PEIR Main Report Vol14 Falcon Brook Pumping Station

Preliminary environmental information report
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station site assessment

CSO interception 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 (this document) 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 Beckton Sewage Treatment Works site
Page ii
Thames Tunnel Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 ........................................ 12 Base case .............................................................................................. 12 Introduction ............................................................................................ 14 Proposed development .......................................................................... 14 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 17 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 20 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 23 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 24 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 26 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 28 Introduction ............................................................................................ 29 Proposed development .......................................................................... 29 Assessment Methodology...................................................................... 30 Baseline Conditions ............................................................................... 30 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 33 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 33 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 35 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 37
Proposed development.................................................................................... 4 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Air quality and odour ..................................................................................... 14 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9
Ecology - aquatic ........................................................................................... 29 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8
Page iii
5.9 6 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.5 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
Assessment completion ......................................................................... 39 Introduction ............................................................................................ 40 Proposed development .......................................................................... 40 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 43 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 45 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 46 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 46 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 48 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 49 Introduction ............................................................................................ 50 Proposed development .......................................................................... 50 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 51 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 52 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 63 Operational effects ................................................................................ 68 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 68 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 70 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 72 Introduction ............................................................................................ 73 Proposed development .......................................................................... 73 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 73 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 74 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 81 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 84 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 86 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 87 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 88 Introduction ............................................................................................ 89 Proposed development .......................................................................... 89 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 91 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 92 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 95 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 103
Ecology - terrestrial ....................................................................................... 40
Historic environment ..................................................................................... 50
Land quality .................................................................................................... 73
Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 89
Page iv
9.7 9.8 9.9 10 10.1 10.2 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
Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 106 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 108 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 110 Introduction .......................................................................................... 111 Proposed development ........................................................................ 111 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 112 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 113 Construction assessment .................................................................... 121 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 131 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 131 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 132 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 134 Introduction .......................................................................................... 135 Proposed development ........................................................................ 135 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 136 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 137 Construction assessment .................................................................... 149 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 158 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 164 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 165 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 171 Introduction .......................................................................................... 172 Proposed development ........................................................................ 172 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 177 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 178 Construction assessment .................................................................... 183 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 190 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 194 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 197 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 200 Introduction .......................................................................................... 201 Proposed development ........................................................................ 201 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 202
Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 111
Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 135
Transport ...................................................................................................... 172
Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 201
Page v
13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 14 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 15 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6
Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 203 Construction assessment .................................................................... 205 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 207 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 208 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 210 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 211 Introduction .......................................................................................... 212 Proposed development ........................................................................ 212 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 214 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 214 Construction assessment .................................................................... 217 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 219 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 223 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 224 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 225 Introduction .......................................................................................... 226 Policy considerations ........................................................................... 227 Regulatory position .............................................................................. 227 Assessment of flood risk ...................................................................... 229 Flood risk - design and mitigation ........................................................ 235 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 237
Water resources surface water ................................................................ 212
Water resources flood risk ....................................................................... 226
Appendices ........................................................................................................... 239 Appendix A Historic environment ....................................................................... 241 Appendix B Land quality...................................................................................... 250 Appendix C Noise and vibration ......................................................................... 252 Appendix D Townscape and visual ..................................................................... 253 Appendix E Water resources groundwater ..................................................... 258 Glossary ................................................................................................................ 269 References ............................................................................................................ 284
Page vi
List of figures
Page number
Vol 14 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan ........................................................................ 2 Vol 14 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental designations ....................................................... 2 Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1 Demolition and site clearance plan............................................. 4 Vol 14 Figure 3.1.2 Construction - site setup, shaft construction & tunnelling ........... 4 Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3 Construction - construction of other structures ........................... 4 Vol 14 Figure 3.1.4 Permanent works layout ............................................................. 4 Vol 14 Figure 4.4.1 Air Quality monitoring locations ................................................ 18 Vol 14 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 Habitat Survey ............................. 43 Vol 14 Figure 7.4.1 Historic features map................................................................ 53 Vol 14 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses....................................... 74 Vol 14 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality - proposed borehole locations .............................. 79 Vol 14 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality - environmental records and waste sites .............. 80 Vol 14 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration closest residential receptors ..................... 93 Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context ....................................................... 113 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual pattern and scale of development .... 138 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation ....... 138 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape - open space distribution and type .................... 139 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual - transport network ........................... 140 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape character areas ................................................. 141 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations ........................ 145 Vol 14 Figure 12.2.1 Transport construction traffic routes .................................. 174 Vol 14 Figure 12.2.2 Transport - construction lorry profile ..................................... 175 Vol 14 Figure 12.4.1 Transport site plan ............................................................. 178 Vol 14 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk flood tidal zones ................................................ 229
Page vii
List of tables
Page number
Vol 14 Table 3.3.1 Working hours ........................................................................... 11 Vol 14 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Falconbrook Pumping Station ............... 12 Vol 14 Table 4.2.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement ......................... 16 Vol 14 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations ................................ 17 Vol 14 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - additional monitoring locations................................ 18 Vol 14 Table 4.4.3 Air quality background pollutant concentrations ........................ 18 Vol 14 Table 4.4.4 Air quality receptors - construction ............................................ 19 Vol 14 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts and magnitude at ground level - operation ........ 24 Vol 14 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts and magnitude at buildings - operation ............. 24 Vol 14 Table 4.8.1 Air quality summary of construction assessment ....................... 26 Vol 14 Table 4.8.2 Odour summary of operational assessment .............................. 27 Vol 14 Table 5.4.1 Aquatic ecology receptors and values/sensitivities .................... 32 Vol 14 Table 5.6.1 Aquatic ecology impacts ............................................................ 33 Vol 14 Table 5.8.1 Aquatic ecology operation assessment ..................................... 37 Vol 14 Table 6.2.1 Terrestrial ecology notable species surveys .............................. 42 Vol 14 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 Habitat Survey............................... 43 Vol 14 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology summary of construction assessment ......... 48 Vol 14 Table 7.4.1 Terrestrial ecology receptors (assets) and significance (value) . 62 Vol 14 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment summary of construction effects .............. 66 Vol 14 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment construction assessment.......................... 70 Vol 14 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses ........................................ 74 Vol 14 Table 8.4.2 Land quality anticipated geology and hydrogeology .................. 78 Vol 14 Table 8.4.3 Land quality records and waste sites......................................... 80 Vol 14 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts - construction ........................................... 83 Vol 14 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptors - construction ......................................... 84 Vol 14 Table 8.5.3 Land quality effects - construction ............................................. 84 Vol 14 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts - operation ................................................ 85 Vol 14 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptors - operation ............................................. 85 Vol 14 Table 8.6.3 Land quality effects - operation.................................................. 85 Vol 14 Table 8.8.1 Land quality construction assessment ....................................... 87 Vol 14 Table 8.8.2 Land quality operational assessment ........................................ 87 Vol 14 Table 9.4.1 Noise receptors ......................................................................... 93
Page viii
Vol 14 Table 9.4.2 Airborne noise assessment categories construction.................. 94 Vol 14 Table 9.5.1 Noise at FB1, Pennethorne House - construction..................... 96 Vol 14 Table 9.5.2 Noise at FB2, Arthur Newton House - construction ................... 96 Vol 14 Table 9.5.3 Noise at FB3, York Gardens Community Centre - construction. 97 Vol 14 Table 9.5.4 Noise at FB4, 100 York Road - construction.............................. 98 Vol 14 Table 9.5.5 Noise at FB5, 100 Lavender Road - construction ...................... 99 Vol 14 Table 9.5.6 Vibration impacts - construction............................................... 101 Vol 14 Table 9.5.7 Vibration and human response - construction ......................... 102 Vol 14 Table 9.5.8 Noise and vibration construction effects .................................. 103 Vol 14 Table 9.6.1 Airborne noise impacts - operation .......................................... 104 Vol 14 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration effects operation ...................................... 105 Vol 14 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration construction assessment.......................... 108 Vol 14 Table 9.8.2 Noise and vibration operational assessment ........................... 109 Vol 14 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economics receptors .................................................... 119 Vol 14 Table 10.5.1 Socio economics construction effects .................................... 129 Vol 14 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economics construction assessment ........................... 132 Vol 14 Table 11.4.1 Townscape - open space type and distribution...................... 139 Vol 14 Table 11.4.2 Townscape and visual site components ................................ 140 Vol 14 Table 11.4.3 Townscape sensitivities to change ........................................ 145 Vol 14 Table 11.4.4 Visual viewpoints sensitivities to change ............................... 148 Vol 14 Table 11.5.1 Townscape effects - construction .......................................... 149 Vol 14 Table 11.5.2 Townscape magnitude of change - construction ................... 153 Vol 14 Table 11.5.3 Visual significance of effects - construction ........................... 157 Vol 14 Table 11.6.1 Townscape - effects during Year 1 of operation .................... 158 Vol 14 Table 11.6.2 Visual assessment viewpoints during Year 1 - operation ...... 162 Vol 14 Table 11.8.1 Townscape assessment summary - construction .................. 165 Vol 14 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment summary - construction........................... 166 Vol 14 Table 11.8.3 Townscape assessment summary Year 1 of operation ....... 168 Vol 14 Table 12.2.1 Transport - construction traffic details .................................... 172 Vol 14 Table 12.2.2 Transport - construction worker numbers .............................. 176 Vol 14 Table 12.3.1 Transport - stakeholder engagement ..................................... 177 Vol 14 Table 12.4.1 Transport - bus service frequency ......................................... 179 Vol 14 Table 12.4.2 Transport receptor values/sensitivities................................... 183 Vol 14 Table 12.5.1 Transport forecast construction vehicle movements ........... 185 Vol 14 Table 12.8.1 Transport construction assessment ....................................... 197
Page ix
Vol 14 Table 12.8.2 Transport operational assessment ........................................ 199 Vol 14 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater - methods of construction ................................. 202 Vol 14 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater - ground conditions and hydrogeology ............. 203 Vol 14 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater receptors .......................................................... 205 Vol 14 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts - construction ...................................... 206 Vol 14 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptors - construction ................................... 206 Vol 14 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater effects - construction ........................................ 207 Vol 14 Table 13.6.1 Groundwater impacts -operation ........................................... 208 Vol 14 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater receptors - operation ........................................ 208 Vol 14 Table 13.6.3 Groundwater effects operation .............................................. 208 Vol 14 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater summary of construction assessment .............. 210 Vol 14 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater summary of operation assessment .................. 210 Vol 14 Table 14.4.1 Surface water receptors......................................................... 215 Vol 14 Table 14.6.1 Surface water impacts -operation ......................................... 221 Vol 14 Table 14.6.2 Surface water effects - operation ........................................... 223 Vol 14 Table 14.8.1 Surface water operational assessment .................................. 224 Vol 14 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk - runoff rates .......................................................... 233 Vol 14 Table 15.5.1 Flood risk - runoff rates and attenuation volumes .................. 236
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 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station
Section 1: Introduction
1
1.1.1 1.1.2
Introduction
This volume presents the preliminary environmental information for the proposed Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This document reports the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the Thames Tunnel project at Falconbrook Pumping Station. 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. The proposed development including construction and operation is described in Section 3. The design evolution for this site is set out in Section 3.4. Finally, Section 3.4.1 refers to other development schemes which have been submitted or with extant planning approval within or in proximity to the site. The development at Falconbrook Pumping Station would link the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO through a CSO drop shaft to a connection tunnel which would be driven from the shaft to the main tunnel. The CSO currently discharges approximately 40 times a year at approximately 708,900m3. 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. It is noted that the Scoping Report issued in March 2011 was prepared before Falconbrook Pumping Station was identified as a potential alternative site. This site has therefore not been the subject of formal scoping. The scope of the assessment set out in this volume has drawn on the scoping response received from the London Borough (LB) of Wandsworth, feedback from other statutory consultees as well as professional judgement.
1.1.4
1.1.5
1.1.6
1.1.7
Page 1
Section 2: Site context
2 2.1
2.1.1
Site context Site location

The site is located in the LB of Wandsworth. It comprises the Thames Water Falconbrook Pumping Station and disused toilet block to the south west covering an area of 0.4ha. The site is shown in Vol 14 Figure 2.1.1. Vol 14 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan (see Volume 14 Figures document)
2.1.2
The site is bounded to the north by York Gardens Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground with playground facilities further to the north. York Gardens sits to the east and south of the site, with a library and community centre to the south. To the west of the site is York Road (A3205). The closest residential development lies approximately 45m to the east of the site. Access to Falconbrook Pumping Station is through York Gardens on an existing access road to the east. Access to the Transport for London Road Network (the A3205 York Road) is via Lavender Road, Darien Road, Ingrave Street and Falcon Road. The nearest railway station is Clapham Junction (0.5km), and the nearest London Underground station is Fulham Broadway (1.9km). The Thames Path Public Rights of Way runs approximately 40m to the northwest of the site. Within the site is almost entirely hard standing and buildings, the majority of which comprise the operational Thames Water site Vol 14 Figure 2.1.1 shows the site and includes site context photographs.
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 14 Figure 2.2.1. Vol 14 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental designations (see Volume 14 Figures document)
2.2.2
There are no notable habitats present on the site itself, and no statutory nature conservation designations within 2km of the site. The site lies within York Gardens Site of Local Importance (SLI) for nature conservation and is within 200m of the River Thames and Tidal Tributaries Site of Metropolitan Importance (SMI). St Peter's Church Hall, a Grade II Listed Building is located 150m from the site, and the South East Tower of the Church of St Peter and St Paul, a Grade II Listed Building. The site is not within a conservation area the closest being Clapham Junction Conservation Area 500m to the south east of the site. The site is within the Wandsworth Archaeological Priority Area. There are no known archaeological receptors recorded within the site boundary. There are no Tree Protection Orders within the site or within close proximity of the site.
2.2.3
2.2.4
Page 2
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 2.2.5
Section 2: Site context
The site lies within the Wandsworth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) which was declared due to the risk of annual mean objectives being exceeded for particulate matter PM10 and NO2. Land quality at the site is influenced historical onsite and offsite activities specifically a former sewage pumping station building and electricity generation facilities and the current pumping station. The geology of the site consists of made ground / alluvium / river terrace deposits (5m), London Clay (44 m), Lambeth Group (19 m) and Thanet sand (9 m). The site is located in Flood Zone 3 (1 in 200 year flood extent) but is defended to the 1 in 1000 year flood level.
2.2.6
2.2.7
Page 3
Section 3: Proposed development
3 3.1
3.1.1
Proposed development Overview

The development at Falconbrook Pumping Station would link the Falconbrook storm relief sewer through a CSO Drop shaft and connection tunnel to the main tunnel. Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1 - Vol 14 Figure 3.1.4 show the demolition and site clearance, construction phasing and permanent works plans. Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1 Demolition and site clearance plan Vol 14 Figure 3.1.2 Construction - site setup, shaft construction & tunnelling Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3 Construction - construction of other structures Vol 14 Figure 3.1.4 Permanent works layout (see Volume 14 Figures document)
3.1.2
3.1.3
Construction of the main works at this site is scheduled to commence in late 2018 (Year 1) and be completed by late 2021, taking approximately three 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. The following lists the structures required at this site: a. A drop shaft b. A below ground interception chamber with ground level access cover(s). c. A below ground valve chamber extending above ground level with above ground level access cover(s).
3.1.4
d. An underground connection culvert with access via the shaft and/or valve chamber e. A below ground passive ventilation chamber consisting of air management systems including filtration, and ventilation ducting f. An above ground ventilation structure consisting of air flow control louvres
g. Underground ventilation ducting h. A ventilation stack column serving the interception chamber i. 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.
3.1.5 3.1.6
Further details of these elements are given in Section 3.2 and Section 3.3 where these are relevant to the technical assessments that follow. The following construction methods would be required:
Page 4
a. Gates to new temporary site entrance and exit off York Road 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 including new and realignment of kerbing h. Material storage and handling areas and treatment facilities i. j. 3.1.7 Shotcrete plant, and power supply The carrying out or maintenance of other such works.
Further details of these methods 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 scheme would divert the majority of current CSO discharges via the CSO shaft and connection tunnel to the main tunnel for treatment at Beckton Sewage Treatment Works. The number of CSO discharges would be reduced from 40 spill events to approximately 4 spill events per year at an average rate of 56,200m3 per year.
Permanent structures
3.2.2 A plan of the permanent structures is shown in Vol 14 Figure 3.1.4. The area of operational land required by the scheme is less than that required for the construction phase. The land which is not required for operational purposes would be returned to publically accessible lands as per the existing land use arrangement. After construction, the structures detailed below would remain in place during operation. The design and finishing proposed for the above ground features will be further developed during the period up to the application.
3.2.3 3.2.4
Shaft
3.2.5 The CSO drop shaft would have an internal diameter of 9m. The shaft would be approximately 40m deep. The Falconbrook CSO shaft would be constructed in the west of the site on the line of the connection tunnel which would connect the shaft to the main tunnel. A full description of this tunnel is provided in Volume 3. Existing ground level falls from west to east across the shaft location. Shaft finished levels would be set at or similar to existing ground levels. Localised landscaping and re-grading would be employed to integrate levels across the site.
3.2.6
Page 5
Interception chambers and culverts

3.2.7 3.2.8 The interception chamber would be finished to existing ground levels and extend to a depth of approximately 14m. The valve chamber would be finished approximately 1.5m above existing ground levels and to a depth of 15m within the pumping station compound boundary. The above ground structure would be concrete clad. A 2.4m internal diameter tunnelled connection culvert would connect the interception chamber to the shaft.
3.2.9
Tunnel
3.2.10 To connect the shaft to the main Thames Tunnel, a 2.4m internal diameter connection tunnel would be constructed. The internal diameter of the connection tunnel would be increased locally adjacent to thw shaft for hydraulic purposes. A 2.4m internal diameter connection tunnel would connect the interception chamber to the shaft.
3.2.11
Ventilation structures
3.2.12 The passive filter structure would be below ground and would discharge via louvre housing through a 4m high ventilation column in the north west corner of the pumping station compound. In addition, a second 4m high ventilation column would sit to the west of the compound boundary within publicly accessible space. The interception chamber would be vented by means of a vent column located within the pumping station compound.
3.2.13 3.2.14
Electrical kiosk
3.2.15 Electrical equipment would be housed within the existing pumping station building.
Paved areas
3.2.16 The area around the shaft would be finished with hardstanding to allow crane access to the covers on top of the shaft. This hardstanding would be publicly accessible but Thames Water would retain a right of access over it and would install temporary security fencing when the area was used for shaft access. The hardstanding arrangement that would be employed allows area of land formerly made up of hardstanding to be returned to landscaped finish. The area within the pumping station would be returned to hardstanding to provide continued operational access within the pumping station.
3.2.17
Access and maintenance works

3.2.18 Access to the Thames Water Falconbrook Pumping Station site would continue to be via York Gardens. The pumping station compound boundary wall would be reinstated to include the existing gated access to the compound.
Page 6
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 3.2.19 3.2.20
The western site boundary fenceline along York Road would be reinstated to include pedestrian access similar to the existing arrangement. Access to the shaft would be via York Gardens. This would be required for a light commercial vehicle on a three to six monthly maintenance schedule. This would be carried out during normal working hours. There would be no aerial lighting. Access would be via the existing access from York Gardens. Additionally once every ten years, more significant maintenance work would be carried out. This would be carried out in normal working hours. Two cranes would be required for these visits. Access would be via the existing access via York Gardens. Access for unplanned maintenance or repairs would also be required.
3.2.21
3.2.22
3.3
3.3.1
Construction
The construction works at Falconbrook Pumping Station would encompass the pumping station compound, the publically accessible area west of the compound and the access road between the Pumping Station and Community Centre. Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1 - Vol 14 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 the assessment. It is recognised that, following further design development and selection of contractors, alternate methodology and scheduling may be proposed.
3.3.2
Construction works
3.3.3 The following physical construction works are described: a. site setup (see Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1) b. shaft construction (see Vol 14 Figure 3.1.2 - Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3) c. tunnelling (see Vol 14 Figure 3.1.2 - Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3) d. construction of other structures (see Vol 14 Figure 3.1.2 - Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3).
Construction processes
3.3.4 This sections describes the following: a. code of construction practice b. dewatering c. 3.3.5 ground treatment. Code of construction practice All works would be undertaken in accordance with the Thames Tunnel Code of Construction Practice (CoCP, a draft is appended to Volume 2).
Page 7
The CoCP 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. Site Setup Trees and landscaping along the western boundary with York Road would need to be removed in advance of these works. Prior to any works commencing the site boundary would be established and secured. The boundary would be built to an appropriate height for the site. Welfare and office facilities would also be set up with utility and power connections installed. The extent of demolition and site clearance works are shown on the Demolition and Site Clearance drawing (Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1). Elements to be removed include: a. disused toilet block b. existing screening chamber within pumping station compound c. temporary removal of boundary fence along with a limited area of trees and vegetation to form the access/egress points from York Road
3.3.7
3.3.8 3.3.9
3.3.10 3.3.11
d. existing southern and western boundary wall. Shaft construction 3.3.12 Plant and material storage areas (including displaced slurry storage), waste skips, muck bin and delivery vehicle turning area would be established. Craneage, shotcrete silos, water tanks, mixing pan, compressor, air receiver, excavator and dumper for excavated material handling are among the items of plant that would all be required on site. The shaft would be constructed as a sprayed concrete lined shaft. A piling rig would drive sheet piles through the over lying ground to cut off ground water ingress. The piling rig would be transported on and off site by low loader lorry. Sheet piles would be delivered by flatbed lorry, off loaded with the telehandler. A proportion of the shaft would be constructed through the abandoned pumping station substructure in the west of the site. This will require localised demolition and break-out of the former structure to enable shaft construction. The shaft would be excavated using a tracked excavator loading excavated material into a shaft skip. The skips then hoisted by a crawler crane and excavated material deposited into the muck bin. The shaft would be advanced in 1m incremental cycles. After 1m has been excavated the primary Sprayed Concrete Lining (SCL) would be constructed.
3.3.13 3.3.14
3.3.15
3.3.16
3.3.17
Page 8
A steel reinforced concrete base plug would be formed at the base of the shaft. A tunnel portal would be constructed within the shaft lining. The portal would consist of cast in-situ concrete portal with seal tied to the shaft lining. Tunnelling To connect the shaft to the main Thames Tunnel, a 2.4m internal diameter connection tunnel would be constructed using SCL techniques. The shaft lining would be broken out within the previously constructed portal and the tunnel advanced in 1m incremental cycles. A tunnel excavator would be used to excavate each advance. After each excavation advance, excavated material would be withdrawn from the tunnel and hoisted out of the shaft. The SCL tunnel lining would be built up in even layers until the required profile is achieved. The process would be repeated in 1m advances until the main Thames Tunnel is encountered. The tunnel would be locally enlarged at is connection point to the main tunnel. The segments of the Thames Tunnel would be broken out from within the main tunnel and the connection completed from within the SCL connection tunnel. An in situ concrete junction would be constructed. The connection culvert from the Interception Chamber to the CSO drop shaft would be a 2.4m internal diameter tunnel and would be constructed in SCL similar to the connection to the main tunnel. The CSO drop shaft would have a temporary deck installed at the appropriate level to construct the tunnel and the tunnel constructed to break in to the Interception chamber. The tunnel would pass through the valve chamber. The connection tunnel and shaft would have a secondary reinforced concrete lining. Construction of other Structures An interception chamber, culvert and valve chamber would intercept the sewer running into the existing pumping station. After completion of any service diversions the chamber to intercept the storm relief sewer would be constructed. Due to ground conditions and depth, secant piles would be driven to construct the interception and valve chamber walls. The interception chamber would be excavated and the base slab cast. The walls of the interception chamber would be formed by in situ concrete techniques. The piled wall would be extended to the shaft to allow the connecting culvert and valve chamber to be constructed in a similar manner to the interception chamber. The ventilation structure would be constructed in a similar method.
3.3.20 3.3.21
3.3.22 3.3.23
3.3.24
3.3.25
3.3.26 3.3.27 3.3.28 3.3.29 3.3.30
3.3.31
Page 9
For flow interception, a connection would be made to the below ground structure of the screening chamber. During dry weather conditions the opening into the concrete wall existing screening chamber would be cut out. The wall sections would need to be subdivided to enable removal. The below ground ventilation ducts from the CSO drop shaft and to the ventilation column and control equipment would be installed in shallow excavations. On completion the site area would be reinstated and above ground structures finished Once the main elements of construction are completed, the final landscaping works would be undertaken including final treatments and surfaces, planting and installation of street furniture.
3.3.33
3.3.34 3.3.35
Access and movement

3.3.36 3.3.37 For the purposes of this report one vehicle movement is defined as a vehicle either accessing or eggressing the site. The highest lorry movements at the site would occur during shaft excavation and connection tunnel drive when excavated material would be removed from the site by road. The peak daily vehicle movements at this time, averaged over a one month period, would be 20 movements per day. The site would have a new access and separate egress to York Road requiring the kerbs to be dropped. Both access/egress points would offer sufficient turning width for in - and outbound vehicles and would not require additional modifications along the westbound alignment of York Road. Construction lorries would take the route of minimum impact to/from the Transport for London Route Network (TLRN). Construction vehicles would access the site directly from the A3205 - York Road. The westbound bus stop immediately south of site would be temporarily relocated further north of York Road to avoid potential conflicts with site egressing construction vehicles. A one-way system would be operated on-site with vehicles accessing the site via left turn off York Road and returning to York Road via a separate egress and a left turn onto York Road.
3.3.38 3.3.39
3.3.40
3.3.41
3.3.42
Reinstatement and commissioning

3.3.43 Once the main elements of construction are completed, the final landscaping works would be undertaken including final treatments and surfaces, planting and installation of street furniture. Testing and commissioning would also be undertaken once construction is complete. For the purposes of this report, completion of the commissioning stage represents the end of Construction and the commencement of the Operational development
3.3.44
Page 10
Construction programme and working hours

Construction programme 3.3.45 Construction at Falconbrook Pumping Station is anticipated to take approximately three years and would involve the following steps (with some overlaps): a. Year 1 Site setup (approximately 3 months) b. Year 1 - Shaft construction (approximately 5 months) c. Years 1 to 2 - Tunnelling (approximately 5 months) d. Years 2 to 3 Construction of other structures (approximately 16 months) e. Year 3 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.
Working hours 3.3.46 The following working hours set out in the table below would apply for the construction at this site. Vol 14 Table 3.3.1 Working hours Overall Construction Works Standard Working Hours Consist of: Core Working Hours Mobilisation Period Core Working Hours Mobilisation Period Maintenance and Support Period.
08:00 to 18:00 Weekdays 08:00 to 13:00 Saturdays 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 Friday. Limited duration for short connection tunnel.
Connection Tunnel Excavation Continuous Working
Page 11
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, technical studies and open space and socio-economic surveys. 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 since phase one consultation as described in the table below. Vol 14 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Falconbrook Pumping Station Design development Upgrade and enhancement of the existing area of public realm between the Falconbrook Pumping Station and York Gardens Library and Community Centre. Improvements to the external appearance of the existing venture building. Reason To improve the existing appearance and use of the area for the benefit of the community.
3.4.2
To enhance the existing appearance of the building and to connect it with the finished design of the new permanent structures and public realm improvements
3.4.3
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. As a result, by 2021 discharge from the CSO at the site will be 779,300m3 with 42 spills.
3.5.2
3.5.3
Page 12
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). For the base case it is assumed that ten percent of the proposed development at 100 York Road (partially comprising the existing Bridges Court Car Park), of approximately residential units will be constructed either before or during the Thames Tunnel construction. An application has been submitted but not approved.
3.5.5
Page 13
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. The proposed development has the potential to affect air quality and odour due to: a. Construction traffic on the road (air quality). b. Temporary closure of lanes during construction (air quality). c. Emissions from plant (air quality). d. Construction-generated dust (air quality). e. Operation of the tunnel (air quality).
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
Proposed development
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 lorry movements at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site would occur during the shaft excavation and tunnel drive (Year 1 of construction). The peak number of vehicle movements at that time would be 20 movements per day averaged over a one month period. This is based on all materials being transported by road, given that the site is not at a riverside location. The construction traffic routes for the key material supply stages, traffic management and access to the site can be found in Section 12 of this volume. River barges 4.2.5 There is no access to the river at this site, so all material transportation would be by road.
4.2.4
Page 14
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Construction plant 4.2.6
There are a number of items of plant to be used on site that may produce emissions that could affect local air quality. Construction dust 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. Demolition of existing infrastructure and buildings c. Materials handling.
4.2.7
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 demolition d. Extent of any intended excavation e. Nature, location and size of stockpiles and length of time they are on site f. Occurrence and scale of dust generating activities; necessity for onsite concrete crusher or cement batcher
g. Number and type of vehicles and plant required on site h. Potential for dirt or mud to be made airborne through vehicle movements i. 4.2.9 Weather conditions. 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 A ventilation structure would be constructed against the wall of the Falconbrook Pumping Station building. This would feed a 4m high ventilation column designed to release treated air from the tunnel. The air would be treated by passing through a carbon passive filter housed in a below ground chamber adjacent to the ventilation structure. The capacity of the passive filter is to be 0.5m3/s. The maximum air release rate during a typical year is expected to be 0.1m3/s, which is well within the capacity of the passive filter.
Page 15
Air would be released from the vent box for 14 hours in a typical year, all of which would have passed through the OCU. For the remaining hours, no air would be released. This information on the ventilation structure was used in the dispersion model to assess odour dispersion at the site.
4.2.12
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 14 Table 4.2.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Wandsworth Comment Monitoring locations Odour complaints Response Locations agreed with Environmental Health Officer. No odour complaints around Falconbrook Pumping Station site - confirmed by Environmental Team Leader (Environmental Initiatives).
Baseline
4.3.2 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Construction
4.3.3 The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Operation
4.3.4 The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Assumptions and limitations

4.3.5 It has been assumed that background odour concentrations are negligible as there have been very few (only two) complaints to either LB Wandsworth or Thames Water 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).
Page 16
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 issue, undertake long-term air quality monitoring within their administrative areas. There are no continuous monitoring stations or diffusion tube sites within 1km of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, although a continuous monitoring station and three diffusion tubes are located along the construction traffic routes. The continuous monitoring station and the diffusion tube sites are all operated by LB Wandsworth and monitor NO2 but not PM10. NO2 monitoring data for the LB Wandsworth diffusion tube sites and the continuous monitoring site are contained in Vol 14 Table 4.4.1. This shows that all the sites (both roadside and urban background) recorded exceedances of the annual mean NO2 standard (40g/m3) in recent years. The number of exceedances of the hourly standard at the Town Hall (continuous site) indicates that the hourly standard has been achieved. Vol 14 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations Annual Mean (g/m3)
2010* 2009 2008 2007
4.4.3
4.4.4
Monitoring Site
Site Type
Number of Exceedances of Hourly Standard

2010* 2009 2008 2007
Continuous Monitoring Sites Town Hall Urban Background Urban Background Roadside NM Roadside 44 NM 48 NM 53 48 48 53 3 4 1 4
Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites Town Hall (W1) South Thames College (W11) Wandsworth Plain (W12) 44 44 NM NM NM
63
69
73
73
NM
* 2010 data not fully ratified. NM indicates not measured. Emboldened figures indicate an exceedance 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
As a result of previous exceedances of air quality objectives, LB Wandsworth has declared the whole Borough an AQMA for NO2 and PM10.
Page 17
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This monitoring comprises five diffusion tubes based at the locations detailed in Vol 14 Table 4.4.2. A triplicate site has been established next to a continuous monitoring station in Putney for bias adjustment purposes; otherwise all the monitoring locations have single tubes. All identified existing and new sites relating to the Falconbrook Pumping Station site (as well as other sites where they are in close proximity) are shown in Vol 14 Figure 4.4.1. Vol 14 Figure 4.4.1 Air Quality monitoring locations (see Volume 14 Figures document) Vol 14 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - additional monitoring locations Monitoring Site Wynter Street (FPS1) Hope Street (FPS2) Plough Road (FPS3) York Road South (FPS4) York Road North (FPS5) Grid Reference 526422, 175500 526537, 175634 526642, 175738 526677, 175921 526780, 176063
4.4.7
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site are given in the table below for 2010 (baseline year). Vol 14 Table 4.4.3 Air quality background pollutant concentrations Pollutant NOX (g/m ) NO2 (g/m ) PM10 (g/m )
Annual mean for 1km grid square centred on 526500, 175500
3 3 3
4.4.8
2010 46.0 28.9 20.1
Receptors 4.4.9 The Falconbrook Pumping Station site is located in a mixed use area. The closest residential receptors are located 45m to the east of the site, at Pennethorpe House, with more residential properties on Newcomen Road (Ganley Court) 75m to the south-east of the site boundary. York Gardens Library and Community Centre is located just south of the site, adjacent to
Page 18
the site boundary. York Gardens are adjacent to the south-eastern boundary of the site. York Gardens Adventure Playground is located to the north of the site, around 30m from the site boundary. The Battersea Chapel and Thames Christian College are located to the north-east of the site, within 100m and 110m of the boundary site respectively. Commercial/office premises are located to the west of the site in York Road, 20m from the site boundary. In addition to the existing receptors, the proposed redevelopment of 100 York Road will result in additional residential and commercial receptors approximately 40m to the west of the site. 4.4.10 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 14 Table 4.4.4 Air quality receptors - construction Receptors (relating to all identified emissions sources) Residential properties (including the Bridges Court Car Park development of 100 residential units) Commercial/offices Value/sensitivity and justification
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 relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. High sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. Medium sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. Medium sensitivity to local air quality.
York Gardens Library and Community Centre Thames Christian College
York Gardens Adventure
Battersea Chapel
Page 19
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Receptors (relating to all identified emissions sources) York Gardens
Section 4: Air quality and odour Value/sensitivity and justification
Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure is relevant for the hourly mean standards. Low sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance.
Odour
4.4.11 The LB Wandsworth has not received any odour complaints for the local area 3. Complaints in the Thames Water database have been reviewed within an area of 500m radius from the site and there have been only two complaints since 2005, one relating to odour from the general sewerage system in 2010 and the other in 2009, relating to a local sewage pumping station. The nearest sensitive receptors are described in para. 4.4.9 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 (including Bridges Court Car Park residential development) and college are of high sensitivity whilst the commercial/office premises, library/community centre, chapel and York Gardens (including adventure playground) are of medium sensitivity.
4.4.12
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 the future peak construction year. 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 vehicles in the future 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
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.5.4
Page 20
concentrations used in the modelling will be reduced in line with Defra guidance LAQM.TG(09) 5. 4.5.5 The base case will also consider new sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site which are identified in the receptor description in Section 4.4.
Construction assessment area

4.5.6 The assessment area for the local air quality study covers a square area of 600m by 600m centred on the Falconbrook 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 Falconbrook Pumping Station 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.
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 report. 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 report, it is however predicted that the impacts due to construction traffic are expected to be small (ie, small magnitude of change according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5) due to the low number of additional lorry movements during construction in the context of the existing traffic flows on the local road network. The greatest impacts are likely to be during lane closures, which would cause congestion and require diversion of traffic. Given that the residential properties, school and community centre have a high sensitivity to local air quality (as identified in Section 4.4), the likely significance of the effect of construction traffic is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). At the playground and chapel, playground and York Gardens, which have a medium sensitivity to local air quality, the significance of the effect would be negligible, which would also be the case at the commercial/office premises, which have a low sensitivity to local air quality. 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.
4.5.8
4.5.9
4.5.10
Page 21
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 for this report. Modelling is currently being undertaken, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. Based on professional judgement for the purposes of this report, it is noted that the impacts due to construction plant are expected to be small (ie, small magnitude of change according to the criteria in Volume 5), given the localised nature of the emissions (ie emissions are only generated on the construction site). 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, school and community centre, which have a high sensitivity to local air quality (as identified in Section 4.4), the likely significance of the effect of construction traffic is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). Effects would be negligible at the chapel, playground and York Gardens (which have a medium sensitivity to local air quality), and at the commercial/office premises (which have a low sensitivity to local air quality). Construction dust Construction dust would be generated from both on-site activities and from road vehicles accessing and servicing the site. Dust sensitive receptors have been identified in the vicinity of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site in accordance with the criteria in Volume 5, as described in Vol 14 Table 4.4.4. 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 4,000m2 b. The project is a non-residential development c. Main construction at the site would last approximately three years d. There are likely intermittent impacts on identified sensitive receptors.
4.5.13
4.5.14
4.5.15
4.5.16 4.5.17
4.5.18
4.5.19
4.5.20 4.5.21
On this basis, the development has been classified as a medium risk site. Given that the receptor sensitivity (with respect to dust nuisance) is identified as medium for the residential properties, chapel, commercial/office premises, school and the playground (as identified in Section 4.4) and the distance to these sensitive receptors is above 10m, the likely significance of the effect of construction dust is deemed to be a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). York
Page 22
Gardens and the community centre have medium sensitivity to dust nuisance, but the distance is within 10m, therefore the effect is identified as moderate 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 York Gardens and the community centre and a negligible effect at all other receptors. Overall construction effects 4.5.22 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, Thames Christian College, York Gardens Library and Community Centre and negligible at commercial/office premises, Battersea Chapel, York Gardens and the playground. With regard to construction dust, the likely significance of effects is negligible at residential properties, chapel, commercial properties, the playground, the college and York Gardens. The likely significance of effects is minor adverse at York Gardens and the community centre because they are within 10m of the site boundary. On this basis no significant construction effects are predicted.
4.5.23
4.5.24
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 are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions with respect to background odour concentrations as no change in background odour concentrations is anticipated. Receptors considered (in both the base and development case) include the proposed Bridges Court Car Park residential receptors as identified in Section 4.4.
Operational assessment area

