Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD: Victoria Embankment Gardens

Spring 2010
Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Victoria Embankment Gardens
Please note: Further details are provided in the Final Report on Site Selection Process (doc ref: 7.05) that can be found on the Thames Tideway Tunnel section of the Planning Inspectorates web site.
100-RG-PNC-C22XC-900001 | Spring 2010

THAMES TUNNEL
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT C22XC AND CLLAD

LIST OF CONTENTS
Page Number 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 Purpose and structure of the report Background Consultation 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 7 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12
SITE INFORMATION 2.1 2.2 Site and surroundings Type of site
3 4
PROPOSED USE OF SITE CONSTRUCTION PHASE PROPOSED USE OF SITE OPERATIONAL PHASE 4.1 4.2 Introduction Restoration and after-use
ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Access Construction works considerations Permanent works considerations Health and safety
PLANNING ASSESSMENT 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Introduction Planning applications and permissions Planning context Consultation comments Planning comments
ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 Introduction Transport Archaeology Built heritage and townscape Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Ecology Flood risk Air quality Noise Land quality
SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT 8.1 8.2 Socio-economic profile Issues and impacts
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 9.1 9.2 Introduction Crown Land and Special Land comments
100-RG-PNC-C22XC-900001.doc
9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10
Land to be acquired Property valuation comments Disturbance compensation comments Offsite statutory compensation comments Site acquisition cost assessment
12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 15 15 16
SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 Introduction Engineering Planning Environment Socio-economic and community Property
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN APPENDIX 6 SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN APPENDIX 7 CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT APPENDIX 8 OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT APPENDIX 9 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLE
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AOD BAP BT CPO CSO DLR EA GLA HGV LNR LPA LU m MOL ONS ORN PLA POS PTAL SAM SINC SNCI SSR SSSI SuDS TfL TD TLRN TPA UDP UXO
above Ordnance Datum Biodiversity Action Plan British Telecom compulsory purchase order combined sewer overflow Docklands Light Railway Environment Agency Greater London Authority heavy goods vehicle local nature reserve local planning authority London Underground metre/metres Metropolitan Open Land Office of National Statistics Olympic Route Network Port of London Authority public open space public transport accessibility level scheduled ancient monument site of importance for nature conservation site(s) of nature conservation importance site suitability report site(s) of special scientific interest sustainable urban drainage systems Transport for London tunnel datum Transport for London Road Network Thames Policy Area unitary development plan unexploded ordnance
1 1.1 1.1.1
INTRODUCTION Purpose and structure of the report The Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper (paragraphs 2.3.29 - 2.3.34) outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of shaft sites, and this process also applies to CSO sites. Paragraph 2.3.31 lists the type of general considerations that will be addressed in each site suitability report, but they depend on the relevance to the site and professional judgement made in the assessments. This report was prepared through the assessment of information from the perspective of a number of technical disciplines: Engineering, Planning, Environment, Property and Community. The reports have been prepared on the basis of the information listed in Appendix 1 - Sources of Information, and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to the current stage. The Background Technical Paper provides information on the requirements for different site types, their sizes and typical activities/facilities within the sites. Each site suitability report considers a particular site on its own merits. In addition, an engineering options report was produced. Information from both of these reports will feed into the technical assessment of how well the site may fit in with tunnel design options, ensuring combinations of sites spread across the length of the tunnel route provide a reasonable spatial distribution of sites (that will best assist with the construction of the tunnel, operation and maintenance). This is considered in the Preferred Scheme Report. Background The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site Selection Methodology (May 2009) paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: Part 1A - Creation of the long list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites Part 1B - Creation of a short list of potential shaft (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of shaft (and CSO) sites - an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of shaft (and CSO) sites - assessment against a list of detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.
1.1.2
1.1.3 1.1.4
1.2 1.2.1
1.2.2
The final part of Stage 1 includes this report. The following is an overall summary of all elements that apply to all the sites on the final short list: Part 1C - Creation of the Preferred List of shaft (and CSO) sites - site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that will result in the Preferred Scheme Report.
1.3 1.3.1
Consultation The Thames Water project team held meetings with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders to review the provisional short list of shaft and CSO sites. All general and site specific comments can be found in a separate report titled Consultation on the Short List of Sites: Consultation Feedback Report. These comments were considered to help determine the final short list of sites, but they were also considered at the optioneering workshops. Further meetings were held with London local authorities, statutory and other stakeholders between January and March 2010. Comments are included in this report.
1.3.2
Page 1
2 2.1 2.1.1
SITE INFORMATION Site and surroundings This site is one of the shortlisted sites for Regent Street CSO. This section provides an overview of all the site information that will be used by one or more disciplines to assess the site in sections 3 to 9 of this report. The proposed site consists of C22XC and CLLAD combined and is on the Victoria Embankment in the City of Westminster. The A3211 and Victoria Embankment separate the site from the foreshore. The site consists of part of the Victoria Embankment Gardens (also known as Waterloo Historic Gardens), a Grade II listed garden, and includes three statues and one memorial listed as Grade II. It is a well-maintained public open space, used by locals, pedestrians and tourists as a thoroughfare and for recreational purposes. An iron fence with extensive greenery, including trees, shrubs, and bedding plants, encloses the gardens from the A3211 and screens some views of the road and the River Thames. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. Adjacent to the west of the site is the National Liberal Club, a large period building with commercial premises that includes a terrace that directly overlooks and connects into the site via a locked gate. The north of the site is bordered by Northumberland Avenue, beyond which is Embankment Station and the Hungerford Bridge. The east of the site is bounded by the A3211, the south by Horse Guards Avenue, and the west by the National Liberal Club and Whitehall Court, which overlook the site and are several storeys high. The nearest residential area is located adjacent to the west side of the site at Whitehall Court. One Whitehall Place, a luxury hotel with 280 guestrooms, is located within the National Liberal Club and is directly adjacent to the site and Whitehall Court. These adjacent buildings have large windows closely overlooking the site. The site and immediate surroundings are covered by various designations within the Westminster Unitary Development Plan. These include an archaeological area, a conservation area and open spaces of local and metropolitan importance. All the mapped designations are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with an aerial photograph of the site, are attached as Appendix 4. There is road access to the site directly off Victoria Embankment (A3211). Charing Cross railway and LU station is approximately 300m from the site and Embankment LU station is 100m away. There are no existing wharfage/jetty facilities at the site as it is about 25m inland, with the Victoria Embankment separating it from the river. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5. Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plan in Appendix 6: LU Bakerloo Line is just outside the northern part of the site. LU Circle and District lines through the north-eastern part of the site. The Regent Street sewer crosses the site (CSO connection is to this sewer). The northern Lower Level Sewer No 1 (LL1) is located to the east of the site, within the embankment structure (CSO connection is also to this sewer). There is a service culvert within the embankment, above the northern LL1 One well potentially onsite. Whitehall Court on the outside western part of the site.
