vol 27 Table 12.4.2 Transport - receptors Value/sensitivity and justification High Receptor Residents on Gay Road and Abbey Lane. Pedestrians and cyclists using Gay Road and Abbey Lane for access and as a through route. Private vehicle users in the area using the local highways or on-street parking. Emergency vehicles accessing the commercial and residential units within the local area. Business owners, small commercial units and workplace occupiers in the local area.
12.4.40
Medium
Low
12.5
12.5.1
At this stage in the assessment process a qualitative assessment has been undertaken based on discussions with TfL and the LHAs, knowledge of the transport networks and their operational characteristics in the vicinity of each site and knowledge of the construction programme, duration and levels of construction activity. These elements have been
Page 154
considered in the context of the range of receptors present in each location and the significance criteria identified. 12.5.2 12.5.3 These elements have been considered in the context of the range of receptors present in each location and the significance criteria identified. Professional judgement has been applied to determine qualitatively the likely effects and their significance in each location being assessed. The Transport Assessment will include full quantitative and qualitative analysis and the transport effects reported in the ES will be based on that detailed analysis.
Construction base and development cases

Assessment year 12.5.4 As described in Volume 5, 2019 has been used as the construction assessment year for all sites, as agreed with TfL, to enable a networkwide assessment. The peak period for vehicle trips to the site is predicted to be in Year 1 of construction. The assessment has been undertaken for the network-wide 2019 assessment year. Assessment area 12.5.7 12.5.8 The area being assessed for the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site is based on discussions with LB Newham and Transport for London. Local roads and junctions included in the assessment are as follows: a. Site access / Gay Road. b. Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street. These roads and junctions would be assessed for highway, cycle and pedestrian impacts. Local bus and rail services, as identified on Vol 27 Figure 12.4.1 Transport - site plan 12.5.9 12.5.10 , would also be assessed. Construction base case The construction base case takes into account traffic growth and major new developments within the local area by 2019. This includes the development described in Section 3.5, namely: a. Olympic Park b. Westfield Shopping Centre, Stratford c. 12.5.11 Lee Tunnel d. Sugar House Lane. The following sub-sections detail what is assumed to change between the baseline and base case scenarios with respect to the different transport aspects considered.
12.5.5 12.5.6
Page 155
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Pedestrian routes 12.5.12
The physical layout of the Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street junction may be changed from baseline conditions as a result of the Lee Tunnel development and may incorporate changes to the pedestrian crossing facilities. The base case will take account of any realignment. Cycle routes Cycle routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumes the same cycle routes as set out in Section 12.4. Bus routes and patronage Bus routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore are assumed to be the same in the base case. There may be some minor changes to bus routes in the Stratford area as a result of the Olympic Park and Westfield Shopping Centre developments. However the details of this are, as yet, unknown and will be taken into account in the Transport Assessment. Bus patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage
12.5.13
12.5.14 12.5.15
12.5.16
12.5.17
London Underground or Overground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. LUL and Overground patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment. National Rail routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. National Rail patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment. It is anticipated that a new DLR route between Canning Town and Stratford Station will be opened in 2011. This may change patronage and service patterns. However as details are as of yet unknown this will be addressed in full in the Transport Assessment. River services and patronage River services and patronage are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Parking Coach and car parking provision is assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Highway layout The physical layout of the Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street junction may be changed from baseline conditions as a result of the Lee Tunnel development. The base case will take account of any realignment.
12.5.18
12.5.19
12.5.20
12.5.21
12.5.22
Page 156
There also may be temporary changes to the highway layout as a result of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. These changes are as of yet unknown and it is assumed that existing road layouts will be reinstated after the Games are complete and will not impact on the construction base case. The base case will take account of any realignment. There are no other changes to the highway layout anticipated for the local area. Highway operation Population growth and development in the wider area will result in an increase in traffic on the surrounding highway network. As a result of this increase, it is anticipated that traffic flows may be heavier and queues longer. Highway capacity analysis Baseline traffic flows (from the junction surveys) will be used and forecasting carried out to understand the capacity on the highway network in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site in 2019 without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Newham and Transport for London. The full assessment of the highway operation and capacity analysis will be undertaken in the ES. Construction development case The construction development case comprises the base case plus construction activities associated with the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This section addresses the changes that would arise as a result of the Thames Tunnel construction activities at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. Construction vehicle movements It has been assumed for the purposes of the assessment that construction lorry movements are limited to the day shift only (08:00 to 18:00). The table below shows the construction lorry movement assumptions for the local peak traffic periods. These are based on the peak months of construction activity at this site. The table also shows the construction worker movements expected to be generated by the site. These movements are based on the assumption that all material is transported to and from the site by road. Vol 27 Table 12.5.1 Transport construction vehicle movements Vehicle movements per time period Vehicle type Construction Total Daily 110 07:00 to 08:00 to 17:00 to 18:00 to 08:00 09:00 18:00 19:00 0 6 6 0
12.5.24 12.5.25
12.5.26
12.5.27
12.5.28
12.5.29
12.5.30
12.5.31
12.5.32
Page 157
Vehicle movements per time period Vehicle type vehicle movements 10%* Worker vehicle movements Total 46 156 23 23 0 6 0 6 23 23 Total Daily 07:00 to 08:00 to 17:00 to 18:00 to 08:00 09:00 18:00 19:00
* As explained in Volume 5 it has been assumed that a maximum of 10% of daily construction vehicle movements associated with materials would take place in each of the peak hours.
12.5.33
Assuming all excavated material and other material is taken by road, an average peak flow of 156 vehicles a day is expected during the months of greatest activity at this site. At other times in the construction period, vehicle flows would be lower than this average peak figure. Modal split The Abbey Mills Pumping Station site has a PTAL of between 3 and 4. A limited amount of parking might be provided on site for workers. It is assumed that some travel to site or between sites is required (for maintenance, client supervision etc) therefore it has been assumed that 50% of staff and 50% of labour staff could drive to the site. Workers who are unable to drive to the site would use other modes. Information regarding the travel arrangements of these workers would be included in the Construction Management Plan and Work Place Travel Plan documents for the site (to be submitted as part of the application). Pedestrian routes No pedestrian routes run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on directly by the construction site development. Cycle routes No cycle routes run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on directly by the construction site development. Bus routes and patronage No bus services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage
12.5.34
12.5.35
12.5.36
12.5.37
12.5.38
No underground or rail services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development. River services and patronage No river services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development.
12.5.39
Page 158
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Parking 12.5.40 12.5.41 12.5.42
No public parking would be impacted on by the worksite area. Highway layout The highway layout would not be impacted on by the worksite area. Highway operation Highway operation would not be impacted on by the worksite area.
12.5.43 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the assessment undertaken for the 2019 assessment year based on professional judgement. A more detailed assessment will be presented in the ES. Pedestrian routes 12.5.44 It would be necessary to realign a section of kerb on the southern side of Abbey Lane opposite the access to Britten Crescent in order to provide adequate road width to allow two-way construction vehicle flow. This would result in reduced footpath widths at this location which may restrict pedestrian movements, although the footpath widths would be maintained within acceptable standards where possible. It may also be necessary to remove a pedestrian refuge which is located on Abbey Lane in order to accommodate large construction vehicles. This would result in pedestrians having to cross Abbey Lane in a single movement, although it may be possible to provide an alternative crossing point on Abbey Lane to replace the removed pedestrian refuge. On this basis it is considered that the effect on pedestrian routes would be minor adverse. Cycle routes 12.5.47 There would be an increase in construction vehicles on Abbey Lane which is a designated cycle route. This would increase the potential for cyclist and vehicle conflicts. Signage would however be provided on Abbey Lane to request large vehicles to be aware of the designated cycle route in place. The increase in number of heavy vehicles routing along Abbey Lane would also reduce the width of road available for cyclists, again increasing the potential for conflict. Therefore it is expected that the effect on cycle routes would be minor adverse. Bus routes and patronage 12.5.49 12.5.50 The routing of bus services in the area should not be affected by the construction works at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using buses to access the site during construction, however, it is expected that the effect on bus routes and patronage would be negligible.
12.5.45
12.5.46
12.5.48
Page 159
Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.51 The Underground, Overground, National Rail and DLR services at Stratford, Pudding Mill and West Ham Stations are not likely to be impacted by the construction works at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using rail and underground to access the site during construction, however, it is expected that the effect on London Underground, Overground, National Rail and DLR services would be negligible. River services and patronage 12.5.53 Construction materials to/from the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site would not be transported by river and therefore would not alter or affect any river services. It is therefore expected that the effect on river services would be negligible. Parking 12.5.54 The majority of on-street parking on the northern side of Abbey Lane between Britten Crescent and Stratford High Street would need to be removed in order to maintain two-way construction vehicle traffic flow. This parking would be relocated where it may be possible to inset parking onto the footpath on the southern side of this section of Abbey Lane where there is adequate footpath width available. This would maintain the parking provision while increasing the carriageway width. Based on vehicle swept path analysis and professional judgement, it is considered that the effect of the construction works on car parking would be minor adverse. Highway layout 12.5.56 12.5.57 12.5.58 A section of Abbey Lane adjacent to the Britten Crescent access may also need to be widened to accommodate two-way traffic flow. The works to widen Abbey Lane at Britten Crescent are likely to require short term pedestrian and traffic management. On this basis it is considered that the effect on local highway layout would be moderate adverse. Highway operation 12.5.59 12.5.60 12.5.61 The additional construction traffic on Stratford High Street might cause some delay to other road users. There may also be delays to general traffic on Abbey Lane when construction traffic is using this route as road widths are restricted. Due to the increase in construction traffic and the potential delay to other road users, it is expected that the effect on highway operation (specifically the ease of vehicle movements) would be minor adverse.
12.5.52
12.5.55
Page 160
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Highway capacity analysis 12.5.62 12.5.63
The additional construction traffic on Stratford High Street undertaking the left turn into Abbey Lane may cause delay to other road users. Due to this potential delay to other road users, it is expected that the effect on highway capacity would be minor adverse. Significance of effects The significance of the transport effects described above has been determined as part of the ongoing assessment and analysis. With regard to the application of the IEMA criteria detailed in Volume 5, this is based on professional judgement for the purposes of this assessment. During construction, the number of heavy goods vehicle movements would be low. The nature of the construction site layout at this location is considered likely to result in a minor to moderate adverse effect on road network operation and delay. Effects on pedestrian and cyclist amenity and safety are expected to be minor adverse.
12.5.64
12.5.65
12.6
12.6.1
This section summarises the preliminary findings of the assessment based on professional judgement. The results summarised below will be presented in more detail in the ES. A qualitative approach to the assessment is appropriate due to the transport activity during the operational phase being very low. The transport elements have been considered in the context of the range of receptors present in each location and the significance criteria identified. Professional judgement has been applied to determine qualitatively the likely effects and their significance in each location being assessed. The transport effects reported in the ES will be based on more detailed information and qualitative analysis where this is appropriate.
12.6.2
Operational base and development cases

Assessment year 12.6.3 As outlined in Volume 5 the operational assessment year has been taken as Year 1 of operation. As transport activity associated with the operational phase is very low, there is no requirement to assess any other year beyond that date. Assessment area 12.6.4 The assessment area for the operational assessment remains the same as for the construction assessment. This includes those roads and junctions which lead to/from the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site to the SRN and TRLN. Operational base case 12.6.5 The operational base case takes into account traffic growth and major new developments within the local area by Year 1 of operation (see para. 12.5.10 for new developments).
Page 161
The following sub-sections detail what is assumed to change between the baseline and base case scenario with respect to the different transport aspects considered. Pedestrian routes The physical layout of the Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street junction may be changed from baseline conditions as a result of the Lee Tunnel construction and may incorporate changes to the pedestrian crossing facilities. The base case will take account of any realignment. Cycle routes Cycle routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumes the same cycle routes as set out in Section 12.4. Bus routes and patronage Bus routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore are assumed to be the same in the base case. There may be some minor changes to bus routes in the Stratford area as a result of the Olympic Park and Westfield Shopping Centre developments. However the details of this are, as yet, unknown and will be taken into account in the Transport Assessment. Bus patronage is anticipated to increase between 2011 (baseline) and Year 1 of operation and this assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage
12.6.7
12.6.8
12.6.9 12.6.10
12.6.11
12.6.12 12.6.13
London Underground and Overground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. It is anticipated that LUL and Overground patronage will increase between 2011 and Year 1 of operation and this assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. National Rail routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. It is anticipated that National Rail patronage will increase between the baseline and Year 1 of operation and this assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. It is anticipated that a new DLR route between Canning Town and Stratford Station will be opened in 2011. This may change patronage and service patterns. However as details are as of yet unknown this will be addressed in full in the Transport Assessment. River services and patronage River services are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions however patronage will increase between 2011 and Year 1 of operation and this assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment.
12.6.14 12.6.15
12.6.16
12.6.17
Page 162
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Parking 12.6.18 12.6.19
Parking provision is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. Highway layout The physical layout of the Abbey Lane / Stratford High Street junction may be changed from baseline conditions as a result of the Lee Tunnel development. The base case will take account of any realignment. There are no other changes to the highway layout anticipated for the local area. Highway operation Population growth and development in the surrounding area will result in an increase in traffic on the surrounding highway network. As a result of this increase, it is anticipated that traffic flows may be heavier and queues longer. Highway capacity analysis Baseline traffic flows (from the junction surveys) are being used and forecasting carried out to understand the capacity on the highway network in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site in Year 1 of operation without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Newham and Transport for London and will be reported in the ES. Operational development case The operational development case for the site includes any permanent changes in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site as a result of the Thames Tunnel project and takes into consideration the occasional maintenance activities required at the site. Trip generation For routine three or six monthly inspections and equipment exercising, vehicular access would be required for light commercial vehicles. In most cases this would be typically a transit van. On occasion there may be a consequent need for small flatbed vehicles with lifting cranes, for example to remove plant from the site. During 10 yearly inspections, sites for placing two large cranes would be required. The cranes would facilitate lowering and recovery of tunnel inspection vehicles and to provide duty/standby access for personnel. Modal split It is anticipated that all trips during the operational phase would be using transit van or large construction vehicles. No trips would be made by public transport, walking or cycling due to the nature of maintenance requiring equipment that can only be transported by vehicles. Pedestrian routes No changes are expected to the pedestrian routes or facilities during the operational phase.
12.6.20
12.6.21
12.6.22
12.6.23
12.6.24
12.6.25
12.6.26
12.6.27
Page 163
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Cycle routes 12.6.28
No change is expected to the designated cycle routes during the operational phase. Bus routes and patronage No change is expected to any bus services in the operational phase and it is not anticipated that operational staff journeys would be made by bus. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage
12.6.29
12.6.30
No change is expected to any London Underground, Overground, National Rail or DLR service in the operational phase and it is not anticipated that operational staff journeys would be made by rail. River services and patronage No change is expected to any river services as a result of the operational phase. Parking No change is expected to car parking in the vicinity of the site as a result of the operational phase. Highway layout Any highway layout changes implemented for the construction phase could be reverted to the baseline layout after construction. When large vehicles are required to service the site, some parking may have to be suspended to ensure the vehicles have sufficient space to manoeuvre into the site. Highway operation Occasional maintenance vehicles would service Abbey Mills Pumping Station every three to six months. When larger vehicles are required to service the site, there may be some temporary, short-term delay to other road users.
12.6.31
12.6.32
12.6.33 12.6.34
12.6.35 12.6.36
Operational effects
12.6.37 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the operational assessment undertaken for the Year 1 of operation assessment year. Pedestrian routes 12.6.38 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Abbey Mills Pumping Station during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on pedestrian routes in the area and footways adjacent to the site. Cycle routes 12.6.39 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Abbey Mills Pumping Station during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on cycle routes in the area and on the roads surrounding the site.
Page 164
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Bus routes and patronage 12.6.40
As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Abbey Mills Pumping Station during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on bus routes and patronage. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail and patronage
12.6.41
London Underground, Overground, National Rail and DLR services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Abbey Mills Pumping Station during the operational phase. River services and patronage River services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Abbey Mills Pumping Station during the operational phase. Parking When large vehicles are required to service the site, some parking may have to be suspended on Abbey Lane to ensure the vehicles have sufficient space to manoeuvre into the site. However, as the maintenance trips would be highly infrequent at the site during the operational phase, it is considered there would be a negligible effect on on-street parking in the local area. Highway layout It is expected that the effect on highway layout would be negligible. Highway operation During the operational phase there may be some delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles are required at Abbey Mills Pumping Station, however this is likely to be highly infrequent, and the effect would be negligible. Highway capacity analysis It is expected that the effect on highway capacity would be negligible. Significance of effects The significance of the transport effects described above has been determined as part of the ongoing assessment and analysis. With regard to the application of the IEMA criteria detailed in Volume 5, this is based on professional judgement for the purposes of this assessment. During the operational phase there would be very occasional vehicle trips to and from the site for maintenance activities but these would have a negligible effect on the surrounding transport networks (in terms of delay and safety) and pedestrian/cyclists.
12.6.42
12.6.43
12.6.44
12.6.45 12.6.46
12.6.47 12.6.48
12.6.49
12.7
12.7.1

Measures contained in the draft CoCP of relevance to transport are summarised in Section 12.2.
Page 165
The project has been designed to limit the effects on the transport networks as far as possible and many measures have been included directly in the design of the project. Any mitigation which is required is detailed below. Pedestrian routes A review of pedestrian facilities at the Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane junction would be undertaken to ensure appropriate green crossing time. Cycle routes A road safety audit would be undertaken at the junction of Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane to ensure that the proposed realignment takes into account cyclist safety. Bus routes The number of construction vehicles to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site is expected to be low. No mitigation measures are likely to be required for bus routes. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail No mitigation measures are likely to be required for underground or rail services. River services No mitigation measures are likely to be required for river services. Parking The on-street parking on Abbey Lane which would need to be removed during construction would be relocated where possible. On this basis no mitigation would be required. Highway layout A review of the signal timings, road markings and pedestrian facilities at the Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane junction would be undertaken. Highway operation The number of construction vehicles to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site is expected to be low. No mitigation measures would be required for highway operation. Highway capacity The number of construction vehicles to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site is expected to be low. No mitigation measures are likely to be required for highway capacity.
12.7.3
12.7.4
12.7.5
12.7.6
12.7.7 12.7.8
12.7.9
12.7.10
12.7.11
Operation
Pedestrian routes 12.7.12 All footways and pedestrian facilities would return to their baseline condition. As a result, no mitigation would be required for the operational phase.
Page 166
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Cycle routes 12.7.13
Cycle routes would not be significantly affected by the operation of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site, and no mitigation would be required. Bus routes Bus services and patronage would not be significantly affected by the operation of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site therefore no mitigation would be required. Docklands Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail London Underground, Overground, National Rail and DLR services would not be affected by the operation of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site therefore no mitigation would be required. River services River services and patronage would not be affected by the operation of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site therefore no mitigation would be required. Parking On-street parking would not be significantly affected by the operation of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site therefore no mitigation would be required. Highway layout The realignment of the Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane junction could be retained however apart from this the highway layout would return to its baseline condition. As a result no mitigation would be required for the operational phase. Highway operation The number of trips associated with the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site during the operational phase would be very low and infrequent and for maintenance purposes only. No mitigation would therefore be required. Highway capacity As the local highway network would not experience a significant detrimental effect from the operational proposals, there would be no requirement for highway improvement mitigation to increase capacity of local junctions.
12.7.14
12.7.15
12.7.16
12.7.17
12.7.18
12.7.19
12.7.20
Page 167
12.8
Vol 27 Table 12.8.1 Transport construction assessment Effect Significance Minor adverse Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Pedestrians in the local area
Mitigation Review of pedestrian facilities at Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane junction.
Cyclists in the local area
Minor adverse Road safety audit
Reduced footway widths Removal of pedestrian refuge (possible alternative crossing to be provided) Construction vehicles and reduced road widths increasing potential for vehicle/cyclist conflicts Some additional patronage from construction workers. Negligible Negligible None required Negligible
Minor adverse
Bus users and operators
Rail users and operators Negligible
None required
Negligible
River users and operators
Some additional patronage from construction workers. Some additional patronage from construction workers. Loss of on-street parking (to be relocated where possible) Movement of large construction vehicles Minor adverse
None required
Negligible
Parking
None required.
Minor adverse
All road users
Minor adverse
Review of signal timings, road
Minor adverse
Page 168
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Effect Highway layout changes including road widening and junction modifications (requiring short-term pedestrian and traffic management). Delay to journey time. Significance Mitigation markings and pedestrian facilities at Stratford High Street / Abbey Lane junction. Residual significance
Receptor
Page 169
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Vol 27 Table 12.8.2 Transport operational assessment Effect Occasional maintenance trips. Occasional maintenance trips. Occasional maintenance trips. No effect. No effect. Occasional suspension of on-street parking in the immediate vicinity of the site during maintenance. Occasional delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles accessing site. Negligible Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Pedestrians in the local area
Cyclists in the local area
Bus users and operators
Rail users and operators
River users and operators
Parking users
All road users
None required
Negligible
Page 170
12.9
12.9.1
In addition to the baseline survey data collected and data obtained from Transport for London (strategic model data and additional ATC and junction count data), there is a need for additional data to supplement the data set. The baseline data collection was in the process of being collated at the time of writing. When baseline data collection (including data from third party sources) and analysis is complete a full transport assessment will be carried out. This will include a detailed analysis of all three levels of assessment (sitespecific, Borough level and project-wide) and will include an assessment of cumulative and in combination effects. The scope of analysis will be agreed with TfL and the LHA and will include the identification of effects at individual receptors. This full assessment will be reported in the ES (and Transport Assessment). Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for transport within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES and Transport Assessment.
12.9.2
12.9.3
Page 171
Section 13: Water resources - ground
13
13.1
13.1.1
Water resources groundwater

Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant groundwater effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. The Scoping Report identified that in the absence of appropriate measures within the design, there is potential for effects on groundwater resources from both construction and operational phases at the site. This preliminary assessment identifies these measures in order to assess the effects (if any) on groundwater resources that might then require mitigation
13.1.2
13.2
13.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to groundwater are as follows. Construction The main infrastructure at the site, relevant to the consideration of groundwater, would include; a. A large diameter reception shaft for the main tunnel (approximate diameter 20m (internal) or 27.7m (external) and with a depth of approximately 64.55m below GL - excluding a 6m thick base slab, once constructed). b. A connection tunnel of 7.2m internal diameter and 33m length to the Shaft F of the Lee Tunnel.
13.2.2
13.2.3
At the site, Shaft F of the Lee Tunnel is currently under construction (2011). This document does not cover the design aspects of Shaft F conditional on permits pending. The groundwater effects of Shaft F were considered within the ES for the Lee Tunnel and Beckton STW Upgrade9 and that project was consented in 2009. The proposed methods of construction for the various elements of the site of relevance to the groundwater assessment are summarised in the table below. Also contained in this table are approximate time-scales and depths. Vol 27 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater methods of construction Design element Method of construction Spray concrete lining Construction periods tbc Construction depths tbc
13.2.4
Connection to Lee Tunnel shaft
Diaphragm wall with dewatering Reception shaft 2 years from outside the perimeter Note: In terms of construction depth - Deep (up to 65m);
Deep
Page 172
Dewatering would take place from outside of the perimeter of the diaphragm wall. The dewatering pumps would be operational during the shaft sinking and would be maintained to ease the reception of the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM). Enhanced dewatering from within the shaft may be required following breakthrough of the TBM. The time period for duration of dewatering could be up to 15 months at this site. As part of the environmental design, dewatering amounts would be minimised where practically possible. Depending on ground conditions, consideration may be given to deepening the diaphragm walls by between 6 and 8m in order to reduce flows up into the diaphragm wall. It is anticipated that ground treatment would required within the Chalk to facilitate the TBM junction with the shaft. The chalk is highly fissured and the purpose of the grouting would be to ensure that a block of ground, immediately adjacent to the shaft, is created with reduced permeability. Operation During operation the presence of below ground structures could interfere with any shallow groundwater movements and potentially act as a barrier to flow locally around the site. If it occurs, the build up of groundwater can cause problems of groundwater flooding.
13.2.6
13.2.7
13.2.8
13.3
13.3.1 13.3.2

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site relating to groundwater. Construction The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Operation The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Assumptions and limitations At this stage, all assessments are based on a qualitative approach only. The list of receptors is based on the best available information from the Environment Agency on abstractions (both licensed and ground source heat pump (GSHP) schemes).
13.3.3 13.3.4 13.3.5 13.3.6 13.3.7 13.3.8
Page 173
13.4
13.4.1

The reception shaft would pass through made ground, River Terrace Deposits, Lambeth Group (Upnor Formation), Thanet Sand and Seaford Chalk as summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater anticipated ground conditions/ hydrogeology Top of stratum Stratum Elevation (mATD) 105.0 101.0 100.0 96.5 91.4 90.5 88.5 87.5 85.0 82.5 81.0 79.5 Depth below ground level (m) 0 4.0 5.0 8.5 13.6 14.5 16.5 17.5 20.0 1.5 22.5 24.0 25.5 Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk Lewes Chalk 74.0 61.5 19.6 26.0 43.5 85.4 12.5 40.4 Not proven Lower aquifer 1.5 5.5 Thickness (m) Hydrogeology
Made ground Alluvium River Terrace Deposits London Clay (A2) Harwich Formation Lambeth Group Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottled Beds Laminated Beds Lower Shelly Beds Lower Mottled Beds Upnor Formation (Gravel) Upnor Formation
4.0 1.0 3.5 5.1 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.5 2.5
Perched Water Aquiclude Upper Aquifer Aquiclude Aquitard / Aquifer
Aquitards/ Aquifers
13.4.2 13.4.3
The River Terrace Deposits or upper aquifer is classified as a secondary A aquifer vii. The Thanet Sands and the Upnor Beds (the lower unit of the Lambeth Group) are known as the Basal Sands and are in hydraulic continuity with
vii
Secondary Aquifers are either permeable strata capable of supporting local supplies or low permeability strata with localised features such as fissures. The term Secondary Aquifer replaces the previously used name of Minor Aquifer.
Page 174
the Chalk aquifer beneath London. The Chalk is a principal aquifer viii and, together with the Basal Sands (the Thanet Sands and Upnor Beds), is referred to as the lower aquifer. 13.4.4 At the site, the depth of the shaft would be at 40.25mATD (with base slab down to 34.25mATD). The base of the shaft and the tunnel itself would both be within Seaford Chalk Formation (Cuckmere Beds). Groundwater levels in the Chalk have historically been between approximately 70 and 90mATD in the area of Abbey Mills. The levels at their lowest within the Thanet Sand Formation of the lower aquifer and at their highest fully saturating the lower aquifer and producing a piezometric head equivalent to a water level near the top of the Lambeth Group. All the historic water levels are influenced by regional abstraction and do not represent the natural groundwater heads. Groundwater levels in the lower aquifer are currently depressed below their peak in the year 2000. Water levels in observation boreholes are close to the top of the Upnor Formation the upper unit of the lower aquifer. Therefore, only a relatively small decline in levels would exacerbate the development of unsaturated conditions in the uppermost part of the lower aquifer. The monitoring boreholes record groundwater levels in the lower aquifer. Four monitoring horizons within two monitoring boreholes are used to record groundwater levels in the following discrete layers (see Vol 27 Table 13.5.1) Upper Shelly Beds, Lower Mottled Beds, Seaford Chalk. There are no measurements of the water level in the upper aquifer at this site. The piezometric heads in the Upper Shelly Beds is at 98mATD and has not fluctuated seasonally and has remained at a consistent level, this reflects the completion of the monitoring structure in a low permeability clay horizon within the Lambeth Group. There are four EA monitoring boreholes in the vicinity of the site. The closest are TQ38/103 that lies 290m to the southwest, TQ38/102 that lies 340 m to the west. To the north is TQ38/97 at 350m and TQ38/66c at 680 m. The only currently monitored EA observation borehole is TQ38/466 which lies 860m to the east of the shaft site. The borehole monitored water levels in the lower aquifer. There is a close match between the EA monitoring record for this borehole and the data collected for the Thames Tunnel project. Monitoring locations and hydrographs are included in Appendix E. The monitoring results demonstrate that the Seaford Chalk and the Lower Mottled Beds are in hydraulic connectivity with one another, and hence also with the intervening Thanet Sand Formation and Upnor Formation. Water levels in the River Terrace Deposits are not monitored at the site, however it is expected that the levels would be close to the levels in the adjacent River Lee and would probably exhibit fluctuations with the tidal
13.4.5
13.4.6
13.4.7
13.4.8
13.4.9
13.4.10 13.4.11
13.4.12
viii
A Principal Aquifer is a geological strata that exhibits high intergranular and/or fracture permeability. This strata has the ability to support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. Principal Aquifers equate in most cases to aquifers previously referred to as Major Aquifers.
Page 175
cycle. The water levels in the upper aquifer are separated from the lower aquifer by low permeability strata. 13.4.13 The regional groundwater levels produced by the EA for the London Basin, and the local observations are effectively the same. The expected groundwater level at the site, based on EA contours (Jan 2009), would be around 82mATD; the same level as that observed in the onside monitoring boreholes. The Chalk piezometric levels do not show any annual or seasonal fluctuations. The changes in levels are assumed to be in response to abstractions at that time. The site does not lie within any SPZ as defined by the EA. The nearest SPZ to the site is 1.5km away to the northwest. This source is in the opposite direction to the direction of groundwater flow expected beneath the site. The site is located within the catchment area of a licensed groundwater abstraction number 29/38/09/0149 held by Mr Anjuman-e-IscahulMuslimeen of UK. The licence holder has two abstraction points that lie 0.29 and 0.49km to the east of the site. The licensee is permitted to abstract a maximum of 107,000m3/annum and 1,963.6m3/d from the Chalk (see Appendix E). There are no unlicensed abstractions near to the site based on information provided by the local council. There are no other GSHP schemes, either proposed or under investigation locally. There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site. Appendix E contains a summary of the water quality information from the land quality assessment. There are some exceedences of drinking water standards or environmental quality standards (EQS) at the site. Samples of groundwater from GI boreholes have elevated concentrations of dissolved zinc and copper. There is no evidence of solid contamination within the two nearest GI boreholes. However, in borehole SR3003, 0.43km to the southwest of the shaft site, 3,600mg/kg of extractable hydrocarbons have been found in shallow (5m depth) samples. This indicates that pockets of contamination may be found within the upper aquifer. There are no recorded groundwater flooding incidents recorded within the vicinity of the site, however, the Newham SFRA indicates that the site and surrounding area are located within an area that is at medium risk of groundwater flooding. Further details on the baseline conditions at the site are provided in Appendix E. Monitoring is continuing and would extend the baseline which would inform the assessment in the ES.
13.4.14
13.4.15
13.4.16
13.4.17 13.4.18 13.4.19 13.4.20
13.4.21
13.4.22
Receptor summary
13.4.23 Groundwater receptors which could be affected during construction or operation are summarised in the table below.
Page 176
Vol 27 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater receptors Receptor Groundwater Body Upper Aquifer Groundwater Body Lower Aquifer Abstractions Licensed Abstractions Unlicensed Construction Operation Comment Penetrated by reception shaft Shaft into Chalk Chalk abstractions, nearest 290m None known None known
GSHP Schemes Note: Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP)
13.5
13.5.1
The shaft would be constructed through the River Terrace Deposits (upper aquifer) and into the Upnor/Thanet Sand/Chalk (lower aquifer). Dewatering would be required from outside the perimeter of the diaphragm wall. The extent of dewatering would be minimised where practicably possible by the construction techniques. The diaphragm wall would prevent direct flow of groundwater into the shaft for example, and deepening the diaphragm wall and constructing a base slab would further reduce inflows deepening the diaphragm wall by up to 8m may be considered as part of the environmental design. On the basis of monitoring at the site there is some groundwater contamination. The works could create a linkage between the upper and lower aquifer that could result in the spread of pollution, or as a result of dewatering. Activities involving grout would only use products that are acceptable to the EA and would be covered by the CoCP to minimise the risk of pollution. The nearest Chalk abstraction to the site is situated 290m distance away, but in up hydraulic gradient location. The construction works lie just within the estimated catchment of licensed abstractions. However, since the abstraction is up hydraulic gradient, turbidity associated with physical disturbance of the aquifer is not anticipated. Impact magnitude The impacts on groundwater quantity are expected to be moderate or major adverse at this site. This is because of the depth of the excavation into the transmissive Chalk and the likelihood that a full cut off of groundwater would not be achievable with a diaphragm wall to the depth of the shaft base. Therefore major dewatering abstraction from the lower aquifer would be required, with a major cone of depression at the site could extend laterally for a large distance. Since the Chalk (as an environmental receptor) is of high value, and construction would be taking place within the Chalk, in order to minimise the
13.5.2
13.5.3
13.5.4 13.5.5
13.5.6
13.5.7
Page 177
impact magnitude from dewatering to a level acceptable to the EA. The impact magnitude from dewatering is considered in the context of the London Groundwater Licensing Policy (EA, 2006) 39. 13.5.8 The balance between recharge and abstraction from the Chalk aquifer in London formed part of the groundwater resource assessment of the London Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS), (EA, 2006). The Thames Tunnel falls within groundwater management unit 7 (GWMU7 Confined Chalk) which was classed as over licensed. The London Groundwater Licensing Policy (EA, 2006) was produced to restrict further abstraction in areas approaching their sustainable limit. This policy was incorporated into the London CAMS licensing policy which identified areas where further licences are restricted. Abbey Mills Pumping Station lies inside the area defined as East London (Appendix E). In the absence of any specific guidance, the policy states that, every application would be assessed on its own merits, be subject to a detailed local hydrogeological assessment and require the submission of the necessary supporting justification and reports for a decision to be made on an individual scheme. The detailed groundwater assessment to be included within the ES would take into account the following. A preliminary assessment is completed below: Has there been any long-term (several years) downward trend in the groundwater level in the vicinity of the application? a. Preliminary response: The hydrograph in Appendix E for an EA observation borehole 860m from the site exhibits a decline in levels from 2002 through to 2009 (the end of record). However the much closer GI boreholes during the 2009 to 2011 period exhibit a rise at the rate of about one metre per year 13.5.13 The groundwater level in relation to the base of the London Clay. If the groundwater level is near the base of the London Clay, then the EA would be unlikely to grant the abstraction licence. The EA would use discretion if there is a significant thickness of the Lambeth Group below the London Clay, but the aim is to manage abstraction to keep groundwater levels above the Thanet Sands. a. Preliminary response: The water level is below the base of the London Clay Formation, and has been in the area for the last 40 years, the extent of the historical record. 13.5.14 Any recent abstraction development in the same area. If groundwater levels have not yet responded to a recent change in abstraction, the EA may not grant further licences in that area. a. Preliminary response: No recent developments are known. The nearby abstraction licence (290m to the east) was originally issued in 1985, with the most recent variation being in 1996, thus is can be expected that there would have been sufficient time for response of the aquifer to have stabilised. Other licences are over 1km away. Further details of these licensed abstractions are given in Appendix E and Vol 27 Table
13.5.9
13.5.10
13.5.11
13.5.12
Page 178
13.5.2. There are no unlicensed groundwater abstractions within a 1 km radius of the site and no Ground Source Heat Pump schemes either proposed or under investigation locally. 13.5.15 Other proposals in the area that have been refused for water resource reasons in the last five years. a. Preliminary response: No refusals known. 13.5.16 Proximity of the proposal to an existing or proposed Artificial Recharge Scheme (ARS). Artificial Recharge scheme proposals would be treated as a special case as they involve the management of groundwater levels to provide additional resource to the project operator. a. Preliminary response: No known ARS in the vicinity. 13.5.17 On the basis of this preliminary assessment it is concluded that in order to construct the shaft in the lower aquifer significant dewatering would be required that could be detrimental to groundwater resources and the impact would be moderate. The impacts on groundwater quality within the lower aquifer are expected to be negligible if the groundwater levels are kept above the top of the Thanet Sands. However, if the water table is drawn below this level, moderate impacts may be expected. Recent groundwater levels are within the Upnor Beds the upper unit of the lower aquifer, therefore the likelihood that dewatering would result in drawdowns into the Thanet Sands is anticipated. The drawdown as a result of dewatering has yet to be quantified. Once modelling is complete, as described in Volume 6, the impact on the aquifer and on nearby abstractors is expected to be moderate. A summary of the impacts and likely magnitude is provided in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts - construction Impact Dewatering of upper aquifer Dewatering of lower aquifer Magnitude Impact to be quantified Moderate impact on water resources and potentially other water users. To be quantified.
13.5.18
13.5.19
13.5.20
Lowering of groundwater levels in vicinity of Chalk abstractions
Creation of a pathway for pollution Possible, since elevated upper aquifer concentrations of some heavy metals have been found in groundwater. Creation of a pathway for pollution To be quantified. lower aquifer Induced groundwater movement (lower aquifer) Negligible if the groundwater levels are kept above the top of the Thanet Sands. Moderate if
Page 179
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Impact
Section 13: Water resources - ground Magnitude water levels drawn below this level.
Pollution through use grout or other ground treatment Receptor sensitivity 13.5.21
Negligible; CoCP to identify acceptable materials
The upper aquifer is a secondary aquifer but not used locally so is categorised as being of medium importance. The lower aquifer is of high importance where it is not in use and high to very high importance where it is being used, as summarised in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptors -construction Value/sensitivity Medium importance; secondary aquifer of limited thickness and use High value, principal aquifer High value; aquifer used for industrial purposes and public water supply
Receptor Upper Aquifer Lower Aquifer Chalk abstractions
Significance of effects 13.5.22 A summary of significance of the effects is shown in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater effects - construction Effect Dewatering of upper aquifer Dewatering of lower aquifer Chalk abstractions Significance Impact yet to be quantified Moderate adverse .To be quantified Potentially significant if use/integrity of nearby abstraction source is affected. To be quantified. Possible effect
Deterioration in groundwater quality as a result of pathway creation both aquifers Deterioration in groundwater quality as a result of dewatering lower aquifer Effect on groundwater quality from induced groundwater movement as a result of dewatering (lower aquifer)
To be quantified.
Minor adverse if water table remains above the top of Thanet Sands; Major adverse if water table drawn below this level.
Page 180
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Effect Deterioration in GWQ from grouting around main tunnel lower aquifer
Section 13: Water resources - ground Significance Minor adverse*
Note: Minor adverse is lowest categorisation for a receptor of High importance.
13.6
13.6.1
The base case and operational development case are derived from current baseline conditions as described in Section 13.4 and Appendix E. The possible future change from current baseline conditions is taken into account by considering a range of groundwater levels in the assessments. The Water Framework Directive commits EU member states to achieve good qualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies (including marine waters up to kilometre from shore) by 2015. The Directive defines 'surface water status' as the general expression of the status of a body of surface water, determined by the poorer of its ecological status and its chemical status. Thus, to achieve 'good surface water status' both the ecological status and the chemical status of a surface water body need to be at least 'good'.
13.6.2
Operational assessment results