4.6.3 Odour dispersion modelling was carried out over an area of 400m by 350m centred on the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. The assessment area was selected on the basis of it being considered the potential maximum extent of the impact area.
Operational effects
4.6.4 Vol 14 Table 4.6.1 shows the predicted maximum ground level odour concentrations at the Falconbrook 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
Page 23
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. Vol 14 Table 4.6.2 gives similar results for the predicted impacts at the worst affected buildings, where concentrations at ground level and at various heights have been considered. Vol 14 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts and magnitude at ground level operation Year Typical Maximum at ground level locations 98th percentile 0 3 (ouE/m ) No. of hours > 5 3 1.5ouE/m Impact magnitude and justification Negligible 98th percentile concentration is less than 1ouE/m3
Vol 14 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts and magnitude at buildings operation Year Typical Maximum at buildings 98th percentile (ouE/m3) No. of hours > 1.5ouE/m3 4.6.5 0 0 Impact magnitude and justification Negligible 98th percentile concentration is less than 1ouE/m3
In the two tables above, the 98th percentile is shown as zero as the number of hours with air released from the vent would be less than 176 and therefore the 98th percentile concentration would be zero at all locations, thus achieving the odour criterion at all locations. This represents an impact of negligible magnitude. The highest odour concentrations are predicted to occur close to the vent within the site where odour would be above 1.5 ouE/m3 for five hours in a typical year. 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 would not exceed the 98th percentile criterion of 1.5ouE/m3, it is considered that an overall significance would be negligible. No significant effects are therefore predicted in relation to odour.
4.6.6
4.6.7
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.
Page 24
Operation
4.7.2 No mitigation is required.
Page 25
4.8
Vol 14 Table 4.8.1 Air quality summary of construction assessment Effect Minor adverse None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Negligible None required
Residential (including the Bridges Court Car Park development of 100 residential units) Negligible None required
Effects from construction dust
Negligible
Commercial/offices
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Negligible Minor adverse None required None required
Negligible
Negligible Minor adverse
York Gardens Library and Community Centre Minor adverse Minor adverse
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions
None required None required
Minor adverse Minor adverse
Thames Christian College Negligible Negligible
None required None required
Negligible Negligible
York Gardens Adventure Playground
Negligible
None required
Negligible
Page 26
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Effect Negligible None required Negligible Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Battersea Chapel
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Negligible Negligible None required None required Negligble Negligible
York Gardens
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Minor adverse None required
Minor adverse
Vol 14 Table 4.8.2 Odour summary of operational assessment Effect Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Significance Mitigation None required None required None required None required None required None required None required Residual significance Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Receptor
Residential properties
Odour
Commercial/offices
Odour
York Gardens Library and Community Centre
Odour
Thames Christian College
Odour
York Gardens Adventure Playground
Odour
Battersea Chapel
Odour
York Gardens
Odour
Page 27
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site: a. Diffusion tube monitoring has been set up to monitor NO2 concentrations at five sites in the vicinity of the Falconbrook 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 are 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 28
Section 5: Ecology - aquatic
5 5.1
5.1.1
Ecology - aquatic Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant aquatic ecology effects at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. For the purposes of the assessment of the Thames Tunnel project 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. Animals, plants and habitats which occur above the mean high water level are assessed in the Terrestrial Ecology section (Section 6). Waterfowl, including those which occur on the Thames Tideway are also included under Terrestrial Ecology. Further details of the scope of the assessment are provided in Volume 5. This assessment considers the operational improvements on water quality on aquatic ecology receptors in the Thames Tideway as a result of the CSO interception. There would be no in river works associated with this site, which is located 200m inland from the River Thames. Therefore the construction phase is not considered within this assessment.
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
5.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to aquatic ecology are as follows. Operation The Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO currently discharges into the River Thames in the LB of Wandsworth. The CSO would be intercepted as part of the proposed development. Based on the base case (which includes permitted Thames Tideway sewage treatment works upgrades, and the Lee Tunnel scheme, as well as projected population increases) discharges from this CSO are anticipated to be 708,900m3 per annum over a total of 40 discharge events (or spills) by 2021. The discharge is projected to reduce to 56,200m3 (a 93% reduction) over 4 discharge events once the Thames Tunnel is operational. Further information about projected changes in discharge as a result of the scheme is presented in Volume 2. Improvements in water quality are anticipated both in the local area around the discharge point for Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO and in the wider Thames Tideway. The assessment of operational impacts on the Thames Tideway as a whole are contained within the project-wide assessment (Volume 6). Water quality improvements would also have implications for aquatic ecology receptors and that is assessed in Section 14.
5.2.2
5.2.3
Page 29
5.3
5.3.1
Assessment Methodology Scoping and engagement

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. The Scoping Report was prepared before the Falconbrook Pumping Station site had been identified as a site and therefore it has not been the subject of formal scoping. The scope for aquatic ecology for this site has therefore drawn on the Scoping Opinion for the LB of Wandsworth and professional judgement. This potential site was presented at a biodiversity working group in March 2011 attended by local planning authorities, including the LB of Wandsworth.
Baseline
5.3.2 Details of the approach to baseline collection and the assessment are presented in Volume 5. Field surveys were undertaken in spring 2011 but these are still being analysed and will be reported in the ES. There are no site specific variations for this site. Details of the background data sets are provided in Volume 5. Invertebrate data is available from the Environment Agency for Battersea, which is 460m upstream of Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO and is the nearest EA site. It is also the nearest Environment Agency fish survey site. Although the EA sampling sites are remote from the discharge point, the fish and invertebrate communities they reflect are considered to be representative of this section of the upper Tideway, and therefore they provide a suitable baseline. Existing algal data has been requested and will be assessed and reported in the ES.
5.3.3
5.3.4
Operation
5.3.5 The methodology for assessing operational effects is described in Volume 5. There are no deviations from the standard assessment methodology.
5.4
5.4.1
Baseline Conditions
Designations There are no aquatic statutory nature conservation sites within the local area of this site. The outfall discharges directly into the non statutory Tidal Tributaries Site of Metropolitan Importance. The SMI (Site Reference: M31) is adopted by all Boroughs which border the River Thames, recognises the range and quality of estuarine habitats including mud flat, shingle beach, reedbeds and the river channel itself. Over 120 species of fish have been recorded in the Tideway, though many of these are only occasional visitors. The more common species include dace (Leuciscus leuciscus), bream (Abramis brama) and roach (Rutilus rutilus) in the freshwater reaches, and sand-smelt (Atherina presbyter), flounder (Platichtyhys flesus) and Dover sole (Solea solea) in the estuarine reaches. Important migratory species include Twaite shad (Alosa fallax), European eel (Anguilla anguilla), smelt (Osmerus eperlanus), salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (S. trutta). A number of nationally rare snails
Page 30
occur, including the brackish water snail Pseudamnicola confusa, and an important assemblage of wetland and wading birds. Habitats 5.4.2 The London Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)8 includes a Habitat Action Plan (HAP) for the Thames Tideway which identifies a series of target habitats and species. LB of Wandsworth does not have a separate Biodiversity Action Plan. The HAP divides the river into the zones; freshwater, brackish and marine. The Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO discharge is in the freshwater zone (see Volume 6, Figure 3.4.1). The habitat is specifically identified as the UKBAP priority habitat mudflat on the Natural England website www.natureonthemap.co.uk. Marine mammals 5.4.3 Records compiled by the Zoological Society of London for 2003 2011 indicate that harbour porpoise, bottlenose dolphin and various seal species (grey and common) migrate through the Tideway. Common seal has both been recorded very close to Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO although there is no evidence the mudflat is regularly used as a haul out site. Fish 5.4.4 Fish are routinely categorised into four guilds according to their tolerance to salinity and habitat preference (Elliott and Taylor, 1989 9; Elliott and Hemingway, 2002 10) which can be defined as follows: a. Freshwater Species which spend their complete lifecycle primarily in freshwater b. Estuarine resident Species which remain in the estuary for their complete lifecycle c. Diadromous Species which migrate through the estuary to spawn; d. Marine juvenile Species which spawn at sea but spend part of their lifecycle in the estuary. 5.4.5 The Environment Agency carry out annual surveys for fish within the Thames Tideway using a variety of methods including trawling and seine netting, with data available over 18 years from 1992 to 2010. The nearest sampling site to the Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO discharge is at Battersea. A range of freshwater and estuarine resident fish species were recorded at this site over the 18 year period, including bass, bream, dace, flounder, thin lipped grey mullet, smelt, sand smelt and gobies. Only small numbers of fish (10-25 individuals for all species) were recorded during each sampling visit throughout the period. All of these species are widespread in the Thames Tideway, with freshwater species such as roach and bream most frequent in the upper Tideway, and estuarine residents such as sand smelt, goby and flounder common in the lower Tideway. The species age classes represented most widely in the data sets are dace (range of age classes), flounder (0+ [0 -1 year old] and 1+, [1-2 year old fish]), bream
5.4.6
Page 31
(range of age classes), roach (range of age classes), smelt (0+,1+), gobies (0+), thin-lipped grey mullet and eels. 5.4.7 It is important to note, that Colclough et. al. (2002) 11 regard upstream Tideway sites, including Hammersmith to be within the spawning zone for common smelt (a species listed under section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 & Priority UKBAP species). Invertebrates 5.4.8 Battersea has been regularly sampled by the Environment Agency since 2005 and it is nearest regular EA sampling site for invertebrates. A total of 46 taxa were recorded at Battersea over the six year period in which samples were collected (2005 2010). The taxa Oligochaeta (worms), which is often used as an indicator of organic pollution, was relatively abundant, together with other pollution tolerant species such as the snail Potamopyrgus antipodarum. However, Gammarus zaddachi, a moderately pollution-sensitive species was also highly abundant and Theodoxus fluviatilis (pollution sensitive river neritid) was present most years. Algae 5.4.9 Existing algal data has been requested and will be assessed and reported in the ES. Aquatic ecology receptor values and sensitivities 5.4.10 Using the baseline set out above the value accorded to each receptor considered in this assessment is set out in the table below. The definitions of the receptor values and sensitivities used in this evaluation are set out in Volume 5. Vol 14 Table 5.4.1 Aquatic ecology receptors and values/sensitivities Receptor Foreshore habitat (including intertidal and subtidal habitat)/designated sites Mammals Value/sensitivity and justification Medium (Metropolitan) value. Habitats form part of a major Site of Metropolitan Importance. Low (Local) value. Only occasional records of seal exist from the area and very little intertidal habitat is available for use as a haul out site by seals. Medium (Metropolitan) value. The stretch up to Battersea does represent a range of age classes of several important freshwater species (roach, bream and dace). Low-Medium (Borough) value due to the limited invertebrate diversity. To be completed following receipt of data.
Fish
Invertebrates Algae
Page 32
5.5
5.5.1
Construction assessment
As stated in para. 5.1.3, there would be no in river works associated with this site, which is located 200m inland from the River Thames. Therefore the construction phase is not considered within this assessment.
5.6
5.6.1
Operational assessment Operational Impacts

The potential impacts arising from operation of the scheme at this site would be large reduction in the volume of sewage effluent discharged from the CSO. These impacts are described below. The definitions of the different magnitudes of impact referred to in this assessment are given in Volume 5. Reduction in the volume of sewage effluent discharged from the CSO.
5.6.2
Discharges from the Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO are anticipated to have increased to 779,300m3 per annum over a total of 40 discharge events (or spills) by 2021. The discharge is projected to reduce to 56,200m3 (a 93% reduction) over four discharge events once the Thames Tideway scheme, including the Thames Tunnel, is operational. This would result in localised improvements in water quality, and a contribution to Thames Tideway wide improvements. Water quality improvements would consist of increases in dissolved oxygen concentrations, reduction in microbial activity (known as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)) and suspended solids, and a reduction in sewage debris. The magnitude of the impact is considered to be medium positive, and to be probable and permanent as shown in the table below. Vol 14 Table 5.6.1 Aquatic ecology impacts Impact Improvement of local water quality through CSO interception. Magnitude Medium positive impact Permanent. Probable.
5.6.3
5.6.4
Operational Effects
5.6.5 The effects of the operational activities on ecological receptors are described in detail below. The way in which the magnitude and reversibility of each impact has been combined with the value of each receptor to determine the significance of the effect is set out in Volume 5. Mammals Increase in the number and/or change in the distribution of marine mammals due to improvements in water quality. 5.6.6 No major change in the use of the foreshore as a haul out for grey seals is anticipated as a result of the interception of the discharge. Improvements
Page 33
in habitat quality may make the habitat more favourable, although the factor determining its use by seals relates predominantly to the lack of disturbance rather than water quality. Effects are considered negligible in Year 1 of operation and by Year 6. Fish Reduction in the occurrence of dissolved oxygen related fish mortalities. 5.6.7 The microbial activity associated with untreated sewage effluent (BOD) causes a depletion in the levels of dissolved oxygen downstream of a discharge. This is often referred to as an oxygen sag. Oxygen sags are more common in the summer months when water temperatures are higher and oxygen is less soluble. Impacts on fish health occur when dissolved oxygen levels drop beneath 4mg/l 12, and significant mortalities begin to occur when levels drop beneath this threshold. Fish mortality due to low dissolved oxygen concentrations is referred to as hypoxia. Such hypoxia events are currently relatively common in the Thames Tideway, particularly during the summer months when heavy storms follow periods of low flow and water temperatures are relatively high. Over the past 34 years, there have been at least 154 hypoxia events in which fish mortalities have occurred. This will be further investigated as part of the final ES. Interception of the CSOs throughout the Thames Tideway would improve sewerage system capacity and result in far fewer hypoxia events. The Tideway Fish Risk Model is currently being re-run in order to predict the change in the number of hypoxia events. Interception of the Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO will contribute to this Thames Tideway wide improvement, but will also result in improvements in the local area. Given the range of diversity of freshwater species in particular in the upper Tideway, and the potential value of this site as a nursery area for juvenile freshwater fish the effect is considered to be moderate beneficial at Year 1 of operation and also at Year 6. Improvements across the Thames Tideway as a whole will be assessed in Volume 6 (Project-wide effects assessment). Increase in the distribution of pollution sensitive fish species. 5.6.10 The ThamesTideway supports a number of rare fish species such as salmon, sea trout and twaite shad and river lamprey. A number of factors limit the colonisation of habitats by these species, including salinity, substrate type and current, but pollution is known to be a significant factor in determining colonisation (eg, Maitland, PS and Hatton-Ellis, TW. Ecology of the Allis and Twaite Shad. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No. 3. English Nature). Changes in the diversity of fish communities, including recruitment of more sensitive species is a process which would occur at a wider scale, and will be assessed in Volume 6: Project-wide effects assessment. At the local scale for this site, effects on fish diversity are considered to be minor positive. The effect is considered to be minor in the short term, increasing to moderate beneficial in Year 6 of operation.
5.6.8
5.6.9
5.6.11
Page 34
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Invertebrates
Localised improvements in invertebrate diversity and abundance. 5.6.12 As well as causing low dissolved oxygen events, untreated sewage effluent contains nutrients which cause enrichment of the water column and sediments in the river. Excessive nutrient enrichment causes phenomenon such as algal blooms, and is known as eutrophication. Such enrichment tends to favour a small number of pollution tolerant species at the expense of a wider range of pollution sensitive species. For example, certain species of Oligochaete worm are indicative of polluted conditions because they are able to tolerate the low dissolved oxygen conditions and multiply rapidly in the enriched sediments. Oligochaeta was the most abundant taxa at the EA sampling points up and downstream of the site, and so it is reasonable to assume that they would also be dominant at this site. By intercepting the CSO the source of sewage related nutrients would be reduced and the sediments in the vicinity of the outfall would begin to return to a more natural state. As nutrients reduce in concentration a wider range of invertebrate species, including more pollution sensitive species such as the river neretid (Theodoxus fluviatilis) would begin to colonise the sediments. The effect is considered to be negligible in Year 1, rising to minor beneficial in Year 6. Increase in the distribution of rare and pollution sensitive invertebrate species. 5.6.14 The Thames Tideway currently supports a small number of rare invertebrate species including swollen spire snail and tentacled lagoon worm. A number of factors limit the colonisation of habitats by these species, including salinity, substrate type and current, but pollution is known to be a significant factor in determining colonisation. Improving water and sediment quality would facilitate the spread of those pollution sensitive species which are currently being impeded by poor water and sediment quality. Removal of the CSO discharge at this location may facilitate the spread of the rare depressed river mussel, which is known to occur in the vicinity of the site. Effects on invertebrate diversity are thus considered to be negligible in Year 1, increasing to minor beneficial by Year 6. Algae 5.6.16 Effects on algae will be reported in the ES.
5.6.13
5.6.15
5.7
5.7.1
Approach to mitigation
The approach to mitigation will be informed by the Mitigation and Compensation Hierarchy discussed with the Thames Tunnel EA Biodiversity Working Group as a systematic and transparent decisionmaking process. The hierarchy is sequential and seeks to avoid adverse environmental effects. The hierarchy of avoid effects, minimise, control compensate, and enhance will be strictly applied in this sequence. The Environmental
5.7.2
Page 35
Statement will describe how this hierarchy has been applied. The mitigation hierarchy is also described in detail in Volume 5.
Operation
5.7.3 No mitigation is required since the effects on aquatic ecology receptors are associated only with the improvements in water quality arising from interception of the CSO.
Page 36
5.8
Vol 14 Table 5.8.1 Aquatic ecology operation assessment Significance of effect (Year 1) Negligible Negligible Significance of effect (Year 6) Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Assessment summary
Operation
Receptor
Description of effect
Mammals
Increase in the number and/or change in the distribution of marine mammals. Moderate beneficial.
None required Negligible due to beneficial effect.
Fish
Reduction in the occurrence of low dissolved oxygen related fish mortalities. Minor beneficial Moderate beneficial
Moderate beneficial. None required Moderate beneficial. due to beneficial effect.
None required Moderate beneficial. due to beneficial effect. None required Moderate beneficial due to beneficial effect.
Invertebrates
Increase in the distribution of pollution sensitive fish species. Localised improvements in invertebrates diversity and abundance. Negligible. Negligible.
Minor beneficial
Increase in the distribution of rare and pollution sensitive invertebrate
Minor beneficial
None required Minor beneficial in due to beneficial Year 6. effect.
Page 37
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect (Year 1) To be completed for the Environmental Statement Significance of effect (Year 6) Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Description of effect species.
Algae
Page 38
5.9
5.9.1 5.9.2
Further analysis of Environment Agency fish and invertebrate data may enable a fuller assessment of benefits for the Environmental Statement. Additional water quality modelling is underway to determine the relative beneficial improvements that would accrue for other water quality improvements such as Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and ammoniacal nitrogen. In addition, results for inorganic nitrogen and dissolved oxygen to compare against the Water Framework Directive standards for transitional waters will be available. This information will inform the assessment of effects on fish and invertebrates and will be reported in the ES. An assessment will also be carried out of cumulative effects and reported in the ES.
5.9.3
Page 39
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. Likely effects on aquatic ecology are reported in Section 5. Elements of the proposed works that have particular relevance to terrestrial ecology comprise site clearance, piling, and associated construction activities. Plans of the proposed Falconbrook Pumping Station works are appended to Volume 2. The operation phase is not considered in this terrestrial ecology assessment as maintenance works are limited to intermittent visits to site by people and vehicles and the ecological receptors on and adjacent to the site are unlikely to be affected by these activities.
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 construction year. b. Ground excavation and construction traffic movements and the use of construction machinery will involve noise, vibration and lighting. c. Site working hours will include limited duration 24 hour work associated with the short connection tunnel. Whilst the majority of night-time activities will be conducted underground, there is likely to be a degree of movement of vehicles and people above ground.
Code of Construction Practice 6.2.2 The draft Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) (Volume 2: Proposed Development) outlines that works would be undertaken in compliance with legislation, and with due regard to relevant nature conservation policies and guidance, including the Mayors Biodiversity Strategy 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, appropriate mitigation proposed and any necessary licences or consents obtained. 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.
6.2.3
Page 40
6.3

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. The Scoping Report was prepared before the Falconbrook Pumping Station site had been identified as a potential site and therefore has not been the subject of formal scoping. The scope for terrestrial ecology for this site has therefore drawn on the scoping response from the LB of Wandsworth and is based on professional judgement. This potential site was presented at a biodiversity working group on 22 March 2011 attended by local planning authorities, including Wandsworth.
Baseline
6.3.1 Baseline data collection has followed the methodology detailed in Volume 5. Baseline data presented within this assessment is derived from desk study data. All subsequent survey data will be reported in the ES. This is described further in Section 1.1 and in the table below. In summary, the following baseline data has been reported in this assessment: a. Desk study including database searches (for ecological records within a 2km radius from the site boundary, 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. Phase 1 Habitat Survey on 26th November 2010 following the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey Methodology, 2010. The survey included the site and any adjacent habitat considered, using professional judgement, to be potentially affected by the proposed works. 6.3.3 Species surveys identified as being required following the desk study and Phase 1 Habitat Survey have commenced and will continue in 2011 as shown in the table below. AT this particular location it was not possible to follow the bat survey methodology detailed in Volume 5, which involves a dawn swarming survey. However, additional intensive remote recording surveys have been undertaken and the results will be provided in the ES.
6.3.2
Page 41
Vol 14 Table 6.2.1 Terrestrial ecology notable species surveys Survey Bat activity and dawn surveys dependent on the results of the triggering surveys Invasive plants Survey area Around suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site. The site and within 10m of the site boundary The survey area includes the site and adjacent features that are assessed to be potentially affected. Timing July to October 2011
August 2011
Bat survey using remote recording equipment (Anabat detectors) undertaken over three nights.
July 2011
Construction
6.3.4 The construction phase assessment methodology follows this standard methodology provided in Volume 5, which is based on IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) 13. The following ecological receptors are included in the assessment: a. bats b. breeding birds c. 6.3.5 6.3.6 other notable species d. invertebrates There are no designated sites within 500m of the site. Therefore, designated sites are not considered any further in this assessment. The potential presence of Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) noted in para. 6.4.5 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. 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. This is likely to be the peak year for impacts on terrestrial ecology as this is when initial site clearance would occur. Assuming that the site and any nearby designated sites would continue to be managed as they are at present then the base case for is considered to be the same as the current baseline conditions as described in Section 6.4.
6.3.7
6.3.8
6.3.9
Page 42

6.3.10 It is assumed for the purposes of assessment that the current site management regime of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site will continue. The assessment assumes that the measures within the CoCP will be implemented as part of the development. As stated in para. 6.3.3, it was not possible to undertake a dawn swarming survey at this site. Additional intensive remote recording surveys will therefore be carried out. All surveys have been and will be undertaken at appropriate times of the year. No other site specific limitations or assumptions have been identified.
6.3.11
6.3.12
6.4
6.4.1
Baseline conditions
The following section sets out the baseline conditions for terrestrial ecology receptors at the site and surrounds, including their value.
Habitats
6.4.2 Habitats recorded within the survey area during the Phase 1 Habitat Survey are described in the table below and shown on the Phase 1 Habitat Map (Vol 14 Figure 6.4.1). Vol 14 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 Habitat Survey (see Volume 14 Figures document) Vol 14 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 Habitat Survey Habitats Hardstanding Habitat Description The survey area contains the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station, which is enclosed by a boundary wall. Hardstanding is present across the survey area around disused infrastructure for pedestrian and vehicle access. Buildings Buildings within the survey area comprise a pumping station building and a disused toilet block which is a single storey brick building with a flat roof and protruding canopy. Also present within the survey area is a screening chamber, which comprises a two storey high brick and concrete structure. Tall ruderal vegetation and shrubs Scattered trees Vegetation within the survey area is limited in extent, located predominantly around the boundary in the west and comprising ruderal vegetation and low shrubs. A small number of semi-mature evergreen and deciduous trees are located at the boundary of the
Page 43
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Habitats
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial Habitat Description
survey area in the west. On site 6.4.3 Ruderal vegetation and shrubs do not comprise a BAP priority habitat and are of relatively low intrinsic value. The habitat is considered to be of site (low) value. Scattered trees on site have limited intrinsic value and do not comprise UK or London BAP priority species. These are considered to be of site (low) value. Japanese knotweed (a noxious and invasive plant) may be present on site and a survey for invasive plants is proposed. If present, 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. Surrounding area 6.4.6 The site is located in a mixed use setting. York Gardens is located adjacent to the east of the site and comprises a medium sized space characterised by open grassland, scattered mature trees, a childrens playground, York Gardens Childrens Centre and a community centre/library. The park is surrounded by residential development to the north, east and south, and bounded by York Road to the west. This habitat is considered to be of local (low) value.
6.4.4
6.4.5
Notable species
Bats On site 6.4.7 All bats are European Protected Species under the Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and are listed as priority species on the UK BAP and London BAPs. The site is known to support foraging and commuting bats including common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus and soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus bats within the site (as indicated by the bat triggering surveys). There is potential for roosts to be present on the site. The value of the bat resource will be reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.4.8 Existing data search records have not shown bats recorded within 500m of the site. As noted in para. 6.4.7 bat triggering surveys have indicated the presence of foraging and commuting bats within the site. Trees and buildings near to the site may support roosting bats, in particular, those within the adjacent York Gardens. The baseline and value of the bat resource in the surrounding area will be reported in the ES.
6.4.9
Page 44
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Breeding birds On site 6.4.10
Any birds nesting within site vegetation are likely to be bird species common to the area, including some that are listed as London and UK BAP priority species. The number of nests that the structures and vegetation could support is small. The bird resource on site is therefore considered to be of site (low) value. Surrounding area Data searches have identified that the house sparrow Passer domesticus (Red status 14, London BAP species, UK BAP species) has been recorded within 500m of the site. It is considered likely that the wider area to the site provides some nesting habitat for small numbers of birds during the breeding season. Therefore, the bird resource adjacent to the site is considered to be of local (low) value. Other notable species On site
6.4.11
6.4.12
The habitat on site is considered to be sub-optimal for a notable assemblage of invertebrate species. Therefore, the invertebrate resource is considered to be of site (low) value. Surrounding area No records of any notable invertebrates have been identified within 500m of the site. Habitat within the vicinity of the site is considered to be of site (low) value.
6.4.13
6.5
Construction assessment Habitats

On site
6.5.1
It is probable that the permanent loss of semi-natural habitat of site (low) value would be significant at the site level only (minor adverse effect). Surrounding area No significant effects have been identified that would affect habitat in the surrounding area (negligible).
6.5.2
Notable species
Bats On site 6.5.3 Site clearance would result in a permanent loss of semi-natural vegetation that may provide a foraging resource for bats. Effects, such as lighting, noise and vibration from the works, could cause disturbance to bats leading to displacement from foraging areas. It is probable that the loss of potential bat foraging habitat and disturbance to bats from noise, vibration and lighting may have a significant effect at the local level (minor adverse effect).
6.5.4
Page 45
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Surrounding area 6.5.5
Due to the localised nature of the works on site and the presence of suitable foraging habitat within the wider York Gardens, disturbance effects from lighting and noise are unlikely to be significant. Breeding birds On-site
6.5.6
Site clearance would result in the loss of a relatively small amount of seminatural vegetation that could provide nesting habitat for a range of common bird species including some that are listed on the UK and London BAPs. Activities on site that cause temporary effects, such as noise, vibration and lighting effects, could disturb birds that use the site for refuge or feeding purposes. It is probable that the loss of bird nesting and foraging habitat of site (low) value would be significant for birds at the site level (minor adverse effect). Surrounding area Displacement of birds from adjacent habitat may render a small area of nesting habitat unsuitable to birds. This is unlikely to affect the breeding ability of these birds as alternative habitat is available within the area. Therefore it is considered probable that the effect on birds would not be significant (negligible). Other notable species On-site
6.5.7
6.5.8
6.5.9
Site clearance would result in the loss of semi-natural habitat that may support invertebrate species. It is considered probable that the loss of invertebrate habitat of site (low) value would be significant for invertebrates at the site level (minor adverse effect). Surrounding area The loss of a small area of invertebrate habitat on site is unlikely to have a significant effect (negligible) on populations of invertebrates within the surrounding area.
6.5.10
6.6
6.6.1
Operational assessment
As stated in para. 6.1.3, the operational phase is not considered to result in significant effects on terrestrial ecology and therefore this is not included in assessed.
6.7
6.7.1
Approach to mitigation Mitigation of construction effects

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.
Page 46
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. Mitigation for potential effects associated with the presence of bats (subject to the results of bat surveys) c. Replacement planting to mitigate for effects on habitats, bats and birds.
Page 47
6.8
Assessment summary
Construction
Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Unlikely to be significant (negligible)
Vol 14 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology summary of construction assessment
Receptor
Habitats Probable site level (minor adverse effect) Probable site level (minor adverse effect) Probable local level (minor adverse effect) Probable local level (minor adverse effect) Replanting Replanting
Ruderal and shrub vegetation
Permanent loss on site
Scrub vegetation
Permanent loss on site
Notable species Replacement planting, wildflower areas Disturbance minimisation measures.
Bats
Loss of foraging resource on site
Disturbance from lighting, noise and vibration on and adjacent to site Probable site level (minor adverse effect) Probable site level (minor adverse effect)
Breeding birds
Loss of foraging and nesting habitat on site
Replacement planting Replacement planting
Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Unlikely to be significant (negligible)
Other notable species invertebrates
Loss of invertebrate habitat on site
Page 48
6.9
6.9.1
Bat and invasive species surveys are ongoing in 2011 as summarised in 6.4. The data from these surveys will be used to inform the ES and further evaluation 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 in the EIA. Consideration will be given to biodiversity enhancement measures in consultation with stakeholders. Where possible, these mitigation and enhancement measures will be embedded in the scheme design.
6.9.2
Page 49
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 heritage asset effects at the Falconbrook 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 para. 7.4.48 below). These might comprise below and above ground archaeological remains, buildings, structures, monuments or heritage landscapes within or around the site 15. This section should be read in conjunction with Volume 6: route overview, 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 summarised in this section, 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 construction aspects of specific relevance to the historic environment assessment are: a. Enabling works will require demolition of a disused toilet block, screening chamber and boundary wall; the establishment of a works compound and facilities; site preparation; and the diversion of existing services. b. The construction of permanent works comprising a Combined Sewage Overflow (CSO) shaft, and deep excavations for interception and valve chambers; a connection culvert and a connecting tunnel and 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 The proposed operation of the infrastructure at Falconbrook Pumping Station is described in Volume 3. No elements of the scheme are likely to result in any effects on the historic environment.
Page 50
7.3
7.3.1

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.
Baseline
7.3.2 The baseline methodology follows that set out in Volume 5, with a key component being a desk based assessment, consulting 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. The 300m-radius study area used for the assessment is considered through professional judgement to be most appropriate to characterise the historic environment potential of the site. Occasionally there may be reference to assets beyond the study area where appropriate, for example in the early and later medieval periods, 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 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. 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) for the assessment of construction effects would 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.
7.3.5
Operation
7.3.6 7.3.7 No direct operational effects during operation are anticipated and this is not considered further in the assessment. In terms of the historic setting of heritage assets, whilst operational effects were originally scoped out of the assessment, it has since been agreed with EH that indirect effects on the historic setting of heritage assets during the construction and operational phases should be covered for the project. However, at Falconbrook Pumping Station, given the lack of statutorily designated/ protected receptors in the wider study area, no assessment of setting effects is considered necessary. Therefore operational effects are not considered further, and nor are setting effects arising during the construction phase.
Page 51

7.3.8 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 solely on a desk based study and site visit. In particular, no intrusive archaeological investigation has been carried out on the site in the past and few have been carried out in the study area around the site. 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).
7.3.9
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 300m-radius 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 A site walkover survey was carried out on 7th April 2011. The light and weather conditions were dry and sunny. The interior of buildings located within the site were inspected on the 10th May 2011. The survey noted that the buildings on site are of brown and redbrick construction and concrete, and date to the end of the 20th century. No heritage assets
Page 52
were noted within the site. Several manhole covers indicate buried services.
Historic environment features

7.4.3 The historic environment features map (Vol 14 Figure 7.4.1) shows the location of known historic environment features within the 300m-radius 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. Vol 14 Figure 7.4.1 Historic features map (see Volume 14 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 study area contains no nationally designated (statutorily protected) heritage assets, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or registered parks and gardens. Local authority designations 7.4.6 The site does not lie within a conservation area and contains no locally listed buildings. The nearest locally listed building is the Church of St Peter and St Paul (hall and tower) off Plough Road, 150m to the south. The site lies within an archaeological priority area, which defines the potential of the historic and prehistoric floodplain of the Thames along Wandsworth riverside. Known burial grounds 7.4.7 There are no known burial grounds within the Falconbrook Pumping Station site or adjacent to it.
Site location, topography and geology

Site location 7.4.8 The site is bounded by York Road to the west, a community playground to the north and York Gardens to the east and south. The site falls within the historic parish of Battersea and formerly lay within the county of Middlesex, prior to being absorbed into the administration of the LB of Wandsworth. The site lies 195m to the east of the current course of the River Thames. The site lies immediately to the south of the subterranean course of the Battersea Creek, formerly known as the Falconbrook.
7.4.9
Page 53
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Topography 7.4.10
The site and immediate vicinity are flat with street levels along York Road and in York Gardens at approximately 104.0m ATD (above Tunnel Datum; the equivalent to 4.0m Ordnance Datum). Buildings occupy the northern, eastern and central parts of the site, between which is tarmac. The western and southwestern parts of the site are grassed areas. Geology The site straddles three geology types (British Geological Survey digital data). The northern edge overlies alluvium associated with the Falconbrook, a small tributary of the Thames entering the Thames floodplain from the southeast. The southern part of the site overlies Kempton Park river terrace (sand and gravel). In the central part of the site the gravel terrace is overlain with Brickearth (Langley Silt Complex: a fine-grained silt believed to have accumulated by a mixture of processes, eg wind, slope and freeze-thaw, mostly since the Last Glacial Maximum around 17,000BP). Where the Falconbrook has entered the Thames floodplain in the area of the site, it has eroded both the river terrace and the overlying Langley Silts backward in an easterly direction (British Geological Survey Sheet 270). There are no geotechnical/geological borehole records for the site. There is one borehole (TQ27NE1059) some 130m to the south of the site, on the river terrace, and four closely spaced boreholes (PR1100D, SR1099A, SR1099 B & C), 60m to the northwest, within the area of alluvium associated with the Falconbrook. The boreholes are relatively modern and area detailed, and the ground levels noted at these locations are similar to that of the site, at 104.1104.4m ATD. The boreholes near the Falconbrook revealed varying thicknesses of made ground. Two of the boreholes (PR1100D and SA1099A) revealed made ground 3.84.7m thick, overlying terrace gravels at 99.8100.6m ATD. Two boreholes (SR1099B & SR1099C) revealed 2.6m of made ground overlying alluvial clay associated with the Falconbrook Channel at 101.8m ATD, over terrace gravels at 101.0m ATD. The borehole on the river terrace to the south of the site (TQ27NE1059) revealed 3.2m of made ground lying directly on gravel terrace at 101.2m ATD. This borehole should be indicative of levels of terrace gravels lying beneath the southern half of the site, suggesting a similar depth of made ground may be present (the nature of such made ground is not known: the lower strata may contain remains of archaeological interest). Although the alluvium and the river terrace represent distinctly different geological areas, they are linked by the changing environmental conditions affecting the Thames and the Falconbrook. The alluvium on which the northern edge of the site lies extends in a westerly direction and probably accumulated throughout the late prehistoric period onwards. From the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age, the Falconbrook and its confluence with the Thames would have provided rich natural resources
7.4.11
7.4.12
7.4.13
7.4.14
7.4.15
7.4.16
7.4.17
7.4.18
Page 54
and the closeness of the high ground of the terrace a focus point for settlement/occupation. The Thames would have been fresh water until the late prehistoric, then becoming brackish and tidal due to the effect of rising relative sea level (RSL). This would have had an effect on the site area, as the Falconbrook would have been similarly brackish and tidal and is likely to have flooded the local area.
Past archaeological investigations within the study area

7.4.19 Seven archaeological investigations have been carried out within the 300m radius study area around the site, although none are within the site itself. The nearest investigations have been carried out at the Price Candles Factory (HEA 23 and 57), 60m to the west and southwest of the site, between 1991 and 2002. These investigations recorded medieval and post-medieval remains of a former residence of the Archbishops of York, and later post-medieval industrial development. An archaeological investigation 175m to the northwest (HEA 1), recorded a series of timber revetments from the 16th to the 18th century that would have supported the northern bank of a small tributary known as the Falcon Brook, near the confluence of the main Thames channel. Another archaeological investigation, 215m to the northeast (HEA 4), recorded a post-medieval well or cess pit. The results of these investigations, along with other known sites and finds within the study area, are discussed by period, below.
7.4.20
7.4.21
Archaeological and historical background of the site