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.1.6
2.1.7 2.1.8
2.1.9
2.1.10 The locations of other third-party assets, such as BT and fibre optic communication cables, are to be confirmed by further studies and utility searches and may not be shown on the services and geology plan.
Page 2
2.1.11 Information on the geology specific to this site can be found within the services and geology plan, which is in Appendix 6. This plan shows that the shaft would be founded in the Lambeth Group. 2.2 2.2.1 Type of site The site C22XC is a potential site for the interception of the Regent Street CSO (CS22X). The site CLLAD is a potential site for the partial interception of northern LL1. Although identified separately, C22XC and CLLAD are, in practice, the same physical site, and this site is now being considered to intercept both CS22X and LL1 as: a large CSO site to intercept the Regent Street CSO and provide relief to LL1 through an overflow weir a small CSO site for the same purpose. 3 3.1.1 3.1.2 PROPOSED USE OF SITE CONSTRUCTION PHASE The proposed construction phase layouts for the CSO site are located in Appendix 7 Construction Phase Layout, and are based on a preliminary assessment. The construction phase layout drawings are illustrative and show: the layout as a large CSO site the layout as a small CSO site potential access points. 3.1.3 These drawings provide initial preliminary schematic layouts that have not been optimised. If the site proceeds to the next stage as a preferred site, construction phase layouts would be optimised to minimise impacts. Photographs of typical activities associated with the CSO site construction phase are provided in Appendix 7. Potential above ground construction features include: approximately 3m high hoarding around the site boundary welfare facilities, temporary structures, approximately 3m high grout plant, approximately 3m to 5m high, including silos mobile crane, approximately 30m high (maximum and not for full construction duration). 3.1.5 To enable the works in the carriageway, the A3211 Victoria Embankment would require closure of the southbound lane. The footway along the Embankment would also be closed. A preliminary assessment of the traffic management which would be required is indicated on the temporary traffic management plan in Appendix 5. Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1 and are common to both the large site and small site scenarios. Table 3.1 Construction phase data Activity Length of construction period Likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) Working days Primary means of transporting excavated material away from site Primary means of transporting materials to site CSO site 0.5 to 2 years 12 hrs from 7am to 7pm Mon to Sat Road Road
3.1.4
3.1.6
Page 3
4 4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2
PROPOSED USE OF SITE OPERATIONAL PHASE Introduction The indicative operational phase layout for the CSO site is located in Appendix 8 Operational Phase Layout, and is based on a preliminary assessment. The generic elevations of structures shown on the operational phase layout are located in Appendix 8 and provide an illustration of typical examples of the permanent structures which are applicable to CSO sites. For both CSO options, the above ground infrastructure at this site is likely to comprise a a ventilation column 10m high and 3m diameter, a ventilation building 5m x 15m x 5m high and a 20m x 10m top structure with openings. The top structure is to provide access and egress into the main shaft and flap valve chamber. The top structures are envisaged to be finished at a level of 107m tunnel datum (TD) (7mAOD), and since the ground level mean value at this site is 104mTD (4mAOD), the top structures would be raised to approximately 3m above the current ground level. For further information on the generic layout of this top structure, refer to Appendix 8. A hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would not be fenced. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/weekend) frequency of visits 1 daytime visit every six months for electrical/instrument inspection. An additional 1 week maintenance period for tunnel/shaft inspection required per 10 years that could be night/day/weekend working. 1 van visit every six months. An additional 1 week period of 2 to 10 movements per day (estimated several vans and 2 cranes) every 10 years.
b
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5 4.1.6
No of traffic movements
4.2 4.2.1
Restoration and after-use The portion of the site not occupied by the permanent works would be restored to its original condition on completion of the construction works. If any buildings were demolished, these would not be reinstated unless required. ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT Access This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2.
5 5.1 5.1.1
It was anticipated that the ventilation column at shaft sites would be 10m high when the assessment in this report was undertaken. Although this was subsequently changed to 15m high, the assessment was not revised as it was considered that the difference would not change any disciplines conclusion on the suitability of the site. b It was anticipated that the elevation of top structures at both CSO and shaft sites would be finished at 107mTD when the assessment in this report was undertaken. Although this was subsequently changed to 104.5mTD, the assessment was not revised as it was considered that the difference would not change any disciplines conclusion on the suitability of the site.
Page 4
Road 5.1.2 5.1.3 During the construction phase, for both options, there would be a one-way through system in use for the site, with both access and egress direct from Victoria Embankment. For the operational phase, only one access point would be used from Victoria Embankment to facilitate access onto the hardstanding. Rail 5.1.4 Charing Cross railway and LU station would be approximately 300m from the site and Embankment LU station would be 100m away. However, rail access is not considered to be a significant factor for CSO sites. River 5.1.5 River access and jetty/wharfage facilities are not a requirement for CSO sites. In addition, the site would be 25m inland and separated from the river by Victoria Embankment. Construction works considerations No demolition would be required. The site is a garden with statues and associated features, some of which would require temporary relocation. Data available on third-party assets and significant utilities show that the items of concern in this area are Whitehall Court, the LU Bakerloo Line through the outside northern part of the site, and the LU Circle and District lines through the outside eastern part of the site. The Regent Street sewer is located within the site (CSO connection is to this sewer) and the northern LL1 is located in the outside eastern part of the site (CSO connection is also to this sewer). Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme. The interception chamber for the Regent Street sewer would be within the site. The overflow weir for the low level sewer would be in the embankment under the footpath, next to the river wall. The associated connection culvert would have to be tunnelled under Victoria Embankment and the District and Circle lines. The traffic management plan in Appendix 5 provides further detail. Permanent works considerations As the top structures to the drop shaft and flap valve chamber would be finished at ground level, there would be no impacts associated with above ground structures. Health and safety There are no unusual health and safety issues with this site. PLANNING ASSESSMENT Introduction The planning assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Planning applications and permissions Planning context Planning comments.