Impact magnitude 13.6.3 13.6.4 The impact of the reception shaft on groundwater flows in the upper aquifer has yet to be quantified. Seepage out of the shaft into the upper aquifer would be negligible given that the shaft will be full on relatively few occasions (which increases the risk of seepage). The shafts would also have a secondary lining to minimise the risk to the upper aquifer. Seepage into the shaft would be prevented by the double lining, this should ensure that this risk is fully minimised over the asset life. No other operational effects are envisaged. A summary of the impacts and their likely magnitude is provided in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.6.1 Groundwater impacts - operation Impact Physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer and resultant rise in groundwater level Seepage out of the shaft affecting groundwater quality (both aquifers) Seepage into the shaft affecting groundwater resource Magnitude To be quantified
13.6.5 13.6.6 13.6.7
Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary lining Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary
Page 181
Section 13: Water resources - ground lining
Receptor sensitivity 13.6.8 The value of the groundwater receptors remains as defined in Vol 27 Table 13.5.2. Significance of effects 13.6.9 A summary of significance of the effects is shown in the table below. Vol 27 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater effects -operation Effect Change in groundwater storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper aquifer Deterioration in water quality from seepage out upper aquifer Deterioration in water quality from seepage out lower aquifer Significance, and justification Negligible effect
Negligible effect
Minor adverse
13.7
13.7.1
The project includes a number of environmental design elements. Groundwater monitoring is proposed during construction and operation as discussed in Section 6.The following section contains the extra mitigation measures to be taken to address the effects identified within the assessment.
Construction
13.7.2 The dewatering of the lower aquifer would be kept to a minimum. A diaphragm wall would reduce the amount of dewatering required, although if up flows into the diaphragm wall are significant, then this may require either ground treatment to be used or the installation of recharge wells located around the diaphragm wall. The dewatering of the lower aquifer could also take place from within the diaphragm wall, in order to reduce drawdown effects in the surrounding area. The need for this approach will be informed by ongoing assessment work and reported in the ES, The monitoring of the water quality from the upper aquifer during dewatering is required to ensure that it is not contaminated with respect of heavy metals. The quality of the water would be a guide as to the acceptable disposal options. Mitigation would be to minimise the period of dewatering.
13.7.3
13.7.4
Page 182
Operation
13.7.5 No effects are identified in the operational assessment and therefore no mitigation is required.
Page 183
13.8
Vol 27 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater assessment summary - construction Significance Impact yet to be quantified Impact yet to be quantified. Potentially significant. No mitigation proposed at this point No mitigation proposed at this point No mitigation proposed at this point Further assessment for ES
Assessment summary
Residual significance Yet to be quantified Yet to be quantified Yet to be quantified Negligible effect Yet to be quantified To be determined
Receptor
Upper aquifer
Effect Dewatering
Lower aquifer
Dewatering
Mitigation No mitigation proposed at this point No mitigation proposed at this point
Chalk abstractions
Both aquifers To be quantified. Minor adverse if water table remains above top of Thanet Sands; Major adverse if water table drawn below this level. Minor adverse
Lowering of the groundwater Impact yet to be quantified. levels as a result of dewatering Potentially significant. Creation of a pathway for Possible effect pollution
Lower aquifer
Movement of polluted groundwater
Lower aquifer
Groundwater quality deterioration from induced groundwater movement as a result of dewatering (lower aquifer)
Lower aquifer/Chalk abstractions
Pollution through use grout or other ground treatment
No mitigation proposed at this point
Yet to be quantified
Page 184
Vol 27 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater assessment summary - operation Significance Negligible effect Minor Adverse Negligible effect, design of shaft includes double lining Minor adverse, design of shaft includes double lining No mitigation proposed at this point No mitigation proposed at this point Mitigation Residual significance Negligible Not significant Negligible Yet to be quantified
Receptor
Upper aquifer
Effect Change in groundwater storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper and lower aquifers
Lower aquifer
Upper aquifer
Seepage into shaft affecting groundwater resources
Regular GWL monitoring No mitigation proposed at this point
Lower aquifer/Chalk abstractions
Page 185
Section 13: Water resources ground
13.9
13.9.1 13.9.2
No additional data collection is required at the site. The ES will contain quantitative calculations on the amount of dewatering and the effects on the Lower aquifer/Chalk abstractions. No modelling of groundwater abstractions will take place as part of the current assessment. The impact of the physical obstruction post construction will be modelled. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for groundwater within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
13.9.3
13.9.4
Page 186
Section 14: Water resources surface
14
14.1
14.1.1
Water resources surface

Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant surface water effects at the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site. This assessment: a. identifies the existing water resources baseline conditions b. identifies the future base case conditions against which the project should be assessed c. identifies both the beneficial and adverse effects of the project during construction and operation and assess the significance of the effects
d. identifies any residual effects with respect to surface water resources potentially affected by the project, both during construction and operation. 14.1.2 Groundwater resources are assessed separately in Section 13. Similarly land quality is addressed in Section 8. A Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been carried out separately and is included in Section 15. In addition, it should be noted that this assessment only covers the effects of the work at the Abbey Mills PS site. The catchment-wide effects on the Thames Tideway, particularly the water quality improvements anticipated from the project are assessed separately in Volume 6.
14.1.3
14.2
14.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to surface water resources are described in the following sections. The Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) includes a number of measures that are important in protecting water quality and these are referred to as appropriate. Construction It should be noted that raised formal flood defence walls are present along the frontage of the site. The presence of these walls would form a physical barrier to any potential contaminants reaching the watercourses via overland routes. The main Thames Tunnel would be routed to the Abbey Mills site. From here, CSO discharges would be conveyed to Beckton STW via the Lee Tunnel, a separate project currently under construction by Thames Water. In summary, the works at Abbey Mills would consist of the following: a. a main shaft b. a tunnel connecting the Thames Tunnel shaft to the Lee Tunnel shaft F c. reception of the tunnelling machine driving from Chambers Wharf.
14.2.2
14.2.3
14.2.4
The base of the main shaft is expected to be within Chalk, thus requiring dewatering. Disposal of dewatering effluent can have an impact on
Page 187
surface water resources. See Groundwater resources, Section 13, for further details of dewatering requirements. 14.2.5 The remaining construction works would be undertaken within the boundary of the existing Abbey Mills PS site and would consist of onsite workshops and site offices and material processing. Construction controls 14.2.6 To prevent pollution from leaks or spillages, contaminating substances would be stored in leakproof containers, with secondary containment equal to 110% of the volume of the container, in a safe and secure building or compound. Areas for transfer of contaminating substances, including refuelling, oiling and greasing, would be similarly protected and activities would take place above drip trays or on an impermeable surface with sealed drainage or oil interceptor. All wash down of vehicles (including wheel washing) and equipment would take place in designated areas and washwater would be prevented from passing untreated into drains or holding areas prior to pumping. These measures would be detailed in the CoCP. The CoCP would be adhered to at all times and good construction techniques followed to ensure protection against pollution incidents. In addition, relevant Environment Agency guidance would be followed, including the following: a. General Guide to the Prevention of Pollution: PPG 1; b. Works and maintenance in or near water: PPG 5; c. PPG 6 Pollution prevention guidance for working at construction and demolition sites;
14.2.7
d. Vehicle washing and cleaning: PPG 13; e. Dewatering of Underground Ducts and Chambers: PPG 20; f. Incident Response Planning: PPG 21; and g. Storage and handling of drums and intermediate bulk containers (IBCs): PPG 26. 14.2.8 14.2.9 Appropriate maintenance of vehicles and plant would also minimise pollution during construction. Suitable spill kits would be provided and positioned in vulnerable areas and staff would be trained in their use and a record should be kept of all pollution incidents or near-misses, to ensure appropriate action is taken and lessons are learned from incidents. Regular toolbox talks would be held to raise staff awareness of pollution prevention and share lessons learned from any recorded incidents. There would be written procedures in place for dealing with spillages and pollution (The Pollution Incident Control Plan or PICP). The PICP would contain the following as a minimum: a. guidance on the storage and use of hazardous materials with the aim of preventing and containing spills and releases;
Page 188
b. guidelines on the degrees of containment which take account of the nature of the materials and the sensitivity of the environment; c. procedures to be adopted in the event of a pollution incident, to contain and limit any adverse effects;
d. procedures and appropriate information required in the event of any incident such as a spillage or release of a potentially hazardous material; e. systems for notifying appropriate emergency services, the Environment Agency and other relevant authorities, Thames Water and the Contractor's personnel; and f. arrangements for notifying appropriate statutory bodies and local authorities of pollution incidents where required to by legislation.
Operation 14.2.10 During operation, the works at Abbey Mills would act as a connection between the Thames Tunnel and Lee Tunnel and the two tunnels, along with Beckton STW, would operate as one system.
14.3
14.3.1
The construction/operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Scoping and engagement

14.3.2 Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments relating to surface water resources from consultees for this particular site.

14.3.3 Full results from project ground investigations were not available at the time of compiling this assessment of contamination risk and from intrusive ground works at the site have relied on existing records of contamination (see Section 8 Land quality).
14.4

Surface water receptors
14.4.1
A list of surface water receptors and their status under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is included in Volume 27, Vol 27 Table 14.4.1, which are either within the vicinity of the site, or downstream of the site and therefore have the potential to be affected by the proposed scheme. Due to the dilution effect of the Thames Middle, the effects of construction activities would be localised to the waterbodies listed below and this chapter assesses only the impacts local to the proposed site. Therefore, only the Thames Middle waterbody is considered in this assessment.
14.4.2
Page 189
Vol 27 Table 14.4.1 Surface water receptors Water Body Name/ID 2015 2015 Hydromor Current Current Predicted Predicted phologica Ecologica Chemical Ecologica Chemical l Status l Quality Quality l Quality Quality Moderate Potential Fail Moderate Potential Fail
Thames Middle Heavily GB53060391140 Modified 2 River Lee Channelsea Creek 14.4.3
Assessed as part of the Thames Middle waterbody under the WFD. Assessed as part of the Thames Middle waterbody under the WFD.
The Thames Middle waterbody (which stretches from Battersea Bridge to Mucking Flats and includes the River Lee and Channelsea Creek) can be considered to be high value waterbody as although its current and predicted status in 2015 (target date from River Basin Management Plan) is moderate potential, there is a status objective of good by 2027 ix. In addition, the Thames is a valuable resource and plays an important role as a water resource, habitat provision, amenity, recreation, and transport throughout London. Raised formal flood defences are present along parts of the frontage of the Abbey Mills PS site. The presence of these defences along with the site drainage arrangements would form a physical barrier to any potential contaminants reaching the watercourses via overland routes. This would be taken into consideration during the surface water impact assessment. Current CSO operation The CSO has two sources, Station A and Station F. Using the June 2011 catchment model of the sewer system, the current operation of the Abbey Mills CSO Station A has been characterised and the annual average duration, frequency and volume of spill has been defined at as follows: a. the CSOs spill on average of 56 times per year b. the CSO spills for an average duration of 403 hours per year c. the spill volume from the CSO is approximately 4,099,800m3 per year.
14.4.4
14.4.5 14.4.6
14.4.7
Using the June 2011 catchment model of the sewer system, the current operation of the Abbey Mills PS CSO Station F has been characterised and the annual average duration, frequency and volume of spill has been defined as follows: a. the CSOs spill on average of 56 times per year b. the CSO spills for an average duration of 873 hours per year
Thames River Basin Management Plan Annex B: Water Body Status Objectives, Environment Agency, 2011
ix
Page 190
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station c. 14.4.8
the spill volume from the CSO is approximately 15,319,000 m3 per year.
The polluting load data that is discharged from the CSO (Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD, Ammoniacal-N and Total Oxidised Nitrogen TON) would be provided in time to inform the ES. Receptors designated sites The River Thames and Tidal Tributaries are designated as a Site of Metropolitan Importance. There are no internationally designated hydrologically linked conservation sites within 2 km of the proposed site that could be affected by construction. The project-wide effects of the overall scheme on the internationally designated sites in the Lower Thames are covered separately in Volume 6. Receptors discharges and abstractions Other than the Abbey Mills PS CSOs, there are no consented discharges within 1 km of the site. There are no licensed surface water abstractions within 1 km of the site.
14.4.9
14.4.10
Base case
Construction base case 14.4.11 The Lee Tunnel and the TTQI projects (improvement works at Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Long Reach and Riverside STWs) would be operational by the time construction commences. Significant improvements in the water quality in the Tideway are anticipated as a result of these projects. The construction base case would therefore be the water quality in the Tideway with the TTQI and Lee Tunnel schemes in place. Results from modelled simulations of conditions in 2021 (as simulated model runs are only available for 2006 and 2021) with the TTQI and Lee Tunnel in place have therefore been used for the base case. Operational base case 14.4.13 For the assessment of operational impacts, the effects have been assessed against a base case of Year 1 of operation. As described in the methodology section in Volume 5, this base case year takes account of the effects that other major schemes would have on the quality of the Thames Tideway as explained in the construction base case above. Results from modelled simulations of conditions in 2021 with the TTQI and Lee Tunnel in place have therefore been used for the base case.
14.4.12
14.4.14
14.5
14.5.1
As described in Volume 5, the construction effects at Abbey Mills PS have been assessed for significance against the relevant WFD objectives as well as their significance locally on targets set by other legislation. The WFD objectives as taken from Article 4 of the WFD are as follows: a. WFD1 Prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water.
14.5.2
Page 191
b. WFD2 Protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water, with the aim of achieving good surface water status by 2015. c. WFD3 Protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status by 2015.
d. WFD4 Reduce pollution from priority substances and cease or phase out emissions, discharges and losses of priority hazardous substances.
Identification of construction impacts and effects

14.5.3 As noted above, raised formal flood defences are present along parts of the frontage of the Abbey Mills PS site. The presence of these defences along with the site drainage arrangements would form a physical barrier to any potential contaminants reaching the watercourses via overland routes. Site drainage 14.5.4 Site surface water runoff has the potential to become polluted with a number of substances during construction activities, which may include the following: a. silt and suspended solids from earthworks and exposed soils b. oil and fuels from machinery and equipment maintenance and refuelling c. concrete or cement from spillages during spraying and pouring d. hazardous substances from ground contamination exposed during earthworks and construction. 14.5.5 However, as all construction site drainage would drain to the combined sewer there would be no direct impact pathway for effects from site drainage. Although the Lee Tunnel would overflow occasionally to surface watercourses (the River Thames at Beckton) the flows within the tunnel would provide sufficient dilution to prevent an adverse affect on the receiving watercourse. This has therefore not been considered further within this assessment. It is considered that via the adherence to the measures detailed in Section 14.2 during construction works, combined with the treatment of all site drainage via the STW treatment process, the pollution pathway can be managed sufficiently to reduce the pollution risk to negligible and hence the likely significant effect is not considered further within this assessment. Contamination and dewatering 14.5.7 Ground investigation work identifies various contaminants within the underlying ground, particularly the Lambeth Group and Thanet Sands. Contaminants include Volatile Organic Compounds and various hydrocarbons. Ongoing monitoring of boreholes across the Abbey Mills site is being undertaken and the results from this and would inform future assessments. See Section 8 for further details.
14.5.6
Page 192
Should significant levels of contamination be identified during the site preparation works the dewatering effluent may require treatment before discharge to surface watercourses. Should this be the case, the treated effluent would be discharged to a local combined sewer. In addition, it is likely that construction work currently underway for the Lee Tunnel project would have carried out any necessary major remediation works in the vicinity of the proposed shaft. There would therefore be no discharge of contaminated groundwater from the site and this effect is not considered further within this assessment.
14.5.9
Assessment of impacts
Impact assessment 14.5.10 Environmental design measures have resulted in all the identified effects being reduced to negligible and therefore the effects of construction activities would not be considered further in this assessment.
14.6
14.6.1
As with the construction effects, the assessment has defined the WFD objectives and the waterbodies affected.
Identification of operation impacts and effects

Reduction in CSO spills 14.6.2 The operation of the Abbey Mills PS CSO connection to the new Lee Tunnel would have a beneficial effect on water quality, bacteriological quality and aesthetic value in the Abbey Mills PS locality, the River Lee and the Thames Tideway by substantially reducing the frequency, duration and volume of discharges from the Abbey Mills PS CSOs. June 2011 catchment modelling of the operational base case has simulated that by Year 1 of operation (assessed to be 2021 to use modelled assumptions) the frequency, duration and volume of the Abbey Mills PS CSO, Station A, would have decreased (as a result of the Lee Tunnel operation) to the following: a. the CSO would spill on average of 0 times in the typical year (45 less than the current baseline); b. the CSO would spill for an average duration of zero hours in the typical year (403 hours less than the current baseline); and c. 14.6.4 the spill volume from the CSO would be approximately zero in the typical year (4,099,800 m3 less than the current baseline).
14.6.3
By the 2021 the frequency, duration and volume of the Abbey Mills PS Station F CSO would have decreased (as a result of the Lee Tunnel operation) to the following: a. the CSO would spill on average of zero times in the typical year (56 less than the current baseline); b. the CSO would spill for an average duration of zero hours in the typical year (873 hours less than the current baseline); and
Page 193
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station c. 14.6.5 14.6.6
the spill volume from the CSO would be approximately zero in the typical year (15,319,000 m3 less than the current baseline).
The number of risk days for river users being exposed to pathogens during the base case year would be zero. The Thames Tunnel, would not reduce any further the spill frequency at the Abbey Mills CSOs as the CSOs are still predicted not to spill in the Typical Year. However once the Thames Tunnel is operational more extreme rainfall events would lead to a predicted spill at Abbey Mills once every ten years.
Assessment of impacts
14.6.7 As discussed, overall Tideway-wide benefits are discussed in Volume 6 and this section only assesses the beneficial impacts local to the proposed site at Abbey Mills PS. Therefore, with respect to the Thames Tideway waterbody, only the Thames Middle waterbody is considered in this assessment. As the reduction in CSO spills from the Abbey Mills PS CSOs would be due to the construction and operation of the Lee Tunnel, there would be no water quality effect local to the site from this project, other than the Tideway-wide water quality improvements as described in Volume 6.
14.6.8
14.7
14.7.1
The assessment of significance of effect for both construction and operation concludes there would be no significant adverse effects associated with the development at the site.
14.8
14.8.1
Assessment summary
No significant adverse effects have been identified.
14.9
14.9.1
Any additional information on potential contamination of the site, collected as part of new site investigations (see Section 8), will be used to inform the baseline for the ES. Information on potential contamination would be collected as part of the Land Quality Scope and used to inform the baseline for the ES. Assessment of the effects of the Thames Tunnel on water quality at Abbey Mills would be assessed once modelling is further progressed and would be reported in the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects would be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for surface water resources within the project would be finalised and reported in the ES.
14.9.2 14.9.3
14.9.4 14.9.5
Page 194
Section 15: Water resources flood risk
15
15.1
15.1.1
Water resources flood risk

Introduction
This section presents a Level 1 FRA which assesses the flood risk from all flood sources both to and from the proposed Abbey Mills Pumping Station site as a result of development. This Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25) x and covers the construction and operation phases. The purpose of this report is to assess flood risk at each site within the project. This Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)40 and covers the construction and operation phases. This assessment makes use of the PPS25 Practice Guide 41 and is consistent with the outputs and findings of the Thames Estuary 2100 Plan (TE2100)42 and the policy requirements of the London Plan 43, Borough specific documents have been reviewed in addition to other relevant flood risk planning, policy and legislative documents. This Level 1 FRA is supported by 2D hydrodynamic modelling, undertaken to assess flood risk effects for the project as a whole (as described in Volume 5) and for specific sites (Volumes 7 to 28). The FRA comprises four parts, which can be found in the following volumes of this report: a. Volume 5 contains Part A of the FRA: Common sections relevant to all sites, including assessment methodology. b. Volume 6 contains Part B of the FRA: Project-wide risk assessment section. c. Volumes 7-28 contain Part C and Part D of the FRA: Individual risk assessment sections for every site (Part C) where flood risk is considered as an issue, organised according to London Borough (this Part) which precede the conclusions for each site (Part D).
15.1.2
15.1.3
15.1.4
15.1.5
15.1.6
15.1.7
As explained in Volume 5, a Level 1 FRA is an assessment of flood risk based on information available at the time of undertaking the assessment. Where further detailed assessment (including modelling and calculations) is required to define flood risk or required mitigation, this is undertaken to support a Level 2 or more detailed Level 3 FRA. The aim of this part of the Level 1 FRA is to assess the effects of flood risk from all sources at the site, both to the site and from the site to surrounding areas. The purpose of this section is to highlight the key issues for the design team and provide a preliminary assessment of flood risk issues. A more detailed assessment will be completed in the ES.
15.1.8
15.1.9
Communities and Local Government (March 2010). Planning Policy Statement 25 Development and Flood Risk.
Page 195
Considering the nature of the project, the length of construction period at the site and the location of the site within the Thames Tideway, it is important that flood risk is assessed both during the construction phase and the operation phase taking into consideration climate change over the lifetime of the project. The project involves the construction at many sites throughout London. Many of these sites are situated within close proximity to, or within, the River Thames or other watercourses. According to PPS25, any development located within Flood Zones 2xi or 3xii or greater than 1ha and situated within Flood Zone 1xiii should be accompanied by a FRA. The FRA will be required to demonstrate how flood risk from all sources of flooding to the development and from the development will be managed now and in the future as a consequence of climate change for the lifetime of the development. The objectives of this section are to satisfy the requirements of PPS25 in relation to this site.
15.1.11
15.1.12
15.2
15.2.1
Policy considerations
The proposed development of a shaft and associated structures is classified as water and sewage transmission infrastructure including docks, marinas and wharfs which is classified as water-compatible development and compatible within all flood zones within PPS25.
15.3
15.3.1
Regulatory position Overview