7.4.22 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) 7.4.23 Throughout this period, the Falconbrook and its confluence with the Thames would have provided rich natural resources, with the nearby high ground of the terrace providing a focus for settlement or occupation. Over time the area at the confluence of the rivers would have become increasingly marshy and seasonally flooded as the rising RSL resulted in higher levels in the Thames and Falconbrook. The nearby wetlands would have provided valuable resources of food, water and mud and reeds for the production of pottery and for building materials. Evidence for prehistoric activity within the study area is limited to isolated chance finds, including an undated prehistoric flake and lithic implement 230m to the north of the site (HEA 10), a Bronze Age stone axe 200m to the northeast (HEA 9), a Middle Bronze Age sword from the Thames foreshore, 190m to the northwest (HEA 14), and a Middle Bronze Age ditch from the Prices Candles Factory, 75m to the west of the site (HEA 16). The finds may be residual (outside of the context that they were originally deposited), but the quantity suggests later prehistoric activity in the general area, the nature and extent of which is currently little understood.
7.4.24
Page 55
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Roman period (AD 43410) 7.4.25
The site lay 7.5km to the southwest of the Roman town of Londinium, which grew up in the mid-1st century AD in the area of the City of London. The relationship of London to settlements in its hinterland was symbiotic. Small, nucleated settlements, typically located along the major roads leading to the capital, acted both as markets and as producers to the capital16. Evidence for Roman activity in the study area is limited to an isolated chance find of a coin found 180m to the south of the site (HEA 12). The northern part of the site was probably located within or on the bank of the Falcon Brook, whilst the central and southern parts were on the dry land of the higher terrace gravels and suitable for settlement. The area was probably a rural landscape of open fields and scattered farmsteads. Early medieval (Saxon) period (AD 4101066) The site lay on the western edge of the manor (estate of Battersea), within a district of Wassingham. Battersea is first referred to in a 7th century charter, when land at Badoricesheah [Battersea] next [near] Hydaburn (the Falcon Brook) was granted to Barking Abbey by Erkenwald, Bishop of the East Saxons. It is not clear whether Barking Abbey subsequently held any lands in Battersea 17. Another charter, dated AD 693, mentions a district of Wassingham (or Walsingham). This probably extended along the River Thames between Battersea and Wandsworth, as far as the Wandle, 1.3km to the southwest of the site 18, and is likely to have included the site. Chance finds of artefacts from the Thames suggest Early Saxon activity at Battersea, and documentary sources indicate a riverside settlement had been established there by the late 7th century. In 19758, a small Middle Saxon occupation site was excavated at Althorpe Grove, (Greater London Historic Environment Record/GLHER ref. 031340; Museum of London site code AG75), 925m to the north of the site. Activity appears to have been domestic rather than trade or manufacturing, and was mainly dated to around AD 750800. The settlement is close to the site of the later medieval parish church 19. The GLHER also records Saxon occupation between Westbridge Road and Battersea Bridge Road, 1.1km to the northeast of the site (GLHER ref. 025276). No evidence of early medieval activity or occupation has been recorded within the study area. In all likelihood the site was located in open land beside the Falcon Brook (originally named Hidaburna). Later medieval period (AD 10661485) The site lay within the medieval manorial estate of Battersea. At the Norman Conquest (AD 1066), King William I seized the manor (sometimes known as the manor of Battersea and Wandsworth), and shortly afterwards granted it to the Abbey of Westminster in exchange for land in Windsor. It included meadow and woodland, and seven mills 20. During William's reign several parts of land of the manor were sold off. In AD 1225, Battersea was assigned to the monks of Westminster for their
7.4.26
7.4.27
7.4.28
7.4.29
7.4.30
7.4.31
Page 56
maintenance in bread and ale. From an account of the steward of the manor in AD 1303, it appears that the manors lands were directly farmed by the monks21. 7.4.32 The parish church of St Mary, on Battersea Church Road, 975m to the north of the site, is documented from AD1157, although the present building dates from AD 17756 22. The church, and the nearby manor house, which is documented from the 13th-century (GLHER ref 031567) formed the focus of the main settlement in the manor. The GLHER records another village (GLHER ref 025277) and manor house (GLHER ref 031568) close to modern Battersea Bridge Road, 1.1km to the northeast of the site. The site itself lay within, or immediately outside, the medieval hamlet of Bridges. The settlement probably took its name from a timber bridge on York Road over the Falcon Brook. The watercourse rose in Tooting Bec Common and flowed approximately along the course of modern Northcote Road and Falcon Road. It reached the Thames in the vicinity of modern Bridges Court, passing immediately to the north of the site. Bridge Court was a sub-manor by the 13th century (known as Sylverton, Bridges or, later, York Place). In the 15th century it was held by the Stanley family and by 1474 by the Bishop of Durham, Laurence Booth, later Archbishop of York, who bequeathed the estate to the See of York 23. The GLHER locates the manor house close to the bank of the Thames on York Place, 160m to the southwest of the site (HEA 13 and HEA 11). Booths manor house of Bridges Court (later known as York Place) may have been the first on the site 24. It was used by successive Archbishops of York throughout the later medieval and post-medieval periods. In 1996 and 1998, archaeological investigations at the Prices Candle Factory (HEA 2 and 7), 65m to the west of the site, and on the other side of York Road, recorded a remains of the southern side of the manor house, along with a fishpond. Throughout this period the site was located beside the medieval bridge over the Falcon Brook, and may have been in the area of the Bridges settlement, although little is known about it. It is possible that the hamlet grew up at a crossroads south of the bridge, 75m to the southwest of the site, as suggested by Rocques map of 1746 (Appendix A). Post-medieval period (AD 1485present) 7.4.36 Historic maps indicate that the site remained within open fields until the mid/late 19th century. Rocques map of 1746 (Appendix A), shows the northern part of the site crossed by the Falcon Brook whilst the southern part lies in an open pasture at the side of the main road. There is no indication of a nucleated settlement around the bridge (ie, of medieval origin), although there is a small settlement at the junction of York Place and York Road, 75m to the southwest of the site. The map shows York Place as an extensive walled property on the opposite side of the main road. In AD 1554, when Queen Mary had deprived Archbishop of York of his See, the mansion at York Place was broken into and plundered. The property was returned to the Archbishop of York in 1660. By 1753, the pioneering Battersea enamel works had been established on the site of
7.4.33
7.4.34
7.4.35
Page 57
the former manor house, and towards the end of the 18th century the property passed out of the ownership of the Archbishops and had a number of owners 25. In 1856, Prices Patent Candle Company Limited purchased the estate for the Prices Candle Factory (HEA 23 and 57). 7.4.37 The Battersea Tithe map of 1838 (not reproduced) shows no change within the site. The map shows the post-medieval development of York Place gardens and buildings to the west, on the opposite side of the main road. By 1874, the riverfront had become a thriving industrial area filled with warehouses, docks, several mills and large factories for silk, starch, candles and other materials. Between the river and Clapham Junction grew streets of terraced houses for the local workers and their families. As a response to the growing population a temporary church building and school house were erected on a small plot of land on Plough Road, and in 1876 St Peters Church was founded, 150m to the south of the site (HEA 8). The Ordnance Survey 1st edition 25:mile map of 186295 (Appendix A) shows the extensive suburban development. The central and southern parts of the site built up with rows of terraced houses along a new eastwest aligned Creek Road, whilst the northern part of the site lies in an open field. The Falcon Brook is not shown and has presumably been covered over: it is open on the north side of York Place. The map shows the extensive industrial complex of Prices Candle Factory on the former site of York Place estate to the west. The Ordnance Survey 2nd edition 25:mile map of 189698 (Appendix A) shows no change in the central and southern parts of the site, whilst the formerly open northern part of the site is occupied by a newly built row of terraced houses. The Ordnance Survey 3rd edition 25:mile map of 190920 (Appendix A) shows no change within the site other than the demolition of some buildings in the western part of the site, by York Road. In the mid-20th century, a pumping station was built in the vacant western part of the site and is shown first in the Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale map of 1951 (Appendix A). No other changes are shown within the site or the immediate vicinity. During the 1960s the former terraced housing on the site was cleared and left vacant, but for the pumping station on its western part as shown in the Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale map of 1964 (Appendix A). The Ordnance Survey 1:10,000 scale map of 1976 (not reproduced) shows the current buildings on the site surrounded by York Gardens. The existing pumping station buildings were built in the early 1970s as concrete building with brick cladding. The main pumping station building was built with a three level basement. The current site 7.4.45 The site currently includes a reinforced concrete framed building with brown brick infill and steel sheeting roof to the north; a smaller twostorey
7.4.38
7.4.39
7.4.40
7.4.41
7.4.42
7.4.43
7.4.44
Page 58
structure with an unusual roof shape to the south of this and a single storey concrete framed building along the eastern boundary of the site (Appendix A). Collectively they form the current pumping station. The main building is of two storeys above ground and contains a deep basement of three levels with steel-framed walkways running against the structural walls. The bottom floor and walls, to various heights, are clad in brown and terracotta tiles. Machinery and pipes related to the current function fill the basement (Appendix A). Natural light is provided by a series of lights running the full length and width of the second floor of the main building. 7.4.46 The smaller central building is formed in the same manner but has a triangular-shaped roof with vent facing south. There is a single-storey concrete-framed structure running north to south along the eastern boundary, formed in the same way as the first two structures. The pumping station is surrounded by a boundary wall of brown brick in English bond with a metal vehicular gateway and separate pedestrian access to the south creating a compound surrounding the station (Appendix A). Located in the southwestern corner of the site is a small rectangular building with chamfered corners and an overhang rectangular roof (Appendix A) (HEA 17). It is constructed of a reinforced concrete frame with red brick infill. There is a concrete string course running around the building and providing a lintel for the doorway and sills for the upper windows, grilled. The underside of the overhang is formed of shuttered concrete and roof is flat and coated with tar paper. This building dates to the late 20th century and is currently used as a community space, although at the time of the site visit, all windows and doors were blocked. A large, modern billboard slotted into cement block supports is located west of the pumping station.
7.4.47
Statement of significance: above ground heritage assets

Introduction 7.4.48 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 fully defined in Volume 5 and are briefly summarised as follows: a. Evidential value: the potential of the physical remains to yield evidence of past human activity. This might take into account date; rarity; state of preservation; diversity/complexity; contribution to published priorities; supporting documentation; collective value and comparative potential. b. Aesthetic value: this derives from the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from the heritage asset, taking into account what other people have said or written.
Page 59
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station c.
Historical value: the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through heritage assets to the present, such a connection often being illustrative or associative;
d. Communal value: this derives from the meanings of a heritage asset for the people who know about it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory; communal values are closely bound up with historical, particularly associative, and aesthetic values, along with educational, social or economic values. Within the site 7.4.49 The buildings within the site are dated to the mid to late 20th century and have no heritage significance. They are therefore not considered further in this assessment. A cobbled surface of granite sets (HEA 18) located immediately to the west of the pumping station, leading towards York Road (Appendix A) and appears to be aligned to a street layout that existed prior to the mass redevelopment of the area post 1945, and is probably an original street surface, retained for convenience. The surface would consequently hold very low significance for its evidential and historical connection with the former residential character of the area. Within the study area 7.4.51 York Gardens (HEA 19) lies to the southeast of the site (Appendix A). The gardens were constructed sometime after 1945, on an area that had been cleared of dense, closely populated housing, possibly due to bomb damage in the area. The gardens are not a designated heritage asset and do not lie within a conservation area. The gardens area a heritage asset of very low significance, in terms of its historic value as a local landmark. Opposite the site is 100112 York Road, originally part of the Prices Candle factory (HEA 20). This is a mid to late 19th-century industrial building complex constructed as part of the factory of Prices Patent Candles Ltd. The factory was established in 1856 and was a major employer and landmark in the area, finally closing its doors around 1995. The factory is considered to be of medium heritage asset significance 26.
7.4.50
7.4.52
Statement of significance: buried heritage assets on the site

Introduction 7.4.53 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.
7.4.54
Page 60
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Factors Affecting Survival 7.4.55
Archaeological survival potential across the site is likely to be variable, with low survival potential beneath existing buildings and high survival potential elsewhere. Remains within and beneath the alluvial deposits in the northwestern part of the site, and at the alluvial/gravel interface in the central and southern parts of the site, are likely to be intact. Archaeological remains potentially lie directly below the modern made ground. Likely impacts which may have compromised archaeological survival comprise: a. The deep basement of the existing pumping station would have removed any archaeological remains within its footprint. b. Foundations and services associated with other structures would have locally removed archaeological remains within their footprints. Service trenches and shallow pad or raft foundations would typically have removed archaeological remains to a depth of approximately 1.0 1.5mbgl, but potentially up to 2.0mbgl for sewage pipe trenches. Deeper, earlier, remains at the bottom of the alluvium and at the alluvial/gravel interface will have remained intact beneath this truncation. c. Mid- to late-19th century building foundations across the site: The construction of these foundations is likely to have partially removed earlier archaeological remains from within their footprint. Remains of the foundations themselves are however also considered as a part of the archaeological record.
Asset potential and significance 7.4.56 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. Palaeo-environment 7.4.57 The site has a high potential to contain palaeoenvironmental remains. The northern edge of the site is located partly on the alluvial floodplain at the confluence of the Thames and an ancient tributary, the Falconbrook. Palaeoenvironmental remains may be preserved within deep alluvial sediments. Such remains would potentially be of low asset significance, derived from their evidential value. Prehistoric 7.4.58 The site has low potential to contain prehistoric remains. Although the location of the site on well-drained and fertile gravels beside the Falconbrook would have been conducive to early settlement and farming, no remains of occupation or significant activity has been recorded in the study area. The main potential is for isolated residual prehistoric finds, of low asset significance, derived from their evidential value. Roman 7.4.59 The site has low potential to contain Roman remains. No archaeological remains of a Roman settlement have been recorded within the study area,
Page 61
and the only evidence comprises a coin and a ditch. The site was probably open fields throughout this period. Isolated artefacts and agricultural ditches would be of low asset significance, derived from the evidential value of such remains. Early medieval 7.4.60 The site has a low potential to contain early medieval remains. The site was located some distance from the known settlements. No evidence or finds of this date has been recorded within the study area. In all likelihood it lay within open fields. Isolated or agricultural remains would be of low asset significance, if present. This would be derived from the low evidential value of such remains. Later medieval 7.4.61 The site has a moderate potential to contain later medieval remains. The site possibly lay within, or immediately outside a small medieval settlement, beside a wooden bridge across the Falconbrook, and at the side of a road. Evidence of footings of buildings, rubbish and cess pits would be of medium asset significance. This would be derived from the evidential and historical value of the remains. Post-medieval 7.4.62 The site has a high potential to contain post-medieval remains. The site was developed in the mid 19th century for terraced housing and buried 19th-century foundations and cellars would be of low asset significance. This would be derived from the historical value of the remains.
Summary of asset significance

7.4.63 The table below provides a summary of the known or likely historic environment assets relevant to the proposed scheme. Vol 14 Table 7.4.1 Terrestrial ecology receptors (assets) and significance (value) Receptor (Asset) Mid 19th century or later cobbled surface to the west of the pumping station Asset type Significance (value) Very Low
Above ground/ within the site
100112 York Road, part of the former Prices Candle Above ground/ Factory outside the site York Gardens communal garden and open area High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains Above ground/ outside the site Buried/within the site
Medium
Very Low Low
Page 62
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Receptor (Asset) Low potential for isolated, residual prehistoric remains Low potential for redeposited Roman artefacts Low potential for isolated or agricultural early medieval remains Moderate potential for remains of later medieval settlement High potential for buried post-medieval 19th century remains, including the footings of previous houses Low potential for possible, previously unrecorded remains dating from the prehistoric period onwards
Section 7: Historic environment Asset type Low Significance (value)
Low
Low
Medium
Low
Unknown (low or medium, considering modern truncation)
7.5
Construction assessment Above ground heritage assets

Within the site
7.5.1
The mid-19th century or later cobbled surface to the west of the pumping station within the site is considered of very low heritage significance. It is likely that this would be removed during the process of site preparation, which would comprise a high magnitude of impact. The environmental effect would be negligible. Within the study area No impacts upon heritage assets outside the site have been identified.
7.5.2
Buried heritage assets

Enabling works 7.5.3 The following enabling works would potentially have an impact upon buried heritage assets:: a. The construction of the works compound would be likely to entail preliminary site stripping, assumed for the purposes of this assessment to extend to a depth of up to 0.2mbgl. Site fencing would be erected, supported by timber posts in concrete foundations. Office, storage and welfare facilities would be constructed upon pad
Page 63
foundations up to approximately 1mbgl, as assumed for the purposes of this assessment. b. The enabling works would also 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 potentially locally truncate archaeological remains. This would locally reduce the significance of the assets to negligible and would constitute a medium magnitude of impact. 7.5.4 There is a high potential for post-medieval remains of low asset significance to be present at the top of the archaeological sequence. These remains are most likely to be affected by the enabling works. Where such remains are removed there would be a minor adverse effect, allowing for the localised nature of the impacts. Construction works 7.5.5 Construction works with potential to impact on the historic environment comprise the following below ground works: a. The CSO shaft and inner and outer guide walls. b. The interception chamber c. The valve chamber, located between the interception chamber and shaft
d. The ventilation chambers and associated ducting. e. Connection tunnels and culverts between the chambers f. The foundations of the control kiosk, where these are located outside the footprint of the underground structures.
g. Construction of a crane base, including a concrete foundation within guide walls. 7.5.6 The construction works would entirely remove any archaeological remains within the footprint of the CSO drop shaft. Within the footprint of the interception chamber, valve chamber, ventilation chamber, control kiosk foundations and crane base, any archaeological remains present above the formation level of the works would be removed, reducing the significance of any affected assets present here to negligible. This would constitute a high magnitude of impact for these assets. The connection tunnel between the CSO drop shaft and Thames Tunnel would have no impact on archaeological remains as it would be bored at a level too deep to have any archaeological impact. The environmental effect would vary depending upon the significance of the assets removed, as detailed below: a. The site has a high potential for palaeoenvironmental remains of low asset significance. The removal of such remains would comprise a minor adverse effect.
7.5.7
7.5.8
Page 64
b. There is a low potential for isolated, residual prehistoric remains of low asset significance. The removal of such remains would constitute a minor adverse effect. c. There is a low potential for redeposited Roman remains of low asset significance. The removal of such remains would constitute a minor adverse effect.
d. The site has a low potential to contain isolated or agricultural early medieval remains of low asset significance. The removal of such remains would constitute a minor adverse effect. e. The site has a moderate potential to contain evidence of later medieval settlement activity, which would be of medium asset significance. The removal of such remains would comprise a moderate adverse effect. f. There is a high potential for post-medieval remains of low asset significance. If such remains are removed this would constitute a minor adverse effect.
g. There is a low potential for buried possible, previously unrecorded remains, the heritage significance of which is currently unknown (based on the extent of modern disturbance, no remains of high/very high asset significance are likely). Localised removal of these remains, if present, would result in a minor to moderate adverse effect.
Significance of Environmental Effect

7.5.9 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.
Page 65
Vol 14 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment summary of construction effects Impact (magnitude, and justification) Above ground heritage assets High Removal during site preparation Negligible Effect (prior to mitigation)
Asset (resource)
Cobbled mid 19th-century road surface to the west of the pumping station within the site (Low asset significance) Buried heritage assets High Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible High Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible High Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible High Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible High Minor adverse
High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains (Low asset significance)
Low potential for isolated, residual prehistoric remains (Low asset significance)
Minor adverse
Low potential for redeposited Roman artefacts (Low asset significance)
Minor adverse
Low potential for isolated or agricultural early medieval remains (Low asset significance)
Minor adverse
Moderate potential for later medieval
Moderate adverse
Page 66
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Impact (magnitude, and justification) Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible High Assets removed by enabling works, excavation for CSO shaft, and other constructions. Asset significance reduced to negligible Unknown Minor adverse Effect (prior to mitigation)
Asset (resource) settlement remains (medium asset significance)
High potential for buried 19th century remains, including the footings of previous houses (low asset significance)
Uncertain potential for possible previously unrecorded remains
Uncertain (minor to moderate)
Page 67
7.6
7.6.1
Operational effects
As stated in para 7.2.4 the operational phase is not considered to result in significant effects on the historic environment and therefore this is has not been assessed.
7.7

Above ground heritage assets
7.7.1
In terms of above ground heritage assets, as no significant adverse effects have been identified within the site or the surrounding study area, mitigation is not required. Buried heritage assets 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 would be likely to include the following: a. An archaeological watching brief during site preparation and construction to mitigate impacts upon post-medieval remains of low significance, arising from service diversions and foundations for offices and welfare on the landward side of the existing river wall. b. Archaeological excavation and recording of archaeological remains within the footprint of the proposed CSO drop shaft and other deep constructions (ie, valve chamber, interception chamber etc). If the alluvium is particularly deep in this area of the site, mitigation of the impacts of deeper constructions on palaeoenvironmental and prehistoric remains would only become feasible following the insertion of the perimeter walls/shaft segments of each construction (the shaft, the chambers etc). Targeted archaeological investigation would proceed as the ground within the perimeter walls/shaft segments is excavated downwards.
7.7.2
7.7.3
7.7.4
Page 68
Both evaluation and mitigation would be carried out in accordance with a scope of works (Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI)) which would 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 application.
Page 69
7.8
Vol 14 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment construction assessment Significance of effect Buried heritage assets Minor adverse Environmental sampling during archaeological excavation Negligible Negligible Mitigation Residual Effect
Assessment summary
Asset (receptor)
High potential for palaeoenvironmental remains (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Low potential for isolated, residual prehistoric remains (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Low potential for redeposited Roman artefacts (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Negligible
Negligible Archaeological excavation and recording to achieve preservation by record
Low potential for isolated or agricultural early medieval remains (Low asset significance) Moderate adverse
Moderate potential for later medieval settlement remains (Medium asset significance) Minor adverse
Negligible
High potential for buried 19th century remains, including the footings of previous houses (Low asset significance)
Negligible
Page 70
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect Buried heritage assets Uncertain Negligible Mitigation Residual Effect
Asset (receptor)
Uncertain potential for possible previously unrecorded remains (Unknown asset significance)
Page 71
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 geoarchaeological monitoring of geotechnical boreholes (clarifying depth and nature of deposits). Possible effects of ground settlement resulting from deep constructions within the site, other than the tunnel itself (this will be discussed in Volume 6: project-wide 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 72
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This section 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: The works at Falconbrook Pumping Station will include the construction of the following: a. a CSO drop shaft to 40 metres below ground level (mbgl); b. an interception chamber; c. a connection culvert; d. a valve chamber; and e. a connection tunnel to the main tunnel.
8.2.2
8.2.3 8.2.4 8.2.5
It is not thought that any dewatering or ground treatment will be required at this location. The plan shown in Vol 14 Figure 3.1.1 - Vol 14 Figure 3.1.3 provides an indicative extent and layout of the construction site. On completion of the civil works for the shaft a capping concrete slab will be located above the shaft with permanent access facilities. The area will then be landscaped and public access will be allowed across most of the area.
8.3
8.3.1 8.3.2

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.
Construction and operation

8.3.3 8.3.4 The construction and operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Page 73

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 site.
8.4
8.4.1
Baseline conditions
Baseline conditions have been assessed 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 was sourced from the Thames Tunnel Geographical Information Systems (GIS) database, including historic maps and environmental records. A full list of the data sets drawn upon in this assessment is presented in Volume 5 methodology. In addition information has been sourced from stakeholder consultation and results from a preliminary intrusive ground investigation undertaken by the Thames Tunnel project.
8.4.2
Site walkover
8.4.3 A walkover of the site at Falconbrook Sewage Pumping Station was undertaken on the 25th May 2011. The walkover survey was conducted from publicly accessible areas only. A walkover report is contained in Appendix B. Apart from the sewage pumping station and electrical substation no significant contamination sources were noted on or adjacent to the site.
8.4.4
Site history and surroundings with potential for contaminants

8.4.5 The table below 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. Items listed in the table below are also show in Vol 14 Figure 8.4.1. Vol 14 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses (see Volume 14 Figures document) Vol 14 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses Ref Item Inferred date of operation Potentially contaminative substances associated with item
8.4.6
On site 1 Sewage pumping c1951station present
Electrical
c1973-
Heavy metals, arsenic, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons, PCBs, pathogens (eg, faecal coliforms) Oils, PCBs
Page 74
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ref Item Inferred date of operation present
Potentially contaminative substances associated with item
substation Off site 3 a) Belmont works c1869(candle and c1955 soap) (55m north west) b) Grove works c1896 (55m north west)
c) Saw mill (55m north west)
c1896
Hydrocarbons (including tars, paraffin, waxes), fats, salts, acids. Mineral oils, metal ions including sodium, ammonium, calcium, glycerol. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, sulphates, phenol, acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs and cresols Content unknown
d) Associated tanks (55m north west) a) Silk manufactory (150m south west) b) Starch and glucose factory (150m south west) Engineering works (140m west) Saccharin works (150m south west) Southampton wharf (185m west) a) Sugar works (150m south west) b) Glucose works and associated tanks (150m south west) c) Works (150m south west)
c1916c1973 c1869c1874
c1973
Heavy metals, boron, nitrates, sulphates, asbestos, phenol, acetone, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, dieldrin, PCBs Oils, fuels, greases, diesel associated with machinery and back-up power, toluene, sulphides, acids, chlorine, ammonia. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Oils, fuels, greases, diesel associated with machinery and back-up power, toluene, sulphides, acids, chlorine, ammonia. Hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, sulphates, sulphides, chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Oils, fuels, greases, diesel associated with machinery and back-up power, toluene, sulphides, acids, chlorine, ammonia, heavy metals. Oils, fuels, greases, diesel associated with machinery and back-up power, toluene, sulphides, acids, chlorine, ammonia, heavy metals. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos,
c1896
c1896
c1896c1984
c1916c1949
c1950c1963
c1967c1975
Page 75
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ref Item Inferred date of operation
Potentially contaminative substances associated with item aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Oils, PCBs
10 11 12
Electrical substation (130m south west) Tank (160 west Tank (150m west) Heliport (185m north west) Garage (30m west)
c1950c1973 c1950c1963 1950-c1989 c1963present c1963c1989
Contents unknown Contents unknown Metals, hydrocarbons, VOCs, semi VOCs, particulate matter, oil/fuel hydrocarbons Heavy metals, asbestos, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, organolead compounds Contents of warehousing unknown
13
14
15
Group of warehouses (105m north west and 150m north west) Works (55m north west)
c1963c1989
c1963c1975
16
Works (65m south west)
c1963
17
a) Works (200m north)
c1963
18
19 20
21
22
b) Warehouse (200m north) Electrical substation (55m north east) Candle factory (165m west) Electrical substation (160m north east) Electrical substation (110m south) Electrical
c1989 c1973c1989 c1973c1989 c1973c1989 c1973present c1989-
Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Contents unknown Oils, PCBs
Hydrocarbons (including tars, paraffin, waxes), fats, salts, acids. Oils, PCBs
Oils, PCBs
Oils, PCBs
Page 76
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ref Item Inferred date of operation present c1989present c1949c1967
Potentially contaminative substances associated with item
23
24
substation (170m east) Electrical substation (145m south east) a) Works (200m south west)
Oils, PCBs
25
b) Steel construction works (200m south west) Tin box factory (220m south west) Electrical substation (225m south west)
c1950c1951
c1951
26
c1972c1989
Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, boron, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, arsenic, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Oils, PCBs
8.4.7
Historical mapping available for review was dated between 1869 and 1989. In summary the historical mapping has identified on site contaminative uses to be limited to the sewage pumping station and electrical substation. Mapping from 1869 shows the site at Falconbrook Pumping Station was developed with individual residential properties to the south and undeveloped land to the north of the site. Between 1896 and 1916 a small area of residential properties were demolished at the south west corner of the site, this area was subsequently redeveloped by 1920 and was identified as a Pumping Station on mapping from 1950. The rest of the site still remained developed with individual residential properties. Between 1950 and 1963 all property on the site was demolished and between 1963 and 1973 the current Falconbrook Pumping Station and electrical substation were developed, within the wider York Gardens public open space. The 250m search radius has identified that historically, the surrounding area is comprised of an industrial area to the west of the site and a mixed use residential/community area to the east of the site. Historical mapping has also identified the presence of earth mounds within the York Gardens area. These features are present on the available mapping from 1973-1989 and could indicate infilling of material.
8.4.8
8.4.9
8.4.10
8.4.11
8.4.12
Page 77
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Geology and hydrogeology 8.4.13
Data from British Geological Survey together with logs from boreholes excavated as part of previous investigations of the site indicate the geological succession as summarised in the table below. 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. The site is classified by the Environment Agency as not being within a Source Protection Zone (SPZ) for groundwater that is extracted for potable supply. The proposed drop shaft at this site would be constructed to an invert level of approximately 40 mbgl therefore the shaft would be founded in the London Clay Formation. Vol 14 Table 8.4.2 Land quality anticipated geology and hydrogeology Geological Unit/ Strata Made Ground Description Granular fill comprising sand and gravel or brick with some fragments of timber. Locally clay soils predominate. Medium dense to dense sand and gravel (predominantly quartz sand and flint gravel). Medium dense to dense to dense sand and gravel (predominantly quartz sand and flint gravel). Expected to be slightly sandy clay Multicoloured slightly calcareous Approximate Depth below ground level (m) 0.0-2.6 Hydrogeological classification Non applicable
8.4.14
8.4.15
8.4.16
Alluvium
2.6-3.4
Secondary A Superficial Aquifer
River Terrace Deposits
3.4-8.9
Secondary A Superficial Aquifer
London Clay Formation Harwich Formation
8.9-46.70 46.70-46.75
Unproductive strata Secondary A Bedrock Aquifer
Page 78
Section 8: Land quality Approximate Depth below ground level (m)
Geological Unit/ Strata
Description clast supported conglomerate.
Hydrogeological classification
Lambeth Group (Upper Shelly Beds) Lambeth Group (Upper Mottled Beds)
The Upper Shelly Beds is mainly a grey shelly clay, and occasionally sand dominated unit and shelly limestone. The Upper Mottled Beds comprise mottled or multicoloured, stiff or very stiff fissured clay, compact silt, and dense or very dense sand
46.75-49.30
Secondary A Bedrock Aquifer
49.30-53.40
Unexploded ordnance 8.4.17 During World Wars I and II the London area was subject to bombing. In some cases bombs failed to detonate on impact. During construction works unexploded ordnance or bombs (UXO) are sometimes encountered and are required to be made safe and disposed of. A desk based assessment for unexploded ordnance (UXO) threat was undertaken during 2009 for ground investigation works at the proposed development site. The report reviews information sources such as the Ministry of Defence (MoD), Public Records Office and the Port of London Authority (PLA). Three exploratory boreholes (SR1099A, SR1099 and PR1100) located approximately 50m and 40m west of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site were assessed (refer to Vol 14 Figure 8.4.2) It was concluded that at these boreholes there was no bomb damage indicated and there were no bombs reported. Vol 14 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality - proposed borehole locations (see Volume 14 Figures document) 8.4.20 Taking into account the findings of this study and the known extent of the proposed works it was considered that there is an overall low to medium threat from UXO immediately to the west of Falconbrook Pumping Station site. A revised risk assessment for the site itself will be prepared in due course and reported in the ES.
8.4.18
8.4.19
Page 79
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ground investigation data 8.4.21
There is currently no ground investigation data available for review. Other environmental records
8.4.22
Details of environmental records for the vicinity of the site held by the EA 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 listed in the table are also shown in Vol 14 Figure 8.4.3 Vol 14 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality - environmental records and waste sites (see Volume 14 Figures document) Vol 14 Table 8.4.3 Land quality records and waste sites Item On-site Within 250m of site boundary 0 0 3 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 1
8.4.23
Licensed Industrial Activities Hazardous Substance Sites Pollution incidents to controlled water Waste Treatment and Disposal Sites Landfill sites Industrial authorisations (IPPC, COMAH) Past Potential Contaminated Uses Registered Waste Transfer Sites Licensed Waste Management Facilities Licence Abstractions Local authority Pollution Prevention & Controls 8.4.24
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Within a 250m radius of the site at Falconbrook Pumping Station, inspection of the GIS mapping has identified one local authority Pollution Prevention and Control reportable incident situated approximately 55m west (relating to the candle factory site). The mapping identifies that the area to the west of the site is classified as an area of past potentially contaminated land use (the location of the previously identified candle and soap works, silk manufactory, saccharin works, engineering works tanks and garage refer to Vol 14 Figure 8.4.1 Several pollution incidents are noted in the Thames to the west. None of the above entries are considered to have significantly affected soil quality at the Falconbrook site.
8.4.25
8.4.26
Page 80
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Technical engagement 8.4.27
The LB of Wandsworth has been consulted for this site and concluded that it is unlikely that there is an issue of any significant land contamination within the area of the proposed site although there may be localized areas impacted by contaminants such as hydrocarbons or metallic species in the site of the ex-petrol servicing/garage area and there is no evidence of events to indicate that there is polluted land at the site, such as discoloration of soils or malodours. The stakeholder information has identified that from the 1930s mapping there were large storage tanks and silos present along the River Thames and Battersea Creek, serving the candle factory and this continued into the 1947 mapping. In the 1950s part of the creek was infilled such that it terminated less than 50m from the Thames. The area to the north of the creek had become warehousing and the eastern part of the candle factory became a garage. This was used for petrol sales between 1959 to 1968, then becoming used for car sales and servicing. The glucose works to the south was still operating, becoming redeveloped in the early 1990s. The factory area to the east of the current car park obtained planning permission for redevelopment to the current mixed business/residential flats in 1997. Relatively minor localized contamination with metals and hydrocarbons was remediated by excavation and off-site disposal. The storage tanks held waxes, which had low mobility within soil, and did not lead to significant contamination in their vicinity.
8.4.28
8.4.29
8.4.30
8.5
8.5.1
Assessment year: construction It is anticipated that land quality baseline conditions will not alter significantly for Year 1 of construction, from those described above by the commencement of the construction.
Development of conceptual model

8.5.2 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 8.5.5 The following potential sources of contamination have been identified: a. On site i. On site sources of contamination from current use as a Sewage Pumping Station and Electrical Substation
8.5.3 8.5.4
Page 81
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station ii. iii. b. Off site i.
Naturally occurring sulphate within the London Clay Formation Possible unexploded ordnance Adjacent past and present potential contaminated land uses, including the presence of a garage 60m west of the site.
Pathways 8.5.6 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 the shaft; e. direct contact of soils with construction materials; f. gas/vapour migration through pipes/foundations, along piles and into structures; g. accidental detonation of UXO during GI or construction activities. Receptors 8.5.7 The following receptors have been identified: a. Construction workers b. Site end users (maintenance staff and public) c. Built environment d. Controlled waters e. Off-site receptors park users and residences 8.5.8 8.5.9 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 8.5.10 Desk based information suggests that localised contamination may be present on site as a result of historical uses. 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 82
Construction workers involved in intensive below ground works are high sensitivity receptors. However there are a number of measures set out in the CoCP which aims to substantially reduce risks associated with construction activities (The Draft CoCP is appended to Volume 3 and the land quality methodology in Volume 5 provides further detail); these include: a. b. c. the remediation of the site so it is fit for purpose; the use of appropriate PPE as well as training and welfare for construction staff plus; and the employment of UXO specialist advice.
8.5.12
Overall the magnitude of the impact is likely to be negligible, giving a 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 procedures, 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 For impacts and effects to groundwater reference should be made to Section 13. The construction impacts, receptors and effects relating to land quality are shown in the tables below. Vol 14 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts - construction Impact Health impact on construction workers Magnitude, and justification Negligible measures such as use of correct PPE, safety briefings and remediation of contaminated soils reduce impacts substantially Negligible - measures such as UXO specialists employed to advise staff reduce impacts substantially Negligible - measures such investigation for selection of concrete mix for buried structures reduce impacts
8.5.13
8.5.14 8.5.15
Damage to built environment existing structures Damage to built environment proposed structures
Page 83
Vol 14 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptors - construction Receptor Construction workers Built environment - existing Built environment - proposed Value/sensitivity and justification High intensive below ground construction Low infrastructure Low infrastructure
Vol 14 Table 8.5.3 Land quality effects - construction Effect Negligible effect on built environment - existing Negligible effect on built environment - proposed Significance, and justification Not significant Not significant
Slight effect on construction workers Not significant
8.6
8.6.1
Operational effects could 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 will be working on the site occasionally and members of the public who will be able to access the completed hardstanding above the shaft. These are low (eg, maintenance workers visiting the site occasionally and wearing personal protection equipment) to high sensitivity receptors (eg, members of the public). Following the design measures incorporated into the construction phase (investigation, soil and groundwater remediation as necessary) as well as the placement of newly built hardstanding there is not considered to be any impacts to the future site users from pre-existing contamination in the completed development. 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 structures. The proposed built environment is a low sensitivity receptor and with the inclusion of the proposed measures such as suitable concrete mix design and soil remediation (as necessary), the impact of the effect is low giving a negligible effect overall (not significant).
8.6.2
8.6.3
8.6.4
8.6.5
Page 84
In addition it is possible that gas build up from sewage may impact proposed above ground structures. The risk of this is very limited and measures, such as site investigation, gas risk assessment and the incorporation of measures into the structure design (such as gas resistant membranes if necessary), mean the magnitude of impact is negligible. This gives a negligible effect (not significant) as shown in the tables below. Vol 14 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts - operation Impact Health impact on site end users Magnitude, and justification Negligible - Ventilation of shafts to ensure no gas build-up from sewage prevents risks to construction personnel from inground gases. Negligible - measures such as incorporation of gas membranes in buildings and suitable concrete mix design reduce impacts Negligible - measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils reduce risks substantially.
Damage to built environment proposed structures
Damage to built environment existing structures
Vol 14 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptors - operation Receptor Site end users Value/sensitivity and justification Industrial/infrastructure end use may be considered as low sensitivity. Low industrial/infrastructure Low industrial/infrastructure
Built environment existing Built environment - proposed
Vol 14 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
Page 85
8.7
8.7.1
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 86
8.8
Vol 14 Table 8.8.1 Land quality construction assessment Significance of effect Not significant Not required Not required Not required Not significant Not significant Mitigation
Assessment summary
Receptor
Construction workers
Slight effect on construction workers
Significance of residual effect No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Built environment existing structures
Negligible effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed structures Vol 14 Table 8.8.2 Land quality operational assessment Significance of effect Not significant Not significant Not significant Mitigation Not required Not required Not required
Negligible effect on built environment - proposed
Receptor
Site end users
Negligible effect on end users
Significance of residual effect No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Built environment proposed
Slight effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed
Slight effect on built environment - proposed
Page 87
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 88
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 Falconbrook 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 does not run beneath this location. 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. The construction works at this location would involve the following stages:
9.2.5 9.2.6
Page 89
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station a. Enabling works (including demolition)
b. Shaft sinking (including driven sheet piling) c. Construction of connection tunnels d. Interception and CSO works e. Completion work (including landscaping, and construction and fit-out of permanent facility). 9.2.7 The above ground works (activities a, b and e) have the potential to create airborne noise impacts. Some noise will be generated for activities c and d, however these activities will be mostly carried out below ground level, impacts from this activity are considered to be much lower. Activity e is likely to be much smaller in scale than the other activities considered here. Activities c, d and e have the potential to generate groundborne noise and vibration impacts, namely from vibratory compaction and dynamic compaction respectively. There will be sheet piling during the shaft sinking process (activity b) which would involve a piling rig driving sheet piles through the over lying soft ground to cut off any potential ground water ingress and the construction of the connection tunnels and the completion work (activities c and e) which involve the compaction of backfilled materials. Sheet piling methods are proposed at this location as part of the shaft construction, which would involve a piling rig driving sheet piles through the over lying soft ground to cut off any potential ground water ingress. 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. It is anticipated that it would only take a few days to drive in the sheet piles but the type of piling rig is still to be confirmed. The connection tunnel would be constructed by tunnel excavator and not tunnel boring machine (TBM) in this location. Of the two methods the tunnel excavator would give rise to much lower vibration and noise levels. Information for activities c and e (connection tunnel and completion work respectively) is not available at this stage of the design so these have not been assessed as part of this report. However, these activities are assumed to be much smaller in scale than the rest of the works, would not involve heavy construction operations and much of the connection tunnel and shaft fit-out works would in the main take place underground. Construction traffic would use the main strategic road network (York Road A3205) and would access the site directly off York Road. Estimated vehicle movement numbers are presented in Section 3. The majority of the activities would be carried out during standard (core) hours as identified in Vol 14 Table 3.3.1. As such, only daytime working is considered at this location. The exception to this is the requirement for 24 hour working 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
9.2.8
9.2.9
9.2.10
9.2.11
9.2.12
9.2.13
Page 90
disturbance. However, the potential for any associated activities at surface levels would be examined further in the ES when more information is available. Operation 9.2.14 The permanent installation would have above ground structures housing ventilation equipment and electrical and control equipment. This plant equipment would be required to operate under various different scenarios dependent on the flows into and along the tunnel, with the potential to operate at any time of the day or night. The plant installed and the cascade events have the potential to create noise and vibration impacts.
9.3
9.3.1
Assessment methodology
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. Baseline 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 three year construction period. 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 27. For non-residential receptors, comparison has been made to the noise levels reported from road traffic in the DEFRA London Noise Maps 28. 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 i. 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. Baseline traffic data are not currently available, and therefore although peak traffic movements are known, it is not possible to calculate the change in noise level that would arise at the identified receptor locations. A qualitative assessment has therefore been undertaken to consider the
9.3.2
9.3.3
9.3.4 9.3.5
9.3.6
9.3.7
See 9.2.13 for a discussion of 24 hour working
Page 91
likelihood of a significant effect given current traffic levels and considering the proposed peak daily lorry movements. Operation 9.3.8 The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