5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2
5.2.3 5.2.4
5.3 5.3.1
5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1
Page 5
6.2 6.2.1
Planning applications and permissions An initial desktop search of the City of Westminster online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to the site. Planning context The current planning policy context for the site is provided from the saved policies in the Westminster Unitary Development Plan, adopted in January 2007, and the Consolidated London Plan, adopted in February 2008. The planning designations and policies that are applicable to the site are detailed below. Victoria Embankment Gardens is a Grade II registered garden and an open space of local importance. Policy DES12, Parks, Gardens and Squares, states that development adjacent to open spaces must: safeguard their appearance, wider setting and ecological value; preserve their historic integrity; protect views into and out of these spaces; and should not project above existing tree or building lines. Further to this, development on or under open spaces will not be granted permission where open spaces form an important element in the townscape, are characteristic features of conservation areas, provide the setting of listed buildings or are of significant ecological value. The site lies wholly within the Whitehall Conservation Area. In addition, two other conservation areas are located near to the site: the Savoy to the north and Trafalgar Square to the northwest. Policy DES9, Conservation Areas, states that development will not be permitted which may have a visibly adverse effect upon the areas recognised special character or appearance, including local views into, out of, within or across the area. It also states that additional details may be required regarding the physical impact of the proposed development to allow for a full assessment. The site contains three Grade II listed statues spread through the centre of the site. These statues are of William Tyndale, Sir Bartle Frere and Sir James Outram. The Grade II listed Plimsoll Memorial and two listed catenary lamps are located adjacent to the site, along the eastern boundary of Victoria Embankment Gardens. Further listed catenary lamps are located along the Embankment adjacent to the site. The site is also adjacent to Whitehall Court and the National Liberal Club, both Grade II* listed buildings. Policy DES 10, Listed Buildings, states that the demolition of listed buildings will only be permitted where a defined set of criteria can be met. Development will not be permitted where it would adversely impact upon the setting of listed buildings, recognised and recorded views of listed buildings, or the spatial integrity or historic unity of the curtilage of a listed building. The site is located entirely within Lundenwic and Thorney Island Archaeological Area. Policy DES11, Archaeological Areas, outlines where development permission will be granted where scheduled ancient monuments or their settings, or areas and sites of special archaeological priority, may be affected.
6.3 6.3.1
6.3.2 6.3.3
6.3.4
6.3.5
6.3.6
6.3.7
6.3.8 6.3.9
6.3.10 The southern half of the site is within a viewing corridor: King Henry VIII's Mound to St Pauls Cathedral. 6.3.11 Policy DES14, London Views Management Framework, states that permission will normally be refused for developments within the viewing corridor where the proposed development will interrupt the strategic views. Policy DES15 similarly restricts permission for developments likely to have an adverse effect upon important views of, among others, important buildings, monuments and statues, parks, squares and gardens, and the River Thames. 6.3.12 Policies 4B.17 and 4B.18 of the Consolidated London Plan also highlight strategic linear views, including the above viewing corridor, panoramas, townscape views and important
Page 6
river prospects, such as the views upstream from Hungerford Bridge and the Golden Jubilee footbridges. 6.3.13 Part of the western side of the site is located within the designated flood zones 2 and 3. 6.3.14 Policy ENV9, Flood Zones, states that the City of Westminster council will seek to protect and conserve water by ensuring that developments use techniques to control surface water runoff. 6.3.15 Underground tunnels for the Bakerloo, Circle, District and Northern lines run partly beneath the site. 6.3.16 Policy TRANS19, Underground Tunnels, states that the City of Westminster council will generally restrict the lateral and vertical extent of new or extended basement areas under the adjacent highway, so that there remains a minimum vertical depth below the footway or carriageway of about 900mm, and the extent of the new or extended basement area does not encroach more than about 1.8m under any part of the adjacent highway. 6.3.17 In addition to the planning designations onsite, there are a number of policies adjacent to the site, which are identified and described below. 6.3.18 The Thames Path runs along the southern boundary of the site. 6.3.19 Policy RIV1, The Design of Development, expects a public riverside path in development sites next to the river, and will not allow boardwalks or other structures over the river to create a riverside path. 6.3.20 The site is separated by Victoria Embankment from the River Thames, which is designated as a metropolitan site of importance for nature conservation. The following policy is therefore applicable. 6.3.21 Policy ENV17, Nature Conservation and Biodiversity, seeks to ensure developers take measures to ensure protected species and their habitats are not harmed, and that areas of designated nature conservation value are protected and enhanced. Only where it can be demonstrated that there are reasons for the proposal that outweigh the need to safeguard the nature conservation value of the site and development is approved, mitigation will be required. 6.3.22 The River Thames is also designated as an area of open space of metropolitan importance. 6.3.23 Policy ENV15, Public and Private Open Space, states that permission will not be granted for development on, or under, public or private open space of amenity, recreational or nature conservation value unless the development is essential and ancillary to maintaining or enhancing that land as valuable open space. 6.3.24 There are residential properties located at Whitehall Court. 6.3.25 Policies ENV5, ENV6 and ENV13 seek, among other things, to protect and enhance the quality of the environment, including the amenity of residents, and to prevent undue impacts from air pollution, noise, loss of sunlight or daylight, and unacceptable microclimatic conditions. 6.4 6.4.1 Consultation comments A series of consultations on the shortlisted sites were held with London local authorities, statutory and other pan-London stakeholders during July to September 2009 and January to March 2010. This section summarises factual comments that have been made by consultees, and which have informed the SSR assessments. City of Westminster 6.4.2 The council advised that the site contains the last remaining original layout for the gardens. All other parts of the gardens have been changed, and it is therefore very contentious. The site is also known as Waterloo Historic Gardens. Adjacent to the site is a critical road junction (+E4) and the proposed CSO connection is proposed under a section of the Circle and District lines. The site would impact upon the amenity of the adjacent hotels and flats.