General policy documents (eg PPS25) have been reviewed within Volume 5. The following should be read in conjunction with that Volume.
Local policy
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 15.3.2 The site lies within the LB of Newham. The LB of Newham has produced a Level 1 and Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA)44 . This outlines the main flood sources to the Borough. The SFRA confirms that there is no actual risk of tidal flooding in the 0.5% AEP return period event, inclusive of climate change. There is also no actual risk of fluvial flooding during a 1% AEP event, inclusive of climate change. According to the SFRA:
15.3.3
15.3.4
Flood Zone 2 is defined as medium probability, assessed as having between a 1% and 0.1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) of river flooding or between a 0.5% and 0.1% AEP of sea flooding in any year xii Flood Zone 3 is defined as high probability, assessed as having a 1% or greater AEP of river flooding or a 0.5% or greater AEP of sea flooding in any year xiii Flood Zone 1 is defined as low probability, assessed as having less than a 0.1% AEP of river or sea flooding in any year
xi
Page 196
a. The proposed development site lies within the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone 3, which extends across the majority of the wider Abbey Mills site area. b. The surrounding area is bordered by man-made raised defences. c. The site is defended against inundation from the Thames during the 0.1% AEP tidal event by the Thames Tidal Flood Defences, including the Thames Barrier.
d. The construction of Three Mills Lock and the Prescott Channel excludes the tidal influence of the Thames upstream of these features and may alter flood mechanisms. e. The site is located outside the 0.1% AEP flood zone of the River Lee. f. There is a medium risk of groundwater flooding. g. The site is less susceptible to surface water flooding. There is no data or 0 surface water flooding incidents within the vicinity in the last 10 years. h. The majority of the Abbey Mills site is within a key development area (Major Opportunity Zone 3) at Three Mills Island. i. 15.3.5 Safe access/egress is required from the site to a suitable location within Flood Zone 1.
The SFRA promotes the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) suitable to specific site locations within the Borough, depending on underlying geology. These must however be adopted and adequately maintained post-construction to ensure design operation into the future. Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)
15.3.6
The Council is working in partnership with the Greater London Authority (GLA), Thames Water and the EA to produce a SWMP as part of the Drain London Project. This is scheduled for completion in Autumn 2011.
Environment Agency policy

Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100) 15.3.7 Abbey Mills PS lies within the Royal Docks Policy Unit which has been assigned the P4 flood risk management policy within the TE2100 Plan 45 , meaning that further action will be taken to sustain the current scale of flood risk into the future. The TE2100 Plan identifies the local sources of flood risk at this location as including: a. tidal/fluvial flooding from the River Thames/River Lee b. surface water (heavy rainfall) and urban drainage sources. c. Defence systems currently managing flooding from these sources include:
15.3.8
d. the Thames Tidal Defences and River Lee defences e. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) for mitigation of urban drainage
Page 197
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station f. 15.3.9
flood forecasting and warning.
The TE2100 Plan seeks to promote, where possible, defence improvements that are sensitive to ensure views are maintained and impacts to river access/views are minimised, and to improve the appearance of the river frontage and provide environmental enhancement and amenity opportunities by using opportunities provided by future development to modify the layout of flood defences. Where defence raising in the future as a consequence of climate change is not possible, secondary defences and floodplain management should be introduced. There is also a vision to increase flood risk awareness within the area. Thames Region Catchment Flood Management Plan (CFMP) The Thames Region Catchment Flood Management Plan (CFMP) 46 covers fluvial and non-tidal sections of the River Thames, ie fluvial tributaries of the River Thames and the River Thames upstream of Teddington weir. The Thames Region CFMP advocates the reduction in flood risk through the design and layout of developments within the floodplain; redevelopment should be compatible with its location within the floodplain (ie flood resilience measures should be incorporated). This should be achieved through re-creating more natural river systems and giving space for flood water, aiming for a balance between attenuation and conveyance. The specific messages for developed flood plain with built defences are: At present it is still possible and effective to maintain these flood defences. Climate change will mean that these defences will become less effective in the future. Therefore any redevelopment needs to reduce flood risk in the area benefiting from these flood defences and the natural floodplain needs to be used to accommodate additional floodwater upstream and downstream of these areas.
15.3.10
15.3.11
15.3.12 15.3.13 15.3.14
Regional policy
London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (RFRA) 15.3.15 For the reach between Hammersmith Bridge and the Thames Barrier (City reach (does not specify inclusion of River Lee)) the London RFRA (London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal. Greater London Authority, (Oct 2009)) encourages small scale set back of development from the river walls where possible. The aim of this is to enable modification, raising and maintenance in a sustainable, environmentally acceptable and cost effective way. Development should be designed in such a way as to take opportunities to reduce flood risk and include resilience. There is particular concern surrounding confluences and the interactions between tidal and fluvial flows in the future due to climate change, such as the River Lee. This should be taken into consideration during the redevelopment process. The RFRA indicates that SUDS should be included within developments to reduce surface water discharge.
15.3.16
15.3.17
Page 198
15.4
15.4.1
Assessment of flood risk Overview

The flood risk from all potential flood sources (as listed in Annex C of PPS25) to the site, and from the site as a result of the development, is assessed in the following section. FRAs and associated flood risk work at Abbey Mills has been undertaken in support of various proposed works, including the Lee Tunnel proposals. This section takes the conclusions from these existing FRAs into consideration. For a discussion on project-wide effects see Volume 6. In summary, initial hydraulic computation modelling indicates that the influence of the project as a whole on the River Thames (tidal and fluvial) flood levels is minimal and is unlikely to exacerbate flood risk.
15.4.2
15.4.3
Flood sources
Flooding from sea (tidal sources) Flood risk to the site 15.4.4 The works at Abbey Mills PS involve the construction of the main shaft for the Thames Tunnel and a connection between this shaft and a second shaft currently being constructed as part of the Lee Tunnel project. This connection would link the Thames Tunnel to the Lee Tunnel. The Abbey Mills PS site lies to the north east of the confluence between the Prescott Channel and Channelsea River (which is a tidal backwater with no upstream fluvial connection) reaches of the River Lee. The site is shown to be situated within EA defended Flood Zone 3 (see Appendix E). The new Thames Tunnel shaft would be located to the east of the Prescott Channel and to the west of the Lee Tunnel shaft (under construction). Permanent works would include the 20m diameter shaft, finished at a level flush with the surrounding ground level, and associated infrastructure. Surrounding the shaft would be hardstanding cover which would abut the area of hardstanding surrounding the Lee Tunnel shaft. Construction works would be located to the south and north of the shaft location. The local flood defences are aligned to the north east, east, south, west and north west of the site along the eastern, southern and western boundaries of the overall Abbey Mills PS site with the Prescott Channel and Channelsea River (ie the local defences are aligned along the boundary between the land and the local water bodies) (from NFCDD). The design standard of these defences is stated by the EA to be at the 0.1% AEP level. In addition, the SFRA indicates that these defences provide protection against flooding during a 1% AEP event, inclusive of climate change. The EA has stated that the defence level within the vicinity of the site is 5.49mAOD. The site is also protected from tidal flooding (for fluvial flood risk protection see below) by the Thames Barrier, which is located on the River Thames downstream of this site. The defences at this location are
15.4.5
15.4.6
15.4.7
15.4.8
Page 199
raised and man made (according to NFCDD). Through work undertaken for the Lee Tunnel project the defence type can be refined to earth embankments along the south east of the site, bounding Channelsea River, and engineered flood defences to the north east. 15.4.9 Following a survey of the defences for the Lee Tunnel project it is evident that in places along the Channelsea River the statutory defences (composed of earth embankments) are below the statutory level and are situated at a level of 4.99mAOD (which is however still above the EAs design flood levels, see below). A secondary line of defence exists through the set back from the statutory defence line where land level is currently at or above the statutory level of 5.49mAOD. British Waterways have recently constructed the Three Mills Lock and Water Control Structures (including the Prescott Channel, a lock and a barrage with a number of tidal flaps) adjacent to the proposed location of the Lee tunnel shaft. These structures act to impound the River Lee; downstream of the structures the river is tidal and upstream the river is impounded fluvial. (The impact of these structures on flood risk will be investigated in the Level 2 FRA for this site). The existing land contours on the site are such that an effective secondary defence line is formed set back from the statutory defence line within the Abbey Mills site, where the land is currently at, or above the statutory 5.49mAOD level. Ground levels at the site are approximately 8mAOD in the proposed shaft location. Ground levels decrease towards the south of the site to approximately 5.3mAOD at the proposed location of the excavated material bins (proposed location within the temporary construction area) and increase to the north of the site to approximately 8.3mOAD at the proposed location for the temporary offices. Ground levels within the site do vary with landscaped areas of high and low ground throughout. It should be noted that at the time of completing the assessment of Abbey Mills for the Thames Tunnel PEIR, discussions were taking place between the EA and Thames Water regarding ground works within the site as part of the Lee tunnel project. The Lee Tunnel works is likely to include the relocation of the official (statutory) defence line inland to follow the new contour of planned land raising, as part of a solution to maintain levels of flood protection and ensure no loss of flood storage. As part of the Level 2 FRA the designs of the ground works will be obtained and used to determine accurate flood depths throughout the Abbey Mills PS site and the location of defences. It should be noted that any project is required to ensure the integrity of the local flood defences and make sure constant protection of the land in terms of flood risk is provided. The EA flood design tidal flood levels from the EA Tidal Thames Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study (Thames Tidal Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels 2008 Final Modelling Report. Environment Agency (Apr 2008) (Thames Barrier operational, Model Node 2.47)) are as follows: a. 4.75mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005
15.4.10
15.4.11
15.4.12
15.4.13
15.4.14
Page 200
b. 4.75mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107 (ie inclusive of climate change). 15.4.15 This indicates that the existing statutory defences (despite in some places being at 4.99mAOD, lower than the statutory level of 5.49mAOD) still ensure protection against the extreme tidal flood levels. The design tidal flood levels also indicate that the proposed shaft location, situated at a level flush with the ground level, (approximately 8mAOD), and surrounding site would not flood under the above return periods as ground levels are above flood levels. Tidal flood water from the River Thames would also have to propagate up the River Lee to the site and in doing so it is expected that the flood level would be reduced from the above. The TE2100 Plan indicates that a higher level of protection will be required to protect areas along the river in light of sea level rise. Local defences will be required to be raised which will contribute to the continual protection of the site from tidal flooding into the future. The degree of defence raising at this location has not been provided by the EA and will be obtained and included within the Level 2 FRA for the site. The EA has also used the Tidal Thames Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study to investigate water levels within the Thames in the absence of the Thames Barrier, ie, when the Barrier is not closed (it is assumed that a partial closure would influence flood levels upstream of the barrier). This shows design tidal flood levels within the River Thames are 5.70mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005 and 6.61mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107. Under this modelled scenario, the shaft site would not be flooded as the proposed ground level is above the modelled flood levels. Topographically lower areas of the site may flood as the modelled flood levels are above the statutory defence height and ground levels. However, because the Thames Barrier is a key component of the Thames Tidal defences, these levels are not used for the design event when considering the required flood prevention measures for new development. The Lower Lee Valley Regeneration SFRA (Lower Lee Valley Regeneration Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. has mapped tidal flood zones. This mapping shows the 0.1% AEP tidal (with 5% AEP fluvial) does not inundate the site. The SFRA has also undertaken a number of breach assessments within the area. The closest breach (at point 6 on Three Mills Wall River) does not inundate the site. The LB of Newham SFRA shows that the site (including all proposed construction area) is not inundated during any historical tidal flood events. The SFRA also shows that the site is not situated within the mapped tidal flood zone for the 0.1% AEP event (with 5% AEP fluvial inflow). This recent modelling and mapping undertaken as part of the SFRA is considered more detailed than existing EA flood zone data. Therefore the site is not considered to be located within Flood Zone 3. The proposed level for the shaft and surrounding site ground levels are above the design flood levels for the tidal River Thames. As a result, the
15.4.16
15.4.17
15.4.18
15.4.19
15.4.20
15.4.21
15.4.22
Page 201
site can be classified as Flood Zone 1 and is not within the flood plain of the River Thames. Tidal flood risk is therefore considered to be negligible. Flood risk from the site 15.4.23 The excavation process using TBMs to construct the tunnel has the potential to impact on settlement in some cases which could affect the level of some of the defences. The shaft location is within 50m of the defences. Measures should be put in place to ensure these activities do not risk the integrity of the local defences. The tunnel alignment passes under the local flood defences to the south west of the shaft location. A project-wide study into the potential impacts of the tunnel excavation on settlement of third party assets including flood defences is being undertaken. When complete, any relevant assessment for Abbey Mills PS defences will be included in the Level 2 FRA (within the ES). Until further information is available, due to the proximity of the shaft to the defences and the alignment of the tunnel, the risk of impact to flood defences and hence potential increase in flood risk at the site due to structural modification of the defences due to the tunnelling is considered to be medium. Flooding from rivers (fluvial sources) 15.4.26 At the time of completing the assessment for the Abbey Mills PS site, the site is shown to be within the EA mapped Flood Zone 3. Vol 27 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk EA flood zones Vol 27 Figure 15.4.2 Flood risk flood extents (see Volume 27 Figures document) 15.4.27 As part of the Lower Lee Valley Regeneration SFRA, the River Lee has been modelled. The results from this work have been provided by EA (see Volume 5 for details). This modelling shows the areas of the site proposed for both permanent and temporary uses are not flooded under any modelled return periods, including combined fluvial and tidal scenarios when compared with the above ground levels. Flood levels within the Channelsea River (extracted from the modelling and provided by the EA) are as followsxiv: a. 4.97mAOD 1% AEP b. 5.02mAOD 1% AEP with climate change c. 15.4.29 4.98mAOD 0.1% AEP. Flood levels within the Prescott Channel (extracted from the modelling) are as follows: a. 5.00mAOD 1% AEP b. 5.05mAOD 0.1% AEP.
xiv
15.4.24
15.4.25
15.4.28
Fluvial flood levels are above the tidal flood levels and should therefore be considered as the EA flood design levels
Page 202
Flood levels within the River Lee to the south west of the site (extracted from the modelling) are as follows: a. 4.95mAOD 1% AEP b. 4.97mAOD 0.1% AEP.
15.4.31
The above modelled flood levels for all local watercourses are below the statutory defence height and therefore the shaft site (and land proposed for temporary uses) would not flood under the above modelled scenarios (even if the lower sections of defence were breached as ground levels at the shaft and temporary works locations are above flood levels However, as detailed in the previous section, surveyed defence height in some areas along the Channelsea River are at 4.99mAOD which would result in flooding during the 1% AEP event (when climate change is taken into account). As previously detailed, at the time of completing the assessment discussions were underway in relation to the Lee Tunnel project to agree a new formal defence line at the statutory level of 5.49mAOD set back slightly from the existing statutory defences once ground works are completed. The proposed area for temporary and permanent works would be within this new defence line and hence protected from fluvial flooding. The agreed defence line location will be available to inform the Level 2 FRA and will be used to re-asses fluvial flood risk to the site. Considering the current defence levels (ie without the new defence line in place) in the event that the 1% AEP fluvial event (with allowance for climate change) were to occur the shaft site and land proposed for temporary uses would not flood under the above modelled scenarios as ground levels at the shaft and temporary works locations are above flood levels). Fluvial flood risk originating from out of bank flow upstream of the site should also be considered. There is an overland flow path to the east of the Abbey Mills site originating from the Waterworks River to the north of the site (upstream). This flow path follows the railway south to the Stratford Market Depot and West Ham. This flow path is approximately 400m to the east of the Abbey Mills site and does not inundate the site. The EA Tidal Thames Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study uses a combination of different factors including astronomical tides, tide surge and fluvial river flows to produce an estimation of the peak high water levels within the Tidal Thames during a combined event. This methodology assumes that no combination of fluvial events with tidal conditions produces a higher flood level than the worst case combined tidal storm surge conditions. Water levels influenced by high fluvial flow alone would therefore be lower than the combined event assessed and hence the assessment of fluvial risk from the Thames is considered to be included within the assessment of flood risk from tidal sources in the previous section.
15.4.32
15.4.33
15.4.34
15.4.35
15.4.36
Page 203
On the basis that a new defence line at the statutory level would be established before temporary work is commenced, flood risk to the site from fluvial sources is considered to be negligible. The Lower Lee Valley Regeneration SFRA shows that the site is not inundated from fluvial flood sources during any modelled and mapped scenarios undertaken. The SFRA also shows that the site is not inundated during any historical fluvial flood events. The standard of protection of the current defences and ground levels within the site are such that fluvial flooding does not pose a direct flood risk to the site. Flood risk from this source is negligible. Flooding from land and surface water runoff Flood risk to the site
15.4.38
15.4.39
15.4.40
Surface water flooding could originate from any surrounding hardstanding where infiltration (into the ground or the local sewer network) is exceeded or the local sewer is at capacity and surcharging occurs. The LB of Newham SFRA indicates that the site is not situated within a potential surface water flood risk area (based on Areas Susceptible to Surface Water mapping, undertaken by the EA). In addition, the site lies in an area that has no records of historical flooding. As a result of the above points, flood risk from this source is considered to be low. Flood risk from the site PPS25 states that runoff post development should not be greater than runoff pre development in order to not increase the risk of flooding either downstream or on surrounding land. The London Plan aims towards greenfield runoff rates and the Mayors Draft Water Strategy 47 also aims for greenfield runoff and has an essential standard of 50% attenuation to the undeveloped sites surface water runoff at peak times (see Volume 5). Surface water runoff rates and attenuation volumes are indicative and will be confirmed during the subsequent Level 2 FRA. The shaft site is currently an undeveloped greenfield site with no formal drainage network. Therefore, surface water is thought to infiltrate directly into the ground, either on site, or on immediately adjacent land. It is assumed here that following completion of the Lee Tunnel Shaft, the site would remain (or be reinstated as) a grassed area, except for an area of hardstanding directly around the Lee Tunnel shaft. The undeveloped greenfield surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP event plus 30% for climate change has been calculated using the ICP SUDS rural runoff method in Micro Drainage WinDes Version 12.5 software. Calculations are based on a permanent development area of 1100m2. A soil factor of 0.4, which represents moderately draining silty soils, has been used within this method to represent the existing ground conditions.
15.4.41
15.4.42
15.4.43
15.4.44 15.4.45
15.4.46
Page 204
The existing impermeable and post development impermeable surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP event has been calculated using the Modified Rational Method. In accordance with PPS25 Table B.2 the post development surface water runoff rate includes a 30% increase in peak rainfall intensity to account for the anticipated impact of climate change over the developments lifetime. The existing, post development and Greenfield runoff rates for the 1% AEP climate change event are provided in the table below. Vol 27 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk existing and post development runoff rates onsite Site Status Existing 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change Post Development 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change Greenfield 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change 21.9 1.4 Rainfall Runoff Event Runoff Rate (l/s)
15.4.48
15.4.49
See existing as site is currently greenfield (and see above)
15.4.50
By subtracting the existing runoff rate from the post development runoff rate for the 1% AEP climate change event, an additional runoff rate of 20.5l/s is predicted post development at the permanent works shaft site. Proposed mitigation measures relating to surface water drainage are provided in Section 15.5. Flooding from groundwater The LB of Newham SFRA indicates that the site and surrounding area lies within an area that is at medium risk of groundwater flooding. However, there are no recorded incidents of groundwater flooding identified within the vicinity of the site. Historical FRAs undertaken at Abbey Mills have acknowledged the presence of groundwater within the underlying Upper Chalk. However, these are known to be somewhat confined by the overlying strata (heavy clays within the Alluvium) and Made Ground. Potential mechanisms for groundwater flooding will be explored further including local water levels from ongoing monitoring and data collection as part of the EIA. This will inform the assessment of groundwater flood risk to this site and will be reported in the Level 2 FRA for the Abbey Mills PS site.
15.4.51
15.4.52
15.4.53
15.4.54
Page 205
Until further information is available, flood risk to the site from this source is considered to be low, as there is no evidence from the Newham SFRA to suggest that groundwater flooding has occurred in the past and overlying strata may confine the groundwater in the Upper Chalk. Flooding from sewers The LB of Newham SFRA shows that there have been no flooding incidents recorded by Thames Water in the last 10 years in the vicinity of the site. The proposed site area is located within the overall Abbey Mills PS, which is served by an existing surface water sewer system. There are multiple large sewers leading into the PS from the south west, north and east. If the capacity of any of these systems was exceeded the sewers would overflow at upstream combined sewer overflows. Flood risk from this source is considered to be low. Flooding from artificial sources The River Lee navigation channel (ie, Prescott Channel) has been considered within the tidal and fluvial flood risk assessment, above. Therefore, there are no artificial flood sources within proximity to this site and no related flood risk from this source.
15.4.56
15.4.57
15.4.58 15.4.59
15.5
15.5.1
Flood risk design and mitigation Overview