9.3.9 9.3.10 Noise-related environmental design measures have been assumed as defined in the CoCP. 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. The assessment has been carried out based on the assumption that the noisiest two activities within any one stage could potentially occur onsite 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. 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. While it is considered that there is a possibility for noise and vibration effects arising from water cascading during tunnel filling events at receptors very close to drop shafts, it has not been possible to adequately assess this as part of this report. The likely noise and vibration emissions however be estimated as the cascade design develops and will be reported in the ES.
9.3.11
9.3.12
9.3.13
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 will be located partially within the existing site of the Thames Water Falconbrook pumping station, which is located within York Gardens, just to the east of York Road (A3205), within the LB of Wandsworth. Access to the existing site is currently off Newcomen Roads to the east. Immediately on the northern perimeter of the site is York Gardens Childrens Centre and adventure playground, whilst to the south is York Gardens library and community centre.
9.4.2
Page 92
A new residential development is currently proposed directly opposite the Falconbrook Pumping Station. There are likely to be approximately 100 apartments within this new building, with many of these looking directly across York Road onto the Falconbrook site The existing closest residential properties are high rise flats, the closest of which is Pennethorne House to the east and Arthur newton House to the southeast. Directly behind Pennethorne House is the Thames Christian College School, which is well screened from the site by Pennethorne House. Further away from the site to the south, east and north, the area is comprised largely of residential buildings, of two and three storeys. The residential properties selected for the noise and vibration assessment are identified in the table below. These are shown in plan view in Vol 14 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 the table below. Vol 14 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration closest residential receptors (see Volume 14 Figures document)
9.4.4
9.4.5 9.4.6
9.4.7
Other non-residential noise sensitive receptors which have been assessed are York Gardens Community Centre and No.100 Lavender Road a childrens centre and adventure playground, both of which lay in close proximity to the site. These are also included in the table below. The noise climate around this area site is dominated by road traffic noise from York Road to the west, interspersed with local traffic along estate roads in the residential areas to the east. Passenger train movements along the mainline railway hub at Clapham Junction to the south of the site, is also a contributing noise source to the overall noise climate in this area.
9.4.8
Receptor sensitivity
9.4.9 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. There are no further non-residential receptors that have been identified in this area which would qualify for assessment. Vol 14 Table 9.4.1 Noise receptors Ref Receptor addresses Pennethorne House Arthur Building Use Residential Residential Sensiti vity High High No. of noise sensitive properties/areas 128 36
9.4.10
FB1 FB2
Page 93
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ref Receptor addresses Newton House FB3 York Gardens Community Community Facility Centre No.100 York Road Apartments No.100 Lavender Road Residential (proposed) Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground Building Use
Section 9: Noise and vibration Sensiti vity No. of noise sensitive properties/areas
Medium
FB4
High
Between 90 to 100
FB5
Medium
9.4.11
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 to the Falconbrook site are as shown in the table below. 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 14 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 N/A3 65
FB1 FB2 FB3 FB4
Pennethorne House Arthur Newton House York Gardens Community Centre No.100 York Road Apartments (proposed) No.100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure
A A N/A3 A
FB5
N/A3
N/A3
Page 94
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Playground

1 2
From ABC method BS5228:2009 (measured data not available lowest category assumed) Baseline measurement data not available for this report ABC method BS5228:2009 does not apply directly to non-residential receptors
9.5
9.5.1 9.5.2

The noise level for the base case for the assessment is expected to be as measured during the baseline noise levels for 2011. Where there is a variation in the conditions during the first year of construction year, 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 would cause the baseline noise levels at the receptor locations to change significantly between 2011 and the first year of construction. 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 as identified in 2011 plus any additional noise and vibration sources associated with this.
9.5.3
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 all locations, the top floor of residences would directly overlook the site despite the site hoarding. No acoustic screening has been assumed as a result of the presence of the trees Construction noise 9.5.7 The results of the assessment of construction noise are presented in Vol 14 Table 9.5.1 to Vol 14 Table 9.5.5 Pennethorne House 9.5.8 Pennethorne House is a large nine storey block of flats. The upper floors, from level two onwards, will directly overlook the site, and receive no screening from the site hoardings. Based on the BS 5228 impact criterion threshold, small excesses above the threshold are predicted to occur at ground level. At second floor level and above, larger exceedances above the impact threshold criterion will occur, between 9 and 12dB, at a large number of receptors which is therefore considered to be a significant effect.
9.5.6
9.5.9
Page 95
Vol 14 Table 9.5.1 Noise at FB1, Pennethorne House - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 128 Construction noise level1, dBLAeq Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
Pennethorne House Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -1 +2 +1 Approx. activity duration, months 3 7 6
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection Tunnels Second Floor2 Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection Tunnels
1 2
64 67 66
65 65 65
74 77 76
65 65 65
+9 +12 +11
3 7 6
Construction noise only Worst case floors assessed not necessarily the highest floor level.
Arthur Newton House 9.5.10 Arthur Newton House is a terraced three to four storey block of flats, which is situated along Lavender Road, approximately 90m east of the Falconbrook pumping station. Residences at ground floor and 1st floor level will benefit from screening offered by the site hoardings, however properties on the upper floors will not benefit from this noise screening. There are no exceedances predicted at ground level, which will benefit from screening provided by the site hoardings. However, exceedances will occur on the upper floor levels during all three phases of work assessed, between 4 and 7dB, at a large number of receptors which is therefore considered to be a significant effect. Vol 14 Table 9.5.2 Noise at FB2, Arthur Newton House - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 36 Significance criterion Value/sensitivity
Arthur Newton House Activity Construction noise level1,
High Magnitude/ justification
Page 96
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station dBLAeq
Section 9: Noise and vibration threshold level, dBLAeq Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -6 -3 -4 Approx. activity duration, months 3 7 6
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection Tunnels Second Floor2 Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection Tunnels
1 2
59 62 61
65 65 65
69 72 71
65 65 65
+4 +7 +6
3 7 6
Construction noise only Worst case floors assessed not necessarily the highest floor level.
York Gardens Community Centre 9.5.11 The single storey building serves as a local community centre and library which is situated within York Gardens, immediately to the south of the Falconbrook site. Whilst it will benefit from noise screening from the site hoardings, it is extremely close to the site. Therefore, the impact is such that construction noise is likely to cause disturbance at this community centre. Vol 14 Table 9.5.3 Noise at FB3, York Gardens Community Centre construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 1 Assumed Ambient baseline dBLAeq2 65-70 Value/ sensitivity Medium Magnitude/ justification
York Gardens Community Centre Activity Constructi on noise level1, dBLAeq 84
Ground Level Enabling Works 16dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 3 months 19dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 7
Shaft Sinking
87
65-70
Page 97
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Receptor
Section 9: Noise and vibration No. of noise sensitive properties 1 Value/ sensitivity Medium Magnitude/ justification
York Gardens Community Centre Activity Constructi on noise level1, dBLAeq 86 Assumed Ambient baseline dBLAeq2 65-70
months Connection Tunnels 18dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 6 months
1 2
Construction noise only From DEFRA London Noise Maps
100 York Road (under development) 9.5.12 A new residential development is currently building built directly opposite the Falconbrook Pumping Station. There are likely to be between 90 to 100 apartments within this new building, with many of these looking directly across York Road onto the Falconbrook site. The lower ground floors will be completely screened from site activities, providing beneficial attenuation of construction noise. However, properties on the upper floor levels will not benefit from noise screening due to the proximity of the building to the works. The impact criterion will be exceeded at ground and upper floor levels during each of the stages assessed. Based on the BS5228 impact threshold criterion, these increases will result in a significant impact. Vol 14 Table 9.5.4 Noise at FB4, 100 York Road - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 90-100 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
100 York Road New Apartments Activity Construction noise level1, dBLAeq
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq +5 +8 +7 Approx. activity duration, months 3 7 6
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection 70 73 72 65 65 65
Page 98
Section 9: Noise and vibration No. of noise sensitive properties 90-100 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
100 York Road New Apartments Activity Construction noise level1, dBLAeq
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq Approx. activity duration, months
Tunnels Second Floor2 Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Connection Tunnels

1 2
80 83 82
65 65 65
+15 +18 +17
3 7 6
Construction noise plus measured ambient Worst case floors assessed not necessarily the highest floor level.
100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground 9.5.13 This building is used as a Childrens centre/Adventure Playground and is situated within York Gardens, immediately to the north of the Falconbrook site. There is also an adventure playground area just the north, which is a part of this community facility. This building is single storey only. However, whilst it will benefit from noise screening from the site hoardings, it is extremely close to the site. Therefore the impact is such that construction noise is likely to cause disturbance at this community facility. Vol 14 Table 9.5.5 Noise at FB5, 100 Lavender Road - construction Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 1 Value/ sensitivity Medium Magnitude/ justification
100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre/ Adventure Playground Activity Constructi on noise level1, dBLAeq 78 Assumed Ambient baseline dBLAeq2 65-70
Ground Level Enabling Works 10dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 3 months
Page 99
Section 9: Noise and vibration No. of noise sensitive properties 1 Value/ sensitivity Medium Magnitude/ justification
100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre/ Adventure Playground Activity Constructi on noise level1, dBLAeq 81 Assumed Ambient baseline dBLAeq2 65-70
Shaft Sinking
13dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 7 months 12dB increase relative to assumed average baseline ambient noise levels over 6 months
Connection Tunnels
80
65-70
1 2 3
Construction noise only From DEFRA London Noise Maps Worst case floors assessed not necessarily the highest floor level.
Construction traffic 9.5.14 Baseline traffic data is not currently available, 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. The noise impact associated with the small proportionate increase in lorry traffic on the local road network is likely to be low in magnitude. As discussed above this is a qualitative assessment made in the absence of traffic data and would be assessed in more detail in the ES. Construction vibration 9.5.16 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), according to the criteria given in Volume 5. The results of the assessment of construction vibration are presented in the following table.
9.5.15
9.5.17
Page 100
Vol 14 Table 9.5.6 Vibration impacts - construction Ref Receptor Impact Value/ Magnitude and (highest sensitivity justification predicted PPV across all activities, mm/s) 0.5 High No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage 0.3 High No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage 0.5 Medium No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage 1.3 High No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage Medium No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage
FB1
Pennethorne House
FB2
Arthur Newton House
FB3
York Gardens Community Centre
FB4
No.100 York Road Apartments
FB5
No.100 Lavender 4.0 Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground
9.5.19 9.5.20
The vibration levels reported here are well below the levels likely to cause building damage according to the criteria described in Volume 5 Section 2. The assessment of potential construction vibration impacts due to human response at neighbouring receptors has been assessed using the predicted estimated Vibration Dose Value (eVDV). The results from the assessment are presented in the table below.
Page 101
Vol 14 Table 9.5.7 Vibration and human response - construction Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted VDV across all activities, m/s1.75) 1 0.26 Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification2
FB1
Pennethorne House
High
Impact: low probability of adverse Comment No Impact: Below low probability of adverse comment No impact: Non-residential below low probability of adverse comment Impact: adverse comment possible Impact: Non-residential adverse comment probable
FB2
Arthur Newton House
0.10
High
FB3
0.26
Medium
FB4
0.78
High
FB5
No.100 Lavender 3.43 Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground
Medium
Worst affected floor Categorisation of magnitude as defined in Volume 5 Section 2
9.5.21
All of the predicted eVDV levels are based upon the worst case conditions that may arise during vibration intense activities within the site compound. Potentially high vibration levels are predicted at 100 York Road apartments and 100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre/Adventure playground due to compaction activities taking place very close to these buildings. The precise methods used for this procedure would be considered in more detail to verify the predictions. However, this assessment indicates that there is a risk of relatively high exposure levels and in order to reduce the levels as far as possible, the methodology for providing compaction near these buildings may need to be reviewed. At
Page 102
Pennethorne House there is predicted to be a small excursion into the low probability of adverse comment category. Summary of construction effects 9.5.22 The table below 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 construction 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 14 Table 9.5.8 Noise and vibration construction effects Ref FB1 FB2 FB3 FB4 FB5 Receptor Pennethorne House Arthur Newton House Significance, and justification Noise Significant Significant Vibration Significant Not significant Not significant Significant Significant
9.5.23
York Gardens Significant Community Centre No.100 York Road Apartments No.100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground Significant Significant
9.5.24 9.5.25
The assessment identifies significant noise and/or vibration effects at all assessed receptor areas. Based on the impacts assessed there are no significant effects predicted for construction traffic.
9.6
9.6.1
Operational assessment Operational base and development cases

As discussed in para. 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.
Page 103
For vibration, no change is assumed between the present time and future base case.
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) 29 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. The table below contains a summary of the assessment results for operational noise. Vol 14 Table 9.6.1 Airborne noise impacts - 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
9.6.4
FB1
Pennethorne House
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
FB2
Arthur Newton House
High
FB3
Medium
FB4
High
Page 104
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Ref Receptor Impact
Section 9: Noise and vibration Value/ sensitivity Medium Magnitude and justification Change in ambient subject to local authority limits no adverse impact
FB5
No.100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground
Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142
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 Volume 2 Section 6. 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. As no impacts have been identified from the operation of the site, no significant effects have been identified. As no impacts have been identified from the operation of the site, no significant effects have been identified. These are shown in the table below. Vol 14 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration effects operation Ref Receptor Significance, and justification Noise from surface site ventilation plant FB1 FB2 FB3 FB4 FB5 Pennethorne House Arthur Newton House York Gardens Community Centre No.100 York Road Apartments No.100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Noise from maintenance operations. Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
9.6.7
9.6.8
9.6.9 9.6.10
Page 105
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. Significant effects as a result of construction noise have been identified at all receptors, hence additional mitigation would be applied where practicable and effective at these locations. This is based on a worst case assessment where the two noisiest activities in any stage happen concurrently and over the entire duration of the stage. This is a conservative approach considered appropriate for the level of information provided in this report and will be refined once further information is available at the ES stage. The buildings affected are all more than two stories high, and close to the site, and as such the standard site hoarding only provides screening to the ground floor of the properties. For all properties with significant noise effects, the hoarding height would need to be extremely high to reduce the noise levels at these properties. It is likely that hoarding at a height to provide effective screening would not be practicable. Significant vibration effects have also been identified at three receptors and additional mitigation would be applied where practicable and effective at these locations. All stages of works assessed as having the potential to give rise to likely significant effects (enabling works, shaft sinking and connection tunnels) would require additional mitigation, if practicable, to supplement the best practicable means (BPM) environmental design measures assumed for all sites. The quantitative assessment has assumed only general BPM measures, as far as it is possible to incorporate these in the noise and vibration prediction exercise. These include site boundary screening, careful selection of modern construction plant, and positioning of equipment. To address significant effects, specific solutions will be developed as appropriate to provide additional mitigation targeted on those noise and vibration sources generating the highest noise/vibration levels at the relevant receptor. For example, within this more detailed mitigation design, the use of localised screens and customised enclosures around the item of plant or the process would be considered. For the purposes of this report and at this stage of the design, site specific additional mitigation beyond BPM measures has not been identified in the assessment. However, when the potential mitigation options for the illustrative scheme can be confirmed, this will be presented in the ES.
9.7.3
9.7.4
9.7.5
9.7.6
Page 106
Operation
9.7.7 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. It should be noted that operational plant design for the ventilation of the tunnel would include environmental design measures to meet noise limits agreed with the local authority to avoid significant effects
9.7.8
Page 107
9.8
Vol 14 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration construction assessment Significance Significant Significant Significant Not significant Significant Not significant Significant Significant Significant Significant None required Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES None required Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation to be reported in the ES Mitigation Residual significance
Assessment summary
Construction
Receptor
Effect
Pennethorne House
Noise
Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Not significant Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Not significant Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options)
Vibration
Arthur Newton House
Noise
Vibration
Noise
Vibration
Noise
Vibration
Noise
No.100 Lavender Road Childrens Centre / Adventure Playground
Vibration
Page 108
Operation
Vol 14 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 Not significant Not significant None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant None required Not significant Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Effect
Pennethorne House
Noise
Vibration
Arthur Newton House
Noise
Vibration
Noise
Vibration
Noise
Vibration
No.100 Lavender Road
Noise
Vibration
Page 109
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 this 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. It has not been possible to adequately assess the potential for noise and vibration from water cascading down drop shafts during tunnel filling events. The likely noise and vibration emission will be estimated as the cascade design develops and will be included in the ES. 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 9.9.7
Page 110
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 Falconbrook 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, in the main, be located within the existing pumping station site, and would be solely accessible by maintenance staff. The exception is the shaft which will require periodic maintenance (see para 3.2.19). On this basis, there would be no public access to any operational structures and little direct impact on any existing public areas. As such, there is no requirement to assess socio-economic impacts of the permanent above-ground structures during the operational phase.
10.1.2
10.1.3
Potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts during the operational phase are likely to be relatively modest or non-existent and impacts, if any, are likely to be able to be readily contained. As a result, they are unlikely to cause deterioration in the amenity experienced by users of nearby open spaces, residents or other adjacent sensitive receptors.
10.2
10.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to socio-economics are as follows. Construction Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to limit, and in some cases eliminate, any unacceptable air quality, noise, vibration, and visual impacts could reduce socio-economic impacts, particularly amenity impacts. See Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this Volume for detail on the type of measures that may be employed. The construction site area straddles the existing boundary of Falconbrook Pumping Station and land to the west which is currently a disused toilet block and hardstanding. Both the 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 Section 10.1, it is considered that there is no potential for any significant socio-economic operational effects.
10.2.2
10.2.3
10.2.4
10.2.5
10.2.6
Page 111
10.3
10.3.1
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. The Scoping Report was prepared before the Falconbrook site had been identified and therefore it has not been the subject of formal scoping. The scope for the assessment of this site has therefore drawn on general comments made as part of LB Wandsworths scoping opinion, feedback from on-going stakeholder consultation and professional judgement. Baseline 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: a. The assessment years used for socio-economic effects in terms of construction activity are estimated to cover approximately a three year period. Operational
10.3.2
10.3.3
10.3.4
As described in Section 10.1, it is considered that there is no potential for any significant socio-economic operational effects.

10.3.5 The following assumptions and limitations apply to the above findings: a. York Gardens are well used in the existing baseline situation, and that both the usage levels and quality of the park as it is at the present time (observed to be good) are likely to remain the same under a construction base case scenario. b. York Gardens Library and Community Centre and York Gardens Adventure Playground are well used in the existing baseline situation and that both the usage levels and quality of the facilities as it is at the present time are likely to remain broadly the same under a construction base case scenario. 10.3.6 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 respective topic areas (see Sections 4, 9 and 11 respectively). The socio-economic assessment has had reference to the preliminary findings of these topic assessments.
Page 112
10.4
Baseline conditions
York Gardens Childrens Centre and York Gardens Adventure Playground
10.4.1
The York Gardens One Oclock Childrens Centre and the York Gardens Adventure Playground are managed by LB Wandsworth and are situated next to one another within York Gardens immediately adjacent to the northern perimeter of the site boundary. The Childrens Centre is one of several in the LB Wandsworth. Together these facilities comprise a one storey modern building and grounds which include play facilities for under-five year olds. Generally, these centres provide a range of services for young children and their parents 30. The childrens centre at York Gardens provides opportunities for indoor and outdoor play (including in association with the adjacent supervised York Gardens Adventure Playground see para. 10.4.3); meeting rooms and informal space where parents and carers can meet with each other; and information and advice on parenting 31. The York Gardens Adventure Playground is attached and lies adjacent to the childrens centre to the north of the northern perimeter of the site boundary, providing adventure play facilities for five to 16 year olds. Both the childrens centre and adventure playground are used by both parents and children, and as a work place for the centres staff. In terms of considering the sensitivity of the users of the childrens centre and adventure playground, it is noted that children are generally considered to be more sensitive to certain amenity effects, such as noise and air pollution than adults. Children and parents, as users of the centre are likely to use it only at certain times of the week and so are not likely to be exposed to any potential effects for prolonged and continuous periods of time. Due to the limited opening hours of the centre (approximately two to three hours daily, weekdays during school term time 32), it is likely that staff at the centre will only be at the premise for a short period of time, and therefore are not likely to be exposed to potential amenity effects for a prolonged period. On this basis, it is considered that users and employees of this community facility are likely to have a medium level of sensitivity to any potential amenity effects. Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 presents a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context (see Volume 14 Figures document) York Gardens Library and Community Centre
10.4.2
10.4.3
10.4.4
10.4.5
10.4.6
York Gardens Library and Community Centre is situated within York Gardens, directly to the south of the proposed construction site. It comprises a two storey (including the ground floor) brick building which offers library services and two flexible rentable meeting spaces which have a combined capacity of 240 persons 33, and associated car parking facilities. The Library and Community Centre lies immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the construction site.
Page 113
The northeastern portion of the building has glass windows from floor to ceiling and a further number of small windows on the north, east and south sides of the building. These windows offer people inside the centre a pleasant outlook over York Gardens, partially beneath the canopy line of the mature trees planted adjacent to the building entrance. While the number of centre users is currently unknown, it is likely that there is a high level of usage due to the residential nature of the area and the variety of services and events offered (including internet access, a reading group, music and book lending library, talks and seminars, as well as a community meeting place 34). The capability of the users and employees of the Library and Community Centre to cope with the changes in amenity is considered limited due to the close proximity of the construction site to the library premises, the nature of activities which are likely to occur in the library (users would generally be expected to have a preference/requirement for quiet conditions) and the design of the northeast portion of the library building (which includes floor to ceiling glass windows). Additionally, users of the centre are generally likely to come from the local area and it is unlikely that they would find it convenient to access an alternative but similar facility. However, it is considered that the main timeframe of users exposure to the construction effects would be during their arrival at and departure from the building and using the car park, since activities at the library and community centre occur indoors. On the basis of the above factors, it is considered that the sensitivity of users and employees of this community facility is likely to be medium. Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 presents a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. York Gardens Public Open Space York Gardens is a large area of open amenity space which surrounds the proposed construction site to the north, east and south. The site is a functioning area of public open space that is approximately 2.5ha in size and is accordingly classified as a local park under the GLA Open Space Hierarchy 35. The size and layout of the site allow for active and passive recreation. York Gardens Library and Community Centre, Childrens Centre and Adventure playground are all surrounded themselves by York Gardens, at the northwestern perimeter of the gardens. York Gardens has areas of grassed open space (predominantly to the south but also smaller areas to the north), with a formal landscaped garden area and benches in the approximate centre of the gardens, just to the south of the proposed construction site. There are paved pedestrian footpaths running through and around the perimeter of the garden and it is securely fenced with restricted opening hours (generally dawn to dusk). There is an active recreation area in the southern portion of the garden, with approximately 16 pieces of publicly accessible outdoor gym equipment for use by adults and older children. There are six entrance/ exit points to this open space. Trees planted around the perimeter of York Gardens help to provide a partial visual
10.4.8
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11
10.4.12
10.4.13
Page 114
distraction to traffic on York Road (to the immediate west of the garden) and users of the park. The garden is overlooked on its northern and eastern boundaries by dwellings in Fairchild Close, Penge House and partially by Arthur Newton House and Ganley Court. 10.4.14 In terms of the numbers of people using the garden, it has been observed on a site visit that the garden experiences high usage levels, especially during after school hours when the visit was made. It is also likely to be frequented by pedestrians passing through this open space (via the footpaths which run through the site) in order to access residential dwellings on the eastern side of the park. There were also a notable number of pedestrians walking dogs or visiting the childrens centre and adventure playground during the time of the visit. However, on that occasion no users were observed using the outdoor gym equipment. Users are assumed to use the open space for varying periods of time, depending on the nature of their use of the space. In considering the sensitivity of users of the space to the potential adverse amenity impacts arising at the adjacent construction site, the size of the open space, its position near to York Road and the availability of alternative spaces are key factors. These factors are considered below: a. The size of the open space is large and means that users could make use of the park and remain a reasonable distance away from any nearby amenity impacts arising at the proposed construction site (the northern and southern edges of the park are 130m and 160m away from the construction site boundary respectively). b. The site is located adjacent to the heavily trafficked York Road and this means that users are already likely to experience adverse amenity effects as a result. c. There are no alternative open spaces of a comparable size in the immediate vicinity (ie, approximately 400m). There is a small open space (ie, a space between 0.4 and 2ha in area as defined by the Mayors Open Space Hierarchy) situated at Meyrick Road, approximately 200m to the east, which offers opportunities for passive recreation and has seating areas and a childrens playground. The availability of this alternative provides an alternative open space resource that could somewhat reduce the sensitivity of users to the effects of construction impacts.
10.4.15
10.4.16
Taking account of the above factors, and particular the lack of comparably sized open space areas in the surrounding area, it is considered that the sensitivity of users of York Gardens to disruption of their recreation from construction effects is likely to be medium. See Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Residential There are several residential developments (ie, buildings/terraces or blocks of flats) at varying distances from the proposed construction site at the present time. The residential receptors that are either most proximate
10.4.17
10.4.18
Page 115
to the construction site and considered to be have potential to experience impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction work are listed and described below: a. Pennethorne House a large, mixed tenure local authority-built block of flats to the east of the site. b. Lavender Road flats a group of four flats above commercial units, to the east of the site. c. Arthur Newton House a low-rise residential block to the east of the site.
d. Ganley Court a low-rise residential block to the southeast of the site. e. Fairchild Close a group of two storey houses to the north of the site. f. Bridges Wharf a large newly built development of flats to the northwest of the site.
g. Properties at the corner of Lavender Road and Darien Road two high rise local authority blocks, east of the site. h. Candlemakers apartments (100 York Road) a low rise converted wharf building to the west of the site. 10.4.19 Pennethorne House lies approximately to the east of the proposed site. The building bounds York Gardens to the east and is orientated such that it has an approximately 100m frontage overlooking the gardens to the west. The building is nine storeys (including the ground floor) and comprised of flats. None of the properties in the block have balconies. Flats at Lavender Road also lie to the east of the proposed site, just east of the southern end of Pennethorne House and across Lavender Road from Arthur Newton House. The flats are situated on the first floor of a row of commercial units and comprise four flats. All flats have large balconies with views over Lavender Road to the south and York Road and York Gardens to the west. The construction site is likely to be visible from the flats, particularly during winter when the trees planted around the western perimeter of York Gardens are not in leaf. Arthur Newton House lies approximately 75m across Newcomen Road to the east of the proposed site. The building fronts on to Lavender Road to the north. The building comprises flats over three storeys (including the ground floor) which form part of the larger Winstanley Estate on Lavender Road. None of the properties in the block have balconies; however external corridors allowing access to the dwellings on the north side of the building provide views over York Gardens towards the construction site to the west. The flats on the ground floor of the block also have small private gardens to the rear of the properties, all of which are bounded by low fences. The proposed construction site is partially visible from the most westerly gardens. Ganley Court is situated to the east of the proposed construction site. The building fronts on to Newcomen Road to the west, and has a view of York Gardens beyond this, but which is partially obscured by trees. The building comprises two storeys (including the ground floor) of flats with
10.4.20
10.4.21
10.4.22
Page 116
connected terraced houses. None of the properties in Ganley Court have balconies; however the majority of properties in the block have small private gardens to the front and rear of the properties, bounded by low fences. . 10.4.23 Fairchild Close lies immediately north of York Gardens. The close comprises semi-detached one storey houses (including the ground floor). Dwellings backing on to the park have small rear gardens bounded by high brick walls, which obscure views of York Gardens apart from on the upper floor. Views of the construction site are also partially obscured by trees planted within the garden, and the Childrens Centre and Childrens Playground. Bridges Wharf is a multi-building residential complex situated northwest of the proposed site, adjacent to the River Thames. The complex comprises a number of medium to high rise towers which are mainly residential. There is further continuing construction currently underway on residential buildings associated with the complex. There are currently three residential towers (comprising flats) at the Bridges Wharf site (between ten and 16 storeys), which back on to Bridges Court Road. Properties at the corner of Lavender Road and Darien Road lie west of the construction site, comprising two high rise local authority built residential towers. The closest residential tower to the construction site has 16 storeys and situated at the northwest corner of Lavender Road. A further nine storey tower lies at the junction of Lavender Road and Darien Road. Both are likely to have largely obscured views of the construction site, due to the situation of other residential properties, however views from the upper floors of the 16 storey tower may have clearer views of the construction site. Candlemakers apartments are situated approximately 150m to the west of the proposed site, at the junction of Cotton Row and behind York Road. Candlemakers apartments comprise residential flats within a stepped wharf building (three to five storeys high). The apartments lie approximately 150m from the construction site boundary. There is no direct view of York Gardens, or the construction site. Some inward facing properties have balconies. The majority of the above residential receptors are considered to experience reasonable or good existing levels of amenity in respect of their internal (and within external private spaces such as gardens and balconies) residential environments as influenced by internal factors such as ambient noise levels and views. This is owing to the largely residential nature of the area and the presence of York Gardens itself, which is overlooked by many of the dwellings. Traffic along York Road, and to a lesser degree along local streets, is likely to detract from amenity levels for some dwellings however. A number of other residential buildings are situated in the surrounding area further from the site, however these have not been considered due to their distance and / or orientation in relation to the proposed construction site.
10.4.24
10.4.25
10.4.26
10.4.27
10.4.28
Page 117
In terms of the potential sensitivity of the occupants of the dwellings in the area, it is considered that overall, residents are likely to be vulnerable to amenity impacts arising from the construction process. This is due to the fact that residents cannot easily take steps to avoid amenity effects that may arise. Residents are less likely to be 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 the above factors into account, and given that the construction processes would be limited to daytime working hours (aside from the limited duration 24 hour working period) it is considered that nearby residents are likely to have a medium level of sensitivity to amenity effects that may arise as a result of the construction process. See Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Commercial and office premises There are three existing commercial premises near the proposed site on the opposite (north) side of York Road in the existing baseline condition that are considered to be potentially sensitive to adverse amenity impacts. These are: a. A candle maker and wholesaler open to the public. b. An artist and record management agency. c. A marketing and advertising agency.
10.4.30
10.4.31
10.4.32
10.4.33
The wholesale candle business has candle manufacturing premises and a retail-type shop (open daily) that is housed in a large one storey brick warehouse building. Views from inside the shop are across York Road towards York Gardens to the east, with large windows allowing customers views towards the construction site. The music and record management agency has offices housed in a small one storey brick building to the south of the candle wholesaler on York Road. The building has an open lobby and reception area on the ground floor, with offices on the upper floor. It is assumed that there would be views onto the construction site from the first floor of the building, however this is likely to be partially obscured by the perimeter fence and trees planted at the western edge of York Gardens. The marketing and advertising agency occupies the large warehouse building on the corner of York Road and York Place, which shares the courtyard with, and lies immediately east of the Cotton Row apartments. The distribution and occupation of units within the building is not known, however it is assumed that the entire four storey premise is occupied by the marketing and advertising agency. It is assumed that there would be an outlook onto the construction site from the upper floors of the building, however this is likely to be partially obscured by the perimeter fence and trees (when in leaf) planted at the western edge of York Gardens.
10.4.34
10.4.35
Page 118
It is assumed that the offices are subject to some existing adverse amenity effects arising from traffic on York Road (eg, leading to air pollution, noise and visual impacts). However, the type of business activities conducted inside the buildings, protected to some degree from potential adverse impacts, means that they do not rely on clients visiting the premises on a regular basis. As such the businesses are not likely to be dependent on visitor trade. The candle shop may be slightly different, as it has a retailtype frontage directly opposite the site and visitors to its shop could potentially be vulnerable to adverse amenity impacts. However, the specialist nature of the business means that it is probable that it relies on destination trade rather than people walking past and so this may curtail the degree to which people would avoid the business. A further business, a Volkswagen car dealership occupies a large plot on the corner of York Road and Bridges Road, situated approximately 60m to the northwest of the Pumping Station. There is a car showroom and workshop with offices situated to the north of the plot and a large car park to the south. Views towards the proposed construction site from both the car park and offices are obscured by passing traffic along York Road and the trees planted along the western perimeter of York Gardens. Given the nature of the business and its position in relation to the proposed construction site, it is considered that the project would not cause undue disturbance to the car dealership and that there is very limited potential for there to be any significant effects on the business as a result of the construction proposal;. As such, the car dealership is not considered further within this socio-economic impact assessment. Taking account of the above presented factors, it is considered that the overall sensitivity of the three businesses to adverse amenity effects is likely to be low. See Vol 14 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Summary A summary of receptors as described in the baseline conditions and their sensitivity is provided in the table below. Vol 14 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economics receptors Receptor Users of York Gardens Childrens Centre and adventure playground Value/sensitivity and justification Medium The Childrens Centre and playground are resources are likely to be most intensively used by the immediate local community. They have indoors and outdoors facilities. Most visits will only for short periods of time. Children are more sensitive to amenity effects. Medium the facilities serve the local community and there are no conveniently available alternative
10.4.37
10.4.38
10.4.39
10.4.40
Users of York Gardens Library and Community Centre
Page 119
Section 10: Socio-economics Value/sensitivity and justification facilities. Due to the nature of the activities, users are likely to be more sensitive to adverse amenity impacts.
York Gardens public open space
Medium There are no other comparably sized open spaces in the surrounding area. There is however a smaller, somewhat conveniently accessible alternative public open space available 200m east of the site. Medium residents less able to avoid effects but less sensitive during the day when the effects will be experienced Low employees may be subject to amenity effects, however all businesses operate indoors. These businesses are not likely to be solely dependent on passing trade.
Residential development
Commercial and office premises-based businesses
Page 120
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. There may potentially be changes to the baseline conditions on-site as a result of the following: a. An application has been submitted for residential led mixed use development of the Bridges Court car park site at 100/110 York Road. This development is only expected to be 10% complete in the base case year.
10.5.2
10.5.3
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 Under the development case, it is expected that the following changes to the baseline would occur: a. Nearby sensitive receptors may be subject to construction and construction-traffic related impacts such as noise, dust, air pollution or visual disturbance. These impacts may occur individually or in combination.
10.5.4
10.5.5
Other than the above, it is assumed that the development case for other socio-economic conditions at the site would remain the same as set out in the baseline.
Amenity effects on York Gardens Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground users 10.5.6 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 users and employees of York Gardens Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on the community facility, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality and construction dust effects are likely to be negligible at the air quality receptor identified. Effects arising as a result of the proposed works are therefore not likely to be significant at the receptor identified, for the duration of the construction period.
10.5.7
Page 121
b. Noise effects have been assessed as likely to be significant at the childrens centre. Vibration (human response) effects are also likely to be significant at the childrens centre. c. No visual receptors were identified as requiring assessment in direct relation to the York Gardens Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground. However, it is noted that one recreational receptor viewpoint to the immediate north of the playground within York Gardens was identified as being likely to experience moderate adverse effects (at viewpoint 2.1). It is stressed that this is not a viewpoint which specifically relates to the Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground. Accordingly, this result should be interpreted with caution, in terms of considering its relevance to this facility.
10.5.8
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this report. The above findings regarding air quality, dust, noise and vibration effects have been taken into consideration in undertaking a preliminary assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on childrens centre and playground receptors below. This preliminary assessment balances 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. In terms of duration, the potential for impacts which reduce the amenity for users of the York Gardens Adventure Playground would only last during the construction period of approximately three years, which equates to a medium term impact. During this time, as well as being restricted to daytime working hours, these impacts are not likely to be continual over the working day, but are likely to rise and fall as different activities of the construction process take place throughout the day or when vehicles enter and leave the construction site. Similarly, the nature of the construction activity/process being undertaken would determine whether the different types of impacts arise simultaneously or whether only one or two impacts arise at any one time. Further, given that use of the centre is commonly restricted to afternoon periods only (due to restricted opening hours), the potential for staff and visitors to be exposed to any impacts for prolonged periods of time is reduced. Other considerations affecting the magnitude of any impacts as they would be experienced by users of the centre and playground include the number of users and staff, their physical location in relation to the site and their base case amenity experience. These are discussed in turn: a. While the number of centre users is currently unknown, it is likely that there is a high level of usage due to the quality and distinctiveness of the facilities and the relatively concentrated amount of residential development in the surrounding area. This is likely to stay the same
10.5.9
10.5.10
10.5.11
10.5.12
Page 122
(or potentially increase, in line with general population trends within London 36) up to the base case year. b. The main building of the childrens centre where many activities are conducted indoors is located closest to the proposed construction site, while the outdoor adventure playground is located further away from the proposed construction site, mainly to the north of the childrens centre buildings. For the most part, York Road is closer to the adventure playground than is the proposed construction site. The exception to this is the under-fives play area which is located on the south-side of the childrens centre just to the north of part of the proposed construction site. c. It is considered likely under the base case that the majority of centre users and staff will already experience some amenity impacts as a result of the situation of York Road as outlined in para. 10.5.13.
10.5.13
On the basis of the above factors, it is considered that the potential for amenity and in combination impacts to adversely impact on users of the York Gardens Adventure Playground could be medium. Taking account of the potential for a medium magnitude of impact and the medium sensitivity of centre users, it is considered that the overall effect on users of the Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground could be moderate adverse and therefore significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Amenity effects on York Gardens Library and Community Centre users
10.5.14
10.5.15
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 users and employees of the York Gardens Library and Community Centre. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on the community facility, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality and construction dust effects are likely to be minor adverse. Effects arising as a result of the proposed works are therefore likely to result in a significant effect on the library and community centre. b. Noise effects on users have been assessed as likely to be significant at the library and community centre receptor identified. Vibration (human response) effects are not likely to be significant at the library and community centre receptor. c. No visual receptors were identified as requiring assessment in relation to the library and community centre in the immediate vicinity of the site which lies closest to the proposed development. This likely reflects the type of activities conducted indoors within the facilities, and it is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that it is not
10.5.16
Page 123
likely that there will be any significant effects from construction visual impact issues for users. 10.5.17 For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this report. The above findings regarding air quality, dust, noise and vibration effects have been taken into consideration in undertaking a preliminary assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on library and community centre receptors below. This preliminary assessment balances 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. Most of the other factors affecting the impact magnitude of potential amenity impacts are the same as per those explained above with regard to the York Gardens Adventure Playground and (see previous sub-section). Given that the majority of library users are likely to use the facilities during the daytime (coinciding with the core construction hours) with the potential for some use of community facilities during the evening, the potential for staff and visitors at the centre could be heightened. The current amenity experience of users is likely to be limited however, by the situation of York Road within close proximity to the centre. The other main exceptions to consider are the number of users and staff that could be impacted by potential amenity impacts and their base case amenity experience. These exceptions are discussed in turn: a. As stated in Section 10.4, it is likely that there is a high level of usage of the facilities. Usage levels are likely to stay the same (or potentially increase, in line with general population trends within London 37) in the base case year. b. It is considered likely under the base case that the majority of centre users and staff will already experience amenity impacts such as noise and air pollution as they enter and exit the centre, as a result of the situation of York Road. 10.5.22 Finally, it is also anticipated that as all of the activities at the centre take place indoors, the building will provide some level of protection against any adverse amenity impacts. On the basis of the above factors, it is considered that the potential for amenity and in combination impacts to adversely impact on users of the York Gardens Library and Community Centre could be medium. Taking account of the potential for a medium magnitude of impact and the medium sensitivity of centre users, it is considered that the overall effect on users of the library and community centre could be minor adverse and therefore not significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage.
10.5.18
10.5.19
10.5.20
10.5.21
10.5.23
10.5.24
Page 124
Effects on York Gardens open space users amenity 10.5.25 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 users of York Gardens which bounds the construction site to the north, east and south. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the potential 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 public open space and associated facilities, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality effects are likely to result in a negligible effect and construction dust is likely to have a minor adverse effect on York Gardens open space for the duration of the construction period. b. No noise and vibration receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to York Gardens open space. 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 the open space for the duration of the construction period. c. Visual effects were assessed as being likely to be major adverse at one of the five viewpoints identified, moderate adverse at three of the viewpoints and minor adverse at the remaining viewpoint for the duration of the construction period (viewpoints 2.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4 and 2.5 respectively).
10.5.26
10.5.27
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this report. The above findings regarding air quality, dust and visual effects have been taken into consideration in undertaking a preliminary assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on open space receptors below. This preliminary assessment balances 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. While the above assessments did not identify noise and vibration impacts in association with the open space in this location; it is noted that residences in the immediate vicinity of the site were identified and that at least some impacts were recorded for these receptors (see the residential amenity assessment subsection below). Accordingly, it is noted that there is still a potential for noise impacts within York Gardens open space. Most of the factors affecting the magnitude of potential amenity impacts are the same as per those explained above with regard to the York Gardens community facilities (see previous sub-sections). The number of
10.5.28
10.5.29
10.5.30
Page 125
users frequenting the open space is likely to remain high, as per the baseline (see para. 10.4.14). 10.5.31 The furthest part of York Gardens lies over 160m from the proposed construction works area and some of the other areas closer to the proposed site would be partially shielded by other buildings such as the childrens centre and library/community centre. As such, any adverse impacts, if occurring, are considered more likely to be experienced by users in close proximity to the construction boundary, rather than across the entire open space or within those parts of the open space that are shielded from potential impacts. Furthermore, the presence of York Road means that it is likely that visitors to the gardens may already experience some negative amenity impacts as a result of passing traffic (see para. 10.5.13). This situation would be unlikely to improve by the base case year or throughout the construction phase for Thames Tunnel. On the basis of the above factors, and taking account of the temporary nature of the impact it is considered that the magnitude of amenity impacts could be low. Taking account of the possible low magnitude of potential adverse amenity impacts and the medium sensitivity of the open space users, it is considered that the effect on open space users could be minor adverse and therefore not significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Amenity effects on residents 10.5.35 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 residents living nearby the site. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on residential receptors, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality effects are likely to be minor adverse and construction dust effects are likely to be negligible. b. Noise effects on residents have been assessed as likely to be significant at all of the three residential receptors identified. Vibration (human response) effects are likely to be significant at two of the three residential receptors. c. Visual impacts on residential receptors were identified as likely to have major adverse effects on one of six residential viewpoints (1.2) and moderate adverse effects on three of the six (1.1, 1.4 and 1.5), with the remaining two likely to experience minor adverse effects (1.3 and 1.7).
10.5.32
10.5.33
10.5.34
10.5.36
Page 126
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this report. The above findings regarding air quality, dust, noise and vibration, and visual effects have been taken into consideration in undertaking a preliminary assessment of the overall magnitude of impact for amenity impacts on residential receptors below. This preliminary assessment balances the above findings considering the contribution that each assessed element (eg, the quality of the air, the quality of a view) makes to a receptors overall experience of amenity, together with other considerations presented below. Most of the other factors affecting the impact magnitude of potential amenity impacts are the same as per those explained above with regard to the various York Gardens-based community facilities (see previous subsections above). The main exceptions to consider relates to the varying distance of receptors surrounding the site and the degree to which this will alter the overall amenity experience for people within their homes. Many of the receptors for which significant visual impacts were assessed were not identified as potentially sensitive noise receptors or air quality receptors. Likewise, some of the dwellings considered within the noise assessment do not have direct views of the construction site. Accordingly, it is considered that the potential for the above described impacts to act in combination with one another is reduced. Additionally, residents of flats and apartments overlooking the site, particularly those on upper floors, are likely to find that while views their foreground views are temporarily compromised, their views further afield beyond the park will be less affected. Factors such as these are likely to minimise the magnitude of the overall amenity impact for many of the dwellings considered by the air quality, noise and visual impact assessments. On the basis of the above factors, it is considered that the potential for amenity impacts to adversely impact on nearby residents could be medium. Taking account of the potential for a medium magnitude of impact and the medium sensitivity of residents, it is considered that the overall effect on residents could be medium term moderate adverse and therefore significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Amenity effects on commercial and office premises 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 the three commercial and office premises on the opposite side of York Road. If the amenity impacts were disruptive enough to result in a potential loss of trade or satisfactory
10.5.38
10.5.39
10.5.40
10.5.41
10.5.42
10.5.43
10.5.44
10.5.45
Page 127
working conditions, there could be a resulting significant economic impact for the businesses. 10.5.46 Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects arising during the construction phase. With respect to the potential effect of the proposed works on the three commercial and office premises, the following points summarise the preliminary assessment findings of likely effect significance: a. Air quality and construction dust effects are likely to be negligible. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that there will not be any significant effects on office and commercial premises. b. No noise and vibration receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to the three commercial and office premises. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that there will not be any significant noise and vibration effects on the office and commercial premises. c. No visual receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to commercial and office premises. It is therefore assumed for the purpose of this assessment that there will not be any significant visual effects on office and commercial premises.
10.5.47
For further information, refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this volume. The above assessment indicates that there are not likely to be any significant adverse air quality, construction dust, noise, vibration or visual effects on the three office and commercial premises as a result of the proposed construction works. It is likely that the layout of the surrounding area and the presence of York Road situated between the site and the commercial / office premises, together with the nature of the businesses concerned minimise the potential for any potential amenity impacts to significant affect the businesses. Given the above factors, it is considered that the magnitude of the impacts could be low. Taking account of the low magnitude of the potential impact and the low sensitivity of the businesses, it is considered that the overall effect on employees could be negligible. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Summary The preliminary findings of the above assessments are summarised in the tables below.
10.5.48
10.5.49
10.5.50 10.5.51
10.5.52
Page 128
Vol 14 Table 10.5.1 Socio economics construction effects Magnitude Significance Medium predicted to be significant noise and Moderate vibration and major visual impacts for one viewpoint. adverse Assumed high number of users. However, users significant unlikely to experience prolonged exposure. Impacts are likely to occur sporadically and infrequently.
Impact
Sensitivity
Amenity impacts on users of York Gardens Childrens Centre and adventure playground
Medium The Childrens Centre and Adventure Playground are resources serving the local community and are frequented by children and adults, indoors and outdoors, however visits will only for short periods of time. Children are more sensitive to amenity effects. Medium predicted to be minor adverse air quality and construction dust effects, significant noise and major visual impacts for one viewpoint. Exposure to amenity impacts for visitors will be lessened internally within the buildings. Impacts are likely to occur sporadically and infrequently. Low predicted to be minor adverse construction dust, major adverse visual impacts on one viewpoint, moderate adverse visual impacts on three viewpoints and minor adverse visual impacts on one further viewpoint. Assumed high number of users. Also, the farthest point within the gardens is likely to be sufficiently distant to ameliorate the worst impacts.
Amenity impacts on users of York Gardens Library and Community Centre
Medium the facilities serve the local community and there are no conveniently available alternative facilities. Due to the nature of the activities, users are likely to be more sensitive to adverse amenity impacts.
Moderate adverse significant
Amenity impacts on users of York Gardens public open space
Medium There are no other comparably sized open spaces in the surrounding area. There is however a smaller, somewhat conveniently accessible alternative public open space available 200m east of the site.
Minor adverse not significant
Page 129
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Medium predicted to be minor adverse air quality, significant noise impacts and significant vibration impacts at two of three receptors, major adverse visual effects on one viewpoint, moderate adverse visual effects on four viewpoints and minor adverse impacts on one further residential viewpoint. Distance of dwellings from the site; screening provided by trees and buildings. Impacts mostly limited to daytime hours, and likely to occur sporadically and infrequently. Low no significant effects predicted Moderate adverse significant
Amenity impacts on residential dwellings amenity
Medium residents less able to avoid effects but less sensitive during the day when the effects will be experienced
Amenity impacts on offices and commercial premises
Low employees may be subject to amenity effects, however all businesses operate indoors. These businesses are not likely to be solely dependent on passing trade.
Negligible not significant
Page 130
10.6
10.6.1
As described in Section 10.1, it is considered that there is no potential for any significant socio-economic operational effects.
10.7
10.7.1
The above assessment has arrived at a preliminary finding that there is a potential for moderate adverse effects to arise in relation to amenity effects on: a. York Gardens Adventure Playground b. York Gardens Library and Community Centre c. Nearby residential dwellings.
10.7.2
As per the significance criteria, moderate adverse impacts constitute significant effects. There is a continuing opportunity for further consideration of the potential for employing any viable additional measures to minimise the potential for significant adverse air quality, noise and vibration and visual impacts (if any) to act individually or in combination in a manner that unacceptably reduces environmental amenity for nearby sensitive receptors. Mitigation measures have been suggested, where possible, by Air Quality and Odour, Noise and Vibration and Townscape and Visual which would help to address significant amenity impacts. For further information on these mitigation measures, refer to Section4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual, within this volume.
10.7.3
Operational
10.7.4 As described in Section 10.1, it is considered that there is no potential for any significant socio-economic operational effects.
Page 131
10.8
Vol 14 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economics construction assessment Significance Moderate adverse significant
Assessment summary
Receptor
Users of York Gardens One Oclock Childrens Centre and adventure playground
Effect Amenity effects York Gardens childrens centre and adventure playground users (outline findings)
Users of York Gardens Library and Community Centre
Amenity effects on York Gardens Library and Community Centre users (outline findings)
Moderate adverse significant
Mitigation Mitigation measures including design alternatives or construction process and management changes that are typical of the sort usually identified to mitigate air quality, noise or visual impacts. Mitigation measures including design alternatives or construction process and management changes that are typical of the sort usually identified to mitigate air quality, noise or visual impacts.
None required No change
Residual significance If mitigation measures suggested in the air quality, noise and vibration and visual assessments to minimise adverse impacts are able to be implemented and achieve a reduction in the assessment of effect significance to an acceptable level, a reduced residual adverse significance may result. If mitigation measures suggested in the air quality, noise and vibration and visual assessments to minimise adverse impacts are able to be implemented and achieve a reduction in the assessment of effect significance to an acceptable level, a reduced residual adverse significance may result.
York Gardens public open space
Amenity effects on York Gardens public open space users (outline findings)
Minor adverse not significant
Page 132
Receptor Significance Moderate adverse significant Mitigation Mitigation measures including design alternatives or construction process and management changes that are typical of the sort usually identified to mitigate air quality, noise or visual impacts.
None required No change
Nearby residents
Effect Amenity effects on residents (outline findings)
Residual significance If mitigation measures suggested in the air quality, noise and vibration and visual assessments to minimise adverse impacts are able to be implemented and achieve a reduction in the assessment of effect significance to an acceptable level, a reduced residual adverse significance may result.
Commercial and officebased businesses
Amenity effects on commercial and office premises-based businesses (outline findings)
Negligible not significant
Page 133
10.9
10.9.1
Collection of baseline data on the use of social infrastructure is likely to be completed later during 2011. Information to be collected includes: a. usage data for York Gardens. Pending the collection and analysis of data on the usage of York Gardens, and the results of assessments by other EIA topics, it is likely that updates to the baseline data and results of the indicative individual and in combination effects assessments would be made for the following: a. amenity effects on users of York Gardens Adventure Playground and Childrens centre b. amenity effects on users of York Gardens Library and Community Centre c. amenity effects on users of York Gardens d. amenity effects on residents e. amenity effects on employees at local businesses
10.9.2
10.9.3
Pending the results of assessments by other EIA topics there is potential for updates to be made to the detailed site-specific mitigation and enhancement/offsetting measures in relation to amenity effects on residential receptors. Given that this assessment has identified significant adverse amenity effects, following the identification of required mitigation measures a reassessment of the potential residual effects after mitigation would be undertaken using the same approach as has been set out above in Section 10.6. 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.
10.9.4
10.9.5 10.9.6
Page 134
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 Falconbrook 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.
11.1.2
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 3. 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 three years. Similar effects would arise during the secondary tunnel lining, which would occur during Year 3 of construction. The site would be under construction during standard working hours with a limited duration of continuous working for the short connection tunnel only, as defined in Section 6 Volume 2. 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 York Road b. Establishment hoardings around the boundary of the construction site, assumed for the purposes of this assessment to be approximately 2.4m high c. Clearance of the site in advance of works, including demolition of buildings and removal of vegetation
11.2.2
11.2.3
d. Use of cranes during shaft sinking and secondary lining of the connection tunnel e. Provision of welfare facilities, stacked up to three storeys high f. Lighting of the site when required.
Page 135
Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce townscape and visual impacts include protection of existing trees to BS5837: Trees in Relation to Construction Recommendations, and the use of appropriate capped and directional lighting when required. Operation The proposed operation of the infrastructure at Falconbrook Pumping Station is described in Volume 3. The particular components of importance to this topic include the design of the public realm and the design and siting of the ventilation structure and column and electrical kiosk.
11.2.5
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 Wandsworth, LB of Hammersmith and Fulham and English Heritage have been consulted on the detailed scope of the townscape and visual impact assessment, including the number and location of viewpoints. The LB of Wandsworth and English Heritage have confirmed acceptance of the proposed viewpoints. Baseline The assessment area, defined using the standard methodology provided in Volume 6, is indicated by the extent of the drawing frame on Vol 14 Figure 11.4.1 to Vol 14 Figure 11.4.6. The scale of the assessment area has been set by the maximum extent of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV), excepting those locations down York Road to the south of the site where the visibility of the proposed components of the scheme would be barely perceptible. The methodology for establishing the townscape and visual baseline follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 6. With specific reference to the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, baseline information has been gathered through a review of: a. The Unitary Development Plans (UDPs) for the LB of Wandsworth and the neighbouring LB of Hammersmith and Fulham; b. Sands End Conservation Area Character Profile, produced by the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham; and c. The Thames Strategy: Kew to Chelsea. Construction
11.3.3
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. With reference to the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, the peak construction phase relevant to this topic would be during Year 2 of
11.3.7
Page 136
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 impacts. The intensity of construction activities would be similar during Year 3 of construction, during the secondary lining of the connection tunnel, involving the import of materials by road. 11.3.8 For the purposes of the construction phase assessment, it is assumed that there would be no substantial change in the townscape and visual baseline between 2011 and Year 2 of construction. Operation 11.3.9 The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. The operational phase assessment has been undertaken for Year 1 of operation and Year 15 of operation. For the purposes of the Year 1 assessment, it is assumed that the existing Bridges Court car park (opposite the site) would be under construction (approximately 10% complete). Further work will be undertaken for the ES to make appropriate assumptions with regard to any potential change in the base case for Year 15 of operation. Assumptions and limitations 11.3.11 11.3.12 For this site, there are no site specific townscape and visual assessment limitations beyond the generic ones listed in Volume 6. Assumptions on the base case for the construction and operational phase assessments 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 1 of construction and Year 1 of operation without the scheme (ie the do nothing scenario). Assumptions will be made in the ES regarding what the base case may be in Year 15 of operation without the scheme. The preliminary assessment of operational effects is based on the engineering design of the proposed development. The assessment recognises that the project is committed to high quality design, and this forms the basis of the preliminary assessment of likely significant effects presented here. The details of the scheme design and landscaping, to be provided for the planning submission, will inform the assessment of operational effects in Year 1 and Year 15 which will be presented in the ES.
11.3.10
11.3.13 11.3.14
11.4
11.4.1
Baseline conditions Townscape baseline