Page 7
English Heritage 6.4.3 English Heritage advised that the site is one of the original listed gardens (original 1860 layout) and contains numerous listed statues. The site, part of a designated landscape, contains archaeological remains of Iron Age date at 5mBgl (but not listed on the Sites and Monuments Record). Environment Agency 6.4.4 No comment. Port of London Authority 6.4.5 No comment. Transport for London 6.4.6 Transport for London perceives Northumberland Street to generate the most problems because the District Line runs under Whitehall Gardens and the Bakerloo Line and Northern Line are located close by. There is concern over the closure of Victoria Embankment. Other statutory consultees 6.4.7 6.5 6.5.1 No comment. Planning comments A number of planning and environmental designations and policies are applicable both on and adjacent to the site. These designations and policies have been identified and described in Section 6.3. Those relating to heritage, conservation, residential amenity and open space are of most relevance to the proposed development. The site is a Grade II registered garden, accessible by the public and of local importance within the City of Westminster. It is understood that the site contains the last remaining original layout for the gardens. Use of the site would result in the temporary loss of an area of the gardens. The proportion of gardens that would be lost is dependent on the CSO interception working area required. The indicative sizes vary greatly and would result in the approximate loss of between one- and four-fifths of the site. Use of the site in either instance would conflict with the aims of policies ENV12 and ENV15, and therefore mitigation and/or reprovision of the open space facilities elsewhere may be required during the construction works. The reprovision of open space within the surrounding area may be difficult, and would require further investigation. The ability to return the site to public open space use and the visual appearance of the remaining top structures would also require detailed design consideration. Mitigation would be needed to ensure the legacy structures would not result in overly prominent or inappropriate development and that they comply with policies ENV12 and ENV15. There are a number of Grade II* listed buildings located adjacent to the site and a number of Grade II listed statues spread across the site. The smaller indicative layout avoids the listed statues onsite; however, the larger site area would impact on all three. Mitigation and protection of the statues during construction works is likely to be required under listed building Policy DES10, in order to reduce potential impacts on visual amenity and setting, as well as to avoid the loss of these structures. A construction site in the proposed location would have an impact on the existing setting of the conservation area. Again, suitable mitigation should reduce some of the potential impacts on appearance and setting. However, it may be more difficult to mitigate the likely loss of mature trees, which heavily border the site. The degree of impact on setting which may be caused by the loss of mature trees would be an important consideration under conservation area Policy DES9. Further heritage considerations can be found in Section 7.
6.5.2
6.5.3
6.5.4
Page 8
6.5.5
The site falls within a designated archaeological priority area. The appropriate level of site investigation should be agreed with the LPA in accordance with Policy DES11. Further appraisal of the archaeological potential on the site is provided in Section 7. The southern half of the site is within the King Henry VIII's Mound to St Pauls Cathedral viewing corridor. The smaller CSO construction site is not located within the protected view. However, the areas identified for offices and the stockyard for the larger construction site are located within the viewing corridor. The works proposed within the viewing corridor should not be of a height to unacceptably interrupt or have an adverse impact on the strategic view. There may be conflict with adopted Consolidated London Plan view management policies 4B.17 and 4B.18 in terms of river prospects upstream from the Hungerford Bridge and Golden Jubilee footbridges. There is likely to be conflict with Policy DES 15, which seeks to protect views of monuments and statues, parks, squares and gardens. Mitigation would be required to reduce the impact on local views in and around the site. However, sufficient mitigation may be particularly difficult in the case of the larger CSO site, given the extent of the works proposed. The site is adjacent to a number of residential properties located within Whitehall Court and the National Liberal Club. The close proximity of these dwellings to the proposed construction site is likely to impact on the amenity of existing residents. Appropriate mitigation to reduce potential visual impacts, as well as those arising from noise, dust, vibration and traffic movements, may be required. In addition, a restriction on the operational hours of the construction site may also be required by the LPA. The site is in close proximity to a metropolitan site of nature importance, which covers the entire River Thames. Given the extensive nature of this designation, the fact that the Thames Tunnel Project would improve the environmental condition of the river, and the siting of the construction works adjacent to the protected area, it is unlikely that this designation would be affected to an unacceptable level. ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL Introduction The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 Environmental Appraisal Tables. Transport The site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site as it would require closure of part of the TLRN for the construction of the interception chamber. The site access would lead directly onto the TLRN, Victoria Embankment (A3211). It requires the construction of a construction site access and egress in addition to a permanent site access with left-in/ left-out arrangements. This may require the removal of mature trees to enable access. Temporary traffic management is required for the closure of Victoria Embankment (A3211), the resulting footway diversions and the construction of the site accesses/egress. Rail access is possible, although the use of rail transport is unlikely to be required due to the small volumes of excavated material produced from a CSO site. The site is located within close proximity to the river, although river access is not essential for CSO sites. Some parking could be provided onsite for the workforce. Parking on surrounding roads is unsuitable due to red route and permit holder restrictions. However, there is good potential for the workforce to use public transport to access the site. Archaeology Based on current information, this site is suitable as a small or large CSO site, as no archaeological receptors are shown to be present. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value could be located on or near the site. While no direct evidence has been revealed, peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have been commonly recorded throughout Page 9
6.5.6
6.5.7
6.5.8
7 7.1 7.1.1
7.2 7.2.1
7.2.2
7.2.3
7.3 7.3.1
7.3.2
London in a similar proximity to the River Thames. Given the location of the site, and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest that waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present. 7.4 7.4.1 Built heritage and townscape The site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site, due to the potential direct and indirect adverse impacts it would have on a small number of listed structures, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens, and protected views. The site would also potentially severely and adversely impact both the townscape character and local views during both construction and operation. Due to the highly sensitive location of the site, mitigation to reduce these potential adverse impacts on all of these receptors would be difficult to satisfactorily achieve. Water resources hydrogeology and surface water In terms of hydrogeology, this site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site because the drop shaft is to be constructed in Lambeth Group (minor aquifer), which is in hydraulic continuity with Chalk (major aquifer). Additionally, the site lies within the catchment area of two Environment Agency licensed abstraction boreholes. The proximity of the shaft depth to the piezometric surface in the Chalk means that if the shaft depth went deeper or the piezometric head was found to be higher, dewatering may be required during construction. The Chalk piezometric head may potentially need to be considered in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are alluvium, which is classified as a minor aquifer at the drop shaft site. There would be limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer due to sheet piling. In terms of surface water resources, this site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site. Depending on the design, there could potentially be a direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution via the low level sewer interception chamber and specific mitigation may be required. Ecology This site is considered less suitable for use as a small or large CSO site. It has heightened sensitivity due to the requirement for temporary and permanent land-take from Victoria Embankment Gardens Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation. There would be land-take from London BAP habitat within this site of local importance for nature conservation, which means there would be a requirement for offsite mitigation/ compensation solutions, as well as potentially arduous post-works restoration requirements. Flood risk This site is less suitable for use as a small or large CSO site because works required to construct the interception chamber would likely require alterations to (and replacement of) the existing flood defences along the Victoria Embankment. The site itself is currently defended from flooding from the River Thames. However, further investigation would be required into the feasibility of using sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) onsite. Air quality This site is suitable for use as a small or large CSO site. There is sufficient distance from the site to potential dust-sensitive receptors for there to be a low risk of a perceptible impact at the nearest residential receptors, provided standard dust control measures are in place. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts. However, this can be mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