This assessment has identified the following sources of flood risk related to the site: a. negligible risk of flooding to the site from fluvial and tidal sources b. low risk of groundwater flooding to the site associated with water levels in the underlying geological strata c. low risk of sewer flooding to the site d. low risk of surface water flooding (or ponding) to the site as a result of runoff from surrounding land e. low risk of an increase in tidal flood risk due to the potential for settlement during construction of the tunnel to impact on food defences.
15.5.2
This section describes flood mitigation methods that have been highlighted as being required specifically to address flood risk effects as a result of development at Abbey Mills PS. Flood mitigation methods in this context are defined as being required to alleviate the effect of the development of a site on any consequential (increase in) flood risk.
Flood prevention
Flood resilience/resistance during operation 15.5.3 The London RFRA states that flood risk should be reduced where possible and flood resistance and resilience measure should be built into the
Page 206
development. Given that the project is a water compatible development type (see para. 15.2.1), there is no project-wide intention to provide flood resistance and resilience measures for residual flood risk as it is considered that the primary operational function of the Tunnel would not be affected by flooding as a result of a breach. Construction and emergency planning 15.5.4 Any existing emergency plans for Abbey Mills PS should be consulted and any recommendations or site protocols incorporated into a specific emergency plan for the Thames Tunnel works at the site. This emergency plan will be included within the subsequent Level 2 FRA and will outline appropriate working practices and appropriate access/egress routes in the event of a flood warning. The LB of Newham will be required to comment on the Emergency Plan.
Design and mitigation

Surface water discharge 15.5.5 An appropriate surface water management strategy is required to ensure surface water is positively drained from this site post development. Surface water drainage would be designed to the 3.3% AEP event for the site. The preliminary calculations shown in Vol 27 Table 15.5.1 are based on attenuation, assuming zero infiltration (the feasibility of SUDS infiltration techniques onsite is currently unknown). PPS25 states that runoff post development should not be greater than runoff pre development in order to not increase the risk of flooding either downstream or on surrounding land. The attenuation volume is based on this Policy. In addition, and in accordance with the Mayors Draft Water Strategy, the preferred standard and essential standard have also been considered. To take into account the effects of climate change over the developments lifetime a 30% increase in peak rainfall intensity has been included when considering post development runoff and the associated attenuation volumes. Vol 27 Table 15.5.1 Runoff rates and preliminary attenuation volumes 1% AEP rainfall event Preferred Standard (attenuation to greenfield runoff rate) Essential Standard* (attenuation to 50% of undeveloped runoff rate) Runoff rate (l/s) Attenuation volume (m3)
15.5.6
15.5.7
1.4
70 95
N/A
N/A
Page 207
1% AEP rainfall event PPS25 Standard (no increase in runoff post development)
Runoff rate (l/s)
Attenuation volume (m3)
See preferred standard
*Not applicable as existing site should be considered as a greenfield site
15.5.8
Vol 27 Table 15.5.1 indicates that to meet PPS25 standards for the 1% AEP event (analogous with the preferred standard) a storage volume between 70 95m3 would be required for the permanent Thames Tunnel shaft site and associated hard standing at Abbey Mills PS. It is important to note that the attenuation volumes provided in Vol 27 Table 15.5.1 are based on preliminary calculations and would be subject to refinement at outline and detailed design stage. Both the need and the potential to deliver this level of attenuation at the site will be determined during the Level 2 FRA and reported in the ES, which will ensure that the requirements of PPS25 are met at all times and the aspirations of the London Plan are met where practicable. Until soakaway tests and further contamination studies are carried out the feasibility of SUDS infiltration techniques are unknown. The following surface water mitigation measures should be considered for incorporation into the development design: a. In the event of return periods in excess of the 3.3% AEP event, the layout and the landscaping of the sites should aim to route water away from vulnerable property/infrastructure, and avoid creating hazards to access egress routes, whilst not increasing flood risk to third parties. b. Surface water runoff would where possible be directed to the existing surface water drainage system. c. If surface water is discharged into the Prescott Channel or Channelsea River appropriate scour protection would be provided at the outfall.
15.5.9
15.5.10 15.5.11
d. Depending on operational activities at the site surface water runoff may be required to pass through an oil interceptor, or similar, prior to discharge to the chosen surface water receptor. e. During the construction phase appropriate mitigation would be provided to ensure surface water is managed in a controlled manner.
15.6
15.6.1 15.6.2
A Level 2 FRA will be prepared for the site which will outline further specific design approaches and measures. It is considered that a Level 2 FRA will be sufficient to assess the impact of flood risk for the final site design (ie no Level 3 specific site modelling is required). This will be prepared for the site and incorporated in the ES.
Page 208
a. The Level 2 FRA will use the data collected as part of the Level 1 FRA and build upon the preliminary findings of this assessment once further information is available from the EA and other assessments being undertaken to support the FRA and the EIA. In summary, the following additional assessment elements will be undertaken: b. Confirmation of existing River Lee defence levels local to the site following receipt of the EA survey information and correlation with results from Lee Tunnel defence survey. Also confirm the agreed location of re-aligned statutory l flood defences at the site this will be assessed in detail in the Level 2 FRA and following completion of the Lee Tunnel ground works). This will be used to reassess the standard of protection at the site and effect on flood risk. It will also inform flood prevention design. c. d. Obtain final topography of the site following the construction of the Lee Tunnel to determine accurate flood depths throughout the site. A project-wide study into the potential impacts of the tunnel excavation on the integrity of the flood defences is being undertaken. Any relevant assessment for the defences at the Abbey Mills PS site will be included in the Level 2 FRA.
e. Groundwater flood risk and any required flood risk prevention measures will be reassessed when the groundwater resources impact assessment is complete. This will be included in the Level 2 FRA. f. An emergency plan will be developed to support the Level 2 FRA and the CoCP.
g. Further detail of any site specific mitigation and flood prevention measures that may be required to manage both residual risk and direct flood risk based on the final site design. 15.6.3 It is not anticipated that further primary data collection (assuming outstanding data from the EA is supplied) or any modelling will be required at this site as part of future work and hence a Level 2 FRA will be sufficient to support the ES specific to the Abbey Mills PS site.
Page 209
Appendices
Appendices
List of figures
Page number
Figure A.1 Rocques map of 1746 .......................................................................... 212 Figure A.2 Chapman and Andres map of 1777...................................................... 212 Figure A.3 OS 1st edition 25 scale map of 1868-95 (not to scale) ........................ 213 Figure A.4 OS 2nd edition 25 scale map of 1896-8 (not to scale) ......................... 213 Figure A.5 OS 3rd edition 25 scale map of 19091920 (not to scale) ................... 214 Figure A.6 OS 1:10,000 scale map of 195496 (not to scale) ................................ 214 Figure A.7 View of Abbey Mills Pumping Station, station A .................................... 215 Figure A.8 Detailed view of the interior of Abbey Mills pumping Station, Station A 215 Figure A.9 View of base of northern chimney stack at Abbey Mills PS ................... 216 Figure A.10 View of C station, Abbey Mills Pumping Station .................................. 216 Figure A.11 View of the interior of C Station, Abbey Mills Pumping Station ........... 217 Figure A.12 View of 116130 Abbey Lane, looking east, standard lens ................. 217 Figure A.13 View of the Northern Outfall sewer bridge over the Channelsea river . 218 Figure D.1 Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences .......................................... 231 Figure D.2 Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane .............. 231 Figure D.3 Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway ............................ 232 Figure D.4 Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath ......................................... 232 Figure D.5 Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green ................................. 232 Figure D.6 Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the corner of Three Mills Green ............ 233 Figure D.7 Viewpoint 2.9: View southwest from the bridge .................................... 233 Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology ........................................................ 234 Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology ................................................................ 234 Figure E.3 Groundwater EA monitoring locations ................................................ 239 Figure E.4 Groundwater level hydrographs at Abbey Mills PS ............................... 240 Figure E.5 Groundwater level hydrograph Abbey Mills PS OBH ............................ 241 Figure E.6 Groundwater SPZ .............................................................................. 243 Figure E.7 Licensing areas (EA, 2006) ................................................................... 246
Page 210
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station List of tables
Appendices
Page number
Table A.1 Gazetteer of known heritage assets ....................................................... 219 Table B.1 Land quality site walkover survey ........................................................... 228 Table E.1 Groundwater - anticipated Thames Tunnel geological succession ........ 234 Table E.2 Groundwater - anticipated ground conditions ......................................... 235 Table E.3 Anticipated Thames Tunnel main hydrogeological units ........................ 237 Table E.4 Groundwater - depth and strata from on-site monitoring boreholes ....... 238 Table E.5 Groundwater - licensed abstractions ...................................................... 243 Table E.6 Groundwater quality results .................................................................... 244
Page 211
Appendix A: Historic environment
Appendix A Historic environment

A.1
Figures
Figure A.1 Rocques map of 1746
Figure A.2 Chapman and Andres map of 1777
Page 212
Figure A.3 OS 1st edition 25 scale map of 1868-95 (not to scale)
Figure A.4 OS 2nd edition 25 scale map of 1896-8 (not to scale)
Page 213
Figure A.5 OS 3rd edition 25 scale map of 19091920 (not to scale)
Figure A.6 OS 1:10,000 scale map of 195496 (not to scale)
Page 214
A.2
Photographs
Figure A.7 View of Abbey Mills Pumping Station, station A Note: looking north, standard lens
Figure A.8 Detailed view of the interior of Abbey Mills pumping Station, Station A Note: , showing elaborate castiron arcades and galleries, standard lens
Page 215
Figure A.9 View of base of northern chimney stack at Abbey Mills PS Note: looking northeast, standard lens
Figure A.10 View of C station, Abbey Mills Pumping Station Note: looking east, standard lens
Page 216
Figure A.11 View of the interior of C Station, Abbey Mills Pumping Station Note: showing dials and remaining fixtures and fittings relating to original use, looking northeast, standard lens
Figure A.12 View of 116130 Abbey Lane, looking east, standard lens
Page 217
Figure A.13 View of the Northern Outfall sewer bridge over the Channelsea river Note: looking east, standard lens
Page 218
Appendix B: Land quality
A.3
A.3.1
Gazetteer of known heritage assets