The proposed development would be located partially within the confines of the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station, and partially in a small area of hardstanding between the pumping station and York Road, which
Page 137
includes a disused toilet block. The wider townscape is predominantly residential, around York Gardens, a medium sized open space which surrounds the site on three sides. Physical elements 11.4.2 The physical elements of the townscape in the assessment area are described below. Topography 11.4.3 The site is located on relatively flat ground on the south bank of the River Thames, with no notable topographic features in the vicinity of the site or across the assessment area. Land use 11.4.4 In the vicinity of the site, both banks of the river are dominated by residential development, interspersed with some commercial uses along the western side of York Road. The site is located within the existing Pumping Station and an area of hardstanding, which are situated within York Gardens, a medium sized public park. Development patterns and scale 11.4.5 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.1 illustrates the pattern and scale of development within the assessment area and also indicates building heights. Vol 14 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual pattern and scale of development (see Volume 14 Figures document) 11.4.6 The site is located in an area of mixed development patterns. The river frontage along the south bank is characterised by dense residential development up to seven storeys high, apart from a recently completed residential block to the north of the site which is fifteen storeys high. To the west of the site, there is a series of low-rise commercial buildings set amongst large areas of hardstanding and car parking. To the north east of the site, the area is dominated by a mix of five storey residential apartment blocks and two to three storey residential terraces. The residential area to the east of the site is characterised by larger building plots up to 16 storeys high, set amongst communal open spaces. To the south, the residences are three to four storey high terraced apartment blocks. On the north bank, the townscape is dominated by large modern residential blocks up to eight storeys high, fronting onto the river. Vegetation patterns and extents 11.4.9 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.2 illustrates the pattern and extent of vegetation, including tree cover and known Tree Preservation Orders, within the assessment area. Vol 14 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation (see Volume 14 Figures document)
11.4.7
11.4.8
Page 138
Vegetation within the assessment area is generally concentrated within York Gardens and the residential area to the east of the site, characterised by large blocks set amongst communal grounds with scattered mature trees. The river frontages on both banks are characterised by a notable absence of trees or other vegetation. Some groups of trees to the south of the site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders. However, there are no other known Tree Preservation Orders within or close to the site, based on local authority information received by the project to date. Trees within Sands End Conservation Area, on the south bank of the river, are indirectly protected by virtue of the designation. Open space distribution and type Vol 14 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 14 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape - open space distribution and type (see Volume 14 Figures document)
11.4.11
11.4.12
11.4.13
The assessment area is characterised by a number of incidental green spaces, communal areas and private gardens, particularly amongst residential areas to the west of the site. There are also several small and medium sized public and private open spaces, which are described in more detail in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.4.1 Townscape - open space type and distribution Open space York Gardens Distance from site 0m (south of river) Character summary Medium sized public park characterised by areas of amenity grass, scattered mature trees, planted beds and several semi-natural planted areas. The park also incorporates a childrens playground to the north of Falconbrook Pumping Station. Designated as Other larger protected open space by the LB of Wandsworths UDP. Small open space enclosed by fencing and mature trees with a mounded grass and shrub area in the centre. The space also includes some play equipment. Medium sized open space comprising undulating grass areas, scattered semi-mature trees, low hedges and a childrens playground. Open space contained by new residential developments to the north and south, and by the River Thames to the east. The area is
Harroway Open Space Meyrick Road Open Space Sands Wharf Open
250m N (south of river) 250m E (south of river) 450m NW (north of
Page 139
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Open space Space
Distance Character summary from site river) characterised by extensive open grassland, areas of shrub planting and a central water feature.
Transport routes 11.4.14 Vol 14 Figure 11.4.4 illustrates the transport network within the assessment area, including cycleways, footpaths and Public Rights of Way. Vol 14 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual - transport network (see Volume 14 Figures document) 11.4.15 The site is located to the east of York Road, which is characterised by relatively high flows of traffic. The remainder of the streets in the assessment area are generally residential in nature, with relatively low levels of traffic. The railway line close to Clapham Junction is located in the far south east corner of the assessment area. The Thames Path generally runs along the riverfront of both banks, although it does divert inland around the small area of commercial uses to the west of the site. Site character assessment 11.4.17 The site is located partially within the confines of the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station, and partially in a small area of hardstanding between the pumping station and York Road. The components of the site are described in more detail in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.4.2 Townscape and visual site components ID 01 Component Existing pumping building and disused toilet block Screening chamber structure Boundary fence Boundary vegetation Description Single storey brick building with a flat roof and protruding canopy. Condition Poor condition
11.4.16
02
Two storey high brick and concrete structure with two mobile phone antennae on the roof 2m high block railings on a low concrete wall. Mix of low shrubs and semi-mature evergreen and deciduous trees
Poor condition Fair condition To be confirmed following the completion of a tree survey
03 04
Page 140
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station ID 05 06 Component Advertising hoarding Boundary wall
Section 11 Townscape and visual Description Condition Fair condition Poor condition
10m high black advertising hoarding with an electronic display Brick built boundary wall to the existing pumping station
11.4.18
The condition of the townscape within the site is generally fair to poor, with good potential for enhancement, due to the disused nature of some components and the general limited maintenance undertaken on others. Due to the industrial use of part of the site, dominance of hardstanding and location adjacent to York Road, the site has a low level of tranquillity. The site has limited townscape value due to the industrial/disused nature of the area. Due to the poor condition and limited townscape value, the site has a low sensitivity to change. Townscape character assessment Vol 14 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape character areas (see Volume 14 Figures document)
11.4.19 11.4.20 11.4.21
11.4.22
The Townscape Character Areas surrounding the site are identified on Vol 14 Figure 11.4.5; they are ordered from the north of the site and continue around the site in a clockwise direction. Each area is described below. River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach This reach of the River Thames extends from Wandsworth Park in the west, beyond the assessment area of this site, to the railway bridge south of Chelsea Creek, also beyond the assessment area. The reach is largely characterised by industrial uses interspersed with recent riverfront residential developments such as Imperial Wharf and those to the west of the site. The river itself is characterised by numerous jetties associated with current or past industrial use. Both banks have a relatively wide area of foreshore at low tide. The overall character is dominated by a changing environment from post-industrial to modern residential apartments. With the exception of new developments, whereby new jetties and river walls have been constructed or renovated, the overall townscape condition is relatively poor. Despite the surrounding industrial uses, the area has moderate levels of tranquillity due to the low levels of river traffic. This reach is a regionally valued stretch of the river, forming the backdrop to a sizeable regeneration area in London. Therefore, despite the relatively poor condition of the townscape, due to the regional level of value of this reach of the River Thames, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change.
11.4.23
11.4.24
11.4.25
11.4.26 11.4.27 11.4.28
Page 141
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station York Gardens 11.4.29
This area comprises York Gardens, a medium sized open space characterised by open grassland, scattered mature trees, a childrens playground, a crche and a community centre/library. The park is surrounded by residential development to the north, east and south, and bounded by York Road to the west. The landscape of the open space is well managed. The overall townscape condition is good. The area has a high level of tranquillity due to the widespread presence of tree planting, limited levels of activity and seclusion offered from the surrounding built environment. The area is valued at a Borough level due to the size of the open space and the wide range of facilities, both within and adjacent to it. Due to the good condition and Borough value of the townscape, and high level of tranquillity, this character area has a high sensitivity to change. Thameside Residential This area is characterised by a variety of mixed use developments (ranging from three to fifteen storeys) along the south bank of the River Thames. The area is bounded by York Road to the east. The development pattern is heavily influenced by the river, with buildings orientated to maximise riverside views. Due to the ad-hoc nature of development in this area, the architectural style is diverse and includes a mix of 20th and 21st century developments. Vegetation within the area is generally limited to occasional amenity shrubs and semi-mature trees. The area does also include some occasional low-rise warehouse buildings, particularly towards the southern end of this character area. The buildings and public realm within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. The tranquillity of the residential area located alongside the river is slightly diminished by the presence of some industrial premises and busy traffic along York Road. Therefore, this area has a moderate level of tranquillity. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area. Due to the good condition and local value of the townscape, and the moderate levels of tranquillity, this area has a medium sensitivity to change. Lombard Road Commercial This area is characterised by a cluster of one and two storey commercial and large scale retail premises set amongst extensive areas of hard standing used as storage yards and car parking. The area also includes a helipad which protrudes into the river. The area has a notable absence of vegetation, apart from small clusters amongst parking bays throughout the area.
11.4.30 11.4.31
11.4.32 11.4.33
11.4.34
11.4.35 11.4.36
11.4.37 11.4.38
11.4.39
Page 142
The buildings and public realm within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Due to the industrial and commercial uses, located along York Road, which is characterised by busy traffic, this area has a low level of tranquillity. In addition, due to the type of use, with an inherent lack of public amenity or vegetation, the area has limited townscape value. Due to the low level of tranquillity and limited townscape value, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. Yelverton Road Residential This character area comprises an area of four to five storey large scale residential apartment blocks, with a 24 storey tower in the north west of the area. The residential blocks are located to the north of York Road and set amongst fairly extensive communal grounds, including car parking, open amenity grassland and scattered mature trees. The buildings and communal spaces within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Due to the residential character, low levels of traffic and abundance of mature trees, offset against the presence of York Road along the southern boundary, this character area has a moderate level of tranquillity. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area. Due to the good condition and local value of the townscape, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. Battersea Residential This area comprises a large residential area which extends to the north, characterised by two to four storey residential terraces along relatively narrow streets in an informal layout. The area is densely developed with few substantial public or private open spaces. Vegetation within the area is generally concentrated within the private gardens of residential terraces. The pattern of development means the area is generally inward looking in character. The buildings and public realm within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity due to the residential character, affected to a limited extent by the presence of busy traffic along York Road cutting through the area. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area. Due to the good condition and local value of the townscape, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change.
11.4.42 11.4.43
11.4.44
11.4.45 11.4.46
11.4.47 11.4.48
11.4.49
11.4.50 11.4.51
11.4.52 11.4.53
Page 143
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station York Gardens Residential 11.4.54
This area is dominated by a distinct residential area, which is highly uniform in character in terms of scale of building, development pattern and architectural styling. The area is characterised by large scale residential apartment blocks ranging from three storey terraces to 15 storey towers. The buildings are set amongst extensive areas of communal open space, characterised by amenity grassland with a high number of scattered mature trees. The southern boundary of the area is formed by the wide area of railway lines outside Clapham Junction mainline station. The area is generally inward looking in character. The buildings and public realm within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity due to the residential character and location adjacent to York Gardens, affected to a limited extent by the presence of regular rail traffic along the southern boundary. The townscape of the character area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the area, particularly with regard to the green outlook provided by the presence of mature trees. Due to the local value attributed to the townscape and inward looking nature of the built environment, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. Hope Street Residential This area is characterised by four to five storey brick built residential apartment blocks with on-street parking and clusters of garages. The buildings are set amongst small private and communal areas of open space with occasional scattered trees. The pattern of development is inward looking in character. The buildings and public realm within the area are generally well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity due to the residential character, affected to a limited extent by the presence of busy traffic along York Road along the eastern boundary of the character area. The townscape of the character area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the area. Due to the local value attributed to the townscape and inward looking nature of the built environment, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. Sands End Conservation Area This area comprises Sands End Conservation Area, designated by the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham. The character of this area, within the assessment area, is dominated by recent residential and mixed use developments along the river frontage. The buildings in these developments are up to nine storeys high and set amongst small semiprivate green spaces. The area is highly influenced by the character of the river and the opposite bank, to which all the development is orientated.
11.4.55 11.4.56
11.4.57
11.4.58
11.4.59
11.4.60 11.4.61
11.4.62 11.4.63
11.4.64
Page 144
The northern boundary of the area is formed by Sands Wharf Open Space, dominated by open amenity grassland. 11.4.65 11.4.66 The buildings and open spaces within the area are well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Due to the residential use of the area, the riverside location, and the presence of regular small open spaces, this area has a high level of tranquillity. The 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 the influence of the attractive riverside setting, this character area has a high sensitivity to change. The sensitivity to change of the townscape character areas is summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.4.3 Townscape sensitivities to change Townscape character area The site River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach York Gardens Thameside Residential Lombard Road Commercial Yelverton Road Residential Battersea Residential York Gardens Residential Hope Street Residential Sands End Conservation Area Sensitivity Low Medium High Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High
11.4.67 11.4.68
11.4.69
Visual baseline
Vol 14 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations (see Volume 14 Figures document) 11.4.70 Vol 14 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 D contains illustrative winter photographs from selected viewpoints (the ES will include winter and summer photos for each character area and viewpoint). Residential 11.4.71 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
Page 145
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 on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens 11.4.72 This viewpoint is representative of the view from the rear of residential properties adjacent to the northern edge of York Gardens on Fairchild Close. The view is an open panorama over York Gardens, characterised by open grassland bounded by a belt of mature trees. The childrens playground, crche and the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station form the background of the view. Views of the site are largely obstructed from this location by intervening fencing, buildings and trees. Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens 11.4.73 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential apartments in the block on Pennethorne House, adjacent to the eastern edge of York Gardens. The foreground of the view is dominated by the open grassland and scattered mature trees in York Gardens, framed by the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station, crche and adjacent playground. Views from upper storeys encompass York Road and the commercial units to the west. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location, apart from a degree of screening by the existing electrical substation. Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road 11.4.74 This viewpoint is representative of the oblique view from residential properties along Lavender Road, close to the junction with Darien Road. The view is a linear view along Lavender Road, framed by a residential terrace to the south and a mix of residences and open spaces to the north. York Gardens and the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station form the background of the view. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location, apart from a degree of screening by the existing electrical substation. Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court 11.4.75 This viewpoint is representative of the oblique view from residential properties along Lavender Road, close to the junction with Darien Road. The view is a linear view along Canley Court, enclosed by residential apartments in the foreground of the view. York Gardens and the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station form the background of the view. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location, apart from a degree of screening by the existing electrical substation. Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road 11.4.76 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residences on Newcomen Road, adjacent to the eastern edge of York Gardens. The foreground of the view is dominated by the open grassland and scattered mature trees in York Gardens. The existing Falconbrook Pumping Station
Page 146
and community centre form dominant components in the view across the park. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location. Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river 11.4.77 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential properties located between the Thames Path and William Morris Way on the north bank of the river. The view is an open panorama across the River Thames from Wandsworth Bridge in the south to the railway bridge in the north. The view is characterised by the mixed frontage along the south bank of the river, comprising modern residential developments and low rise commercial premises. The view towards the site is largely obstructed by intervening structures and buildings on the south bank of the river. Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court 11.4.78 This viewpoint is representative of the oblique view from residential properties located on the south bank of the River Thames, close to Bridges Court. The oblique view to the east is characterised by commercial premises, hardstanding and York Road in the foreground. The existing Falconbrook Pumping Station is visible in the periphery of the view. Views of the site from lower storeys are largely obscured by intervening buildings and structures. The site is visible in views from upper storeys. Recreational 11.4.79 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 sensitivity to change. The visual baseline in respect of recreational receptors, including tourists, is discussed below. Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens 11.4.80 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of the northern area of amenity grassland in York Gardens. The foreground of the view is dominated by the childrens playground, which partially obscures views to the crche and existing Falconbrook Pumping Station. Views of the site are largely obscured by intervening structures and buildings. Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens 11.4.81 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of York Gardens, at the footpath leading to the north east entrance to the park. The view is an open panorama over the area of amenity grassland in the northern part of the gardens, with the childrens playground clearly visible in the background, partially obscuring views to the crche and existing Falconbrook Pumping Station. Views of the site are largely obscured by intervening structures and buildings.
Page 147
Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens 11.4.82 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of York Gardens, from the circular area of feature paving and planting at the centre of the park. The foreground of the view is dominated by the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station and community centre. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location. Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens 11.4.83 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of York Gardens, at the footpath leading to the south east entrance to the park. The view is an open panorama over the area of amenity grassland and scattered trees in the southern part of the gardens, with the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station and community centre clearly visible in the background. Views of the site are largely unobstructed from this location. Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way 11.4.84 This viewpoint is representative of the view for recreational users of York Gardens, at the south west entrance to the park, from Plough Way. The view is an open panorama over the area of amenity grassland and scattered trees in the southern part of the gardens, with the existing Falconbrook Pumping Station and community centre clearly visible in the background. Views of the site are partially obstructed by the community centre. Transport 11.4.85 People travelling through an area generally have a medium sensitivity to change, although it is often the means by which the greatest numbers of people view the townscape. Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road 11.4.86 This viewpoint is representative of the view from people travelling south towards the site along York Road. This is a linear view down York Road, contained to the west by commercial premises and to the east by mature trees on the boundary of York Gardens. The southern extent of the site is partially visible in the background of the view. The sensitivity to change of the viewpoints is summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.4.4 Visual viewpoints sensitivities to change Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on High High Sensitivity
11.4.87
Page 148
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Viewpoint
Section 11 Townscape and visual Sensitivity High High High High High
Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road Medium High High High High High
11.5
11.5.1
Effects during the construction phase would be temporary, although medium term due to the scale 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 clearance of the site and construction activity associated with the construction of the shaft and ventilation equipment, and secondary lining of the connection tunnel. The effects on specific components of the site are described in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.5.1 Townscape effects - construction ID Component Effects
11.5.2
Page 149
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station ID 01 02 Component Disused toilet block Screening chamber structure Boundary fence Boundary vegetation Advertising hoarding Boundary wall
Section 11 Townscape and visual Effects
Demolished during construction. Demolished during construction.
03 04 05 06
Removed during construction. The majority of this will be cleared during construction to facilitate access onto York Road. Removed during construction. The majority of this wall will be removed during construction.
11.5.3
The magnitude of change to the site during the construction period is considered to be high due to the clearance required to form the construction site and the level of activity during construction. The existing site has a low level of tranquillity due to the dominance of hard standing and industrial use. This would be altered by the introduction of construction vehicles, plant equipment and high levels of activity in an area not currently intensively used. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is judged to be medium. The overall high magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of the site to change, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on the townscape resource of the site would be of moderate adverse significance. Construction phase townscape assessment River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach
11.5.4
11.5.5
11.5.6
The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, and the presence of cranes is not likely to alter the wider setting substantially. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has a moderate level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to be affected. 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 negligible effects on the River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach. York Gardens The proposed site forms part of the immediate setting for this character area. The setting would be affected by the demolition of buildings and removal of boundary walls, fences and vegetation, and the intense level of
11.5.7
11.5.8
11.5.9
Page 150
activity during construction which would include the presence of cranes at the site. The effect on the setting would be reduced by the retention of several key elements of the areas immediate setting, including the crche, community centre, pumping station and electrical substation. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. 11.5.10 The area has a high level of tranquillity at present, which would be substantially altered by the close proximity of construction activities, including demolition, excavation and regular lorry movements. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be high. The medium magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on York Gardens would be of moderate adverse significance. Thameside Residential 11.5.12 The setting of this area would be affected to a limited extent by construction activity at the site, the presence of cranes and road transport along York Road. However, the majority of the setting of the area, which is principally focused towards the River Thames, would not be affected. 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 construction activity at the site and increased lorry movements along York Road. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on Thameside Residential would be of minor adverse significance. Lombard Road Commercial 11.5.15 The setting of this area would be affected to a limited extent by construction activity at the site, the presence of cranes and road transport along York Road. However, most of the setting of this area, which is principally focused towards the River Thames, would not be affected. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has a low level of tranquillity at present, which would be affected to a limited extent by construction activity at the site and increased lorry movements along York Road. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed construction activity would give rise to negligible effects on Lombard Road Commercial. Yelverton Road Residential 11.5.18 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely inward looking and unlikely to be indirectly affected by construction traffic. The presence of cranes is not likely to alter the setting
11.5.11
11.5.13
11.5.14
11.5.16
11.5.17
Page 151
of the area substantially. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. 11.5.19 The area has a moderate level of tranquillity at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to 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 negligible effects on Yelverton Road Residential. Battersea Residential 11.5.21 The setting of this area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes at the site. However, the majority of the setting of the area would not be affected. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has moderate levels of tranquillity at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to 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 negligible effects on Battersea Residential. York Gardens Residential 11.5.24 The setting of this area would be affected to a limited extent by construction activity at the site and the presence of cranes. However, the majority of the setting of the area would not be affected, particularly given the inward looking character of the 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 construction activity at the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on York Gardens Residential would be of minor adverse significance. Hope Street Residential 11.5.27 The setting of this area would be affected to a limited extent by the presence of cranes at the site and road transport along York Road. However, the majority of the setting of the area would not be affected, particularly given the inward looking character of the 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 lorry movements along York
11.5.20
11.5.22
11.5.23
11.5.25
11.5.26
11.5.28
Page 152
Road. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquillity is considered to be low. 11.5.29 The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on Hope Street Residential would be of minor adverse significance. Sands End Conservation Area 11.5.30 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, and the presence of cranes is not likely to alter the wider setting substantially. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has a high level of tranquillity at present, which is unlikely to be affected. 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 negligible effects on Sands End Conservation Area. The assessment of townscape effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.5.2 Townscape magnitude of change - construction Townscape character area The site River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach York Gardens Thameside Residential Lombard Road Commercial Yelverton Road Residential Battersea Residential York Gardens Residential Hope Street Residential Sands End Conservation Area Sensitivity Low Medium High Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High Magnitude High Negligible Medium Low Low Negligible Negligible Low Low Negligible Effect Moderate adverse Negligible Moderate adverse Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible
11.5.31
11.5.32
11.5.33
Construction phase townscape assessment night time effects 11.5.34 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
Page 153
site. 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 further defined in the ES. Construction phase visual assessment Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens 11.5.35 Views from residences towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes at the site, although intervening fencing, buildings and trees would largely obscure other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens 11.5.37 Views from residences towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the foreground visibility of cranes at the site. Views of other construction activities from lower storeys would be largely obscured by intervening buildings. However, the removal of existing buildings and intense levels of construction activity would be highly visible from upper storeys. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be high. The high magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of major adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road 11.5.39 Views from residences towards the site would be affected to a limited extent during construction. Views towards the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes at the site, although intervening buildings and trees would largely obscure other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court 11.5.41 Views from residences towards the site would be affected to a limited extent during construction. Views towards the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes at the site, although intervening trees would filter the visibility of other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium.
11.5.36
11.5.38
11.5.40
Page 154
The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road Views from residences towards the site would be affected to a limited extent during construction. Views towards the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes at the site, although intervening trees would filter the visibility of other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river
11.5.43
11.5.44
11.5.45
Construction activity at the site would not be visible from this location, and the presence of cranes would be barely perceptible in the background of the panorama over the river. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed construction phase would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court
11.5.46
11.5.47
Views from residences towards the site would be affected to a limited extent during construction. Views towards the site would be affected by the visibility of cranes on the opposite side of York Road. Views of other construction activities from lower storeys would be largely obscured by intervening buildings. However, the removal of existing buildings and intense levels of construction activity would be visible from upper storeys. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens
11.5.48
11.5.49
Views from this location towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the visibility of cranes in the middle ground of the view, although intervening fencing, buildings and trees would largely obscure other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance.
11.5.50
Page 155
Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens 11.5.51 Views from this location towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes at the site, although intervening fencing, buildings and trees would largely obscure other construction activities. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens 11.5.53 Views from this location towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the foreground visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity at the site. The view would also be affected by the demolition of existing structures. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be high. The high magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of major adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens 11.5.55 Views from this location towards the site would be affected during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity at the site. The view would also be affected by the demolition of existing structures. Views would be partially obscured by intervening mature trees. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way 11.5.57 Views from this location towards the site would be affected to a limited extent during construction. Views across the park would be affected by the background visibility of cranes. Views of other construction activities would be largely obscured by intervening mature trees and the community centre/library to the south of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance.
11.5.52
11.5.54
11.5.56
11.5.58
Page 156
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Transport
Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road 11.5.59 Views from this location would be affected to a limited extent by road traffic along York Road and the background visibility of cranes, heavily filtered by intervening mature trees. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. The assessment of visual effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.5.3 Visual significance of effects - construction Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens High Medium Moderate adverse Major adverse Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
11.5.60
11.5.61
Viewpoint 1.2: View south west High from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.2: View south west High High
High
Low
Minor adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Negligible
High High
Medium Medium
High
Negligible
High
Low
Minor adverse
Medium
Moderate adverse Moderate
High
Medium
Page 157
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Viewpoint from the north east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road High
Section 11 Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect adverse High Major adverse Moderate adverse Minor adverse
High
Medium
High
Low
Medium
Low
Minor adverse
11.6
11.6.1
Operational assessment Year 1 of operation