7.5 7.5.1
7.5.2
7.6 7.6.1
7.7 7.7.1
7.8 7.8.1
Page 10
7.9 7.9.1
Noise This site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site due to the relatively short distances between the site and the nearest residential receptors at Whitehall Court. There is also anticipated to be a fairly large number of vehicles associated with the construction phase and the access route proposed along Victoria Embankment. This may cause an adverse noise impact on residential receptors at Whitehall Court. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers would be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Land quality
7.9.2
7.10
7.10.1 The site is suitable as a small or large CSO site based on the low potential for contamination from historical onsite and offsite activities. 8 8.1 8.1.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT Socio-economic profile The site is within the St Jamess ward of the City of Westminster. Statistics from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of the city of Westminster, London and England as a whole: A higher proportion of people employed in full-time work, fewer people employed part-time and a higher proportion of people unemployed than the London or England average. A higher proportion with high-level qualifications. There is a higher proportion of people aged between 20 and 44. The majority of the people in the ward (approximately 64%) were born in the UK and 59% of people are white British, these proportions are higher than average for the borough and London. Housing tenure data shows that a higher proportion of people rent from housing associations. Private renting is higher than in London or England and fewer people are owner occupiers than the national or London averages. 8.1.2 The statistics show a high proportion of social housing as well as private rented housing, with correspondingly lower owner occupiers. This may indicate a more transient population. Issues and impacts Due to the engineering requirements for both a small and large CSO site in this location, the greatest potential impact from a community perspective appears likely to be temporary disruption to users of the Victoria Embankment Gardens. For a large CSO site, the majority of the gardens would be temporarily lost, while for a small CSO, only about a third of the gardens would be temporarily lost but there is also likely to be major disruption to the remaining gardens surrounding the site. The site visit found the gardens to be very well used for a range of leisure activities and with direct links to the National Liberal Club and Whitehall Court. The site appears to be important for locals and tourists, and the loss of the gardens is likely to have an impact on a large number of people. The gardens are of historical merit in London and there are several plaques and statues relating to this. For the large CSO site, all three statues may need to be relocated to enable use of the site. The loss of the statues and historical park area may impact on the local community and also on any tourists specifically aiming to visit the gardens. The small CSO site would not displace any statues, although it is likely that there will be loss of some landscaped garden space.
8.2 8.2.1
8.2.2
8.2.3
Page 11
8.2.4
The use of the site is likely to lead to the loss of trees on the site which may have acted as a traffic noise barrier to the surrounding buildings. This could lead to increased noise from the road, combined with further noise from the works, thereby compromising the quality of the open space and the space within the buildings for users. For the small CSO site, the increase in noise levels would also affect the use of the rest of the gardens. Residents and businesses operating out of One Whitehall Place, Whitehall Court and the building occupied by the National Liberal Club may also be affected by noise and visual disturbance caused by works. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Introduction This site comprises Victoria Embankment Gardens within the City of Westminster. The site is under consideration for both small and large CSO sites, the principal difference between the two options being the size of the temporary construction site, while the operational phase works are common to both options. From a property perspective, the assessment principles are effectively the same, but comment will be made on specific options in the following sections as appropriate. Crown Land and Special Land comments While no land referencing has been provided, it seems highly likely that the gardens are held by either the City of Westminster, the Mayor of London, or similar. The site is therefore likely to be considered Special Land under Section 17 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. Prior to selecting the site, the responsible authority must be consulted so that it can be established whether there are any fundamental issues arising that might prejudice the practicability of using the land. With the co-operation of the authority, there should be no risk to the project. However, acquisition of the site may involve a special ministerial procedure, with the possibility of delay. The risk is considered to be significantly higher for the large site option as, during the construction phase, effectively the whole of the gardens would be required for the temporary worksite. The land is also public open space and may therefore be classified as Special Land under Section 19 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981. If this is the case, and if an acquisition cannot be agreed, a special parliamentary procedure may be needed before the Order is confirmed, with the attendant risk of delay to the programme. Land to be acquired The compensation assessment assumes that the worksite and access to it would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above. At the end of the works, a smaller area would need to be acquired permanently. For the small site option, the site includes an area towards the northern end of the gardens, located close to one of the statues. This may be sensitive and require a slight redesign when the landowner is contacted. Acquisition would require part of the park to be closed off while under construction. For the large site option, the whole of the gardens would be closed during the construction phase. The existing statues would have to be removed for storage and later reinstated. For both site options, the permanent area required for the operational phase extends to approximately 20m x 20m within the northern part of the gardens. Use of this site for either option would involve the construction of sewer interception chambers in Northumberland Avenue and Victoria Embankment, with connecting culverts.
8.2.5
9 9.1 9.1.1 9.1.2
9.2 9.2.1
9.2.2
9.2.3
9.3 9.3.1
9.3.2
9.3.3 9.3.4 9.3.5
Page 12
9.4 9.4.1
Property valuation comments Compensation for the acquisition of new rights is normally based on the diminution in value to the land caused by the acquisition. Compensation for the permanent acquisition of land is normally based on market value. However, compensation for the permanent acquisition of unusual types of property, where there is no general market, can be assessed on the basis of the cost of equivalent reinstatement at a new site, but there must be a genuine intention to reinstate. If compensation is assessed on a diminution in value basis for the new rights (temporary occupation during works, access rights during works, access rights for operational purposes) and on a market value basis for the permanent acquisition, the costs are likely to be relatively low and therefore acceptable. If compensation is assessed on an equivalent reinstatement basis, then the acquisition costs would be significantly higher, but still acceptable in the case of the small site option. The potential reinstatement costs for the large site option are likely to be significantly higher again, given the location. The gardens are not occupied by any tenant and no operational use other than open space is made of the gardens. No rights of way or easements have been included in the assessment of this site acquisition cost. Disturbance compensation comments There are unlikely to be any disturbance costs associated with acquisition of this site. Offsite statutory compensation comments The location of the site is such that its use should minimise inconvenience and disruption to local residents. The risk that statutory claims would be founded under either Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973 or Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 as a direct consequence of selecting this site is considered to be low. Site acquisition cost assessment The acquisition cost for the small site option is likely to be acceptable. The large site option is likely to incur significantly higher acquisition cost if equivalent reinstatement is required. SITE CONCLUSIONS BY DISCIPLINE Introduction
9.4.2
9.4.3
9.4.4 9.4.5
9.5 9.5.1 9.6 9.6.1 9.6.2
9.7 9.7.1
10 10.1
10.1.1 The conclusions presented in this section are drawn from each disciplines assessment , and are designed to inform the workshop where a final conclusion on whether the site moves forward as one of the preferred sites or not. 10.2 Engineering Large CSO site 10.2.1 This site is less suitable as a large CSO site because even though there would be good vehicular access and the site would be large enough to fit all the site facilities, there would be significant constraints from existing assets, notably the District Line and Circle Line through the site. The interception chamber for the northern LL1 would be outside the site.