The location of known heritage assets is shown on the historic environment features map (Vol 27 Figure 7.5.1). Table A.1 Gazetteer of known heritage assets
HEA Ref no. 1
Description
Site code/ HER ref: ---
2 3 4 5
Lee Tunnel Thames Water, Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Geoarchaeological assessment of geotechnical data by MOLA in 2009. The assessment identified an area of low lying migrating channel deposits along the line of the Abbey Creek with high levels of natural gravel deposits in the north (in the region of the main pumping station buildings) and lower lying gravels to the south. Northern outfall sewer bridge over Channelsea River. Grade II listed. Engine House at West Ham Pumping Station. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register The site of a post-medieval bridge over the Prescott Channel. Recorded on the GLHER. Post-medieval bridge over the Channelsea River. In 1539 the western entrance to Stratford Langthorne Abbey was through the 'kilnhouse gate. Recorded on the GLHER. In 1539 the Bake House adjoined the Abbey Mill and the Kilnhouse. Recorded on the GLHER.
493495 204908 062812 062818 40079 061139/0 6 061139/1 2 40705
10
Guest hall to house leased in 1537 to Peter Vannes, Dean of Salisbury. A house known as 'le Gestenhall' adjoined it to the south. The house lay within the former precinct of Stratford Langthorne Abbey, alongside the road leading from the monastery to the abbey mills. Demolished in around the 1840s and last used as a home for Lascars. Recorded on the GLHER. Stratford Langthorne Abbey: Retaining Wall, Stratford Market, Stratford. An archaeological evaluation and excavation by NMS in 1994. Work involved the northern transept, northern aisle and part of the nave of the church of the Cistercian Abbey of Stratford Langthorne. Eighty inhumation burials were discovered within the church and graveyard. In 1539 Lady De Vere leased houses and gardens to the north and south of the west end of Stratford Langthorne Abbey church. These buildings are not recorded in any later documents relating to the site. Recorded on the GLHER. Documentary evidence reveals that the abbey of St Mary Stratford Langthorne was founded in 1135 by Montfichet as a Savignac house. Severe flooding in the late 14th century
HWRW94
061139/1 1
10229 40088 40086
Page 219
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station HEA Ref no. Description
Appendix B: Land quality Site code/ HER ref: 54305 31524 54160 54305
possibly resulted in the abandonment of the abbey. The majority of the buildings were demolished at the Dissolution and a late 18th century owner of the site auctioned and sold the surviving masonry. Part of the main gateway survived into the 19th century. The site is now mostly covered by railway lines and factories. In 1845 railway excavations revealed a brick and stone built drain running east-west. This drain was not discovered in the 1983 excavations (see below) and probably lies under or to the immediate north of Bakers Row. Excavation 1973-4 by P. Wilkinson for PEM located the line of the moat of the Cistercian abbey of Stratford Langthorne. The line of the stone boundary-wall, beside the moat, had four building phases. An early 13th-century house, perhaps the gate-keeper's house, was found inside the medieval wall line. An area measuring around 90m by 28m and mostly within the Cistercian abbey precincts was excavated in 1976. Part of the abbey moat and stone precinct wall, and the preserved footings of a 13th century stone structure were uncovered. The main buildings of the abbey are now occupied by the railway lines leading south from Stratford. A corner of the Abbey Church and part of the associated graveyard were excavated by MOLAS in 1983, in advance of Jubilee Line extension, on land to the west of the railway line. Medieval or post-Dissolution field boundaries were found through excavation at Hubbard Street by the PEM in 1989. Archaeological excavations were carried out by the OA at the Stratford Market Depot between 1991 and 1993 (site code HW-OP 91). Surviving standing walls, containing some green sandstone, were recorded. The walls were thought to form part of the Stratford Langthorne Abbey buildings due to the quality of the workmanship and their location close to the probable site of the abbey complex. At least nine inhumations were recorded in the area of the north east cemetery (see linked record MLO54160). A compacted chalk surface overlaid by rubble was not securely dated, but was thought to be possibly medieval. Excavation work by NMS was carried out on the route of the Jubilee Line extension in 1993. Chalk wall footings were identified in test pits, which may relate to a medieval building found in the Oxford Archaeological Unit excavations. An evaluation was carried out by the MOLAS in May 2007 and a community excavation took place in February 2008 to assess the level, nature and condition of structures on the site and to expose remains in advance of conservation for display. These excavations revealed: parts of the east end of a
Page 220
Appendix B: Land quality Site code/ HER ref:
11
12
13
14
medieval building belonging to the abbey which was previously exposed during excavations in 1973-4. The building lay close to the site of the abbey gatehouse and originally may have served as a guest house. By the Dissolution it had become `the tenement of the janitor of the great gate'. It was mainly built of flint and mortar with chalk foundations. A stone wall, possibly of medieval date, had been built against the south face of the building. Cess pits and one brick wall apparently represented the northern extension of the medieval building after the Dissolution. Three stone coffins were dug up near Grange Farm in the 1830s. By 1895 all were in the vault of a non-conformist chapel containing the bodies of three members of the Mabbs Family, one-time occupants of the farm. Recorded on the GLHER. Removal of the foundations of Stratford Langthorne Abbey on Thomas Holbrook's land in the late 18th century revealed a small onyx seal with the impression of a griffin (or pegasus??) carved into it. The seal was set into a silver fitting and an inscription incised into the silver. The inscription read "nuncio vobis gaudium et salvetum". The seal was shown to H W King of the Essex field club, but was retained by a Mrs Wakelin of Tottenham. The seal now apparently belongs to a Mr Baker of West Ham. The seal probably belonged to one of the monks of Stratford Langthorne Abbey. Recorded on the GLHER. 13th century arch, probably part of the cloisters of Stratford Langthorne Abbey, built into the wall of an outbuilding at the Adam and Eve public house. First mentioned in 1732, when the outbuilding was a dove house. Demolished between 1863 and 1888. Recorded on the GLHER. Gas Pipeline, north of Abbey Road Bridge, West Ham. An archaeological excavation by NMS in 1994. The threatened area, some 5m square, contained four burials and foundations overlying an earlier ditch. The foundations, part of the medieval Stratford Langthorne Abbey, and consisting of pillar bases within the nave and a chapel wall, belong to an as yet undated phase. In 1539 the Abbey slaughterhouse was near the barn of the lodge and probably in the abbey grange. Recorded on the GLHER. Olympic Development: BH9 Abbey Lane Pedestrian Bridge, Abbey Lane, E15. A standing structure recording by MoLAS and PCA. This bridge carried the Northern Outfall Sewer across Abbey Lane, and allowed pedestrian access along the Greenway footpath that runs along the top of the sewer. The sewer and its associated structures relate to Bazalgettes
061139/0 2 061161 061139/2 0
HWGP94
061139/0 8 OL04507
Page 221
15
16
London sewerage system, constructed by the Metropolitan Board of Works between 1859 and 1875, with later repairs and rebuilding. The bridge features yellow brick abutments with millstone grit copings, and appears to have been partially rebuilt in the mid-late 20th century; the cast iron riveted plates which contain the sewerage pipes were replaced in the 1950s. Olympic Development: BH23 Brick wall opposite 116118 Abbey Lane, Stratford, E15. A standing structure recording by MoLAS and PCA. The wall is classically styled, constructed from yellow stock bricks and blue engineering bricks, and relates to the former West Ham gasworks site. The wall was constructed during the 1890's, and formed part of the boundary wall which originally surrounded the entire gas works site. By the late 1990's most of the boundary walls eastern extent had been demolished by the construction of Rick Roberts Way, creating its current length. 116130 Abbey Lane. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
OL04807
17
18
19
A slab with brass studs in it for affixing inlays in the forms of a cross and two figures under canopies, was still visible in the kitchen of the Adam And Eve in 1863. Recorded on the GLHER. Bakers Row, Stratford. The remains of a 13th century, chalk and flint two-roomed house were found through excavation by the PEM between 1973 and 1974. The house was much altered throughout the medieval period with walls and doorways rebuilt. Parts of the east end of a medieval building belonging to Stratford Langthorne Abbey were uncovered during excavations by the Museum of London Archaeology Service in 2007. The building had previously been excavated in 1973-74 (see above). The building lay within the Scheduled area of the abbey and the excavations were carried out with a view to the consolidation and display of the remains. The flint walls and foundations of chalk were found to survive intact, but no external ground surfaces contemporary with the medieval building were identified. These were likely to have been removed in the 1970s excavations. Also 'Le pore infirmary' may indicate the site of an infirmary for the lay poor. Recorded on the GLHER. Beck lane (Stratford Market Depot), West Ham. Medieval pits were found through excavations by the OA at Stratford Market Depot between 1991 and 1992. A sparse amount of residual Neolithic flint was found. To the north of the later
204907 List entry number: 1080983 061139/1 9
061937 061139/1 3
HW-0P91
Page 222
20 21 22 23 24
abbey precinct, a late-Bronze Age to middle-to-late Iron Age and Roman site was discovered, including a horse burial and other animals close to two crouched human burials, suggesting a possible ritual or religious element. A dense area of features (pits, postholes, hut-gullies, ditches) cut into the clay subsoil covered an area of at least 0.6ha (1.5 acres) on the east bank of the Channelsea River, and would seem to indicate a multi-phase settlement. Residual finds also attest to earlier use of the site from the Mesolithic period onwards. Sparse residual middle and late Saxon pottery and 14th to 15th century pottery was recovered from the pit fills. The pits cut through earlier grave cuts. Brick-lined channels and floors associated with J Tucker's Abbey Print Works were found through excavation by the Oxford Archaeological Unit at Stratford Market Depot, between 1991 and 1992. The works were involved in printing calico up until the early 18th century, after which they were used for printing silk. The brick-lined channel may have been used either for washing the silk or, for conducting water to a washing tank. Traces of later 19th century and early 20th century factory buildings were also recorded. 19th-century gasholder. Grade II listed. 19th-century gasholder. Grade II listed. 19th-century gasholder. Grade II listed. 19th-century gasholder. Grade II listed. Unspecified works prior to 1912 revealed an iron spear head. It is thought to date from the early medieval period. Recorded on the GLHER. The site of the Three Mills dating to the post-medieval period. Recorded on the GLHER. 19th-century Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Recorded on the GLHER. B Station at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
204933 204934 204932 204935 61760
25
26 27
062193 062194 062195 90648 204901 List entry number: 1357994 493500 List entry number: 1392550
28
C Station with associated valve house at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
Page 223
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station HEA Ref no. 29 Description
Appendix B: Land quality Site code/ HER ref: 204902 List entry number: 1080980 HWAM95
Stores building at Abbey Mills to the west of the Pumping Station. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
30
31
Abbey Mills Pumping Station. An archaeological excavation by NMS in 1995. A linear feature corresponding to Low Level Sewer No. 2, linked to the 1868 pumping station (Station 'A'), was found. The post-mediaeval deposits were uniformly of 19th and 20th century date. A linear feature at the west end of the site corresponded to Low Level Sewer No. 2, linked to the 1868 pumping station (Station 'A'), and a ceramic pipe running roughly north-south was an overflow pipe, also of later 19th century date. The latter followed the course of an earlier open sewer, the Mill Meads Common Sewer between Stratford and the Channelsea River. A small quantity of residual 17th and 18th century ceramic material was recovered from the 19th century layers. This included Speckled Ware, Post-Mediaeval Redware and Bow Porcelain. Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Grade II* listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
32
The bases of a pair of former chimney stacks at Abbey Mills to the northwest and southeast of the pumping station. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register Offices (former Superintendents House) at Abbey Mills. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register
33
34
Gates and gatepiers at the entrance to Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Grade II listed. Gate lodge at Abbey Mills. Grade II listed. On the Heritage at Risk register Abbey Mills Pumping Station. A standing structure recording by MoLAS and PCA in 2007. Overhead transmission lines were first erected in the Lower Lee Valley in 1953, as part of a 132kV line transmitting electricity from Brimsdown power station to Brunswick Wharf. Two new overhead transmission lines were installed in 1971; a 275 kV line and a 132kV diversion for local electricity supply, which both ran from West Ham power station to Hackney substation. Some of the transmission towers may have been reused in 1971, as they share the same footprint as many erected in 1953, however these early towers have all be renewed. The Three Mills
35
63834 List entry number: 1190476 63837 List entry number: 1357995 204900 List entry number: 1080981 204903 List entry number: 1080982 OL04607 99080
Page 224
Conservation Area Character Appraisal highlighted the transmission towers as having a negative visual impact on their surroundings; their removal will be of significant visual benefit, and they do not merit any statutory protection. A series of site visits produced a comprehensive photographic record of the transmission towers, substations, associated equipment and their setting in the landscape. This was considered to be the most appropriate recording strategy, providing a full visual and written record. 36 37 The 18th- to 19th-century Clock Mill. Grade II listed building. A paved roadway extending from the west side of House Mill to the wall and gate on the east side of Clock Mill. Grade II listed. Also the site of offices opposite Clock Mill. Grade II listed. All dates to the 18th and 19th centuries. The 17th-century Tide Mill also known as the House Mill. Grade I listed. The Bridport Site, Three Mills, Three Mill Lane, Bromley-byBow, E3. An archaeological watching brief and evaluation by PCA in 2003. Alluvial deposits were recorded, one of which contained a single sherd of pottery dating to the 15th or early 16th century. Further alluvial layers from the 18th and 19th centuries were covered with made ground from the 19th 20th centuries. The site had been disturbed by the insertion of a sewer, the construction of the river wall and some fuel storage tanks. The site of a medieval water mill. Recorded on the GLHER. The chance find of Roman coin. Recorded on the GLHER. Olympic Development: BH11, Pedestrian viaduct of sewer. A standing structure recording by MOLAS and PCA in 2007. The pedestrian viaduct, which is part of the Northern Outfall Sewer and associated Greenway footpath, spanning Bridge Road, was photographically recorded. A grade II listed late-19th century gasholder. A grade II listed late-19th century gasholder. A grade II listed late-19th century gasholder. Bromley-by-Bow gasworks was owned by the Imperial Gas and Coke Co. Production ceased in 1972. There is a group of seven gasholders (originally 8) which were erected in 1872. The engineers were Clark and Kirkham. The gasworks were linked to the dock at Bow Creek and there were rail 204972 204973 204974
38 39
204971 TMI03
40 41 42
080995 080806 OL04707
43 44 45 46
204936 204937 204931 221584
Page 225
connections to the Great Eastern Railway and the London Tilbury and Southend Railway. Recorded on the GLHER. 47 48 The site of a post-medieval drain. Recorded on the GLHER. Olympic Development: Marshgate Lane Lock, Stratford, E15. A standing structure recording by MoLAS and PCA in 2007. Marshgate Lane Lock is located between the City Mill and Waterworks. The lock and surrounding banks date from a period of construction following the passing of the River Lee (Flood Relief) Act in 1930 and are constructed variously in plain concrete or in concrete over steel coffering. Grade II listed War Memorial. Also the statue of Sir Corbet Woodhall which is also grade II listed. The Twelve Trees Crescent Bridge which is grade II listed. Stratford Edge, 8092 High Street, Stratford, E15. An archaeological evaluation by MOLA in 2010. Original drift geology was not reached, although the silt of the former Waterworks River channel (backfilled in the 1930s) was found at c. 103.2m ATD in the west. Two probably 19th- or early 20th-century revetments were found at the former south bank of the river: a masonry-faced concrete and rubble revetment in the west and a timber revetment near the centre of the site. To south of the former channel, 18th- or 19th-century landfill was found as deep as c. 102.1m ATD in the east and c. 102.9m ATD in the west. The masonry-faced revetment was topped by mass concrete of uncertain function, possibly a foundation of late 19th- or early 20th-century date, and a concrete surface of early to mid 20th-century date was found just to the south at c. 104.9m ATD. Stone and brick floors or paved areas and a remnant brick wall probably dating to the latter half of the 19th century were found at c. 104.0m ATD in the east together with a concrete surface at c. 104.2m ATD. The remains in the east are industrial in character, probably related to the stone industry (there was a stone yard depicted on an 1867 OS map). Olympic Development: PDZ12, WP 1, Olympic Paralympic and Legacy Transformations Planning. An archaeological evaluation by MoLAS and PCA in 2007. Gravels of late Pleistocene - early Holocene date were recorded, overlain by prehistoric and historic alluvial sequences containing evidence for human activity. These alluvial deposits contained several phases of channel activity, including a sand bar which is associated with flint debitage, Neolithic pottery, animal remains - including horse - and a possible wooden stake structure. The sand bar deposits were truncated by a 060173 OL07407
49 50 51
493490 494812 461826 HSV10
52
OL08707
Page 226
channel containing a possible dislodged or disaggregated wooden structure comprising of the remnants of at least four roundwood timbers. The remains are presently undated but are not thought to predate the Iron Age. The active channel deposits were overlain by a sequence of organic clays and peats, which are likely to represent a channel marginal backwater environment that gradually silted up. Substantial gravel dumps were laid down to consolidate the ground above the alluvium prior to post-medieval construction which is characterised by a range of wells, cess pits, brick walls and drains. A number of walls recorded in section at the northern end of the site were Victorian and are likely to relate to the former Christ Church, known to have been located in this part of the zone. A follow up excavation revealed a sequence broadly suggesting a site that lay at the eastern margins of a prehistoric river course and exposed gravels of late Pleistocene to early Holocene date, overlain by a sequence of alluvial deposits that represented several phases of channel activity from the Neolithic to Iron Age. These alluvial deposits, interbedded sands, clays and gravels, accumulated on channel bars within shifting stream channels. A gravel horizon within the sand bars produced flint debitage and a number of un-abraded sherds of Neolithic pottery, an assemblage of animal remains, including horse, and a possible wooden stake structure. The sand bar deposits were truncated by a channel containing a possible dislodged or disaggregated wooden structure comprising the remnants of at least four roundwood timbers. The remains are undated as yet but are not thought to predate the Iron Age. A sequence of organic clays and peats overlay the active channel deposits; these are likely to represent a channel marginal backwater environment that gradually silted up. In the upper part of the alluvium an early medieval channel, consistent with the possible site of a mill works, was identified. Substantial gravel dumps were laid down to consolidate the ground above the alluvium prior to construction. This was characterised by a range of wells, cesspits, brick walls and drains of 17th-century date. A number of walls recorded in section at the northern end of the site were clearly Victorian and are likely to relate to the former Christ Church. 53 54 55 Lockkeepers Cottage on Blaker Road. Locally listed. The Still, 3 Mills Distillery. Locally listed. Gate lodge at Abbey Mills Pumping Station, statutorily designated grade II asset. On the Heritage at Risk register. List entry: 1080982
Page 227
Appendix B Land quality

B.1
Item Site Ref Site Name Date of walkover Size and topography of site and surroundings Neighbouring site use (in particular note any potentially contaminative activities or sensitive receptors) 25 May 2011 Record elevation in relation to surroundings, any hummocks, breaks of slope etc. North South East West Record extent, size, type and usage. Any boiler rooms, electrical switchgear? Record type and condition Any evidence of distress, unusual growth or invasive species such as Japanese Knotweed? Evidence of buried services? Types/ quantities? Tanks (above ground or below ground) Fuels or chemicals on site Containment systems (eg, bund, drainage interceptors). Record condition and standing liquids Refill points located inside bunds or on impermeable surfaces etc? Vehicle servicing or refuelling onsite Waste generated/stored onsite Record locations, tanks and inspection pits etc. Adequate storage and security? Fly tipping ? Abbey Mills Sewage Pumping Station Channelsea River and Prescott Channel Abbey Mills Sewage Pumping Station Channelsea River and Prescott Channel The work site comprises a largely unused plot of land that is free from significant structures within the southern and western portion of the Abbey Mills site. Unsurfaced None, although the boundary with the Channelsea River is heavily vegetated and marked by low sheet piling which has failed in a number of places. N/A None N/A
th
Site walkover report

Table B.1 Land quality site walkover survey
Details PNM3X Abbey Mills Sewage Pumping Station Site location (Address & Access)
Site buildings Surfacing
Vegetation
Services
N/A
N/A None
Worksite contains mounds of excavated material Site is located at the confluence of the Channelsea River and the Prescott Channel in Stratford.
Surface water
Record on-site or nearby standing water
Page 228

Is the site drained, if so to where? Evidence of flooding? Eg trial pits, borehole covers. Evidence of discoloured ground, seepage of liquids, strong odours?
Site drainage Evidence of previous site investigations Evidence of land contamination Summary of potential contamination sources
N/A None No obvious potential contaminative sources were identified during the survey. Some of the excavated material was noted to contain fragments of tarmac and ash, which can represent a source of heavy metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbon contamination. Extensive foreshore of the Channelsea River is exposed at low tide and is noted to be largely formed from mud (silt and clay). The Prescott Chanel has recently been upgraded and includes new locks and landscaping areas.
Any other comments
Eg access restrictions/ limitations
Page 229
Appendix C: Noise and vibration
Appendix C Noise and vibration

C.1.1 This section does not include noise and vibration monitoring as the baseline survey work has not yet been completed.
Page 230
Appendix D: Townscape and visual
Appendix D Townscape and visual

D.1
Winter photographs for selected viewpoints

Figure D.1 Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences
Note: along the northern end of Gay Road
Figure D.2 Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Abbey Lane
Note: close to The Greenway
Page 231
Figure D.3 Viewpoint 2.1: View south west from The Greenway
Note: over Channelsea River
Figure D.4 Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the footpath

Note: at the confluence of the Channelsea River and Prescott Channel
Figure D.5 Viewpoint 2.5: View west from Three Mills Green
Note: adjacent to the Prescott Channel
Page 232
Figure D.6 Viewpoint 2.6: View west from the corner of Three Mills Green
Note: Southwest corner
Figure D.7 Viewpoint 2.9: View southwest from the bridge

Note: at the confluence of the Prescott Channel and Three Mills Wall River
Page 233
Appendix E: Water resources groundwater
Appendix E Water resources - groundwater

E.1
E.1.1
Geology
A summary of the anticipated geological succession to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown below.
Table E.1 Groundwater - anticipated Thames Tunnel geological succession Period Series Holocene Quaternary Pleistocene Eocene Thames Group Formation Made ground Superficial Deposits Alluvium Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits London Clay Harwich Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottled Beds Laminated Beds Palaeogene Palaeocene Lambeth Lower Shelly Beds Mid-Lambeth Hiatus* Lower Mottled Beds Upnor No group Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk** Cretaceous Upper Cretaceous White Chalk Subgroup Lewes Nodular Chalk New Pit Chalk
Holywell Nodular Chalk * Not a Formation but an important depositional feature ** Subdivided into the Haven Brow, Cuckmere and Belle Tout members. E.1.2 Figure E.1 shows the superficial geology and Figure E.2 shows the solid geology beneath the site. Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology (see Volume 27 Figures document)
Page 234
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station E.1.3
The project Ground Investigation (GI) at the site involved drilling two boreholes both on land, these are SR3001 and SR3002 (TT, 2010) 48. The locations of boreholes around the site are shown in Vol 27 Figure E.2. The depths and thicknesses of geological layers encountered are summarised below. Table E.2 Groundwater - anticipated ground conditions Top of stratum Stratum Elevation (mATD) 105.0 101.0 100.0 96.5 91.4 90.5 88.5 87.5 85.0 82.5 81.0 79.5 74.0 61.5 19.6 Depth below ground level (m) 0 4.0 5.0 8.5 13.6 14.5 16.5 17.5 20.0 22.5 24.0 25.5 26.0 43.5 85.4 Thickness (m) 4.0 1.0 3.5 5.1 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 5.5 12.5 40.4 Not proven
Made ground Alluvium River Terrace Deposits London Clay (A2) Harwich Formation Lambeth Group: Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottled Beds Laminated Beds Lower Shelly Beds Lower Mottled Beds Upnor Formation (Gravel) Upnor Formation Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk Lewes Chalk E.1.4
At the site, the depth of the shaft will be at 40.25mATD (with base slab down to 34.25mATD). The base of the shaft and the tunnel itself will both be within Seaford Chalk Formation (Cuckmere Beds). Borehole logs from SR3001 and SR3002 indicate the made ground is predominantly clay though it contains angular gravel sized fragments of brick, clinker, ash, coal, concrete, glass, slate, cloth and ceramics. The Alluvium along the Thames Valley may be between less than 1m to 15m in thickness, comprising silty clay and clayey silt, with occasional scattered pebbles and granules. Within the Alluvium, local beds of fine to coarse-grained sand may be present, as laminar, lenticular or channel deposits, generally less than 1m thick but may reach up to 4m in thickness. The thickness of Alluvium at the site is 4.0m. Borehole logs indicate the made ground contains brick-like rubble. The River Terrace Deposits commonly has very fine-grained sand, silt and
E.1.5
E.1.6
E.1.7
Page 235
clayey silt 'Brickearth' deposits above (reclassified as Langley Silt). This is not explicitly identified in GI Borehole logs at this site, but may be present. E.1.8 River Terrace Deposits are extensive alluvial sand and gravel deposits laid down in a braided river system of approximately 5km width, in river terraces since the Anglian glaciation. Phases of down-cutting and intervening deposition during colder periods and subsequent meltwaters increased river flows and sediment load. Seven terraces are distinguishable in London in terms of their altitude, rather than distinguishing lithological features, ranging in thickness from around 2.5 to 28m. At the site the River Terrace Gravels are relatively thin compared to other parts of London. The deposit is about 3.5m thick and comprises yellowish brown fine to coarse sand and fine to coarse flint gravel. The London Clay Formation is a firm to stiff fissured thinly laminated greyish brown micaceous slightly sandy clay. The Lambeth Group comprises an alternating sequence of predominately clay and silt with sands. The formations that have been identified at the site are: Upper Shelly Beds (contains shell fragments within a flinty gravel or a sandy clay); Upper Mottled Beds (a bluish grey mottled with greenish brown clay; Laminated Beds (fine to coarse sand or clay with occasional black organic matter); Lower Shelly Beds (identified by the presence of shell fragments within a thinly laminated clay) and Lower Mottled Beds (at this location appears as a yellow brown calcrete and coarse sand). The Upnor Formation (UPN) is a variably bioturbated fine- to mediumgrained sand with glauconite, rounded flint pebbles and minor clay, with distinctive pebble beds and base and top (Upn(Gv)). The Thanet Sand Formation defines the first marine transgression following erosion of the Chalk, and is round unconformably on the approximately planar eroded Chalk surface. The Thanet Sand Formation comprises well sorted, uniform sand, with evidence of intense bioturbation removing bedding structures. With approximately 10 per cent fine-grained sand at the base, the lower part is typically clayey and silty, coarsening and greater sorting upward to the upper beds containing as much as 60 per cent fine-grained sand. The base of the Thanet Sands is a unit known as the 'Bullhead Bed' - a pale to medium-grey to brownish-grey, fine to fine-grained sand; and a conglomerate up to 0.5m thick comprising rounded to angular flint cobble and gravel sized clasts set in a clayey, fine to coarse-grained sand matrix with glauconite pellets forming the basal bed of the Thanet Sand Formation. The Bullhead Bed marks the Palaeocene/Cretaceous unconformity. The Seaford Chalk is the upper unit of the White Chalk, comprising of as firm to soft non-nodular Chalk with flint beds. Thin marl seams are found in the lower 8m and absent higher up. A hard ground marks the top of the Seaford Chalk.
E.1.9
E.1.10 E.1.11
E.1.12
E.1.13
E.1.14
Page 236
E.2
E.2.1
Hydrogeology
A summary of the anticipated hydrogeological properties of the different geologies to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown below. Table E.3 Anticipated Thames Tunnel main hydrogeological units Group Superficial Deposits Formation (Made Ground) Alluvium River Terrace Deposits Thames London Clay Harwich Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottled Beds Laminated Beds Lower Shelly Beds -----Mid Lambeth Hiatus---Lower Mottled Beds Upnor No Group Thanet Sand Undivided mainly Seaford Chalk White Chalk Sub group White Chalk Lewes Nodular Chalk New Pit Chalk Holywell Nodular Chalk Lower aquifer Hydrogeology Perched water Upper aquifer Aquiclude Aquitard / Aquifer
Lambeth
Aquitards/ Aquifers
E.2.2
According the GI boreholes the River Terrace Deposits (upper aquifer) are thin at about 3.5m thick at the site. Below the RTD is a 5.1m thick layer of London Clay Formation and a further 10.4m of Harwich Formation and Lambeth Group until the before the lower aquifer is reached. The Upnor Formation which is part of the Lambeth Group, the Thanet Sand Formation and Chalk are all in hydraulic connection at this location form the lower aquifer. Construction on site will take place through the upper aquifer and into the lower aquifer beneath. The lower aquifer comprises the Upnor Formation, Thanet Sands and the Chalk (principal aquifer) xv comprising of the Seaford Chalk (the shaft is not sufficiently deep to encounter the Lewes Nodular Chalk and New Pit
E.2.3
The terms Principal and Secondary Aquifers were previously known as Major and Minor Aquifers (EA, 2010)
xv
Page 237
Chalk formations beneath). The upper aquifer (River Terrace Deposits) is defined as a secondary A aquifer. E.2.4 The shaft and base slab will extend around 47 m into the lower aquifer, from approximately 81.0mATD at the top of the Upnor Formation (marking the top of the lower aquifer) to the base of the slab at 34.25mATD. The thickness of the slab is 6m. The type of White Chalk present in the face of tunnel excavation will be Seaford Chalk, and either Cuckmere Member and Belle Tout Member (TT, 2010). The Seaford Chalk forms a highly transmissive aquifer, with rapid preferential flow commonly established along fissures and enhanced fractures, often along or above flint and marl layers within the Chalk. Transmissivity and groundwater storage therefore vary considerably both laterally and vertically.
E.2.5
E.3
E.3.1
Groundwater levels
The monitoring of groundwater levels is being undertaken by the project at GI boreholes. In addition, the EA has a network of observation monitoring boreholes across London for which records are available dating back to1963 (in certain locations) and, at the time of writing, were provided up to September 2009 (Figure E.3). The geotechnical investigation boreholes drilled for the Thames Tunnel project have been used to obtain hydrogeological information. Standpipes were installed to monitor groundwater levels in different horizons by means of data loggers and/or manual dips. Groundwater monitoring records from the completion of each borehole to January 2010 were provided for the assessment. The monitoring boreholes record groundwater levels in the lower aquifer. Four monitoring horizons within two monitoring boreholes are used to record groundwater levels in the following discrete layers (see Table E.4): Upper Shelly Beds, Lower Mottled Beds, Seaford Chalk. There are no measurements of the water level in the upper aquifer at this site. The manual dip and logger data collected from these monitoring boreholes is shown in Figure E.4. Further GI monitoring boreholes are proposed (as shown in Vol 27 Figure E.1).
E.3.2
E.3.3
Table E.4 Groundwater - depth and strata from on-site monitoring boreholes Borehole SR3001 SR3001 SR3002 SR3002 Response zone depths mATD 89.305 (tip) 41.105 (tip) 78.511 (tip) 30.511 (tip) Strata Upper Shelly Beds (Clay) Seaford Chalk Lower Mottled Beds (Sand) Seaford Chalk Monitoring Fortnightly Dips and Logger Fortnightly Dips Fortnightly Dips Fortnightly Dips
Page 238
The piezometric heads in the Upper Shelly Beds is at 98mATD and has not fluctuated seasonally and has remained at a consistent level, this reflects the completion of the SR3001 monitoring structure in a low permeability clay horizon within the Lambeth Group. The piezometric head is measured at two locations in the Seaford Chalk. SR3001 and SR3002 show similar levels, Moreover the piezometric head in the Lower Mottled Beds (LMB) in ST3002 is the same as the Chalk heads. This indicates that either the LMB are in hydraulic continuity with the lower aquifer or that there is a construction problem with the piezometer installation. The heads lie in the range of 81.09 to 82.97mATD during the monitoring period from April 2009 to Jan 2011. The head in the lower aquifer during the monitoring period is rising at the rate of approximately one metre per year. There is no seasonal fluctuation of piezometric head. There are four EA monitoring boreholes in the vicinity of the site. The closest are TQ38/103 that lies 290m to the southwest, TQ38/102 that lies 340m to the west. To the north are TQ38/97 at 350m and TQ38/66c at 680m. The only currently monitored EA observation borehole is TQ38/466 which lies 860m to the east of the shaft site. The borehole monitored water levels in the lower aquifer. During the monitoring period from 1972 to 2002 there has been a regional rise followed by decline to 2009. Individual holes exhibit other changes in levels as the balance and location of groundwater abstraction in this part of London has changed in the last few decades. The location of these boreholes is shown on Figure E.3. Figure E.3 Groundwater EA monitoring locations (see Volume 27 Figures document)
E.3.5
E.3.6
E.3.7
A groundwater level hydrograph from this observation borehole is shown in Figure E.5.
Page 239
Figure E.4 Groundwater level hydrographs at Abbey Mills PS