The operational scheme would have little activity associated with it, aside from infrequent maintenance visits. Therefore, for all townscape character areas it is considered that the proposed development would have a negligible effect on tranquillity. Operational effects on the site and surrounding character areas are discussed further below. Operational phase site assessment Year 1 of operation The proposed development would have a direct and permanent effect on the townscape resource of the site. The permanent works layout would result in the clearance of existing disused and poorly maintained components of the site. The majority of above ground structures would be incorporated within the Falconbrook Pumping Station compound, defined by a new boundary wall, which would enclose a smaller area than at present. The remainder of the construction phase working area would be improved and designed as a new hard surfaced area of public realm between the crche and community centre/library. The effects on specific components of the site are described in the table below: Vol 14 Table 11.6.1 Townscape - effects during Year 1 of operation ID 01 02 Component Disused toilet block Screening chamber structure Effects These would not be reinstated. The area would become part of the new area of public realm. This would not be reinstated.
11.6.2
Page 158
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station ID 03 04 Component Boundary fence Boundary vegetation Advertising hoarding Boundary wall
Section 11 Townscape and visual Effects
New fencing would be provided as necessary around the site. Vegetation lost during construction would be replaced in line with a new landscape design for the area. This would not be reinstated. A new boundary wall around the compound of the pumping station would be constructed.
05 06
11.6.3
The magnitude of change to the site is considered to be medium, principally due to the removal of existing disused and poorly maintained structures, and the creation of a new area of public realm. Assessing this positive change against the low sensitivity of the site, means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Operational phase townscape assessment Year 1 of operation Due to the low height of the operational structures, and their location within the reinstated Falconbrook Pumping Station compound, the change to setting introduced by the proposed development would be barely perceptible for all surrounding townscape character areas. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the sensitivity of the various character areas, means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on all townscape character areas surrounding the site. Operational phase townscape assessment Year 1 of operation night time effects
11.6.4
11.6.5
11.6.6
11.6.7
It is likely that the operational scheme would have no substantial lighting requirements. Therefore, for the site and all surrounding townscape character areas it is considered that the proposed development would have a negligible effect on night time character. Operational phase visual assessment Year 1 of operation Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens
11.6.8
Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, structures within the childrens playground and the crche. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible.
Page 159
The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens
11.6.10
Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, structures within the childrens playground and Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road
11.6.11
11.6.12
Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees and buildings, including the electrical substation and Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees and buildings, including the electrical substation and Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road The new area of public realm, in the location of the disused structure cleared during construction, would be visible from this location. However, the majority of the view across the park would be unaffected. The proposed above ground structures would be obscured by the boundary walling of Falconbrook Pumping Station, the pumping station itself and the electrical substation. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance on this viewpoint.
11.6.13
11.6.14
11.6.15
11.6.16
11.6.17
Page 160
Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river 11.6.18 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening buildings and structures along the river frontage and York Road. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court 11.6.20 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening buildings and structures along the river frontage and York Road. The proposed above ground structures would be visible from upper storeys, although they would form barely perceptible components of the wider view, set against structures similar in character, including Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens 11.6.22 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, structures within the childrens playground and the crche. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens 11.6.24 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, structures within the childrens playground and the crche. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens 11.6.26 The new area of public realm, in the location of the disused structure cleared during construction, would be visible from this location. However, the majority of the view across the park would be unaffected. The proposed above ground structures would be obscured by the boundary
11.6.19
11.6.21
11.6.23
11.6.25
Page 161
walling of Falconbrook Pumping Station, the pumping station itself and the electrical substation. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. 11.6.27 The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens 11.6.28 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, the community centre/library and boundary walling around Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way 11.6.30 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, the community centre/library and boundary walling around Falconbrook Pumping Station. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road 11.6.32 Views of the proposed development from this location would be obscured by intervening trees, the childrens playground and crche. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects on this viewpoint. The assessment of visual effects during Year 1 of operation is summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 11.6.2 Visual assessment viewpoints during Year 1 operation Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens High Negligible Negligible Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
11.6.29
11.6.31
11.6.33
11.6.34
Page 162
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Viewpoint Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court Recreational
Section 11 Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect High Negligible Negligible
High
Negligible
Negligible
High High
Negligible Low
Negligible Minor beneficial Negligible
High
Negligible
High
Negligible
Negligible
Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the High northern part of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road Medium High
High
Low
Minor beneficial Negligible
High
Negligible
High
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Operational assessment results Year 15 of operation

11.6.35 Townscape and visual effects arising from the proposed development, 15 years after completion may be altered by growth of vegetation established as part of the scheme, growth of vegetation in the wider assessment area or changes in the base case arising from redevelopment in the vicinity of
Page 163
the site. These may contribute further to generating beneficial effects on the surrounding townscape and visual receptors. This is to be defined further as part of the ongoing design development and will be reflected in the final assessment presented in the ES.
11.7
11.7.1

Various measures relevant to townscape are embedded in the draft CoCP (see 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.
Operation
11.7.2 A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to reduce adverse effects during operation and it is likely that the projects commitment to high quality design would help to minimise adverse effects on the townscape resource of the site. Operational effects depend heavily on the architectural and landscape design of the built elements and public realm, which form part of the scheme design. Therefore no additional mitigation is required.
11.7.3
Page 164
Section 11: Townscape and visual
11.8
Vol 14 Table 11.8.1 Townscape assessment summary - construction Significance of effect Moderate adverse Negligible Not required No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Negligible Negligible Negligible Not required Not required No mitigation possible Minor adverse No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Mitigation
Assessment summary
Significance of residual effect Moderate adverse Negligible
Receptor
The site
Change to character due to site clearance and intensity of construction activity.
River Thames Wandsworth and Sands End Reach Moderate adverse Minor adverse
No significant effects.
York Gardens
Change to setting due to the presence of cranes, construction activity and site hoardings.
Moderate adverse Minor adverse
Thameside Residential
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes and road transport.
Lombard Road Commercial
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Yelverton Road Residential
Battersea Residential
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes.
York Gardens Residential
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes.
Minor adverse
Page 165
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect Minor adverse Negligible Not required No mitigation possible Minor adverse Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Hope Street Residential
Slight change to setting due to the presence of cranes and road transport.
Sands End Conservation Area Vol 14 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment summary - construction Significance of effect Moderate adverse Mitigation
Negligible
Receptor
Significance of residual effect No mitigation possible Moderate adverse
Residential
Viewpoint 1.1: View south Visibility of cranes within a park setting. from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens
Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens
Foreground visibility of cranes within a park setting.
Major adverse
No mitigation possible Minor adverse No mitigation possible Moderate adverse No mitigation possible
Major adverse
Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road
Background visibility of cranes.
Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court
Background visibility of cranes, filtered visibility of site hoardings and construction activity.
Moderate adverse
Page 166
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect Moderate adverse Negligible Not required No mitigation possible Moderate adverse Negligible Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road
Background visibility of cranes, filtered visibility of site hoardings and construction activity.
Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river Minor adverse Not required
Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Major adverse
Oblique visibility of cranes and construction activity, partially obscured by intervening buildings.
Minor adverse
Recreational No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Moderate adverse Minor No further mitigation possible No Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Major adverse
Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens
Middle-ground visibility of cranes.
Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens
Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens
Foreground visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity.
Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens
Background visibility of cranes, site hoardings and construction activity.
Moderate adverse Minor adverse
Viewpoint 2.5: View north
Page 167
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect adverse mitigation possible Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way Minor adverse No mitigation possible
Transport Minor adverse
Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road
Visibility of road transport and background visibility of cranes.
Vol 14 Table 11.8.3 Townscape assessment summary Year 1 of operation Significance of effect Negligible Mitigation Not required Significance of residual effect Negligible
Receptor
All receptors
Change to setting introduced by the proposed development would be barely perceptible
Vol 14 Table 11.8.4 Visual assessment summary Year 1 of operation Significance of effect Negligible Mitigation Significance of residual effect Not required Negligible
Receptor
Residential
Viewpoint 1.1: View south No significant effects. from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens
Viewpoint 1.2: View south west from residences on
Negligible
Not required
Negligible
Page 168
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Pennethorne House, adjacent to York Gardens Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 1.3: View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road Negligible Not required Not required Not required
Viewpoint 1.4: View west from residences on Canley Court Minor beneficial Negligible
Negligible
Viewpoint 1.5: View north west from residences on Newcomen Road
Visibility of the new area of public realm.
Minor beneficial
Viewpoint 1.6: View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river
Negligible
Viewpoint 1.7: View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court
Negligible
Not required
Negligible
Recreational Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 2.1: View south from the northern part of York Gardens
Viewpoint 2.2: View south west from the north east
Negligible
Page 169
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effect Minor beneficial Not required Minor beneficial Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
entrance to York Gardens
Viewpoint 2.3: View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens Negligible Not required Not required
Visibility of the new area of public realm.
Viewpoint 2.4: View north from the south east entrance to York Gardens Negligible
Negligible
Viewpoint 2.5: View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way Negligible
Negligible
Transport Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 3.1: View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road
Page 170
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 report. It may be appropriate to reduce the study area to focus the assessment on likely significant effects. Further work will be undertaken to establish a base case for the Year 15 operational assessment, using professional judgement aligned with future developments. Ongoing work will be undertaken throughout the assessment process to identify design measures to minimise adverse effects arising from the proposed scheme in operation. Where possible, these will be embedded in the proposed development. Details of the scheme design and landscaping will be provided for the planning submission. Further work will be undertaken for the ES to establish the effects of the proposed development after the architectural and landscape design has been fully worked up. This will inform the assessment of operational effects in Year 1 and Year 15. 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 11.9.7
Page 171
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 Falconbrook 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 this assessment for both construction and operational phases of the project. This section details the site-specific findings for the Falconbrook 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 ES. This assessment provides a commentary on the anticipated transport effects of the project. As the baseline data collection and an 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 currently available information.
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. Vol 14 Table 12.2.1 Transport - construction traffic details Description Assumed peak period of construction lorry movements Assumed average peak daily construction lorry vehicle movements Assumption End of Year 1 of construction 20 movements per day (10 two-way lorry trips)
Page 172
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Description Types of lorry requiring access
Section 12: Transport Assumption Excavation lorries Concrete lorries Rebar lorries Office lorries Pipe/Track/Oils lorries Grout/Materials lorries
Note: 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 that all materials would be transported by road. Lorry routing during construction phasing Two new vehicle access points would be constructed off the York Road carriageway. These would enable the site to be accessed directly and avoid the requirements for construction vehicles to utilise the residential roads located to the east of the site. The site would operate on a left in / left out basis. Vehicles accessing the site would travel westbound on the York Road prior turning left into the site, whilst vehicles exiting would turn left onto the York Road. Construction vehicles would not be permitted to cross the York Road central reservation / vehicle refuge area when accessing or existing site. The primary route for vehicles accessing the site would be to utilise the A214 Trinity Road, the A3036 St Johns Hill and the A3220 Latchmere Road. Vehicles would then transfer to the westbound Battersea Park Road and ultimately the A3205 York Road. The primary route for vehicles exiting the site would be westbound along the A3205 York Road, prior to transferring to the southbound A214 Trinity Road. Secondary routes of using either the Wandsworth Bridge, Plough Road or the A3207 Falcon Road are also being considered. Route options between the site and the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and Strategic Road Network (SRN) are under consideration for this site. Vehicles routing towards the site from the Wandsworth Bridge Gyratory would route east along York Road towards the site access while vehicles heading towards the site from the Vauxhall Gyratory would route west along Nine Elms Lane, west on Battersea Park Road, then west along York Road towards the site access.
12.2.4
12.2.5
12.2.6
12.2.7
12.2.8
12.2.9 12.2.10
12.2.11
Page 173
Construction traffic would not be permitted to undertake a right turn into the site from York Road. Vol 14 Figure 12.2.1 Transport construction traffic routes indicates the construction traffic routes for access to/from the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. Vol 14 Figure 12.2.1 Transport construction traffic routes (see Volume 14 Figures document)
12.2.14
The histogram in Vol 14 Figure 12.2.2 below shows that peak activity at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site would in Year 1 of construction. This peak is close to the overall project-wide construction peak in 2019.
Page 174
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Vol 14 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 175
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Construction workers 12.2.15
The construction site is expected to require a maximum workforce of approximately 40 people at any one time. The number and type of workers is shown in the table below. Vol 14 Table 12.2.2 Transport - construction worker numbers Contractor Staff 08:00-18:00 15 Labour 08:00-18:00 20 Client Staff 08:00-18:00 5
12.2.16
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) and will be reported in the ES. Code of construction practice Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce transport impacts include measures in relation to lorry 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.
12.2.17
12.2.18
12.2.19
Operation
12.2.20 The operational structure would be contained within the boundary of the Falconbrook Pumping Station and would be located beneath a new hard standing area. Maintenance vehicles would enter the site via the existing vehicular entrance to the pumping station which can be accessed from Falcon Road via Ingrave Road and Lavender Road and then through York Gardens. This route is currently used by maintenance vehicles accessing the existing pumping station and ancillary buildings. 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.
12.2.21
12.2.22
Page 176
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 report for completeness. Vol 14 Table 12.3.1 Transport - stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Wandsworth Comment Details of traffic generation for all sites during operational and construction phases should be provided. The EIA should consider noise, pollution, access and working times related to the transport arrangements. Response This already forms part of the topic methodology. The topic methodology already includes the need to address these issues where directly relevant to the topic, or to inform other topic assessments. The topic methodology already addresses both site-specific and cumulative transport effects. Construction layouts show a gate setback.
12.3.2
LB Wandsworth
LB Wandsworth
Both individual and cumulative impacts should be considered where necessary.
Transport for London
The gates at the site entrance should be set back from the footway such that if construction vehicles arrive when the gates are closed they can wait off the highway. The new exit point should be deflected to encourage exiting vehicles to left turn out.
Design drawings of the accesses will be revised and agreed with Transport for London. This will be assessed.
Transport for
The safety of the site accesses
Page 177
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Organisation London Comment should be assessed in relation to the Cycle Super Highway on York Road. The location of the relocated bus stop should be agreed with Transport for London, including whether a lay by is required. If a lay by is not required, the kerb line should be straightened at the stop.
Section 12: Transport Response
Noted
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 in the assessment are qualitative and based on professional judgement.
12.3.7
12.4
12.4.1
Baseline conditions
The pumping station is currently accessed by vehicles from the east through York Gardens. The surrounding area is primarily residential in nature with the nearest residents located on Lavender Road to the east of the Pumping Station. The following sub-sections describe the baseline conditions of the site in relation to pedestrians, public transport and highways. Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site are also identified. Vol 14 Figure 12.4.1 Transport site plan Falconbrook Pumping Station shows the Transport Site Plan. Vol 14 Figure 12.4.1 Transport site plan (see Volume 14 Figures document)
12.4.2
Pedestrian routes
12.4.3 There are footpaths in place on both sides of York Road with an approximate width of between 2.5m and 3.0m.
Page 178
A signalised pedestrian crossing is in place at the junction of York Road and Plough Road which is approximately 80m to the south of the site. There are dropped kerbs and tactile paving in place at this crossing point. A second signalised pedestrian crossing is located approximately 180m to the north of the site at the junction of York Road and Lombard Road. Tactile paving and dropped kerbs are also provided here. A pedestrian access to York Gardens is located to the south of the Falconbrook Pumping Station which links to a pedestrian path that runs through the Park to the residential area in the east.
12.4.5
12.4.6
Cycle routes
12.4.7 12.4.8 A cycle superhighway runs along York Road and connects with cycle routes along Yelverton Road, Wye Street and Falcon Road. The cycle superhighway is provided in both directions on York Road, is identified by road markings and signage, and links Wandsworth and Westminster.
Bus routes
12.4.9 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 good. There are bus stops located on both sides of York Road. The nearest southbound bus stop is located approximately 20m to the south-west of the site while the nearest northbound bus stop is approximately 150m to the north-west of the site. Vol 14 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 14 Table 12.4.1 Transport - bus service frequency
Distance from site (metres) and Location of Bus Stop 20m - York Gardens 150m - York Gardens 180m - Hope Street 175m - Hope Street 175m - Hope Street 180m - Hope Origin - Destination AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour
12.4.10
12.4.11
Route Number
44 44 C3 C3
Victoria Station - Tooting Tooting Victoria Station Falcon Road/ Grant Road Warwick Road Tesco Warwick Road Tesco Falcon Road/ Grant Road Ladbroke Grove Sainsburys Clapham Junction Station/ Falcon Road Clapham Junction Station/
Page 179
5 5 6 6
295 295
6 6

Distance from site (metres) and Location of Bus Stop Street 20m - York Gardens 150m - York Gardens 875m - Grant Road 860m - Grant Road 875m - Grant Road 860m - Grant Road 875m - Grant Road 860m - Grant Road 875m - Grant Road 860m - Grant Road -
Route Number
Origin - Destination
AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour
Falcon Road Ladbroke Grove Sainsburys Victoria Station Danebury Avenue Danebury Avenue Victoria Station Telford Avenue Cadogan Gardens/ Sloane Square Cadogan Gardens/ Sloane Square Telford Avenue Clapham Junction Station/ Falcon Road Appold Street Appold Street Clapham Junction Station/ Falcon Road Peckham Bus Station Natural Museum History/ Cromwell Road Natural Museum History/ Cromwell Road Peckham Bus Station Northcote Road White City Bus Station White City Bus Station Northcote Road 5 6 5 5 6 6
170 170 319 319 344 344
345
345
49 49 Total
6 6 91
London Underground and National Rail stations

12.4.12 There is no underground service in the immediate vicinity of the site with the nearest station being located at Fulham Broadway which is on the District Line. Clapham Junction Rail Station, which is situated approximately 500m to the south-east of the site, services National Rail and London Overground Services. Trains run to Waterloo Station and destinations to the south and west of London including Brighton, Reading, Guildford, Woking and Dorking. In the morning and evening peaks, trains depart for Waterloo from Clapham Junction every 2 to 3 minutes. Trains routing south to Brighton and Dorking depart approximately every 20 to 30 minutes and west to Guildford and Woking every 30 minutes.
12.4.13
12.4.14 12.4.15
Page 180
There are also additional bus stops located on Falcon Road, a short distance from the site. The destination of these services includes Sloane Square, Liverpool Street, White City and South Kensington.
River services
12.4.17 There are no wharf or jetty facilities in the immediate vicinity of the Falconbrook site. The nearest pier is Wandsworth Riverside Quarter Pier which is approximately 2.6km west of the site.
Parking
Existing on-street car parking 12.4.18 On-street parking is available on the residential streets to the east of the site. The majority of this parking is not subject to a controlled parking zone (CPZ) and is mainly used by residents of the area. A small area of on-street parking which is bounded by Wye Road to the west, Ingrave Road to the south, Falcon Road to the east and York Road to the north is subject to a CPZ which operates from 09:00 to 16:30, Monday to Friday with a maximum stay of 4hours permitted. There are no coach parking services within 4km of the site. The closest coach parking facility is located at the Nine Elms coach park which is north-east of the site. Existing off-street / private car parking 12.4.21 Off-street parking is available at a large Asda supermarket located on Lavender Hill, south east of the site, which is open 24 hours Tuesdays to Fridays, 07:30 to midnight on Mondays, midnight to 10:00 Saturdays and 11:00 to 17:00 on Sundays. There is no charge for store customers to use the parking and it is approximately 1km walking distance to the site.
12.4.19
12.4.20
12.4.22
Highway network
12.4.23 12.4.24 A site visit was undertaken to observe the traffic volumes on the road network adjacent to the proposed site access and egress. York Road is a dual carriageway at this point and forms part of the TLRN. It routes north-east from Wandsworth Gyratory and continues onto Battersea Park Road. Cycle lanes are present on both sides of the road and are identified by road markings and signage. A 30mph speed limit is imposed on York Road and during the site visit it was observed that traffic flow was quite heavy and fast moving. The area to the east of the site is primarily residential and is accessed from Falcon Road or Plough Road by a number of two-way roads. These roads were observed to be lightly trafficked during the site visit and due to the presence of on-street parking on these streets, which restricts road width when in use, any traffic that was observed was travelling at a low speed.
12.4.25 12.4.26
Page 181
Survey data
Description of surveys 12.4.27 Baseline survey data for the Falconbrook 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 including turning volumes, queue lengths, saturation flows, degree of saturation and traffic signal timings. The following junction surveys were undertaken in the vicinity of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site to understand highway operation in the area. a. York Road / Plough Road. b. York Road / Bridges Court. 12.4.29 An Automated Traffic Counter (ATC) was placed in the following location to obtain data on traffic flows: a. York Road Results of surveys 12.4.30 Data obtained from the surveys were being processed at the time of writing and will be reported fully in the ES.
12.4.28
Data from third party sources

12.4.31 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. This will be reported fully in the ES.
Transport receptors and sensitivity

12.4.32 The receptors and their sensitivities in the vicinity of the Falconbrook 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 for this report 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.
12.4.33
Page 182
Vol 14 Table 12.4.2 Transport receptor values/sensitivities Value/sensitivity and justification High Medium Low Receptor Pedestrians and cyclists using York Gardens as a through route and recreational area. Private vehicle users in the area using the local highways or parking. Residents in the vicinity. Private vehicle users in the area using the local highways or on-street parking. Emergency vehicles travelling on York Road. Business owners and workplace occupiers along Yo Road. Public transport users (passengers) travelling along York Road. No receptors with low sensitivity
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 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.
12.5.2
Construction base and development cases

Assessment year 12.5.3 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 which will be the assessment year for local network assessments and will be contained in the ES. For this report the assessment is undertaken for the network-wide 2019 assessment year. Assessment area 12.5.6 The area being assessed for the Falconbrook Pumping Station site is based on discussions with LB Wandsworth and Transport for London.
12.5.4
12.5.5
Page 183
Local roads and junctions included in the assessment are as follows: a. York Road / Plough Road / York Place. These roads and junctions would be assessed for highway, cycle and pedestrian impacts. The Thames Path would also be included within the assessment due to its proximity to the development site. Local bus and rail services, as identified on Vol 14 Figure 12.4.1, would also be assessed. Construction base case The construction base case takes into account traffic growth and new developments within the local area by 2019. This includes the Bridges Court Car Park development described in Section 3.4.1. 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. Pedestrian routes Pedestrian routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. The base case therefore assumes the same pedestrian routes as set out in Section 12.4. 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. Bus patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment. London Underground and National Rail and patronage London Underground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. LUL 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. 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.
12.5.9
12.5.10
12.5.11
12.5.12
12.5.13
12.5.14
12.5.15
12.5.16
12.5.17
Page 184
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Highway layout 12.5.18
The physical layout of the highway network is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumed the same highway layout. 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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site in 2019 without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Wandsworth 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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This section addresses the changes that would arise as a result of the Thames Tunnel construction activities at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. Construction vehicle movements It has been assumed for the purposes of this 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 14 Table 12.5.1 Transport forecast construction vehicle movements Vehicle movements per time period Vehicle type Construction vehicle movements 10%* Worker vehicle movements Total Daily 20 0 07:00 to 08:00 to 17:00 to 18:00 to 08:00 09:00 18:00 19:00 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0
12.5.19
12.5.20
12.5.21
12.5.22
12.5.23
12.5.24
12.5.25
Page 185
Vehicle movements per time period Vehicle type Total Total Daily 20 07:00 to 08:00 to 17:00 to 18:00 to 08:00 09:00 18:00 19:00 0 2 2 0
* 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.
12.5.26
Assuming all excavated material is taken by road, an average peak flow of 20 vehicle movements a day is expected during the months of greatest activity at the site. At other times in the construction period, vehicle flows would be lower than this average peak figure. Modal split The Falconbrook Pumping Station site has a PTAL of between 3 and 4. There would be no provision for worker parking on site and it has therefore been assumed no workers would drive to the site and 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 There would be two new crossovers located on the eastern side of York Road to accommodate construction vehicles accessing and egressing the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. It would be necessary to remove an existing bus stop to the south of the site egress and realign the existing kerb to tie in with the new site egress. This would result in the footpath to the south of the site egress being widened. Pedestrians are currently able to access York Gardens from York Road via a walkway located between the Pumping Station and the community centre. This would be relocated further south towards the community centre in order to accommodate the site egress and pedestrians would be diverted along the eastern boundary of the site before accessing York Gardens. Cycle routes The cycle superhighway which routes along the eastern side of York Road would be altered to take into account the new site access and egress points. Cyclists approaching the site access from the north would be requested to yield to vehicles undertaking the left-turn from York Road into the site. Traffic marshals will ensure that vehicle egress the site only when safe to do so. Cyclists on York Road may be requested to yield to vehicles egressing the site before continuing south on York Road. Cyclists are currently able to access York Gardens from York Road via a walkway located between the Pumping Station and the community centre. There is no formal cycle path between York Road and York Gardens. This
Page 186
12.5.27
12.5.28
12.5.29
12.5.30
12.5.31
12.5.32 12.5.33
12.5.34
access point would be relocated further towards the community centre in order to accommodate the site egress. Bus routes and patronage 12.5.35 The bus stop located on the eastern side of York Road and approximately 20m to the south-west of the site would need to be removed in order to accommodate the site egress. This stop would be relocated to approximately 150m north-east of the construction site. The exact location of the bus stop relocation will be subject to agreement with TfL. London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.37 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 12.5.38 No river services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development. Parking 12.5.39 12.5.40 No public parking would be impacted on by the worksite area. Highway layout Two new crossovers would be put in place on the eastern side of York Road. A site access would be put in place at the northern end of the site while a site egress would be put in place at the southern end of the site. The site egress would form a priority junction with York Road with vehicles entering directly into the nearside lane of traffic on York Road. The site access and egress points would operate on a left in/left out only basis. The bus stop which is located to the south-west of the site on York Road would be relocated and the edge of carriageway realigned to tie in with the new site egress arrangement. Highway operation 12.5.43 Highway operation would not be impacted on by the worksite area.
12.5.36
12.5.41
12.5.42
12.5.44 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the assessment undertaken for the 2019 assessment year based on professional judgement Pedestrian routes 12.5.45 There would be two new crossovers located on the eastern side of York Road to accommodate vehicles accessing and egressing the construction site. This would result in additional crossing points for pedestrians and a delay to their journey time. It would also result in a potential increase in pedestrian/vehicle conflicts at these locations. It would be necessary to relocate an existing bus stop to the south of the site egress and realign the existing kerb to tie in with the new site egress. This would result in a wider footpath to the south of the site egress. The
Page 187
12.5.46
relocated bus stop (signposted) would be approximately 150m north of the site which would result in greater walk times for pedestrian coming from the south wishing to use this service. The bus stop would be designed using Transport for London design guidance and so would be fully accessible. 12.5.47 The pedestrian access to York Gardens from York Road would be relocated to the south of its existing location and pedestrians would be diverted along the eastern boundary of the site before gaining access to the gardens which would result in an increase in their journey time. Signage would be provided for this diversion. On the basis of the above it is considered that the effect on pedestrian routes would be minor adverse. Cycle routes 12.5.49 Cyclists approaching the site access and egress points on York Road may be required to yield to construction vehicles accessing and egressing the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This would result in a delay to their journey time. The access to York Gardens from York Road would be relocated to the south of its existing location and cyclists would be diverted to along the eastern boundary of the before gaining access to the site which would result in an increase in their journey time. Taking this into account it is therefore expected that the effect on cycle routes would be minor adverse. Bus routes and patronage 12.5.52 It would be necessary to relocate the bus stop currently to the south of the site egress to approximately 150m north of the site. The bus stop would be designed using Transport for London design guidance and so would be fully accessible. Appropriate road markings would be provided at the new location of the bus stop and the bus shelter would also be transferred to the new location. The routing of bus services in the area should not be affected by the construction works at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using buses to access the site during construction. The relocation of the bus stop would increase the walking distance for some passengers but decrease the walk time for others. Therefore, it is expected that the effect on bus routes and patronage would be minor adverse. London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.56 12.5.57 There are no underground services in the immediate vicinity of the site. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using the rail services at Clapham Junction to access the site during construction, however, based on professional judgement, it is expected that the effect on National Rail services would be negligible.
12.5.48
12.5.50
12.5.51
12.5.53 12.5.54 12.5.55
Page 188
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station River services and patronage 12.5.58
Construction materials to/from the Falconbrook Pumping Station site would not be transported by river and therefore would not alter or affect any river services. While there would be some labourers and staff using river to access the site during construction, it is expected that the effect on river services would be negligible. Parking No public parking would be impacted on by the construction at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. The effect on parking would therefore be negligible. Highway layout Two new crossovers would be required on York Road in order to accommodate construction vehicles access and egressing the construction site. Appropriate signage would be provided in advance of the crossovers to alert traffic on York Road that vehicles would be entering and exiting the nearside lane. It would be necessary to remove the bus stop that is currently to the south of the site egress and realign the kerb to tie in with the site egress. The bus stop would be relocated to the north of the site on York Road and the kerb at this location would be realigned to allow the bus stop to be inset into the footpath, allowing stationary buses to be out of the flow of traffic. The works to create the site access and egress points and relocate the bus stop are likely to require short term pedestrian and traffic management. Therefore, it is expected that the effect on local highway layout would be minor adverse. Highway operation There would be an increase in construction vehicles on the local road network as a result of the construction at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This may result in a delay to general traffic on the network. Construction vehicles would be undertaking a left-turn from York Road in order to access the site and also egressing the site onto York Road a short distance from the site access. This could cause delay to vehicles travelling in the nearside southbound lane of York Road. Overall it is expected that the effect on highway operation (specifically the ease of vehicle movements) would be minor adverse. Highway capacity analysis The levels of construction vehicle movement expected at this site are comparatively low in the context of the amount of traffic already using the road network in the surrounding area. As a result of the overall increase in the number of vehicles on the local road network, it is expected that the effect on highway capacity would be minor adverse.
12.5.59
12.5.60
12.5.61
12.5.62
12.5.63
12.5.64
12.5.65
12.5.66
12.5.67
12.5.68
Page 189
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance of effects 12.5.69
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 the 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 adverse effect on road network operation and delay. Effects on pedestrian and cyclist amenity and safety are expected to be minor adverse.
12.5.70
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.
Operational base and development cases

Assessment year 12.6.2 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 12.6.3 The assessment area for the operational assessment remains the same as for the construction assessment as set out in paras. 12.5.6-12.5.7. This includes those roads and junctions which lead to/from the Falconbrook Pumping Station site to the SRN and TRLN. Operational base case 12.6.4 12.6.5 The operational base case takes into account traffic growth and new developments within the local area by Year 1 of construction. 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 12.6.6 Pedestrian routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. The base case therefore assumes the same pedestrian routes as set out in Section 12.4. Cycle routes 12.6.7 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.
Page 190
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Bus routes and patronage 12.6.8 12.6.9
Bus routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore are assumed to be the same in the base case. 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. London Underground and National Rail and patronage London Underground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. It is anticipated that London Underground 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. River services and patronage River services and patronage are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Parking Parking provision is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. Highway layout The physical layout of the highway network is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. 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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site in Year 1 of operation without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Wandsworth 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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site as a result of the Thames Tunnel project and takes into consideration the occasional maintenance activities required at the site.
12.6.10 12.6.11
12.6.12 12.6.13
12.6.14
12.6.15 12.6.16
12.6.17
12.6.18
12.6.19
Page 191
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Trip generation 12.6.20
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 be conducted using light commercial vehicles. 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 mobile cranes would be required. The cranes would facilitate lowering and recovery of tunnel inspection equipment and to provide duty/standby access for personnel. Unplanned maintenance access will be required to the shaft and other below ground chambers to respond to blockages should they occur. Modal split It is anticipated that all trips during the operational phase would be using light commercial 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 The footways and kerb alignments adjacent to the Falconbrook Pumping Station site would be reinstated following the construction phase and would return to their baseline condition. Cycle routes The cycle superhighway on the eastern side of York Road would be reinstated following the construction phase and would return to its baseline condition. Bus routes and patronage No change is expected to any bus services in the operational phase and the relocated bus stop would be returned to its original location. It is not anticipated that operational staff journeys would be made by bus. London Underground and National Rail and patronage No change is expected to any London Underground or National Rail 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, compared to the base case, as a result of the operational phase arrangements at Falconbrook Pumping Station. When large vehicles are required to service the site, some parking may need to be suspended on the residential roads to the east of the pumping
12.6.21
12.6.22
12.6.23
12.6.24
12.6.25
12.6.26 12.6.27 12.6.28
12.6.29
12.6.30
12.6.31
Page 192
station to ensure the vehicles have sufficient space to manoeuvre into the site. Highway layout 12.6.32 The site would be accessed via Ingrave Street and Lavender Road during the operational phase. This reflects the current access arrangements for the Pumping Station. 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 12.6.34 12.6.35 Occasional maintenance vehicles would service the Falconbrook Pumping Station site 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.
12.6.33
Operational effects
12.6.36 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the operational assessment undertaken for the Year 1 of operation assessment year. Pedestrian routes 12.6.37 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on pedestrian routes in the area and footways adjacent to the site. Cycle routes 12.6.38 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on cycle routes in the area and on the roads surrounding the site. Bus routes and patronage 12.6.39 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on bus routes and patronage. London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.6.40 London Underground and National Rail services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase. River services and patronage 12.6.41 River services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase. Parking 12.6.42 As a result of the highly infrequent maintenance trips anticipated at Falconbrook Pumping Station site during the operational phase, there
Page 193
would be a negligible effect on on-street parking in the local area. During maintenance where larger vehicles are required, some parking may be temporarily suspended to enable vehicles to access the site. Under these circumstances, on-street parking bays would be re-provided in a safe location away from turning vehicles Highway layout 12.6.43 In the operational phase the current highway layout would be restored, with the construction access retained, resulting in a negligible impact on the local highway layout. Highway operation 12.6.44 During the operational phase there may be some delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles are required at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, however this is likely to be highly infrequent, and the effect would therefore be negligible. Highway capacity analysis 12.6.45 12.6.46 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 the 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.
12.6.47
12.7
12.7.1 12.7.2