Page 13
Small CSO site 10.2.2 The site is also less suitable as a small CSO site. 10.2.3 Whether a large or small CSO site would be appropriate or not for the interception of the Regent Street CSO and to provide relief to northern LL1 through an overflow weir would be considered at the next stage, in conjunction with the drive strategy that is developed in the Engineering Options Report. 10.3 Planning
10.3.1 Sites C22XC and CLLAD are subject to a number of onsite and adjacent sensitive receptors, such as a registered Grade II garden, conservation area, listed buildings and residential properties. The site area is relatively compact and a number of listed structures are spread across the gardens, therefore offering very little flexibility to site the construction works at a distance from these sensitive receptors. 10.3.2 Mitigation, reduced hours of construction and the reprovision of lost onsite facilities may be required if use of the gardens is to gain planning permission. However, the site is considered significantly constrained and the cumulative impact on the applicable planning designations is considered significant. Large CSO site 10.3.3 This site is not suitable as a large CSO site. 10.3.4 This is based on the extensive site size and the resulting cumulative impact on heritage and open space designations, as well as the likely loss of a significant number of mature trees. Small CSO site 10.3.5 This site is considered suitable as a small CSO site 10.3.6 The smaller CSO working area, due to reduced construction impact and with appropriate mitigation, may be suitable for use as an interception site. 10.4 Environment
10.4.1 Overall, the site is less suitable for use as a small or large CSO site, given the substantial environmental constraints identified. 10.4.2 Based on current information, the site is suitable from the perspectives of archaeology, air quality and land quality. 10.4.3 The site is considered less suitable from the perspectives of transport, built heritage and townscape, water resources (hydrogeology and surface water), flood risk, ecology and noise. 10.4.4 Overall, the site is considered to be less suitable, and further investigation would be required as to whether transport, built heritage and townscape, water resources, flood risk, ecology and noise issues could all be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations would include: Transport identifying a temporary traffic management solution to the closure of the TLRN (A3211). A new site access with left-in/left out arrangements would also need to be provided. Built heritage and townscape a high-quality scheme design, screening and landscaping to ensure against adverse impacts to listed structures, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens, protected views and townscape character. Further studies would be required to understand if this is achievable, given the sensitive location of the site.
Page 14
Flood risk and surface water measures to compensate for the potential temporary loss of existing flood defences along the Victoria Embankment and specific mitigation measures may also be required to avoid potential for pollution of the River Thames. Hydrogeology further investigation to determine whether drop shaft construction could take place within the minor aquifer, given that it is in hydraulic continuity with Chalk (major aquifer) and the site is within the catchment zones of two Environment Agency licensed abstractions. Ecology offsite mitigation/compensation solutions to mitigate for land-take from a London BAP habitat within a site of local importance for nature conservation. Noise standard noise barriers are unlikely to be entirely effective, and other techniques may be required to reduce construction noise to acceptable levels. 10.5 Socio-economic and community Large CSO site 10.5.1 From a community impacts perspective, this site appears not suitable for use as a large CSO site. Use of the site appears likely to significantly impact on the gardens and their users, due to the temporary loss of the majority of the site. 10.5.2 The need for permanent hardstanding and other features would make it difficult to reinstate the affected area of gardens to their original layout after the works. Mitigation is likely to involve discussion around reinstatement of the gardens and minimising the impact of the permanent features required on the site. 10.5.3 The impact of the works is likely to be disruptive for people walking along Victoria Embankment and people in the Whitehall Court and the National Liberal Club buildings. Mitigation is likely to require discussions around noise minimisation measures and limiting working hours. Small CSO site 10.5.4 From a community impacts perspective, this site appears less suitable for use as a small CSO site. Use of the site appears likely to impact on the gardens and their users due to the temporary loss of part of the site. 10.5.5 The need for permanent hardstanding and other features would make it difficult to reinstate the affected area of gardens to their original layout after the works. Mitigation is likely to involve discussion around reinstatement of the gardens and minimising the impact of the permanent features required on the site. 10.5.6 The impact of the works is likely to be disruptive to those using the remainder of the gardens, and could impact on people walking along Victoria Embankment and those in Whitehall Court and the National Liberal Club buildings. Mitigation is likely to require discussions around noise minimisation measures and limiting working hours. 10.6 Property
10.6.1 The site is assessed as suitable for a small CSO site, at acceptable acquisition cost. 10.6.2 For the large CSO site option, the site would be less suitable if equivalent reinstatement was required at significantly higher acquisition cost. 10.6.3 If the site is preferred, early consultation with the owner is strongly recommended to establish and monitor resistance to the proposal, which might make for difficult negotiations against the background of Special Land.