108 106 104 Made Ground 102 100 98 96 94 92 London Clay Alluvium and River Terrace Deposits
Geology at the Shaft Site
Groundwater Level (mATD)
90 88 86 84 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 Seaford Chalk 60 Thanet Sands Lambeth Group (Upnor) Lambeth Group
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
SR3001 USB-CL(Dip)
SR3001 USB-CL(Logger)
SR3001 SCK-A2(Dip)
SR3002 LMB-SD(Dip)
SR3002 SCK-A3(Dip)
TQ38/66C
TQ38/97
TQ38/103
TQ38/466
Page 240
2010
Figure E.5 Groundwater level hydrograph Abbey Mills PS OBH

108 106 104 Made Ground 102 100 98 96 94 92 London Clay Alluvium and River Terrace Deposits Geology at the Shaft Site
Groundwater Level (mATD)
90 88 86 84 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 Seaford Chalk 60 Thanet Sand Lambeth Group (Upnor) Lambeth Group
May-2009
May-2010
Nov-2008
Mar-2009
Nov-2009
Mar-2010
Sep-2009
Sep-2010
Nov-2010
Jan-2009
Jul-2009
Jan-2010
Jul-2010
SR3001 USB-CL(Dip) SR3002 LMB-SD(Dip) TQ38/97
SR3001 USB-CL(Logger) SR3002 SCK-A3(Dip) TQ38/103
SR3001 SCK-A2(Dip) TQ38/66C TQ38/466
Page 241
Jan-2011
The regional groundwater levels produced by the EA for the London Basin, and the local observations are effectively the same. The expected groundwater level at the site, based on EA contours (Jan 2009), would be around 82mATD; the same level as that observed in the onside monitoring boreholes. The Chalk piezometric levels do not show any annual or seasonal fluctuations. The changes in levels are assumed to be in response to abstractions at that time.
E.3.9
E.4
E.4.1
Groundwater abstractions and protected rights

Groundwater abstractions within a radius of influence of up to 2km around the site have been identified. Their precise locations are not presented due to data restriction on licence abstractions held by the EA. Licensed Abstractions the site is located within the catchment area of a licensed groundwater abstraction number 29/38/09/0149 held by Mr Anjuman-e-Iscahul-Muslimeen of UK. The licence holder has two abstraction points that lie 0.29 and 0.49km to the east of the site. The licensee is permitted to abstract a maximum of 107,000m3/annum and 1,963.6m3/d from the Chalk. There are no other abstraction points within 1km of the shaft site. Between one and two kilometres from the site there are 7 locations with abstraction licenses. Further details are given below.
E.4.2
Page 242
Table E.5 Groundwater - licensed abstractions Licence no. 29/38/09/0149 Distance (km) 0.29 & 0.49 1.16 Daily (m3) 1964 Annual (m3) 107000 Purpose Licence holder
Industrial, Anjulman-eCommercial & IscahulPublic Service Muslimeen of UK Industrial, Hanson Quarry Commercial & Products Europe Public Service Ltd Industrial, Aggregate Commercial & Industries UK Ltd Public Service Water Supply Water Supply Thames Water Utilities Ltd Thames Water Utilities Ltd
TH/38/09/009
n/a
n/a
29/38/09/0177 29/38/09/0113 29/38/09/0201 29/38/09/0162
1.18 1.54 1.76 & 1.94 1.85
489 4500 8000 146
30000 1642500 2920000 30000
Lee Valley Environmental Regional Park Authority Industrial, Kedassia Poultry Commercial & Ltd Public Service Water Supply Thames Water Utilities Ltd
29/38/09/0187 08/37/54/0062
1.86 1.94
190 20570
30000 6570000
E.4.3 E.4.4
Unlicensed Abstractions there are no unlicensed groundwater abstractions within a 1 km radius of the site. Ground Source Heat there are no other GSHP schemes, either proposed or under investigation locally.
E.5
E.5.1 E.5.2
Groundwater Source Protection Zones

The EA defines Source Protection Zones (SPZ) around all major public water supply abstractions sources and large licensed private abstractions. The nearest SPZ to the site is 1.5km away to the northwest as shown below. Figure E.6 Groundwater SPZ (see Volume 27 Figures document)
E.5.3
This source is in the opposite direction to the direction of groundwater flow expected beneath the site (see Section 5.12).
Page 243
E.6
E.6.1
Other designations
There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site.
E.7
E.7.1
Groundwater quality and land quality assessment

The EA monitors groundwater quality at a number of points across London. The nearest EA monitoring is PGWU1827 at Mile End Park in Tower Hamlets. The distance of this location from the site (approximately 2.3km) makes it difficult to extrapolate the quality observed at the EA monitoring location. The locations of these monitoring points are shown on Vol 27 Figure E.3 As part of the GI, water quality testing was undertaken on water samples taken from boreholes SR3001 and SR3002. The results from these boreholes are shown below. Table E.6 Groundwater quality results Parameter Units Maximum Concentration SR3001 Arsenic Diss Boron Diss Cadmium Chromium Copper Mercury Nickel Lead Selenium Zinc Free Cyanice Ammonical Nitrogen as N Nitrate as N Sulphate Benzo(a)pyrene (Aqueous) Benzene g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l g/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l ug/l ug/l 5.07 139 0.239 6.40 **9.76 <0.01 6.46 3.81 2.50 **6870 <0.05 1.27 0.282 84.2 <0.009 **<10 SR3002 1.92 98.9 < 0.22 6.92 **5.01 <0.01 5.65 0.553 1.74 28.9 <0.05 1.44 2.47 86.4 **0.0122 **<10 0.01 1 0.1* 30 10 5 0.05 20 Standard DWS 10 1000 5.0 50 5 0.3 30 25 2.5 EQS
E.7.2
PAH 16 Total ug/l 0.1 **0.132 (Aqueous) Note ** Above water quality standard
Page 244
Table E.6 shows there were exceedences for copper and zinc of the relevant standards for water in groundwater sampling points in close proximity to the site. The exceedences for benzene is as a result of a high detection limit, while the PAH exceedence is marginal. Further monitoring of groundwater quality is being undertaken as part of the Thames Tunnel project monitoring programme. Further information will be presented in the ES.
E.7.4
E.8
E.8.1
Groundwater status
In 2009 the baseline results from the river basin management plan showed the status of the Greenwich Tertiaries as poor current quantitative and chemical quality with an upward chemical trend. The predicted quantitative and chemical quality was poor for 2015 due to being disproportionately expensive or technically infeasible. In the April 2011 update (EA website 11th May 2011) the results of further investigation referred to a point or diffuse source of pollution and confirmed good status.
E.8.2
Page 245
Figure E.7 Licensing areas (EA, 2006)
Page 246
E.9
E.9.1
Assessment of effects technical information specific to topics