Some of the measures contained in the draft CoCP of relevance to transport are summarised in Section 12.2. 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 scheme. Any mitigation which is required is detailed below. Pedestrian routes At this location, mitigation measures during the construction phase are likely to be required to provide safe crossing points for pedestrians. A traffic marshal would be situated at the site access point to ensure pedestrians are aware of turning vehicles. Cycle routes Safe crossing points at the site access would be provided. This would include a traffic marshal to be located at the site access to ensure that cyclists are aware of turning vehicles.
12.7.3
12.7.4
Page 194
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Bus routes 12.7.5
On the basis that the relocated bus stop is appropriately designed to be fully accessible and is also signposted, no mitigation would be required. 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 No mitigation measures are likely to be required for parking. Highway layout A road safety audit would be undertaken of the site access and kerb realignments. Highway operation No mitigation measures are required for highway operation. Highway capacity No mitigation measures are likely to be required for highway capacity.
12.7.6
12.7.7 12.7.8 12.7.9
12.7.10 12.7.11
Operation
Pedestrian routes 12.7.12 Footways would be returned to their original routes for operation. As a result, no mitigation would be required for the operational phase. Cycle routes 12.7.13 Cycle routes would not be affected by the operation of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, and no mitigation would be required. Bus routes 12.7.14 Bus services and patronage would not be affected by the operation of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site and therefore no mitigation would be required. London Underground and National Rail 12.7.15 London Underground and London Overground services would not be affected by the operation of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site therefore no mitigation would be required. River services 12.7.16 River services and patronage would not be affected by the operation of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site and therefore no mitigation would be required. Parking 12.7.17 When large maintenance vehicles are required at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site, temporary parking bay suspension may be required along Ingrave Street and Lavender Road to accommodate vehicle
Page 195
movements. Under these circumstances, on-street parking bays would be re-provided in a safe location away from turning vehicles as necessary. No mitigation would therefore be required. Highway layout 12.7.18 The highway layout would be restored to the existing layout and therefore would not be affected by the operation of the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. As a result no mitigation would be required for the operational phase. Highway operation 12.7.19 The number of trips associated with the Falconbrook 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 12.7.20 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.
Page 196
12.8
Vol 14 Table 12.8.1 Transport construction assessment Significance Minor adverse Provision of safe crossing points where needed. Provision of traffic marshal at site access. Minor adverse Provision of safe crossing points where needed. Minor adverse Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Effect
Pedestrians in the local area
Cyclists in the local area
New crossing points. Loss of footway / kerb realignments Local diversions. Relocation of bus stop Local diversion. Delay to journey time.
Bus users and operators Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse
Some additional patronage from construction workers. Relocation of bus stop.
Minor adverse
Provision of traffic marshal at site access. None required
Minor adverse
Rail users and operators
Some additional patronage from construction workers.
None required None required None required Road safety audit
Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse
River users and operators
Some additional patronage from construction workers.
Parking
No effect
All road users
Movement of large construction vehicles Highway layout changes including new crossovers
Page 197
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Effect
and relocation of bus stop (requiring short-term pedestrian and traffic management). Delay to journey time.
Page 198
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Vol 14 Table 12.8.2 Transport operational assessment Effect Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible None required None required None required None required None required Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible None required Negligible Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Occasional maintenance trips.
Pedestrians in the local area Cyclists in the local area Bus users and operators Rail users and operators
No effect.
River users and operators Parking users
No effect.
Occasional suspension of onstreet parking in the immediate vicinity of the site during maintenance (to be reprovided if demand requires).
All road users
Negligible Occasional delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles accessing site.
None required
Negligible
Page 199
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 200
Section 13: Water resources groundwater
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 Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This groundwater assessment has some overlap with the land quality assessment. Water quality information from the land quality assessment is included in the appendices to this section of the report.
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, includes: a. A CSO drop shaft, approximate diameter 9m (internal) and 10m (external) and with a depth of approximately 40m below ground level (excluding a 2m thick base slab). b. An interception chamber for the existing CSO overflow. c. A connection culvert to the drop shaft (dimensions approximately 30m long and 13 to 16m deep).
13.2.2
d. A 2.4m internal diameter, 250m long connection tunnel to the main tunnel. 13.2.3 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 timescales and depths.
Page 201
Vol 14 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater - methods of construction Design Elements CSO Drop Shaft (DS) Interception Chamber and Culverts between IC and DS Method of Construction Sheet Piling through Superficial Deposits Sprayed Concrete Lining (SCL) through London Clay Construction Periods Construction Depth
<1 year
Deep
Sheet piles
<1 year
Shallow
Connecting tunnel to the SCL <1 year Deep main tunnel In terms of construction depth - Shallow (means <10m) and Deep (>10m) 13.2.4 13.2.5 No dewatering would be required as the shaft would be constructed mainly within London Clay. No ground treatment would be required at the site. In order to ensure that no build up of groundwater takes place around the underground structures, the sheet piles walls to be put in around the excavations during construction would need to be removed or cut off at a level below that of the upper aquifer. The preliminary assessment that follows assesses this issue in order to determine the need for any mitigation. Operation 13.2.6 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.
13.3
13.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees relating to this topic for this particular site. 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.
13.3.2 13.3.3 13.3.4
Page 202
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 13.3.5 13.3.6 13.3.7
There are no site specific variations for this site. Assumptions and limitations At this stage, the assessment is based on a qualitative approach. The list of receptors is based on the best available information from the Environment Agency on abstractions (both licensed and GSHP schemes). There is presently no ground investigation (GI) information available for the Falconbrook PS site. The information on GI is based on data obtained from a nearby site at Bridges Court Car Park.
13.4
13.4.1
Baseline conditions Current conditions

The CSO drop shaft to the main tunnel is likely to pass through made ground, Alluvium, River Terrace Deposits and London Clay as summarised in the table below.
Vol 14 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater - ground conditions and hydrogeology Formation Made Ground Alluvium River Terrace Deposits London Clay B A3ii A3i A2 Harwich Formation Lambeth Group USB UMB Elevation* mATD 104.49 101.89 101.09 Depth below ground level (m) 0.0 2.6 3.4 Thickness (m) 2.6 0.8 5.5 Hydrogeology Perched Water Upper Aquifer Upper Aquifer
95.59 81.76 70.76 68.86 57.79
8.9 22.73 33.73 35.63 46.70
13.83 11.00 1.90 11.07 0.05
Aquiclude
Aquitard / Aquifer Aquitards / Aquifers
57.47 55.19
46.75 49.30
2.55 4.10
Note: Based on an assumed ground level of 104.00mATD USB = Upper Shelly Beds; UMB = Upper Mottled Beds
13.4.2
The shaft would be founded in London Clay at approximately 64.38mATD and would be constructed using a sheet pile cut-off (to seal out the upper aquifer) with placed segments and sprayed concrete lining (SCL) to form a secondary lining.
Page 203
The Alluvium and River Terrace Deposits or upper aquifer, is classified as a secondary A aquiferii. The GI at a nearby site establishes the thickness of the Alluvium as 0.8m and the River Terrace Deposits as 5.5m. The shaft would not extend down into the lower aquifer. There would be a separation distance of around 13.7m between the base of the shaft and the base of the Upper Mottled Beds of the Lambeth Group. The top of the Thanet Sands (lower aquifer) is anticipated to be at least 5 to 10m beneath this depth. Water level monitoring in ground investigation boreholes indicates that the piezometric surface within the Lambeth Group lies above the base of the shaft. Upward pressures through more permeable lower units of the London Clay may therefore impact on the excavations. The piezometric levels within the lower aquifer are not monitored locally to the Falconbrook site. Water level monitoring of respective geological units would strengthen the understanding of this risk. The site does not lie within any Source Protection Zone (SPZ) as defined by the EA. The nearest Source Protection Zone (SPZ), also in the Chalk lies 4km away to the northeast. The regional direction of groundwater flow in the Chalk is to the north-northeast, towards central London In terms of local receptors, there are two licensed abstractions which abstract groundwater from the Chalk within the vicinity of Falconbrook PS. One abstraction lies to the southwest of the site at a distance of 1km. One other abstraction lies north of Falconbrook PS at a distance of 1.4km. The uses of these licences are industrial, commercial and public services, and production of energy, respectively. The nearest gravel abstraction is at a distance of approximately 2km to the west of the site, close by the River Thames. One unlicensed abstraction from the Chalk is identified 1.7km to the northnortheast of the Falconbrook PS site, based on information provided by the local council. The nearest licensed Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) schemes are located approximately 1km to the north of the Falconbrook PS site, as shown in Appendix E. There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site. The land quality assessment data from a nearby site shows no exceedances of drinking water or environmental quality standards for any parameters tested. There is currently no data available from the Falconbrook PS site. The flood risk assessment states that there are no groundwater flooding incidents within the vicinity of the site, based on information from the LB of Wandsworth SFRA.
13.4.4
13.4.5
13.4.6
13.4.7
13.4.8
13.4.9
13.4.10 13.4.11
13.4.12
ii
Secondary A aquifers are permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local scale (rather than strategic scale) and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers.
Page 204
Further details on the baseline conditions at the Falconbrook PS site are provided in Appendix E together with a summary of the water quality information from the land quality assessment.
Receptor summary
13.4.14 Groundwater receptors which could be affected during construction or operation are summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater receptors Receptor Groundwater Resources Upper Aquifer Lower Aquifer Construction
Operation
Comment Penetrated by shaft Base of shaft more than 20m above the lower aquifer Nearest Chalk abstractions 1.0km to the south, in direction of groundwater flow but no construction at this depth One unlicensed Chalk abstraction 1.7km to the north northeast, but no construction at this depth Nearest at 1km
Abstractions Licensed
Abstractions Unlicensed GSHP Schemes

Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP)
13.5
13.5.1
The drop shaft passes for most of its depth through London Clay so no groundwater issues are expected in connection with construction of the shaft and no dewatering or depressurisation is proposed. The main potential effects could arise as a result of the interceptor chamber and connection creating a physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer for a period of up to two years. This could cause a rise in groundwater level up gradient and fall down gradient and consequent change in groundwater storage and flood risk. On the basis of monitoring at a nearby site, there is no known groundwater contamination in the upper aquifer and the excavations would not create a pathway into the lower aquifer as the shaft would be founded in London Clay. The site specific contamination assessment and remediation or mitigation, if required, is incorporated in the land quality assessment section of this report.
13.5.2
13.5.3
Page 205
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Impact magnitude 13.5.4
The magnitude of the impact would be confirmed once the local groundwater conditions are established by local ground investigation, and the direction of groundwater flow relative to the interception chambers is known. The magnitude of the impact on groundwater levels is currently expected to be negligible ie a slight rise in groundwater levels may take place on the up hydraulic gradient side of the structure. There is no contamination (known about at present) in the upper aquifer (see Appendix E) based on data from a site close to Falconbrook PS. On this basis, the magnitude of any impact associated with groundwater quality is negligible. However, detailed assessment of groundwater quality and ground quality is subject to the findings of a GI at the Falconbrook site, which is scheduled for 2011. A summary of the impacts and likely magnitude is provided in the table below. Vol 14 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts - construction Impact Physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer and resultant rise in groundwater level Creation of pathway for pollution Magnitude Negligible; to be confirmed following ground investigation.
13.5.5
13.5.6
13.5.7
Negligible; no pollution near surface identified at nearby site. Assumes that no pollution found by GI planned for 2011 at the Falconbrook PS site.
Receptor sensitivity 13.5.8 In terms of receptors, the upper aquifer is a secondary aquifer so is categorised in the Scoping Report as being of medium value, as summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptors - construction Receptor Upper aquifer Significance of effects 13.5.9 A summary of significance of the effects is shown in the table below. There are negligible effects on groundwater as a result of activities at Falconbrook PS. Value/sensitivity Medium value; secondary aquifer
Page 206
Vol 14 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater effects - construction Effect Change in groundwater storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper aquifer Deterioration in groundwater quality caused by creation of a pathway Significance Negligible effect; to be confirmed following ground investigation. Negligible effect, no known contamination in the near surface identified at nearby site. However, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site.
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 the supporting appendix. 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'. Impact magnitude In order to ensure that no build up of groundwater takes place around the underground structures, the sheet pile walls to be put in around the interception chamber would be cut down. Where necessary the pile can be piped through at a low level to allow through flow and prevent the build up of groundwater levels. Seepage out of the shaft into the upper aquifer is expected to 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 likely magnitude is provided in the table below.
13.6.2
13.6.3
13.6.4 13.6.5 13.6.6
Page 207
Vol 14 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 in upper aquifer Seepage into shaft affecting groundwater resources (upper aquifer) Receptor sensitivity 13.6.7 The upper aquifer is a secondary aquifer so is categorised in the Scoping Report as being of medium importance, as summarised in the table below. Vol 14 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater receptors - operation Receptor Upper aquifer Summary of effects 13.6.8 A summary of significance of the effects is shown in the table below. Vol 14 Table 13.6.3 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 of shaft (upper aquifer) Significance Negligible; secondary aquifer and impacts minimised by sheet piles being cut down or piped through at low level if required Negligible effect; design of shaft would include a secondary lining. However, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site. Negligible effect due to negligible impact and medium value of upper aquifer Value/sensitivity Medium importance; secondary aquifer Magnitude Negligible; piles removed or shortened.
Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary lining. However, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site. Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary lining
Loss of groundwater resources from seepage into the shaft
13.7
13.7.1
The scheme has a large number of environmental design elements already included in the design. Groundwater monitoring is proposed during construction and operation. This section contains the extra
Page 208
mitigation measures to be taken to address the effects identified within the assessment.
Construction
13.7.2 Effects are expected to negligible, therefore no mitigation is required.
Operation
13.7.3 No effects are identified in the operational assessment and therefore no mitigation is required.
Page 209
Section 13: Water resources - groundwater
13.8
Significance None required None required, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site. Negligible effect Negligible effect, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site. Mitigation Residual Significance
Assessment summary
Vol 14 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater summary of construction assessment
Receptor
Effect
Upper aquifer
Obstruction to groundwater flows
Upper aquifer
Deterioration in groundwater quality caused by creation of a pathway upper aquifer
Negligible effect to be confirmed by GI Negligible effect, no known contamination in the near surface identified at nearby site. However, subject to findings of GI at Falconbrook PS site.
Vol 14 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater summary of operation assessment Significance Mitigation None required Residual Significance Negligible effect
Receptor
Effect
Upper aquifer
Change in groundwater levels
Upper aquifer
Deterioration in groundwater quality caused by seepage out of the shaft
Negligible effect; piles cut down or piped through at a low level if required Negligible effect; design of shaft would include a secondary lining Negligible effect, design of shaft includes double lining
None required
Negligible effect
Upper aquifer
Loss of groundwater resources from seepage into the shaft
None required
Negligible effect
Page 210
13.9
13.9.1
A ground investigation will be completed at the Falconbrook PS site and would be used to confirm the thickness of the upper aquifer and groundwater quality. At this stage, it is not envisaged that any quantitative assessment would be required at Falconbrook PS. The impact of the physical obstruction during construction will be assessed as part of 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 groundwater within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
13.9.2 13.9.3 13.9.4 13.9.5
Page 211
Section 14: Water resources surface water
14 14.1
14.1.1
Water resources surface water Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant surface water effects at the Falconbrook Pumping Station site. This assessment: a. identifies the existing water resources baseline conditions; b. identifies the future base case conditions against which the scheme should be assessed; c. identifies both the beneficial and adverse effects of the scheme during construction and operation and assess the significance of the effects; and
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 Falconbrook PS site. The catchment-wide effects on the Thames Tideway, particularly the water quality improvements anticipated from the scheme 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 A proportion of the site is located within grounds of the existing Thames Water Falconbrook PS. The site is located approximately 195 m east of the River Thames. The shaft is expected to be constructed almost entirely within London Clay, and it is not thought that any dewatering or ground treatment will be required at this location. Construction controls To prevent pollution from leaks or spillages, contaminating substances would be stored in leak proof 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 will take place above drip trays or on an impermeable surface with sealed drainage or oil interceptor. All wash down of vehicles
14.2.2
14.2.3
14.2.4
Page 212
(including wheel washing) and equipment will take place in designated areas and washwater will be prevented from passing untreated into drains or holding areas prior to pumping. These measures will be detailed in the CoCP. 14.2.5 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. PPG 6 Pollution prevention guidance for working at construction and demolition sites; c. Vehicle washing and cleaning: PPG 13; d. Dewatering of Underground Ducts and Chambers: PPG 20; e. Incident Response Planning: PPG 21; and f. 14.2.6 14.2.7 Storage and handling of drums and intermediate bulk containers (IBCs): PPG 26.
Appropriate maintenance of vehicles and plant will 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; 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.
Page 213
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Operation 14.2.8
The operation of the tunnel would enable the interception of wastewater generated during storms which would otherwise discharge to the Thames Tideway at Falconbrook PS CSO. There would therefore be a reduction in the frequency, duration and volume of spills from the Falconbrook PS CSO.
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. The Scoping Report was prepared before the Falconbrook Pumping Station site had been identified as a site and therefore it has not been the subject of formal scoping. The scope for surface water for this site has therefore drawn on the Scoping Opinion for the LB of Wandsworth and professional judgement.

14.3.3 Full results from project ground investigations were not available at the time of compiling this assessment. The assessment of contamination risk from intrusive ground works at the site has relied on existing records of contamination (see Land Quality assessment Section 8). Definition of Tideway conditions and CSO operation during future base cases and development cases are reliant on model simulations. The model simulations are therefore performed to show the relative change in CSO discharges with a consistent set of catchment and sewer system assumptions. Future climate change simulations have not been completed at the time of compiling this assessment and the impact of climate change on the beneficial impacts of the project will not be available until the ES is completed. The assessment of the beneficial effect of a reduction in sewage derived litter and pathogens discharged to the Tideway has been inferred from catchment modelling simulations of the reduction in discharge volume, frequency and duration and have not been directly modelled. Effects of discharges on dissolved oxygen levels in the river have been simulated using the catchment model and the Tidal Thames QUESTS model.
14.3.4
14.3.5
14.3.6
14.4
Baseline conditions Current conditions

Surface water receptors
14.4.1
A list of surface water receptors and their status under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is included in the table below, which are
Page 214
either within the vicinity of the site, or downstream of the site and therefore have the potential to be affected by the scheme. 14.4.2 Due to the dilution effect of the Tideway, the effects of construction activities would be localised to the waterbodies listed and this section assesses only the impacts local to the proposed site. Therefore, only the Thames Upper and Thames Middle waterbodies are considered in this assessment. Vol 14 Table 14.4.1 Surface water receptors Water Body Name/ID Thames Upper GB530603911403 Thames Middle GB530603911402 2015 2015 Current Current Hydromorphological Predicted Predicted Ecological Chemical Status Ecological Chemical Quality Quality Quality Quality Heavily Modified Heavily Modified Moderate Potential Moderate Potential Good Fail Moderate Potential Moderate Potential Good Fail
Water quality 14.4.3 The Thames Upper (which stretches from Teddington to Battersea Bridge) and Middle (which stretches from Battersea Bridge to Mucking Flats) waterbodies can be considered to be high value waterbodies as although the 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 38. 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. Current CSO operation 14.4.4 Using the June 2011 catchment model of the sewer system, the current operation of the Falconbrook PS CSO has been characterised and the annual average duration, frequency and volume of spill has been defined as follows: a. the CSO spills on average of 40 times per year; b. the CSO spills for an average duration of 263 hours per year; and c. 14.4.5 the spill volume from the CSO is approximately 708,900m3 per year. The polluting load data that is discharged from the CSO (Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD, Ammoniacal-N and Total Oxidised Nitrogen TON) will be provided in the ES. Dissolved oxygen 14.4.6 The discharge from Falconbrook PS CSO has an effect of depleting dissolved oxygen in the Thames as a result of the biological breakdown of organic matter in the discharges. This causes both a localised (at Falconbrook) and more widespread (Tideway wide) cumulative effect of rapidly dropping dissolved oxygen.
Page 215
The half tide plots showing the oxygen depleting effects of the CSO discharges to the Tideway will be provided in the ES. Exposure to pathogens Each discharge also increases the risk of exposure to pathogens for river users who come into contact with water. An assessment of health impacts upon recreational users of the River Thames was conducted and reported by the Health Protection Agency in 2007 39. This concluded that risk of infection can remain for two to four days following a spill as the water containing the spill moves back and forward with the tide. The same study also noted that analysis of the illness events reported against discharges on the Tideway shows that 77% of cases had been rowing in three days of CSO discharge. Assuming the average 40 of spills per annum occur on separate days, there could be up to a maximum of 160 days per year where recreational users are at risk of exposure to pathogens in the Falconbrook PS locality. Sewage derived litter The operation of Falconbrook PS CSO results in the discharge of sewage litter along with the discharge of effluent. It was estimated by the TTSS 40 that overflows from the combined sewers introduce approximately 10,000t of sewage derived solid material to the Thames Tideway annually. Catchment modelling of the current CSO operation defined the average volume of discharge from Falconbrook PS CSO was 708,900m3, representing 1.8% of the total volume discharged to the Thames Tideway annually. As an approximation, this would result in approximately 180t of sewage derived litter being discharged from the Falconbrook PS CSO annually. Receptors designated sites The River Thames and Tidal Tributaries are designated as a Site of Metropolitan Importance. There are no hydraulically linked internationally designated conservation sites within 2 km of the proposed construction site that could be affected by the construction. The effects of the overall scheme on the internationally designated sites in the Lower Thames are covered separately in Volume 6. Receptors discharges and abstractions In addition to the Falconbrook PS CSO, which discharges to the Tideway, there are three other CSO discharges within 1km of the site, the Lots Road PS CSO, Jews Row (Falconbrook Storm Relief CSO and Wandle Valley Storm Relief CSO); there are no licensed surface water abstractions within 1 km of the site. Contamination No particular sources of contaminated land have been identified at this site. Whilst the search radius of historical mapping has identified pockets of previous industrial activities in the surrounding area, it is considered unlikely that any would have significantly affected the soils in the location
14.4.8
14.4.9
14.4.10 14.4.11
14.4.12
14.4.13
14.4.14
Page 216
of the proposed worksite. See the Land Quality assessment in Section 8 for full details of on-site contamination.
Base case
Construction base case 14.4.15 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 future water quality in the Tideway with the TTQI projects and the Lee Tunnel 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. Operation base case 14.4.17 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.
14.4.16
14.4.18
14.5
14.5.1
As described in Volume 5, the construction effects have been assessed for significance against the relevant WFD objectives as well as their significance locally on other legislative drivers. Surface water receptors are identified in Volume 14, Vol 14 Table 14.4.1. 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. 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.
14.5.2
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 The proposed development site lies 200m east of the River Thames; hence it is considered that there is no direct pollution pathway, although
Page 217
pollution could reach the Tideway via surface water and combined drains on the site. Site drainage 14.5.4 Site 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; and d. hazardous substances from ground contamination exposed during earthworks and construction. 14.5.5 These pollutants could be indirectly discharged to the Tideway via surface water drains as part of the surface water discharge from the construction site. Any effects on the Tideway from leakage or discharges would be adverse, although of short duration before remedial action was taken. Where possible, all site drainage would be drained and discharged to mains foul or combined sewers and where this is not practicable, the site would be drained such that accumulating surface water would be directed to holding or settling tanks, separators and other measures prior to discharge to the Tideway surface water drains. It is understood that foul drainage from the site welfare facilities would be connected to the mains foul or combined sewer. There should therefore be no impact pathway from the routine discharge of foul drainage from the site and there is considered to be no effect on the Thames Upper and Middle waterbodies. It is considered that via the proposed drainage management, the pollution pathway can be managed sufficiently to reduce the pollution risk to negligible. It is considered that via the adherence to the measures detailed in Section 14.2 during construction works, the pollution pathway can be managed sufficiently to reduce the pollution risk to negligible. Contamination and dewatering 14.5.10 While no particular sources of contaminated land have been identified at this site, due to the historic uses of the site (a sewage pumping station has been present on-site since 1951) it is likely that contaminants could be present. Further ground investigation work is to be undertaken in 2011 in preparation of the ES to confirm or otherwise the presence of contaminants. Until results from this work are available, there remains a possibility that the release of hazardous substances into the drainage system from the exposure of contamination could occur during general earthworks at the Falconbrook PS site. This information is not available to inform this report and will be re-assessed as part of the ES. As excavation is mainly through the London Clay, no dewatering is envisaged. Any water entering the excavation from either the superficial
14.5.6
14.5.7
14.5.8
14.5.9
14.5.11
Page 218
deposits or from minor seepages through silt layers would be pumped to the sewer via appropriate settlement tanks. It is therefore considered that there is no pollution pathway for this effect, which will not be considered further as part of this assessment.
Assessment of impacts
14.5.12 The previous stage of the assessment has not highlighted any significant adverse effects that would require additional mitigation beyond the environmental design measures.
14.6
14.6.1
As with the construction effects, the assessment has defined the WFD objectives and the waterbodies affected.
Identification of operational impacts and effects

Reduction in CSO spills 14.6.2 The operation of the Falconbrook PS CSO connection as part of the project as a whole would have a beneficial effect on water quality, bacteriological quality and aesthetic value in the Falconbrook locality and beyond by substantially reducing the frequency, duration and volume of discharges from the Falconbrook PS CSO. 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 Falconbrook PS CSO would have increased (as a result of increased population) beyond the current baseline to the following: a. the CSO would spill on average of 42 times in the typical y0ear (2 greater than the current baseline); b. the CSO would spill for an average duration of 291 hours in the typical year (28 hours greater than the current baseline); and c. 14.6.4 14.6.5 the spill volume from the CSO would be approximately 779,300m3 in the typical year (70,400m3 greater than the current baseline).
14.6.3
The number of risk days for river users being exposed to pathogens during the base case year would be a maximum of 168 days in the typical year. June 2011 catchment modelling of the operational development case has simulated that by Year 1 of operation (assessed to be 2021 to use modelled assumptions) with the project in place, the frequency, duration and volume of the Falconbrook PS CSO would have substantially decreased (as a result of the capture of wastewater flow into the tunnel) to the following: a. the CSO would spill on average four times in the typical year (38 times less than the base case); b. the CSO would spill for an average duration of 26 hours in the typical year (265 hours less than the base case); and
Page 219
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station c. 14.6.6 14.6.7
the spill volume from the CSO would be approximately 56,200m3 in the typical year (723,100m3 less than the current baseline).
The frequency, duration and volume of spill at Falconbrook PS CSO would therefore be reduced by approximately 93% as a result of the project. Following on from the interpretation of the base case the number of risk days for river users being exposed to pathogens during the development case year would be a maximum of 16 days in the typical year (a reduction of up to 152 days of risk of exposure). In addition, the tonnage of sewage derived litter can be expected to be reduced by approximately 93% from approximately 180t to approximately 14t in the typical year. The data for the reduction in polluting load that is discharged from the CSO (Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD, Ammoniacal-N and Total Oxidised Nitrogen TON) will be provided in time to inform the ES.
14.6.8
14.6.9
Assessment of impacts
14.6.10 The table below gives a summary of the assessment of effects during operation of the Falconbrook PS site against: a. WFD environmental objectives b. local impacts c. 14.6.11 whether other legislative targets are likely to be affected. As discussed, overall Tideway-wide benefits are assessed in Volume 6 and this section only assesses the beneficial impacts local to the proposed site at Falconbrook PS. Therefore, with respect to the Thames Tideway waterbody, only the Thames Upper and Middle waterbodies will be considered in the assessment for Falconbrook PS.
Page 220
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Vol 14 Table 14.6.1 Surface water impacts -operation WFD Objectives met? WFD 1 WFD 2 WFD 3 WFD 4
Impact Permanent. Reversibility depends on the operation of the tunnel.
Water body Duration and Reversibility
Assessment and likely effect
Local effects or Other Legislative effects
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from the Falconbrook PS CSO.
Thame Improved water s Upper quality in the vicinity and of the Falconbrook Middle PS CSO by reduced pollutant loading and not reducing dissolved oxygen levels.
Contribution to the overall Tidewaywide water quality improvements
The water quality local to Falconbrook would be improved and would ensure that the operation of the Falconbrook PS CSO complies with the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive
Along with the project as N/A a whole, the Capture Falconbrook The of the PS CSO Thames Falconbr connection Upper ook PS would and CSO enhance the Middle is would a heavily water quality reduce of the modified pollution tideway waterbody from helping to and only priority move the needs to substanc Thames achieve es at Upper and good Falconbr Middle potential ook towards good ecological status N/A The bacteriological improvement effect is The effect is not relevant to WFD objectives
Reduced bacterial loadings of the river
Thames Risk of exposure Upper days to pathogens and would be reduced to Middle a maximum of 16
Permanent. Reversibility depends on the operation of the
Page 221
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station WFD Objectives met? WFD 1 WFD 2 WFD 3 WFD 4
Impact tunnel. considered to have an effect locally in the context of local river users.
Water body Duration and Reversibility
Assessment and likely effect
Local effects or Other Legislative effects
giving health improvemen ts to river users
days in the typical year (a reduction of up to 152 days of risk of exposure)
Permanent
Reduced sewage litter discharge Reversibility depends on the operation of the tunnel.
Thames Upper and Middle
N/A The effect is not relevant to WFD objectives
Sewage derived litter discharge at Falconbrook would be reduced by approximately 93% improving the aesthetic quality of the river locally.
The sewage derived litter reduction effect is considered to have an effect locally in the context of local river users.
Page 222
Significance of operational effect