Page 15
Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendices
APPENDICES
Page 16
Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 1
APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Engineering Traffic Management and Access Roads/Rail Scott Wilson Access River BMT Third Parties (Shafts/CSOs) Mott MacDonald and AECOM Geology Thames Water Utilities Thames Water and AECOM Construction and Operational Layout Template London Tideway Tunnels Background Technical Paper London Tideway Tunnels Planning City of Westminster online planning applications database Saved policies in the Westminster Unitary Development Plan, adopted in January 2007
Environment Transport Map of Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) - www.tfl.gov.uk Bus Route Maps: North-east, north-west, south-west, south-east - www.tfl.gov.uk Crossrail Plans - www.crossrail.co.uk/crossrail-bill-documents PTAL scores - Obtained from Table 2.3 information Thames Path map - www.walklondon.org.uk Capital Ring - www.walklondon.org.uk Cycle Routes - www.sustrans.org.uk and Local Cycling Guides, 1-14 Design Manual for Roads and Bridge TD 42/95, Highways Agency Built heritage and townscape Westminster Open Spaces Strategy National Monuments Record - for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens Unitary development plans Local authority websites Bing maps Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Environment Agency abstraction licence details Environment Agency groundwater levels Local authority details of unlicensed abstractors
Appendix 1 - Page 1
Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan - www.lbp.org.uk Westminster Biodiversity Action Plan (2007) Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) www.magic.gov.uk - statutory designated sites London Wildweb - http://wildweb.london.gov.uk/ - non-statutory site of importance for nature conservation Black redstart distribution in London - www.blackredstarts.org.uk/pages/ londonmap.html National Biodiversity Network - http://searchnbn.net - distribution of protected species Google Maps - aerial views of habitat features BAP habitats - www.natureonthemap.org.uk Priority habitats and species on national and local scales - www.ukbap.org.uk Flood risk Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck Air quality Local authority websites www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/default.asp?la_id=&showbulletins=&width=1680 www.airquality.co.uk Noise Envirocheck - Identification of receptors Promap - Calculation of distances between site and receptors Multimap - Aerial photography www.multimap.co.uk Defra noise maps - Identification of existing noise levels Land quality Google Maps/Earth Site walkover information
Socio-economic and community Statistics from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) 2001 Census data Whitehall Gardens - www.westminster.gov.uk/services/environment/ landandpremises/parksandopenspaces/whitehall-garden
Appendix 1 - Page 2
Victoria Gardens - www.westminster.gov.uk/services/environment/landandpremises/ parksandopenspaces/veg Site visit found the following commercial uses: One Twenty-One Two Restaurant and Bar and One Whitehall Place Hotel with 280 guestrooms Westminster City Partnership - http://westminstercitypartnership.org.uk/partnerships/ Pages/WCPNetworks.aspx
Property Mouchel referencing data Multimap/Live maps
Appendix 1 - Page 3
APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN
Appendix 2 - Page 1
Printed 09/11/2010
FI D
EN
TI A
CITY OF LONDON
&
Area of Main Map
AF T
Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites
( !
CSO (Directly Controlled)
CITY OF WESTMINSTER CLLAD
CS22X Regent Street CSO
( !
C22XC
0 50 100
200 Metres 300 400
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345
LAMBETH
CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way.
Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-01547 Date : .............2010/04/26 Projection : .....British National Grid
Thames Water Utilities
SOUTHWARK
The Point, 7th Floo r, 37 North Wharf Ro ad, Padding ton, London W2 1AF
Title:
APPENDIX 2 C22XC SITES SITE LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS
Appendix 3 - Page 1
TI AL
EN
Legend
Thames Policy Area
FI D
Protected/Strategic Views MOD Safeguarding Area Central Activity Zones
Background Assessment Areas
Area of Main Map
AF T
Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites CSO (Directly Controlled)
&
! (
CITY OF WESTMINSTER CLLAD C22XC
! (
10
20
40
60
80
Metres
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. (c) Crown copyright and database right 2009. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way.
LAMBETH
This plan is a strategic and standardised overview based on an interpretation of GIS policy and designation layers provided by affected London local authorities. Please refer to the text in the SSRs for the full planning and environment assessments.

The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Title:
APPENDIX 3A C22XC SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN
TI AL
EN
Legend
FI D
Metropolitan Open Land Green Corridor/Chains Open Spaces Flood Zone 2 Flood Zone 3
Area of Main Map
! !
! !
! !
! !
AF T
&
Sites of Metropolitan Nature Conservation Importance
Legend
! (
CITY OF WESTMINSTER CLLAD C22XC
! (
10
20
40
60
80
Metres
LAMBETH

Title:
APPENDIX 3B C22XC SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN
NT
TI AL
Su b
Cr av en
10
LB
25
24
EN
23 22
FI D
BA NK ME PL A NT CE
EM
&
Nigeria House
Bo ro
SB r
Co
1 TCBs 1 to 1
ns
MLW
CC LW
t, G L
AF T
ic er v il S b Civ Clu
13
15
11
DW
GR
CO TS EA
R YA ND LA
D
FB
VICT ORIA
!
4.7m
WH
EMB AN
FB
ITE
HA
LL
PL
E AC
KME NT
en nm iro nv ir s fE ffa to en u r al A tm r R p a an d 10 De od Fo
Cour
URT
ria E m bank
EHAL
Whit
ehall
C22XC
! !
L CO
m en t
CITY OF WESTMINSTER
!ns
G ar de
Victo
WHIT
's Re ach
Ra ilway
r Tha
Statue
4.6m
! !
Mean
High W ater
mes
War Office
4
Rive
ro un d
Whitehall Stairs
(site of)
Statue
Palace Gate
Whitehall Palace
(site of)
HORSE
The Great Hall
(site of)
GUAR
(site of)
DS A VENU
(site of)
Un de rg
King
Queen Mary's Steps
LB
4.6m
!
Ramp
Statue
Boro Cons t, GL A sly Con st & LB Bdy CCLW
Royal United Service Institution
Mu d
Northumberland House
ND A VEN
Co
NOR
THU
UE
Conservation Areas
SL SG an t ry SB r
er f or (F o d Br ot ) id g e
As ly
MBE
RLA
TCB
The Playhouse
ns
Dolphin
Hu
Archaeological Areas
ng
Ri ve
t&
16
LB
TCB
Bd
17 to
21
MLW
23
Registered Historic Parks and Gardens

Embankment Pier
y
rT ha m
Area of Main Map
Royal Commonwealth Society
27
Transport)
(London
Metropole Buildings Ministry of Defence
TCB's
SG an t ry
Navigation Lights
(fixed red)
4.5m
Legend
Local Authority Boundary
Hu ng er f or d Br
! !
Navigation Lights
(fixed red)
MLW
Memorial
Hu
ng
4.9m
Statue
er f
or d
Br
id g
! CS22X Regent Street CSO
e(
id g
fo o
e(
t)
Fo
! (
ot )
Navigation Lights
National Liberal Club
(fixed red)
MP .25
SL
Navigation Lights
(fixed red)
es
Short Listed CSO Sites CSO (Directly Controlled)
(site of)
TCPs
1 Embankment Place
Embankment Station
Legend ! ! Listed Buildings
Sh e
Pa
PH
ss ag e
PL
EM
lt e
Hungerford Stairs
Hu ng e Ho rfo rd us e
ME
BA
ay
NK
AC
Po
lic
eS
i ta t on
SC ND LA OT E AC PL
Hu
ng
er f
York Place
(site of)
CLLAD
Statue
( !!
or d
Br
id g
e(
fo o
t)
10
20
40
60
80
Metres
4.6m
MLW
2a
3
LAMBETH
Chapel
4.6m
rvice ed Se l Unit seum Roya Mu
WHIT L EHAL GARD E NS
Ban qu

et ing
Ho us
Ministry of Defence
Statue
!