Dewatering assessment to be completed for ES
Page 247
Glossary
Glossary
Term A-weighted sound Description A-weighted decibels, abbreviated dBA, or dBa, or dB(a), are an expression of the relative loudness of sounds in air as perceived by the human ear. Ground elevation is measured relative to the mean sea level at Newlyn in Cornwall, referred to as Ordnance Datum (OD), such that heights are reported in metres above or below OD. Removal of water from a source of supply (surface or groundwater). Areas where the local authority determines the national air quality objectives are not likely to be achieved by the relevant deadlines. People, property or designated sites for nature conservation that may be at risk from exposure to air pollutants that could potentially arise as a result of the proposed development/project. Sediment laid down by a river. Can range from sands and gravels deposited by fast flowing water and clays that settle out of suspension during overbank flooding. Other deposits found on a valley floor are usually included in the term alluvium (eg, peat). The average (mean) of the hourly pollutant concentrations measured or predicted for a one year period. Originating as a result of human activities. A hydrogeological unit which, that allows groundwater movement at negligible rates, even though porous and capable of storing water. Groundwater movement insufficient to allow appreciable supply to a borehole or spring. Aquicludes tend to act as an impermeable barrier. A permeable geological stratum or formation that is capable of both storing and transmitting water in significant amounts.
Above Ordinance Datum abstraction Air Quality Management Area air quality sensitive receptors
alluvium
Annual Mean Concentration anthropogenic aquiclude
aquifer
Archaeological Priority Areas of archaeological priority, significance, potential or Area/Zone other title, often designated by the local authority. background concentration Basal Sands base case The contribution to the total measured or predicted concentration of a pollutant that does not originate directly from local sources of emissions. The Upnor Beds (the lower unit of the Lambeth Group) and the Thanet Sands. The base case for the assessment is a future case, without the project, in a particular assessment year.
Page 248
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term baseflow baseline benthic invertebrates Bentonite Description
Glossary
The component of river flow derived from groundwater sources rather than surface run-off. The existing conditions against which the likely significant effects due to a proposed development are assessed. Invertebrates which are found within or on the river bed. An absorbent aluminium phyllosilicate, in general, impure clay consisting mostly of montmorillonite. Mixed with water, it forms a slurry commonly used as drilling fluid and ground support in tunnelling. A hole drilled into the ground for geological investigation or for the exploitation of geological deposits or groundwater. An abstraction borehole is a well sunk into an aquifer from which water will be pumped. Wind-blown dust deposited under extremely cold, dry post glacial conditions suitable for making bricks. Produced by the BSI Group in order to set up standards of quality for goods and services. 2,000600 BC. Recording of historic buildings (by a competent archaeological organisation) is undertaken to document buildings, or parts of buildings, which may be lost as a result of demolition, alteration or neglect, amongst other reasons. Four levels of recording are defined by Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (RCHME) and English Heritage. Level 1 (basic visual record); Level 2 (descriptive record), Level 3 (analytical record), and Level 4 (comprehensive analytical record). Also called a bund wall, bunding is a separated area within a structure designed to prevent inundation or breaches of various types. An area of stone, concrete or timber laid on the river / sea bed, that is exposed at low tide, allowing vessels to rest safely and securely in place. The area from which surface water and/or groundwater will collect and contribute to the flow of a specific river, abstraction or other specific discharge boundary. Can be prefixed by surface water or groundwater to indicate the specific nature of the catchment.
borehole
brickearth British Standard Bronze Age Building recording
bunding
campshed
catchment
Page 249
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS) Description
Glossary
The Environment Agencys strategy for water resources management in England and Wales through licensing water abstraction. CAMS is used to inform the public on water resources and licensing practice; provide a consistent approach to local water resources management; and help to balance the needs of water-users and the environment. A curve formed by a perfectly flexible, uniformly dense, and inextensible cable suspended from its endpoints. Whales, dolphins and porpoises. A soft white limestone (calcium carbonate) formed from the skeletal remains of sea creatures. Method for evaluating invertebrate communities based on species rarity, diversity and abundance. A temporary or permanent enclosure built across a body of water to allow the enclosed area to be pumped out creating a dry work environment. A sewer conveying waste water of domestic or industrial origin and rain water. A structure, or series of structures, designed to allow spillage of excess waste water from a combined sewer under high rainfall conditions. Flows may discharge by gravity or by pumping. A simplified representation or qualified description of the behaviour of the hydrogeological system. A quantitative conceptual model includes preliminary calculations and flow and mass balances. Conservation areas defined by Local Planning Authorities according to the provisions of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The area of site that would be used during the construction phase. The statutory plan which sets out a boroughs planning policies in relation to the management of development and land use. Supersedes the Unitary Development Plan in Boroughs where it has been adopted. A mobile crane, usually with caterpillar tracks. The flow from the existing CSO is diverted to the location of the drop shaft. The drop shaft location requires suitable access for construction and maintenance.
catenary Cetaceans Chalk Community Conservation Index. (CCI) cofferdam
combined sewer combined sewer overflow (CSO)
conceptual model
Conservation area
construction site Core Strategy
crawler crane CSO connection culvert
Page 250
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term CSO connection tunnel Description
Glossary
The flow from the drop shaft is transferred to the Thames Tunnel through a connection tunnel. These vary in diameter from 2.2m to 5.0m Long connection tunnels can be up to 4,615m in length. The shaft connects the flow down to the Thames Tunnel. The shaft sizes depend on the amount of flow to be intercepted and the de-aeration requirements and the depth depends on the location of the Thames Tunnel. The size ranges from 6m to 25m and depth from 25 to 75m. Site where the flows from an existing CSO would be redirected to the main Thames Tunnel. An area of land or structures around a dwelling or other structure. Excavated material to be re-used within the development as fill or removed off-site. the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified time period T. An area within the shaft and/or associated pipe work, where air is removed from liquids. Logarithmic ratio used to relate sound pressure level to a standard reference level. Influencing or determining elements or factors. In London these refer to the borough Unitary Development Plans. A system used to locally lower groundwater levels around the worksite to provide stable working conditions when excavating. A diaphragm wall is a reinforced concrete retaining wall that is constructed in-situ. A deep trench is excavated and supported with bentonite slurry, and then reinforcing steel is inserted into the trench. Concrete is poured into the trench and only after this does excavation in front of the retained earth commence. The release of substances (eg, water, sewage, etc.) into surface waters, ground or sewer. A lowering of the water level in a borehole or aquifer, usually in response to abstraction. Legal standards set in Europe in the Drinking Water Directive 1998 together with UK national standards to maintain wholesomeness of potable water.
CSO drop shaft
CSO interception site curtilage cut dB LAeq,T
de-aeration chamber decibel (dB) determinands Development Plan dewatering wells
diaphragm wall
discharge drawdown Drinking Water Standards
Page 251
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term early medieval effect effluent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Description
Glossary
AD 410 1066. Also referred to as the Saxon period. The result of an impact on a particular resource or receptor. The treated wastewater discharged from the Sewage Treatment Works. An assessment of the likely significant effects that a proposed project may have on the environment, considering natural, social and economic aspects, prepared in accordance with the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The concentration of chemical pollutants assessed to have detrimental effects on water quality in terms of the health of aquatic plants and animals. EQS are established in the WFD (Annex V) through the testing of the toxicity of the substance on aquatic biology. A document to be prepared following an EIA which provides a systematic and objective account of the EIAs findings, prepared in accordance with the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. A limited programme of nonintrusive and/or intrusive fieldwork which determines the presence or absence of archaeological features, structures, deposits, artefacts or ecofacts within a specified area. A programme of controlled, intrusive fieldwork with defined research objectives which examines, records and interprets archaeological remains, retrieves artefacts, ecofacts and other remains within a specified area. The records made and objects gathered are studied and the results published in detail appropriate to the project design. A structural planar fracture or discontinuity within lithological strata due to strain or compression, in which significant displacement is observable. Factors that will determine the severity of an odour as defined by the Environment Agency; Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness, Receptor. Material required to raise existing ground levels. This can utilise cut material generated within the site, or necessitate the importation of material. The location at which an item was found. A sewer conveying waste water of domestic and/or industrial origin, but little or no rain water. A breakage in a rock mass. Present at any scale, but is generally used for large scale discontinuities.
Environmental Quality Standards (EQS)
Environmental Statement (ES)
Evaluation (archaeological)
Excavation (archaeological)
fault
FIDOR
fill
findspot foul sewer fracture
Page 252
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term GARDIT Description
Glossary
General Aquifer Research Development and Investigation Team (Thames Water, the Environment Agency and London Underground with the support of organisations such as the Corporation of London, Envirologic, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) and BT). The gradual increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere, believed to be due to the greenhouse effect, caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants. Benchmark national quality standard for parks and green spaces in the United Kingdom. Water contained in underground strata, predominantly in aquifers. Inundation of land or basements as groundwater levels rise and the groundwater discharges to the surface or underground structures. The rise in groundwater level that occurs after cessation of abstraction. Groundwater Body: distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer or aquifers. A dark brown slightly glauconitic clay with localised fine sand. Temporary roads provided within the contractors site area to allow the transportation of material around the site. A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. Heritage assets are the valued components of the Historic environment. They include designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing). Archaeological and built heritage database held and maintained by the County authority. Previously known as the Sites and Monuments Record. Designated residential area with streets designed to operate primarily as a space for social use. Generally hard nodular chalks with thin flaser marls. In parts, there are significant proportions of shell debris. Inter-bedded coloured marl and chalk succession characteristic of the Plenus Marls Member are found at its base. Above this, the Melbourn Rock Member is distinguishable by its lack of shell material.
global warming
Green Flag groundwater groundwater flooding
groundwater rebound GWB Harwich Formation haul roads heritage asset
Historic environment Record (HER) Homezone Holywell Nodular Chalk
Page 253
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term hydraulic conductivity Description
Glossary
A constant of proportionality in Darcys law that allows the calculation of the rate of groundwater flow from the hydraulic gradient. For a unit hydraulic gradient, the higher the hydraulic conductivity the higher the rate of groundwater flow. In an aquifer this is the rate of change of groundwater level per unit distance in a given direction. Groundwater flows in the direction of the decline in hydraulic gradient. A graph showing a plot of water flow or level with time, applicable to both surface water and groundwater. A physical or measurable change to the environment attributable to the project. This structure is required to be built around the existing overflow either on land or at the discharge point in the foreshore. The chamber has a weir and valves to divert the flow in to the Thames Tunnel system. It is likely to be a reinforced concrete cut and cover box structure. In some other cases the structure is required to be built adjacent to an inlet or sump of a pump station from which the flow is diverted 600 BC AD 43. A caisson is a retaining, water-tight structure open to the air. A jack is used to push the caisson into the ground, with the internal area then excavated. Equivalent continuous sound level is a notional steady sound level which would cause the same A-weighted sound energy to be received as that due to the actual and possibly fluctuating sound over a period of time (T). It can also be used to relate periods of exposure and noise level. Thus, for example, a halving or doubling of the period of exposure is equivalent in sound energy to a decrease or increase of 3dB(A) in the sound level for the original period. The maximum sound level measured on the A- weighted scale occurring during an event. Complex sequence of highly variable inter-bedded sediments which include clay, sands, pebble beds and Shelly beds. Fine to coarse sand or clay with occasional black organic matter. AD 1066 1500. The Lee Tunnel comprises a 7.2m diameter storage and transfer tunnel from Abbey Mills Pumping Station to Beckton STW and the interception of the Abbey Mills CSO.
hydraulic gradient
hydrograph impact interception chamber
Iron Age jacked caission
LAeq(T)
LAmax Lambeth Group Laminated Beds later medieval Lee Tunnel
Page 254
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term Lewes Nodular Chalk Description
Glossary
Hard to very hard nodular chalks and hardgrounds with interbedded soft to medium hard chalks and marls. More abundant softer chalks towards the top. Formal permit allowing the holder to engage in an activity (in the context of this report, usually abstraction), subject to conditions specified in the licence itself and the legislation under which it was issued. A structure of architectural and/or historical interest. These are included on the Secretary of State's list, which affords statutory protection. These are subdivided in to Grades I, II* and II (in descending importance). The general characteristics of a rock or sedimentary formation. Local areas where the local authority determines the national air quality objectives are not likely to be achieved by the relevant deadlines. Collection of planning documents prepared by the Local Planning Authority outlining the management of development and land use in a Borough. A structure of local architectural and/or historical interest. These are structures that are not included in the Secretary of States Listing but are considered by the local authority to have architectural and/or historical merit. An area specific plan to interpret and apply the strategy set out in the Structure Plan, to provide a detailed basis for the control of development, to provide a basis for co-ordinating new development and to bring planning issues before the public. Fine sandy silty clay to silty clay. The LTI comprise five separate improvement projects at Thames Waters five Tideway sewage treatment works (STWs): Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Riverside and Long Reach. The LTT comprises two separate projects: the Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tunnel. Consisting of the Upnor Beds (the lowest unit of the Lambeth Group), the Thanet Sands and the Chalk. Artificial deposit. An archaeologist would differentiate between modern made ground, containing identifiably modern inclusion such as concrete (but not brick or tile), and undated made ground, which may potentially contain deposits of archaeological interest.
licence
listed building
lithology Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) Local Development Framework (LDF) locally listed building
Local Plan
London Clay London Tideway Improvements (LTI)
London Tideway Tunnels (LTT) Lower aquifer made ground
Page 255
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term main tunnel drive shaft site main tunnel reception shaft site Mesolithic mitigation measures Description
Glossary
Site that would be used to insert and then drive the TBM. Site that would be used to remove the TBM from the Thames Tunnel at the end of the drive. 12,000 4,000 BC. Actions proposed to prevent or reduce adverse effects arising from the whole or specific elements of the development. 4,000 2,000 BC. Non-nodular chalk, massively bedded, with fairly regularly developed marl seams and sporadic flints. A product of combustion processes. Nitrogen dioxide is associated with adverse effects on human health. A report which briefly describes the main points discussed in the Environmental Statement in a clear manner without the use of technical jargon and phraseology. This report is a requirement of the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The Water Services Regulations Authority, a government body set up in 1989 to regulate the activities of the water companies in England and Wales. Odour panel sampling carried out in laboratory conditions. Related to past environments, ie, during the prehistoric and later periods. Such remains can be of archaeological interest, and often consist of organic remains such as pollen and plant macro fossils which can be used to reconstruct the past environment. 700,00012,000 BC. A Middle Bronze Age axe. Solid particles or liquid droplets suspended or carried in the air and includes the same matter after it has deposited onto a surface. For the purposes of this assessment the term includes all size fractions of suspended matter, such as dust, PM10 and PM2.5. A structure containing carbon which absorbs odour from air flowing out of the Tunnel, without the assistance of mechanical pumping. Preliminary Environmental Information Report is a document setting out initial environmental information. In accordance with the Planning Act 2008, it is a requirement that this is the subject of pre-application consultation.
Neolithic New Pit Chalk nitrogen dioxide (and oxides NO2 and NO) Non-Technical Summary (NTS)
Ofwat
olfactometry Palaeo-environmental
Palaeolithic palstave particulate matter (PM)
passive filter chamber
PEIR
Page 256
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term pelagic invertebrates perched water Description Invertebrates which are found in the water column.
Glossary
Is groundwater in an aquifer present above the regional water table, as a result of a (semi-)impermeable layer of rock or sediment above the main water table/aquifer, below the ground surface. The capacity of soil or porous rock to transmit water. A measure of the acidity or basicity of an aqueous solution. A borehole designed specifically to allow the measurement of groundwater level. The level or head to which groundwater would rise in a piezometer if it is free to seek equilibrium with the atmosphere. Written procedures put in place for dealing with spillages and pollution. Containing void spaces. Most sedimentary rocks are porous to some extent, and the term is commonly applied in a relative sense, generally restricted to rocks which have significant effective porosity. Refers to Option 3 Abbey Mills route, which runs from Action Storm Tanks in west London to Limehouse then turns northeast to Abbey Mills Pumping Station, where it connects with the Lee Tunnel. Refers to the preferred route and construction sites. Sites assessed as most suitable following review of suitability of each shortlisted site by taking in to account engineering,planning, environment, property and community considerations. Preservation by recording and advancement of understanding of asset significance. This is a standard archaeological mitigation strategy where heritage assets remains are fully excavated and recorded archaeologically and the results published. For remains of lesser significance, preservation by record might comprise an archaeological watching brief. Archaeological mitigation strategy where nationally important (whether designated or not) heritage assets are conserved in situ for future generations, typically through modifications to design proposals to avoid damage or destruction of such remains.
permeability pH piezometer piezometric surface
Pollution Incident Control Plan porous
preferred route
preferred scheme preferred site
preservation by record
preservation in situ
Page 257
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term Principal Aquifer Description
Glossary
A geological stratum that exhibits high inter-granular and/or fracture permeability. This strata has the ability to support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. Principal Aquifers equate in most cases to aquifers previously referred to as Major Aquifers. Term used to describe the supply of water provided by a water company. Putty chalk (clay characteristics) near the surface of the unit above firm to soft non-nodular chalk with flint (Upper Chalk undivided) above hard nodular chalk with flints (Lewes Chalk). An international treaty for the conservation and sustainable utilisation of wetlands. River Basin Management Plans these are the relevant plans that outline the state of water resources within a River Basin District relevant to the objectives of the WFD. The rarest and most threatened species are often listed in the Red Data Book of Insectsxvi, within which there are three categories. Taxa in danger of extinction are referred to as RDB 1 species; those considered to be vulnerable and likely to move into the endangered category are listed under RDB 2, whilst rare species occur on RDB 3. Section of river between two points. Extensive alluvial sand and gravel deposits laid down in a braided river system in river terraces since the Anglian glaciations. Where live data is used to manipulate control equipment in order to best manage the flow of storm water and sewage within the capacity of the system. People (both individually and communally) and the socioeconomic systems they support. Water that percolates downwards from the surface to replenish the water table. The red route is a network of roads designated by Transport for London that carry heavy volumes of traffic and are essential for the movement of traffic and public transport. These comprise mainly of major routes into and around London. Transport for London are responsible for enforcing the red routes which include clearways, parking and loading bays, bus lanes, yellow box junctions and banned turns.
Public Water Supply Putty Chalk
RAMSAR RBMP
RDB3
reach River Terrace Deposits real time control (RTC) receptors recharge Red route
xvi
Bratton, (1991) Red Data Book for Insects
Page 258
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term risk assessment Description
Glossary
Assessment of the risks associated with an activity or object and possible accidents involving a source or practice. This includes assessment of consequence. AD 43 410. Scheduled Ancient Monument. More commonly referred to as Scheduled Monument. Entry of brackish or salt water into an aquifer, from the sea or estuary. This may be natural or induced by excessive or uncontrolled groundwater abstraction. The zone in which the voids in a rock or soil are filled with water at a pressure greater than atmospheric pressure. An ancient monument or archaeological deposits designated by the Secretary of State as a Scheduled Ancient Monument and protected under the Ancient Monuments Act. The formal view of the determining authority on the range of topics and issues to be considered by the Environmental Impact Assessment, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The document prepared by the applicant setting out the proposed approach to the Environmental Impact Assessment, including the range of topics and issues to be addressed, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The formal view of the determining authority on the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment to be undertaken, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The upper unit of the White Chalk, comprising of as firm to soft non-nodular Chalk with flint beds. Thin marl seams are found towards its base and and absent higher up. A hard ground marks the top of the Seaford Chalk. Alternate piles in-filled with concrete to form a water-tight retaining wall. Either permeable strata capable of supporting local supplies or low permeability strata with localised features such as fissures. The term Secondary Aquifer replaces the previously used name of Minor Aquifer. There are two classes of Secondary Aquifer. Secondary A are capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale and Secondary B are lower permeability layers which may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.
Roman SAM saline intrusion
saturated zone Scheduled Monument
Scoping Opinion
Scoping Report
Screening Opinion
Seaford Chalk
secant piles Secondary Aquifers
Page 259
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term short listed sites SINC (Grade B) SINC (Grade L) SINC (Grade M) Site Description
Glossary
Sites idenitfied following an assessment of long list sites in accordance with the Site Selection Methodology. Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade II of Borough importance). Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade I of Local importance). Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade III of Metropolitan importance). For the purposes of the PEIR assessment, the site is deemed as the entire area located within the Limit of Land to be Acquired or Used. It should not be inferred that this entire site area will be physically separated (ie, hoarded or fenced) for the construction duration. An area given a statutory designation by English Nature or the Countryside Council for Wales because of its nature conservation value. Materials such as hard standing and vegetation including incidental topsoil (including potential contaminated soil). A record of sites of archaeological interest. An efficient method for constructing the tunnel lining with a layer of sprayed concrete. This is instead of using pre-cast concrete segments. Layers of rock, including unconsolidated materials such as sands and gravels. The study of stratified rocks, their nature, their occurrence, their relationship to each other and their classification. A colourless gas with a choking smell, the main product of the combustion of sulphur contained in fuels. Overarching term for recent generally unconsolidated or loosely consolidated deposits of sand, gravel, silt, clay, etc on top of bedrock. Synonymous with drift generally supersedes the term. This is a general term used to describe all water features such as rivers, streams, springs, ponds and lakes. Water that travels across the ground rather than seeping in to the soil.
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) site strip Sites and Monuments Record sprayed concrete lining strata stratigraphy sulphur dioxide (SO2) superficial deposits
surface water surface water runoff
Page 260
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term Thames Tunnel Description
Glossary
The Thames Tunnel comprises a full-length storage and transfer tunnel from Acton Storm Tanks to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works in East London and the interception of specific CSOs along the Thames Tideway with a diameter between 6.5m and 7.2m. Coarsening upward sequence of well sortedfine grained sand which has a higher clay / silt content towards the lower part of the sequence, and evidence of intense bioturbation removing bedding structures. The Thames Tunnel project. Length of river channel swept by water from a discharge point in one tidal cycle. In the case of the River Thames this is considered to 13km up and downstream of the discharge point. Tool developed on behalf of Thames Water to assess the effects of lapses in water quality caused by CSO discharges on Tideway fish populations. The formal assessment of traffic and transportation issues relating to the proposed development. The findings are usually presented in a report which accompanies the planning application. Partially or wholly remove. In archaeological terms remains may have been truncated by previous construction activity. A typical year relates to an actual year, eg, the corresponding meteorological dataset for that year used in the modelling which was 1979-80. The corresponding meteorological dataset is used as it would give a better indication of conditions rather than using a recent year of data where the meteorological data may not be consistent with a rainfall event leading to the tunnel emissions. An enclosed space below the ground surface where air is released to atmosphere, should the pressure within the Tunnel exceed a set value. The statutory plan which sets out a unitary authoritys planning policies. These are rocks which are generally unable to provide usable water supplies and are unlikely to have surface water and wetland ecosystems dependent upon them. Variably bioturbated fine- to medium-grained sand with glauconite, rounded flint pebbles and minor clay, with distinctive pebble beds and base and top.
Thanet Sands
The project tidal excursion
Tideway Fish Risk Model Transport Assessment (TA)
truncate typical year
underground pressure release chamber Unitary Development Plan (UDP) unproductive strata
Upnor Formation
Page 261
Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Term Upper aquifer Upper Mottled Beds Upper Shelly Beds Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive valve chamber Description
Glossary
Comprising the water bearing strata above the London Clay, namely the River Terrace Deposits and the Alluvium. A bluish grey mottled with greenish brown clay. Contains shell fragments within a flinty gravel or a sandy clay The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (1991) has the overall aim of protecting the environment from the adverse effects of urban waste water discharges. An underground structure on the sewer system containing valves which are used to isolate the flow between different parts of the sewer system. For example, flap valves prevent the flow from the river travelling back up the sewer or into the tunnel. A stack through which air is released. An EC Directive seeking to improve water quality in rivers and groundwater in an integrated way (2000). An archaeological watching brief is a formal programme of observation and investigation conducted during any operation carried out for nonarchaeological reasons. Level below which the ground is saturated with water. The water table elevation may vary with recharge and groundwater abstraction. The WEEE Directive aims to reduce the amount of electrical and electronic equipment going to landfill and to encourage everyone to reuse, recycle and recover it. Chalk with flints, with discrete marl seams, nodular chalk, sponge-rich and flint seams throughout. Flint typology and marl seam incidence is important for correlation. Comprises of Seaford Chalk, Lewes Nodular Chalk, New Pit Chalk and Holywell Nodular Chalk.
ventilation column Water Framework Directive (WFD) watching brief (archaeological) water table
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE) White Chalk subgroup
Page 262
References
References
1
Greater London Authority and London Councils (2006) Best Practice Guidance: The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition, November 2006
2
Defra, http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/backgroundmaps.html, Accessed May 2011)

3 4
LB Newham, Personal Communication with Mark Partridge, EHO, April 2011
Defra (2010), http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/documents/Measured-nitrogen-oxides-(NOx)and-or-nitrogen-dioxide-(NO2)-concentrations-do-not-appear-to-be-declining-in-linewith-national-forecastsv1.pdf, Accessed April 2011

5 6
Defra (2009) Local Air Quality Managemen t- Technical Guidance, LAQM.TG(09)
Greater London Authority and London Councils (2006) Best Practice Guidance: The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition, November 2006
7 8
Defra (2010) Draft National Policy Statement for Waste Water, November 2010
The Mayors Biodiversity Strategy Connecting with Nature (Great London Authority, July 2002)
9
Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey Methodology, 2010
10
IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006)
11
Scott Wilson, May 2008, Lee Tunnel and Beckton STW Extension Environmental Statement
12 13
http://www.iucnredlist.org/.
Department of Communities and Local Government. Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010), 1, 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Margary ID, Roman Roads in Britain. London (1967), 56, 243, 246 Victoria County History. A history of the county of Essex Vol. vi (1973), 57 Victoria County History. A history of the county of Essex Vol. vi (1973), 4350 Victoria County History. A history of the county of Essex Vol. vi (1973), 4350 Victoria County History. A history of the county of Essex Vol. vi (1973), 11423 Domesday, eds Williams and Martin (1992), 1017
Rippon S The Transformation of Coastal Wetlands. Oxford (2000), 15385; Thirsk J Rural England, An illustrative history of the landscape. Oxford (2000), 15066 Victoria County History. A history of the county of Essex Vol. vi (1973), 1123
21 22
Weinreb B and Hibbert C, The London encyclopaedia. London: Macmillan (1995), 2445
23
Three Mills Conservation Area: Character Appraisal and Management Proposals 2006 www.newham.gov.uk accessed May 2011
24
http://risk.english-heritage.org.uk/2010.aspx accessed May 2011
Page 263
References
25
Halliday S. The Great Stink of London: Sir Joseph Bazalgette and the Cleansing of the Victorian Metropolis. Stroud: Sutton Publishing Limited (2009), 68
26
Halliday S. The Great Stink of London: Sir Joseph Bazalgette and the Cleansing of the Victorian Metropolis. Stroud: Sutton Publishing Limited (2009), 82
27 28 29 30
http://list.english-heritage.org.uk accessed May 2011 http://list.english-heritage.org.uk accessed May 2011 http://list.english-heritage.org.uk accessed May 2011
Cherry B, OBrien C and Pevsner N. London. 5, East. Pevsner Architectural Guides: Buildings of England. London: Yale University Press (2005), 230
31 32 33
http://list.english-heritage.org.uk accessed May 2011 http://list.english-heritage.org.uk accessed May 2011
BS 5228:2009 (Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites)
34
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (2007), London Noise Maps (http://services.defra.gov.uk/wps/portal/noise
35
BS 4142 (1997): Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas
36
Source: 3 Mills Studios. http://www.3mills.com/#172/about-us-history.html; accessed on 16/06/11
37
LB Newham. http://www.newham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/2E349DCB-F3C8-4935A911-9AB6CE402443/0/FinalDisclosureLog2009.pdf ; accessed on 16/06/11

38
Source: http://www.newham.gov.uk/applications/eventsportal/default.aspx?StartDate=15+Jan +2011&SearchDays=0&TabName=Event&eventGuid=1948#1; accessed on 23/06/11

39
EA(2006) Groundwater Quality Review: London Basin Ref. No. GWQR22 [6441R6] November 2006.
40
Planning Policy Statement 25 Development and Flood Risk. Communities and Local Government (Mar 2010
41
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Practice Guide. Communities and Local Government (Dec 2009))
42
Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. Environment Agency. Accessed Feb 2011 http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/research/library/consultations/106100.aspx
43
The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London Consolidated with Alterations since 2004. Greater London Authority (Feb 2008). The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London Consultation Draft Replacement Plan. (Oct 2009); and the London Plan (2011).
44
LB of Newham Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report. Capita Symonds Ltd (May 2010)).
45
Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. Environment Agency
Page 264
References
46
Thames Region Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report. Environment Agency (Jan 2007))
47
The Mayors Draft Water Strategy. Mayor of London. Greater London Authority (Aug 2009))
48
TT (2010) Ground Investigation LTT-Thames Tunnel-NESR to Beckton Phase 1 Volume 2 (Project no: F1541).
Page 265
Thames Tunn
110-RG-ENV-PNM3X-000035
Phase two consultation (Autumn 2011)
For further information see our website: www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk or call us on 0800 0721 086
Thames Tunn

PEIR Main Report Vol27 Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PEIR Main Report Vol27 Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station site assessment

Phase two consultation documentation

Project information papers

Site information papers

Thames Tunnel Preliminary environmental information report

Part B: Preliminary site information

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 26 Volume 27 Volume 28

Preliminary environmental information report

Proposed development.................................................................................... 4 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

Preliminary environmental information report

Historic environment ..................................................................................... 45

Land quality .................................................................................................... 70

Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 86

Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 102

Preliminary environmental information report

Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 115

Transport ...................................................................................................... 143

Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 172

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

WWT ZTV ZVI

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Section 2: Site context

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 2.2.3

Section 2: Site context

2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 3.1.5 3.1.6

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station Tunnel 3.2.7

Section 3: Proposed development

Access and maintenance works

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Code of construction practise

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station 3.3.9

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Completion of works and site restoration

Access and movement

Reinstatement and commissioning

Construction programme and working hours

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 27: Abbey Mills Pumping Station f.

Section 3: Proposed development