14.6.12 The table below identifies the significance of the effects identified in accordance with the criteria set out in Volume 5. Vol 14 Table 14.6.2 Surface water effects - operation Effect Significance and justification Major beneficial The improvements would allow for the future attainment of Good status under objective 3 in combination with the improvements elsewhere in the Tideway and would also ensure that operation of the Falconbrook PS CSO complies with the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive Moderate beneficial Reduced bacterial loadings of the river giving health improvements to river users The improvements would not adversely affect WFD or other legislative drivers, but would significantly improve conditions for river users at Falconbrook and in the Thames Upper and Middle as a whole. Moderate beneficial The improvements would not adversely affect WFD or other legislative drivers, but would significantly improve aesthetic conditions for river users and recreational use at Falconbrook and in the Thames Upper and Middle as a whole.
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from Falconbrook PS CSO.
Reduced sewage litter discharge
14.7
14.7.1
The assessment of significant effects for both construction and operation has not highlighted any significant adverse effects that would require mitigation to reduce the significance.
Page 223
14.8
Vol 14 Table 14.8.1 Surface water operational assessment Effect Major beneficial Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial None required None required None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Major beneficial
Assessment summary
Receptor
Thames Upper and Thames Middle
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from Acton Storm Relief CSO
Reduced bacterial loadings of the river giving health improvements to river users
Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial
Reduced sewage litter discharge
Page 224
14.9
14.9.1
Any additional information on potential contamination of the site, collected as part of new site investigations (see Section 8 land quality); will be used to inform the baseline for the ES. At the time of writing this report, further water quality modelling was underway to determine the relative beneficial improvements that would accrue for other water quality improvements such as BOD and Ammoniacal Nitrogen. These results for baseline and assessment will be available for the ES, but were not available to inform this report. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. This will include the impact of climate change on the beneficial impacts of the project A capacity assessment (potentially using network modelling) of the surface water system will be required to ensure that the potentially large volumes of dewatering effluent to be disposed from the construction site Falconbrook PS will not cause flooding of the surface water system in the Falconbrook locality. The results of this capacity assessment will be included in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for surface water resources within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
14.9.2
14.9.3
14.9.4
Page 225
Section 12: 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 Falconbrook 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) 41 and covers the construction and operation phases. This assessment makes use of the PPS25 Practice Guide 42 and is consistent with the outputs and findings of the Thames Estuary 2100 Plan (TE2100)43 and the policy requirements of the London Plan 44. 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 (Volume 5) and for specific sites (Volumes 7 to 28). The FRA comprises four parts, which can be found in the following volumes: 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 LB (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
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. 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 operational phase taking into consideration climate change over the lifetime of the project.
15.1.7
15.1.8
15.1.9
Page 226
The project involves construction works 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 2 45 or 3 46 or greater than 1ha and situated within Flood Zone 1 47 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
15.2
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 PPS2) 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 Falconbrook PS site lies within the LB of Wandsworth. The LB of Wandsworth has produced a Level 1 and Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 48. These outline the main flood sources to the Borough and the hydraulic modelling completed as part of the Level 2 study to investigate the residual risk of breaches in the Thames Tideway Defences at a number of locations along the River Thames. The SFRA confirms that the Thames Tidal Defence network (Thames Barrier and Tidal flood defence walls) reduces the annual probability of flooding from the Thames to less than 0.1%. The risk of flooding is therefore a residual risk associated with a breach in the defences. The SFRA advocates the use of flood resilience and resistant measures. These should be adopted during the construction and operation phases of the project. According to the SFRA: a. The site overlies London Clay. b. It is within the Bermondsey Tidal Flood Warning Area and the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone 3. c. There have been >5 sewer flooding incidences recorded by Thames Water in the last 10 years in the vicinity.
15.3.3
15.3.4
15.3.5
Page 227
d. The site is situated within an area identified as having increased risk of surface water ponding based on topography, geology and historic flooding records. e. Safe access/egress is required from the site to a suitable location within Flood Zone 1. There are a number of schools within the locality which could act as rest centres during times of flood. In terms of emergency planning during the construction phase, the SFRA has identified rest and reception centres as Leisure Centre, Churches, Schools and Community Centres. 15.3.6 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) 15.3.7 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) 15.3.8 The Falconbrook PS site lies within the Wandsworth to Deptford Policy Unit which has been assigned the P5 flood risk management policy within the TE2100 Plan 49 meaning that further action will be taken to reduce flood risk beyond that required to keep pace with climate change. The TE2100 Plan identifies the local sources of flood risk (relative to the Falconbrook PS site) as including: a. tidal from the River Thames b. pluvial (heavy rainfall) and urban drainage sources c. 15.3.10 a risk of groundwater flooding from superficial strata which is possibly connected to high water levels in the Thames.
15.3.9
Defences from these sources include: a. the Thames Barrier and secondary tidal defences along the Thames frontage (both making up the Thames Tidal Defences) b. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) for mitigation of urban drainage c. flood forecasting and warning.
15.3.11
TheTE2100 Plan seeks to promote, where possible, defence improvements that are sensitive to ensure views are maintained and impacts to river access/views are minimised. 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 the vision to increase flood risk awareness within the area. Further investigation is required into flood risk from pluvial and groundwater sources and these form part of the TE2100 Action Plan.
15.3.12
Page 228
London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (RFRA) 15.3.13 For the reach between Hammersmith Bridge and the Thames Barrier (City Reach) the London RFRA 50 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. This should be taken into consideration during the re-development process. The RFRA indicates that SUDS should be included within developments to reduce surface water discharge.
15.3.14
15.3.15
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. For a discussion on project-wide effects see Volume 5. 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
Flood sources
Flooding from sea (and tidal sources) Flood risk to the site 15.4.3 The site is situated to the east of York Road, approximately 200m southeast of the River Thames. The site is within Flood Zone 3a (Vol 14 Figure 15.4.1) and is protected by the Thames Tidal Defence network (Thames Barrier and Tidal flood defence walls). Vol 14 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk flood tidal zones (see Volume 14 Figures document) 15.4.4 The local defences are situated along the interface between the River Thames and the land to the west of Bridges Court road and provide a continuous line of flood risk protection. No works are proposed to the local defences as part of the construction at Falconbrook PS. Consequently, the current level of defence protection would be maintained throughout the construction and operation phases of the development. The design standard of the existing local defences along The River Thames to the west of the site is stated by the EA to be at the 0.1% AEP level. In reality, the defence levels along the River Thames vary and are generally in excess of the 0.1% AEP standard of protection with a freeboard.
15.4.5
Page 229
The EA has stated that the defence level at this location is 5.41mAOD. This level will be confirmed with defence survey information, requested from the EA for the Level 2 FRA to be prepared for the application submission. The most extreme flood risk to the site in this location would be as a result of a high tide combined with a storm surge (with the Thames Barrier operational); this is considered to be the EA flood design event. Existing ground levels on the site typically vary between 3.1mAOD in the south to 3.8mAOD in the north. It is proposed to construct the permanent hardstanding area (top of slab level), within which the shaft and supporting infrastructure is situated, at an approximate level of 4.5mAOD. The tidal flood levels within the River Thames for the EA flood design event are: a. b. 5.07mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005 5.04mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107 (ie with climate change).
15.4.7
15.4.8
15.4.9
15.4.10
This data is taken from the EA Tidal Thames Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study51. This indicates that the proposed site for the shaft, which would benefit from the current Thames Tidal Defences (assuming that the current defences would not be altered), would not flood under the above return periods due to the protection afforded by the defences. It should be noted that water levels decrease in the future due to the Thames Barrier closure rule (see Volume 5) such that the 2005 scenario produces the highest water levels. If however there was a breach in the local Thames Tidal Defences, the site could flood as the above flood water levels are higher than the current and proposed ground levels (4mOAD and 4.5mAOD respectively). This assumes there is a pathway from the source (breach in the local River Thames defences) east to the receptor (site). The TE2100 Plan indicates that a higher level of protection would be required to protect areas along the river. This is due to a greater number of Barrier closures being necessary as water levels increase and due to the possibility that higher tides could propagate upstream of the Barrier should the Barrier fail. In line with the requirements of TE2100, defences in the vicinity of the Falconbrook PS site would be required to be raised to 5.85mAOD and 6.35mAOD for 2065 and 2100 respectively. Part of the TE2100 Plan is to consider ways in which this future raising would be achieved for current flood defences. The local defence raising would contribute to the continual protection of the site from tidal flooding into the future. The EA has also used the Tidal Thames 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 tidal flood levels within the River Thames are 6.02mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005 and 6.86mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107.
15.4.11
15.4.12
15.4.13
15.4.14
Page 230
Under this modelled scenario, the site would be flooded as the water level is above the current local flood defence level and that proposed for the construction site and operational site. However, because the Thames Barrier is a key component of the Thames Tidal defences, these levels are not used for the EA flood design event when considering the required flood prevention measures for new development. As part of the SFRA, 2D hydrodynamic modelling was undertaken at 6 locations along the Thames frontage, specified by the EA, to simulate the impact of a breach in the flood defences. One of the selected breach locations (P2) is located approximately 220m to the west of the site. The results from this modelling indicate that in the event of a breach at this location during the 0.5% AEP return period for 2005, floodwaters would inundate the site. Flood depths of up to 0.9m are experienced on the site. It is noted that this modelling was completed in 2008 and uses conservative water levels, available prior to the update to the Tidal Thames Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study that have been referred to within this section. The SFRA shows that there are no records of flooding of the site area during any historic flood events (note, this does not mean the site was not flooded, only that no data is held). Modelling undertaken as part of the SFRA shows that under a breach scenario of the flood defences the site is inundated to a depth of up to 0.9m. The standard of protection of the current defences and the operation of the Thames Barrier are such that tidal flooding up to the EA flood design event (0.5% AEP 2005) does not pose a direct flood risk to the site. Flood risk to the site from tidal sources is therefore residual in the event that there is a breach (or failure) of the existing defences and tidal water could enter the site. If there was a localised breach in the defences adjacent to a site, flood water could flow on to the site, cover the shaft and inundate any ventilation, monitoring or associated operation equipment. As the shaft lids are covered (although not watertight) there would be a limited amount of water that could enter the tunnel though the space between the lid and the shaft. Ventilation and monitoring equipment may be damaged by flood water (if not installed above the flood level); however, this quantity would not endanger the primary function of the tunnel which is to collect, store and transfer discharges from CSOs. Flood risk from the site 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. A project-wide study into the potential impacts of the tunnel excavation on settlement of third party assets including flood defences is being undertaken and will be reported in the ES.
15.4.16
15.4.17
15.4.18
15.4.19
15.4.20
15.4.21
15.4.22
15.4.23
Page 231
Though not in the vicinity of the Falconbrook PS site, the route of the connection tunnel does pass beneath the Thames Tidal Defences approximately 280m west of the site. The project-wide effects of excavation will be assessed for flood defence impact when complete and any relevant assessment for the defences in this location will be included in the Level 2 FRA prepared to support the ES. Until further information is available, the risk of impact to flood defences and hence flood risk at this site due to structural modification of the defences due to the tunnelling process is considered to be medium. Flooding from rivers Aside from the impact of fluvial flows on flood levels of the River Thames at this location, the site is not situated within the floodplain of any fluvial watercourses. 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. Flood risk to the site from fluvial sources alone is therefore considered to be negligible. Flooding from land and surface water runoff Flood risk to the site
15.4.25
15.4.26
15.4.27
15.4.28
15.4.29
15.4.30
The SFRA shows that the site is situated within an area with increased risk of surface water ponding based on topography, geology and historic flooding records. According to the SFRA, there are no surface water flooding hot spots within the vicinity of the site. This assessment will be updated for the Level 2 FRA when Critical Drainage Area (CDA) mapping is made available for the SWMP for LB of Wandsworth through the Drain London project later in 2011. Surface water flooding could originate from any surrounding hardstanding land where infiltration (into the ground or the local sewer network) is exceeded or the local sewer is at capacity and surcharging occurs. There is a decline in ground levels from the south to the site and so there is the potential for overland flow, generated in surrounding hard standing areas, flowing onto the site. Flood risk to the site from this source is considered to be low.
15.4.31
15.4.32
Page 232
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Flood risk from the site 15.4.33
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 52 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). The existing site is currently 100% hardstanding and therefore no increase in the proportion of hardstanding is being proposed. It is assumed surface water runoff drains to an existing drainage network and surface water generated on the existing hardstanding areas would drain to the nearest surface water drain. Surface water runoff rates and attenuation volumes are indicative and will be confirmed during the subsequent Level 2 FRA. Based on a development footprint of 1250m2, the existing previously developed surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP event has been calculated using the Modified Rational Method. The post development surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP climate change event has also been calculated based on the same development footprint. 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 undeveloped greenfield runoff rate has also been calculated using the ICP SUDS rural runoff method in Micro Drainage WinDes Version 12.5 software. A soil factor of 0.4, which represents moderately draining silty soils, has been used within this method. The greenfield runoff is required to identify the volume of attenuation necessary to meet the preferred standard for SUDS (ie reduce runoff from the development to greenfield rates). The existing, post development and greenfield runoff rates for the 1% AEP event are provided in the table below. Vol 14 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk - runoff rates Site Status Existing Post Development Greenfield Rainfall Event 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change Runoff Rate (l/s)
15.4.34 15.4.35
15.4.36 15.4.37
15.4.38
15.4.39
15.4.40
15.4.41
15.4.42
24.6 24.6 1.6
Page 233
By subtracting the existing runoff rate from the post development runoff rate for the 1% AEP event including allowance for climate change, no additional runoff is predicted by the development of the site, given that the site is currently and would remain 100% hardstanding. When comparing the greenfield runoff rate with the post development runoff rate it is apparent that an additional runoff rate of 23.0l/s is generated post development (over the lifetime of the development). Proposed mitigation measures relating to surface water management are provided in Section 14. Flooding from groundwater The TE2100 Plan states that there may be a risk of groundwater flooding at the Falconbrook PS site originating from superficial strata underlying the site. Because the underlying strata are in hydraulic connectivity with the river levels in the Thames, the groundwater levels vary on a diurnal basis with the changing tide levels. Therefore, during high water level conditions within the Thames there is the potential for groundwater to reach ground level at the site. However, there are no incidents of groundwater flooding within the vicinity of the site shown within the Wandsworth SFRA. 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 Falconbrook PS site. Until further information is available, flood risk to the site from this source is considered to be low, as although the TE2100 Plan suggests a flooding mechanism, there is no evidence from the SFRA to suggest that groundwater flooding has occurred in the past. Flooding from sewers The SFRA shows that there have been more than 5 incidents of sewer flooding recorded by Thames Water in the last 10 years in the area in which the site is situated. The local sewer network has been investigated to determine whether there are any capacity issues that may lead to an increase in the potential for sewer flooding to the site. This assessment shows that the site is served by numerous combined sewers which convery flows to Falconbrook pumping Station. If the capacity of these sewers was exceeded, water could surcharge and overflow to the pumping station. If the pumping stations capacity was exceeded, or a blockage occurred then the sewers could surcharge through outlets such as manholes and gullies located along the length of the sewer and potentially pond within the local area. Flood risk from this source is considered to be low.
15.4.44
15.4.45
15.4.46
15.4.47
15.4.48
15.4.49
15.4.50
15.4.51
15.4.52
Page 234
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Flooding from artificial sources 15.4.53
There are no artificial flood sources within proximity to the site and so there is no flood risk from this type of source.
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. residual risk of flooding to the site from tidal sources as a result of a breach in the existing tidal defences 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. medium 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 the Falconbrook PS site. 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 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 The subsequent Level 2 FRA will include the production of a site Emergency Plan in relation to Flood Risk outlining appropriate working practices and appropriate access/egress routes in the event of a flood warning. The LB of Wandsworth will be required to comment on the Emergency Plan.
Page 235
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 the site. Surface water drainage would be designed to the 3.3% AEP event for the site. The preliminary calculations shown in Vol 14 Table 15.5.1 are based on SUDS attenuation, assuming zero infiltration (the feasibility of SUDS infiltration techniques on site 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 PPS25 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 14 Table 15.5.1 Flood risk - runoff rates and attenuation volumes 1% AEP Rainfall Event + climate change Preferred Standard (attenuation to greenfield runoff rate) Essential Standard (attenuation to 50% of undeveloped runoff rate) PPS25 (no increase in runoff post development) 15.5.8 Runoff Rate (l/s) Attenuation Volume (m3)
15.5.6
15.5.7
1.6
81-111
12.3
41-63
24.6
The table above indicates that to meet the PPS25 runoff standard, no storage is required as the site is currently, and would be post development, 100% hardstanding. To meet the Mayors preferred and essential standards a storage volume between 81 111m3 and 41 63m3 would be required respectively to provide sufficient storage to attenuate the 1% AEP event, inclusive of climate change. These storage volumes are provided as indicative of volumes that may be provided to reach these standards. SUDS could be incorporated into the design of the site to accommodate the above attenuation (if required). Appropriate SUDS (eg storage tank or oversized piping), if required, will be explored and developed alongside the
15.5.9
Page 236
development of the final site design, details of which will be included in the Level 2 FRA. 15.5.10 It is important to note that the attenuation volumes provided in the table above 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 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 a contamination study are carried out the feasibility of SUDS infiltration techniques are unknown. However given the underlying clay geology and an increased potential for contamination, it is considered that infiltration techniques are unlikely to be viable. A storage tank or oversized piping is considered to be a suitable option for the commercial/industrial location of the site. Based on the essential standard upper storage volume (63m3) shown in Vol 14 Table 15.5.1, a SUDS feature with a surface area of approximately 57m2 and 1.1m deep would provide the required storage. It is important to note that these dimensions are based on preliminary calculations and would be subject to refinement at outline and detailed design stage. The following surface water mitigation measures should also be considered for incorporation into the development design: a. In the event of return periods in excess of 3.3% AEP storm, the layout and the landscaping of the site should aim to route water away from vulnerable property, and avoid creating hazards to access egress routes, whilst not increasing flood risk to third parties. b. 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. c. During the construction phase appropriate mitigation would be provided to ensure surface water is managed in a controlled manner.
15.5.11
15.5.12
15.5.13
15.5.14
15.6
15.6.1 15.6.2
A full Level 2 will be prepared for the site which will outline further specific design approaches and measures. It is considered that a full 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 into the ES. 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:
15.6.3
Page 237
a. Confirmation of existing defence level following receipt of the EA survey information of flood defences. This will be used to reassess the standard of protection at the site and effect on tidal flood risk (direct and residual). b. Confirmation of ground levels within the site through the completion of a topographic survey to accurately determine flood depths within the site. c. 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 Falconbrook PS site will be included in the Falconbrook PS site Level 2 FRA section.
d. The assessment of surface water flood risk to the site will be completed when the final surface water flood maps are available from the Drain London Project. 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 site specific mitigation and flood prevention measures required to manage both residual risk and direct flood risk based on the final site design. 15.6.4 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 Falconbrook PS site.
Page 238
Appendices
Appendices
List of figures
Page number
Figure A.1 Historic environment - Rocques map of 1746....................................... 241 Figure A.2 Historic environment OS 1st ed 25:mile map 186295 ..................... 241 Figure A.3 Historic environment - OS 2nd ed 25:mile map of 189698 ................. 242 Figure A.4 Historic environment - OS 3rd ed 25:mile map 190920 ..................... 242 Figure A.5 Historic environment - OS 1:2500 scale map of 1951 ........................... 243 Figure A.6 Historic environment - OS 1:1250 scale map of 1964 ........................... 243 Figure A.7 Historic environment - pumping station ................................................. 244 Figure A.8 Historic environment - interior of the main pumping station................... 244 Figure A.9 Historic environment - pumping station compound and the site ............ 245 Figure A.10 Historic environment - rectangular structure........................................ 245 Figure A.11 Historic environment - vent and cobbled surface within the site .......... 246 Figure A.12 Historic environment - York Gardens .................................................. 246 Figure D.1 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.1 .................................................. 253 Figure D.2 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.3 .................................................. 253 Figure D.3 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.6 .................................................. 254 Figure D.4 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.7 .................................................. 254 Figure D.5 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.1 .................................................. 255 Figure D.6 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.2 .................................................. 255 Figure D.7 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.3 .................................................. 256 Figure D.8 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.5 .................................................. 256 Figure D.9 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 3.1 .................................................. 257 Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology ........................................................ 258 Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology................................................................. 258 Figure E.5 Groundwater - level hydrograph Falconbrook PS ................................. 264 Figure E.6 Groundwater GSHP ........................................................................... 265 Figure E.7 Groundwater - resource availability ....................................................... 267 Figure E.8 Groundwater - confined chalk licensing................................................. 268
Page 239
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station List of tables
Appendices
Page number
Table A.1 Historic environment gazetteer of known heritage assets ................... 247 Table B.1 Land quality site walkover report ......................................................... 250 Table E.1 Groundwater - anticipated TT geological succession ............................. 258 Table E.2 Groundwater - anticipated Ground Conditions ....................................... 259 Table E.3 Groundwater - anticipated TT main hydrogeological units...................... 261 Table E.4 Groundwater - on-site monitoring b/hs ................................................... 262 Table E.5 Groundwater - parameter detected at King Georges Park..................... 266
Page 240
Appendix A: Historic environment
Appendix A Historic environment A.1 Figures
Figure A.1 Historic environment - Rocques map of 1746
Figure A.2 Historic environment OS 1st ed 25:mile map 186295 (not to scale)
Page 241
Figure A.3 Historic environment - OS 2nd ed 25:mile map of 189698 (not to scale)
Figure A.4 Historic environment - OS 3rd ed 25:mile map 190920 (not to scale)
Page 242
Figure A.5 Historic environment - OS 1:2500 scale map of 1951 (not to scale)
Figure A.6 Historic environment - OS 1:1250 scale map of 1964 (not to scale)
Page 243
Photographs
Figure A.7 Historic environment - pumping station Note: looking north, standard lens
Figure A.8 Historic environment - interior of the main pumping station Note: showing the machinery and internal space layout; looking east, standard lens
Page 244
Figure A.9 Historic environment - pumping station compound and the site Note: looking north-west, standard lens
Figure A.10 Historic environment - rectangular structure Note: associated with York Gardens library, with Prices candle Factory building in the background; looking west, standard lens
Page 245
Figure A.11 Historic environment - vent and cobbled surface within the site Note: with the pumping station and corner of childrens nursery in the foreground and Prices Candle Factory building in the background; looking south-west, standard lens
Figure A.12 Historic environment - York Gardens Note: library buildings on left and pumping station on right, looking west, standard lens
Page 246
A.2
A.2.1
Gazetteer of known heritage assets

The location of known heritage assets is shown on the historic environment features map (Vol 14 Figure 7.4.1). Table A.1 Historic environment gazetteer of known heritage assets
HEA Ref no. 1
Description
Site code/ HER ref: BFQ06 MLO990 54
Bridges Wharf, Bridges Court, SW11 Archaeological investigation by PCA in 2006 revealed series of timber revetments that would have supported the northern bank of a small tributary known recently as Battersea Creek, formerly the Falcon Brook, near the confluence of the main Thames channel. The earliest of these consisted of oak uprights and elm planking, probably not pre-dating the 16th century. A second more substantial revetment survived to the south in the form of baseplates. Pottery recovered from the deposits sealing the revetment suggests that it was demolished and replaced in the late 17th or early 18th century. The third river wall survived as re-used oak uprights supporting oak planking. Pottery and clay tobacco pipe recovered from the foreshore deposits to the south of this structure show that it was probably in use from the late 17th or early 18th century onwards. Cotton Row, York Road, Prices Candle Factory Archaeological investigation by PCA and CGMS in 1998 recorded substantial truncation due to a previous factory development. Prices Patent Candle Factory was established in York Place in 1856. The industrial buildings were altered throughout their use in the 19th and 20th centuries. Possible traces of a late medieval or post-medieval fishpond, associated with a known mansion of the Archbishops of York, were found. Dover Court Motors, York Road Archaeological investigation by DGLA in 1991 revealed no archaeological features. Jack Barclays Garage, York Road, SW11 Archaeological investigation by MoLAS in 1991 recorded a 19th-century brick-lined well or cesspit. Prices Patent Candle Factory, York Place, York Road, SW11 Archaeological investigation by PCA in 2002 revealed 18th century drains and sluices associated with industrial use. Prices Candle Factory, York Place, York Road, SW11 Building recording by CGMS in 2001 of existing 19th-century
CTT98 022317 MLO761 71
DCM91
JBG91 021361 YPE02 MLO776 10 022318 YPL01 MLO776
Page 247
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station HEA Ref no. Description
Appendix A: Historic environment Site code/ HER ref: 09
building. During the late 17th century or early 18th century, a house was built to the north of the site of the Price's Patent Candle Factory. This new house, known as York House, underwent many alterations and remained standing until the 19th century incorporated the industrial building. 7 York Road, Prices Candle Factory, SW11 Archaeological investigation by PCA in 1996 revealed remains of the southern side of York Place, a late medieval and post-medieval residence of the Archbishops of York.
YRD96 MLO776 08 022315 6 022345 7 LB/104 212197 LB/123
Southeast tower of Church of St Peter, (formerly listed as Church of St Peter) and St Peter's Church Hall, Plough Road/Newcomen Road, London In 1874 the riverfront in Battersea was a thriving industrial area. A temporary church building and school house were erected on a small plot of land on Plough Road for the workers and their families. At that time a local man, George Cubitt, who later became the 1st Baron Ashcombe, gave 5000 for a permanent building and this paid for the construction of a larger church on the site. The foundation stone was laid on St Peters day, 1875. Consecration of the site took place exactly a year later. The tower was not part of the original building plan but was added later. It was built in similar brick with a gabled spire and appeared large in proportion to the rest of the church. This was completed in 1911. Kambala Road, Wandsworth Chance find of a Bronze Age stone axe recorder on the HER. York Rd Chance find of a prehistoric flake and lithic implement recorded on the HER. York Rd Site of a medieval settlement recorded on the HER. St Peters Church Chance find of a Roman coin recorded on the HER. York House Way Site of a medieval moated house and post-medieval house recorded on the HER. Battersea Thames
9 10
031256 021367
11 12 13
025379 031316 031372
14
100147
Page 248
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station HEA Ref no. Description
Appendix A: Historic environment Site code/ HER ref:
Chance find of a Middle Bronze Age sword recorded on the HER. 15 Falcon Wharf, Lombard Road, Wandsworth Chance find of 19th-century to modern made ground recorded on the HER. York Place [Prices Patent Candle Factory], Wandsworth Chance find of a Middle Bronze Age ditch recorded on the HER. Small chamferedcornered building within the site, part of the York Gardens Library Granite sets, possibly relating to 19th century housing development York Gardens, post war gardens extending south of the site Prices Candle Factory, 19th century factory development MLO755 01 MLO761 73
16
17 18 19 20
Page 249
Appendix B: Land quality
Appendix B Land quality B.1 Site walkover report

Table B.1 Land quality site walkover report Item Site Ref Site Name Date of walkover / name(s) of specialist Site location (Address & Access) Size and topography of site and surroundings Neighbouring site use (in particular note any potentially contaminative activities or sensitive receptors) Site buildings Details PWH8X Falconbrook Pumping Station 25th May 2011
Thames Water operated Falconbrook Pumping Station, located within York Gardens and accessed via York Road, Wandsworth. Site access restricted. Record elevation in Site is situated with an area of public relation to surroundings, open space, flat and level with any hummocks, breaks of surrounding land. slope etc. North Adventure playground. South York Gardens and a community centre. East West York Gardens and electrical substation building. The site is bounded by York Road. Beyond York Road are a number of former factory buildings, new build apartments and car dealers. Falconbrook Sewage Pumping Station, a three storey brick and concrete building. Hard surfacing None
Record extent, size, type and usage. Any boiler rooms, electrical switchgear? Surfacing Record type and condition Vegetation Any evidence of distress, unusual growth or invasive species such as Japanese Knotweed? Services Evidence of buried services? Fuels or Types/ quantities? chemicals on site Tanks (above ground or below ground) Containment systems (eg, bund, drainage interceptors). Record condition and standing liquids Refill points located inside bunds or on
N/A None observed N/A N/A
N/A
Page 250
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station impermeable surfaces etc? Record locations, tanks and inspection pits etc. Adequate storage and security? Fly tipping?
Appendix B: Land quality
Vehicle servicing or refuelling onsite Waste generated/stored onsite Surface water Site drainage
No
N/A
Evidence of previous site investigations Evidence of land contamination Summary of potential contamination sources Any other comments
Record on-site or nearby None standing water Is the site drained, if so to N/A where? Evidence of flooding? Eg trial pits, borehole No covers. Evidence of discoloured ground, seepage of liquids, strong odours? None observed
Adjacent electrical substation.
Eg access restrictions/ limitations
Observation through the steel entrance gate.
Page 251
Appendix C: Noise and vibration
Appendix C Noise and vibration

C.1.1 This section intentionally does not include additional noise and vibration baseline monitoring information as the survey work has not yet been completed.
Page 252
Appendix D: Townscape and visual
Appendix D Townscape and visual D.1 Winter photographs for selected viewpoints
Figure D.1 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.1 View south from residences on Fairchild Close, adjacent to York Gardens
Figure D.2 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.3 View west from residences on Lavender Road at the junction with Darien Road
Page 253
Figure D.3 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.6 View south east from residences on William Morris Way on the north bank of the river
Figure D.4 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 1.7 View south east from riverfront residences on Bridges Court
Page 254
Figure D.5 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.1 View south from the northern part of York Gardens
Figure D.6 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.2 View south west from the north east entrance to York Gardens
Page 255
Figure D.7 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.3 View north west from the feature paved area in the centre of York Gardens
Figure D.8 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 2.5 View north from the south west entrance to York Gardens from Plough Way
Page 256
Figure D.9 Townscape and visual - viewpoint 3.1 View south from York Road at the junction with Lombard Road
Page 257
Appendix E: Water resources groundwater
Appendix E Water resources groundwater E.1

E.1.1
Geology
A summary of the anticipated geology succession to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown in the table below. Table E.1 Groundwater - anticipated TT 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** Lewes Nodular Chalk Cretaceous Upper Cretaceous White Chalk Subgroup New Pit Chalk Holywell Nodular Chalk * Not a Formation but an important depositional feature ** Subdivided into the Haven Brow, Cuckmere and Belle Tout members. Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology (see Volume 14 Figures document)
E.1.2 E.1.3
Figure E.1 and Figure E.2 show the superficial geology beneath the site. And the solid geology. The project Ground Investigation (GI) at the site involved drilling boreholes both on shore and within the main river channel (TT, 2010) 53. The
Page 258
locations of boreholes around the site are shown in Vol 14 Figure E.2. The depths and thicknesses of geological layers encountered are summarised in the table below. Table E.2 Groundwater - anticipated Ground Conditions Formation Made Ground Alluvium River Terrace Deposits London Clay B A3ii A3i A2 Harwich Formation Elevation* mATD 104.49 101.89 101.09 Depth below ground level (m) 0.0 2.6 3.4 Thickness (m) 2.6 0.8 5.5
95.59 81.76 70.76 68.86 57.79
8.9 22.73 33.73 35.63 46.70
13.83 11.00 1.90 11.07 0.05
Lambeth Group USB 57.47 46.75 2.55 UMB 55.19 49.30 4.10 Note: Based on an assumed ground level of 104.00mATD USB = Upper Shelly Beds; UMB = Upper Mottled Beds E.1.4 At the site, the depth of the shaft will be 64.38mATD (with base slab down to 62.38mATD). The base of the shaft is likely to be within the London Clay Formation (A2 division), as will be the main tunnel at this site. The culvert inlet level is at 93.68mATD within the River Terrace Deposits. Beneath the 2.6m of made ground, the alluvium at site has a thickness of 0.8m according to the GI. 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. Beneath the made ground and alluvium, the River Terrace Deposits are present. The 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 downcutting and intervening deposition during colder periods and subsequent melt waters 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. The GI indicates that River Terrace Deposits has a thickness of 5.5m at the site.
E.1.5
E.1.6
Page 259
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station E.1.7
The London Clay comprises clayey silt beds grading to an increasing number of silty fine-grained sand westward; and increase in homogeneity upwards through the deposit. The upper sandier formation is informally referred to as the Claygate Member to distinguish its coarser-grained nature. The GI shows that the total thickness of London Clay at the site is 37.8m. Beneath this substantial thicknesses of London Clay, the thin layer of Harwich Formation is identified at the site (0.05m thick) comprises of finegrained glauconitic sand and rounded black flinty pebble beds, commonly deposited in a series of superimposed channels. The Upper Shelly Beds comprising grey, shelly clays with scattered glauconite grains increasing to mainly sand in south-east London. The GI indicates that the Upper Shelly Beds has a thickness of 2.55m at the site. The Upper Mottled Beds (UMB) of the Reading Beds comprise of silty clay and clay, generally un-bedded, fissured and blocky, with up to 50 per cent silt and sand. The GI indicates a thickness of 4.10m at the site. Laminated Beds (LtB) comprise thinly interbedded fine to medium grained sand, silt and clay with shells, with sand lenses found locally in south-east London. The Lower Shelly Beds (LSB) comprise dark grey to black clay with abundant shells, with increasing sand content towards east London. A thin - less than 0.3m thick - seam of Lignite is commonly found at its base, although this has not been established in the borehole logs at the site. Lower Mottled Beds (LMB) of the Reading Beds comprise of silty clay and clay, generally un-bedded, fissured and blocky, with up to 50 per cent silt and 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. The Bullhead Bed, marking 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
E.1.8
E.1.9
E.1.10
E.1.11
E.1.12
E.1.13
E.1.14
E.1.15
E.1.16
Page 260
in the lower 8m and absent higher up. A hard ground marks the top of the Seaford Chalk.
E.2
E.2.3
Hydrogeology
A summary of the anticipated hydrogeological properties of the different geologies to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown in the table below. Table E.3 Groundwater - anticipated TT main hydrogeological units Group Formation (Made Ground) Alluvium Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits Thames London Clay Harwich Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottle Beds Laminated Beds Lower Shelly Beds -----Mid Lambeth Hiatus---Lower Mottled Beds Upnor Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk White Chalk Subgroup Lewes Nodular Chalk New Pit Chalk Holywell Nodular Chalk Lower Aquifer Hydrogeology Perched Water Aquiclude Upper Aquifer Aquiclude Aquitard/Aquifer
Superficial Deposits
Lambeth
Aquitards / Aquifers
No group
E.2.4
The lower aquifer comprises Thanet Sands and the Chalk (principal aquifer) 54. The upper aquifer (River Terrace Deposits) is defined as a secondary A aquifer. The thickness of the Alluvium and the River Terrace Deposits (forming the upper aquifer) at the site are determined by the nearby GI as 0.8m and 5.5m respectively. The depth of shaft will not extend down into the lower aquifer, as it will be constructed entirely within the upper aquifer and London Clay. The majority of the shaft will be excavated through the London Clay Formation (through the B. A3ii, A3i and A2 sub divisions). This is generally acknowledged as an aquiclude between the upper and lower
E.2.5
E.2.6
Page 261
aquifers. It is expected that below the River Terrace Deposits, the shaft will encounter little groundwater in the London Clay Formation with the exception of minor localised seepages and/or minor flows at silt layers or claystone horizons. E.2.7 Within the London Clay Formation, any groundwater present is likely to consist of localised seepages and/or minor flows. It is therefore possible that localised high pressure groundwater might be encountered within parts of the London Clay. The most porous section of London Clay the A3ii division - is present within the GI borehole logs (TT, 2010, Table E.2). Groundwater movement through the London Clay Formation also occurs along horizontal bedding planes, resulting in localised seepages. The base of the London Clay has less sand fraction, and is therefore regarded as the less permeable and more compacted part of the London Clay, thereby forming an effective retardation to groundwater flow from the lower aquifer. The thickness of the respective units of the Lambeth Group, and the Thanet Sand Formation (lower aquifer) at the site have yet to be determined, and will be confirmed subject to the results of further GI planned for 2011.
E.2.8
E.3
E.3.3
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). The monitoring boreholes record groundwater levels in the upper aquifer and lower aquifer. Four monitoring horizons within three monitoring boreholes at the site are used to record groundwater levels in the following discrete layers (see Table E.4): River Terrace Deposits, London Clay Formation and the Lambeth Group (Upper Mottled Beds and Lower Shelly Beds) The manual dip and logger data collected from these monitoring boreholes is shown in Table E.1. Further GI monitoring boreholes are proposed (as shown in Figure E.2). Table E.4 Groundwater - on-site monitoring b/hs Borehole SA1099A, SR1099C SR1099C PR1100D Response Zone Depths mATD 100.40 - 96.40 99.89 - 96.39 64.89 - 61.89 50.06 - 49.26 Strata River Terrace Deposits River Terrace Deposits London Clay Formation Lambeth Group Upper Mottled Beds/Lower Shelly Monitoring Fortnightly Dips Fortnightly Dips Fortnightly Dips and Logger Fortnightly Dips and Logger
E.3.4
Page 262
Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station Response Zone Depths mATD
Borehole
Strata Beds
Monitoring
E.3.5
Groundwater levels in the River Terrace Deposits as measured in SA1099A and SR1099C located at the site, range from approximately 100.6 to 101.0mATD, consistently below the top of the River Terrace Deposits (at 101.09mATD), forming an unconfined aquifer unit. The hydrograph in the London Clay Formation monitoring point (SR1099C) varies between 98.6 and 100.0mATD. The hydrograph does not give an indication of hydraulic continuity with the River Terrace Deposits above or the Lambeth Group beneath. The piezometric heads in the Lambeth Group (from the Upper Mottled Beds, Laminate Beds and Lower Shelly Beds) has a similar values and range as the River Terrace Deposits above, in monitoring point PR1100D ranges typically between 100.7 and 101.4mATD. This piezometric head corresponds with an elevation close to the boundary between the Alluvium and the River Terrace Deposits at 101.09m ATD. This may indicate hydraulic connectivity between the Lambeth Group and the upper aquifer. However, it is undetermined whether there is hydraulic connectivity with the lower aquifer. The EA has a network of observation monitoring boreholes across the London for which records are available dating back to1963. In the future, the Thames Tunnel team are monitoring groundwater levels in some boreholes drilled for the GI. There are no EA monitoring boreholes sufficiently close enough to provide representative water level for the site. The EA have produced a groundwater contour map of the Chalk piezometric levels at a snap-shot in time in January 2010. According to this map (EA, 2010)55; the regional direction of groundwater flow within the confined Chalk (lower aquifer) around the site is to the north-northeast towards a low point within central London.
E.3.6
E.3.7
E.3.8
E.3.9
E.3.10
Page 263
Figure E.5 Groundwater - level hydrograph Falconbrook PS
Page 264
E.4
E.4.3 E.4.4
Groundwater Abstractions and Protected Rights

Groundwater abstractions within a radius of influence of up to 2km around the site have been identified. There are two licensed abstractions which abstract groundwater from the Chalk within the vicinity of the site. One is at a distance of approximately 1.0km southwest of the site, licence number for this source is 28/39/42/0071 and the annual licensed quantity is 2,555,000m3/annum, licensed for industrial, commercial and public services uses, to Hanson Quarry Products Europe Ltd. The second is approximately 1.4km to the north of the site, licensed number 28/39/39/0157 with an annual quantity of 227,300m3/annum, licensed for production of energy uses, to Circadian Ltd. There are also several licensed sources to the southeast of the site, but for which no information is available at present. Further details of these licensed abstractions are given in Table A.1 supporting this appendix. The nearest gravel abstraction is at a distance of approximately 2km to the west of the site, close by the River Thames. One unlicensed abstraction from the Chalk is identified 1.7km to the northnortheast of the site. The nearest licensed Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) schemes are located approximately 1km to the north of the site, as shown in Figure E.6. Figure E.6 Groundwater GSHP (see Volume 14 Figures document)
E.4.5 E.4.6 E.4.7
E.5
E.5.3 E.5.4
Groundwater Source Protection Zones

The EA defines Source Protection Zones (SPZ) around all major public water supply abstractions sources and large licensed private abstractions. There are no SPZs delineated within the vicinity of site.
E.6
E.6.3
Other Designations eg, SSSI or SAC

There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site.
E.7
E.7.3
Groundwater Quality and Land Quality Assessment

The EA monitors groundwater quality at number of points across London. The nearest EA monitoring is at King Georges Park, Wandsworth (PGWU1514). The distance of this location from site is approximately 1.6km to the southwest, up groundwater hydraulic gradient from Falconbrook PS. The quality of water is typical of Chalk (Na-HCO3 water type). The higher than normal Na is due to ion exchange by the clay minerals within the Chalk matrix and Lower London Tertiaries (Lambeth Group) (EA, 2006)56. Table E.5 contains the parameters and the number of occasions which they have breached the Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) at King
E.7.4
Page 265
Georges Park. The water quality information is available for the period July 1997 to June 2009. Table E.5 Groundwater - parameter detected at King Georges Park Parameter Ammonia Chlorofenvinphos Dichlorvos Diazinon Silver Propetamphos Note * above EQS E.7.5 Number of detections* 24 12 3 5 4 5 Number of Sampling 24 12 3 12 4 12
Information provided by the Thames Tunnel team on land quality at a site near to Falconbrook PS shows no exceedances of parameters tested (TT, 2010). However, this assessment is subject to findings of GI at the site planned for Falonbrook PS in 2011. As part of the GI, water quality testing was undertaken on a number of water samples taken from boreholes drilled on a site close by the site. Information from the land quality assessment showed this nearby site to be clean of any contamination above relevant standards. 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. Further ground investigation within the site will be undertaken in 2011. Groundwater quality is due to be initiated in the boreholes drilled as part of the GI.
E.7.6
E.7.7
E.7.8
E.8
E.8.3
Groundwater Status
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) which was classed as over licensed.
Page 266
Figure E.7 Groundwater - resource availability
Taken from EA, 2006. Figure 8: Resource Availability Status E.8.4 The London Groundwater Licensing Policy was produced to restrict further abstraction in areas approaching their sustainable limit. This policy is now incorporated into the London CAMS licensing policy which identifies areas where further licences are restricted The site falls within the Central and South London area. Over this section the policy states that new consumptive licenses are restricted to less than 0.2Ml/d annual average, subject to the local assessment being favourable.
E.8.5
Page 267
Figure E.8 Groundwater - confined chalk licensing
Page 268
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 269
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 270
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 271
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 272
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 273
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 274
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 275
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 276
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 277
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 278
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 Insectsiii, 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
iii
Bratton, (1991) Red Data Book for Insects
Page 279
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 280
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 281
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 282
Volume 14: Falconbrook 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 283
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
Defra, http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/backgroundmaps.html, Accessed May 2011)

3 4
LB Wandsworth, Personal Communication with David Kennett 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.
Thames Estuary Partnership Biodiversity Action Group (undated) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan. Thames Estuary Partnership. 9 Elliott, M. & Hemingway, K. L. (2002). Fishes in Estuaries, London: Blackwell Science.
10
Elliott, M. and Taylor, C.J.L. (1989). The structure and functioning of an estuarine/marine fish community in the Forth estuary, Scotland. Proc. 21st European Marine Biological Symposium (Gdansk). Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Oceanology, Warsaw, Poland, 227-240.
11
Colclough, S.R, Gray, G, Bark, A & Knights, B (2002) Journal of Fish Biology 61 (Supplement A), 64-73. Fish and fisheries of the tidal Thames: management of the modern resource, research aims and future pressures.
12
Turnpenny, A.W.H., Clough, S.C., Holden, S.D.J., Bridges, M., Bird, H., OKeeffe, N.J., Johnson, D., Edmonds, M., Hinks, C. (2004). Thames Tideway Strategy: Experimental Studies on the Dissolved Oxygen Requirements of Fish Consultancy Report no.FCR374/04 to Thames Water Utilities, Ltd. Fawley Aquatic Research, Fawley Southampton, April, 2004. http://www.wfduk.org/LibraryPublicDocs/ThamesTidewayStrategyExperimentalStudie sontheDissolvedOxygenRequirementsofFish]
13
IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006)
14
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 accessed on Monday 7 March 2011).
15
Department of Communities and Local Government. Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010), 1, 13
16
Museum of London Archaeology Service The Archaeology of Greater London. MoLAS and English Heritage. (2000), 150
Page 284
References
17 18 19
Victoria County History, A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 4 (1912), 817 Victoria County History, A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 4 (1912), 817
Cowie R and Blackmore L, 2008 Early and Middle Saxon rural settlement in the London region. MoLAS monograph 41, 1015
20
Domesday, A complete translation eds Williams A and Martin GH (2002), 76; Victoria County History, A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 4 (1912), 817 Victoria County History, A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 4 (1912), 817 Cherry B and Pevsner N The Buildings of England: London 2: South (1983), 668 Victoria County History, A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 4 (1912), 817
21 22 23 24
Hawkins D, Douglas A, Harris A and Ridgeway V, The Archbishop of York's Battersea Mansion in London Archaeologist 9, (2000), 129136
25
Hawkins D, Douglas A, Harris A and Ridgeway V, The Archbishop of York's Battersea Mansion in London Archaeologist 9 (2000), 129136
26
Museum of London Archaeology, 100 York Road , London SW11, Built Heritage Assessment (2011)
27
BS 5228:2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (2007), London Noise Maps (http://services.defra.gov.uk/wps/portal/noise
29 28
BS4142 (1997): Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas
30
Husselman, S. and Bourne, L. Childrens Centres what are they?, in Families, Jan/Feb 09, p.33 (Last accessed in June 2011 at http://www.sarahhusselmann.com/Portfolio/ChildrensCentres_Jan09.pdf)
31
LB Wandsworth Website, Service Provider Details King George's Park One O'clock Centre (Last accessed in June 2011 at http://wandsworth.childrensservicedirectory.org.uk/serviceprovider.htm?q=search&id =2739)
32
Wandsworth One Oclock Centre directory http://wandsworth.childrensservicedirectory.org.uk/serviceprovider.htm?q=search&sn ac=00BJ&kw=one+o+clock&id=2835

33
LB Wandsworth Libraries (Last accessed in June 2011 at http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/directory_record/599 /york_gardens_library) http://www.ukattraction.com/london/york-gardens-library-and-communitycentre.htm

35 34
Greater London Authority. The London Plan (consolidated with alterations since 2004) 2008 Greater London Authority. 2009 Demographic Projections for the London Plan (Last accessed in July 2011 at http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runslondon/mayor/publications/society/facts-and-figures/population)
36
Page 285
References
Ref. 2009 Demographic Projections for the London Plan (Last accessed in July 2011 at http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publications/society/factsand-figures/population)
38
37
Thames River Basin Management Plan Annex B: Water Body Status Objectives, Environment Agency, 2011
39
The Thames Recreational Users Study Final Report (2007), a collaborative partnership project between the City of London Port Health Authority and the Health Protection Agency.
40 41
Thames Tideway Strategic Study, Thames Water, February 2005
Communities and Local Government (March 2010). Planning Policy Statement 25 Development and Flood Risk.
42
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Practice Guide. Communities and Local Government (Dec 2009)
43
(Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. Environment Agency. (Accessed Feb 2011) http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/research/library/consultations/106100.aspx)
44
The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. Greater London Authority (Jul 2011).
45
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
46
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
47
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
48
London Boroughs of Wandsworth, Merton, Sutton and Croydon Level 1 Final Report. Scott Wilson Ltd (Dec 2008). London Boroughs of Wandsworth, Merton, Sutton and Croydon Level 2 Final Report. Scott Wilson Ltd (Apr 2009).
49 50 51
Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. Environment Agency London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal. Greater London Authority (Oct 2009)
Thames Tidal Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels 2008 Final Modelling Report. Environment Agency (Apr 2008) (Thames Barrier operational, Model Node 2.25).
52
The Mayors Draft Water Strategy. Mayor of London. Greater London Authority (Aug 2009)
53
TT (2010) Ground Investigation Factual Report Contract Reference No. WAL080092
54
The terms Principal and Secondary Aquifers were previously known as Major and Minor Aquifers (EA, 2010)
55
EA (2010) Management of London Basin Chalk Aquifer. Status Report 2010.
Page 286
References
56
EA(2006) Groundwater Quality Review: London Basin Ref. No. GWQR22 [6441R6] November 2006.
Page 287
Thames Tunn
110-RG-ENV-PWH8X-000022
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 Vol14 Falcon Brook Pumping Station

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PEIR Main Report Vol14 Falcon Brook Pumping Station

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook 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

Thames Tunnel Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station site assessment

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

Preliminary environmental information report

Ecology - terrestrial ....................................................................................... 40

Historic environment ..................................................................................... 50

Land quality .................................................................................................... 73

Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 89

Preliminary environmental information report

Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 111

Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 135

Transport ...................................................................................................... 172

Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 201

Preliminary environmental information report

Water resources surface water ................................................................ 212

Water resources flood risk ....................................................................... 226

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 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station

Section 2: Site context

Site context Site location

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 2.2.5

Section 2: Site context

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Proposed development Overview

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station

Section 3: Proposed development

Interception chambers and culverts

Access and maintenance works

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 3.2.19 3.2.20

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 3.3.6

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 14: Falconbrook Pumping Station 3.3.18 3.3.19

Section 3: Proposed development

3.3.26 3.3.27 3.3.28 3.3.29 3.3.30

Preliminary environmental information report