4.4m
Title:
!
Memorial
Whitehall Stairs
Whitehall Stairs
APPENDIX 3C C22XC SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN
Gwydyr Hou se
MLW
APPENDIX 4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
Appendix 4 - Page 1
Printed 09/11/2010
FI D
EN
TI A
CITY OF LONDON
Area of Main Map
AF T
Legend
&
( !
CITY OF WESTMINSTER
C22XC

CLLAD
( !
50
100
200
300
400
Metres
LAMBETH

SOUTHWARK
Title:
APPENDIX 4 C22XC SITES AERIAL PLAN
Site Suitability Report C22XC Appendix 4
View of the Victoria Embankment Gardens looking west.
View along Victoria Embankment looking north. The gardens are visible on the left.
Appendix 4
APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN
Appendix 5 - Page 1
FI D
EN
TI A
CITY OF LONDON
CS25X CS26X
Area of Main Map
&
Legend
AF T
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Sites CSO Directly Controlled
( !
CS24X
Transport Access Routes
Transport for London Road Network Thames Path
Transport for London DBFO Network London Cycle Routes Jubilee Walkway
CITY OF WESTMINSTER
C22XC / CLLAD Site access straight on to TLRN
C22XC
CLLAD
( !
0 0.0375 0.075
0.15
Km
0.225
0.3
0.375
LAMBETH
Map Ref : ........... 1PL04-SS-01546 Date : ................. 2010/04/26 Projection : ......... British National Grid

SOUTHWARK
Title:
APPENDIX 5 C22XC SITES TRANSPORT PLAN
NO
1
RTH
LAN
EM
Nigeria House
S
TCBs
A
l ivi Se rv
ice
15
Cl
ub
13
11
GR
T EA
T CO
D AN
YA
OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN
DW
RD
W
FB
HI
H TE
PL LL
BA NK ME
n me n iro nv E irs of ffa t A en al ur rtm a R p d 10 De an d o Fo
NT
EM
EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING
TO RIA
B 4.7m
CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
VIC
ll Co urt
ent G arde n
RT
COU
teha
ALL
ankm
ITEH
Whi
Emb
oria
er T ham es Kin g
WH
Vict
s Re ach
War
ay
Office
C
Statue
Wate r
d Rail w
Riv
Mean
10 m
40 m
groun
Under
4.6m
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
FOOTWAY CLOSURE
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
IL
GT
GT
07.04.10
(site of)
HORSE
Whitehall Palace
(site of)
GUA
The Great Hall
(site of)
RDS
ce Gate
AVE
NUE
4.6m
PEDESTRIAN DIVERSION ROUTE
Chapel
(site of)
Queen Marys Steps
The Point, 7th Floor,
Boro Con st, GL Asl y Const & LB Bdy CCLW
37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:
4.6m
LB
N/A
Project Group:
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
Statue
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT

Drawing Title:
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN REGENT STREERT - C22XC

Drawing No.:
PHASE 4 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Ramp
PLOTTED ON
Royal
20\04\10
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
Thames Tideway Tunnel
X:\Project\371840\CAD\Design Data\CAD Thames\Drawings\Infrastructure\Routewide\100-DE-TRA-C22XC-863002.dgn
c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008
100-DE-TRA-C22XC-863002
1:500
A1
AA
100
150
Whitehall Stairs
Statue
200mm
High
nd House
DA V
ENU
BA N PL KME AC NT E
UM
BER
6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
Hu
MLW TCBs
11 to 14
ng
erf
or
Status:
Br
dB rid ge (fo ot)
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION

Keyplan:
N
THIS DRAWING
Ga
nt
ry SL
Metropole Buildings
4.5m
Ministry of Defence
S Ga nt S ry Br
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36.
MLW
ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
Memorial FB
Hu
ng
NOTES
erf
or
4.9m
t
CSO DROP SHAFT
Statue
dB rid ge (fo ot)
CSO CONNECTION CULVERT
FOOTWAY CLOSURE
THE EXACT LOCATION AND ALIGNMENT OF THE EXISTING CSO AND LOW LEVEL SEWERS ARE TO BE DETERMINED. THESE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE LOW LEVEL SEWER IS LOCATED BENEATH THE SOUTHBOUND CARRIAGEWAY/FOOTWAY OF VICTORIA EMBANKMENT AND THE CSO IS LOCATED BENEATH THE WESTBOUND CARRIAGEWAY OF Navigation NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE.
ND LA OT SC CE
Lights
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. PHASED CLOSURES OF WESTBOUND A308 NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE AND A3211 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT. FOUR PHASES OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT REQUIRED FOR PHASE ONE, TRAFFIC DIVERTED VIA HORSE GUARDS AVENUE AND A3212 WHITEHALL. NO RIGHT TURN RESTRICTIONS TO BE REMOVED AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL RE-PHASED AS NECESSARY. LANE CLOSURES ONLY FOR PHASES TWO TO THREE. FOOTWAY CLOSURES ALSO NECESSARY, DIVERSIONS VIA EXISTING CROSSING POINTS PROVIDED.
A PL
E AC
SUSPENSION OF COACH PARKING AS NECESSARY
2. 3.
4. INDICATIVE AREA OF EXCAVATION
PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 18-20 MONTHS PHASE 1 - 4-5 MONTHS PHASE 2 - 2-3 MONTHS PHASE 3 - 2-3 MONTHS PHASE 4 - 4-5 MONTHS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 4 LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION CHAMBERS
York Place
(site of)
STOCKYARD, STORES AND WORKSHOP
Statue
4.6m
LOW LEVEL SEWER CONNECTION CULVERT
2a
3.25m RUNNING LANE THROUGH WORKS
KEY
AREA OF ROAD/ FOOTWAY CLOSURE
SITE AREA
SUSPENSION OF COACH PARKING AS NECESSARY
AREA OF ACCESS ONLY
TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE
MLW
AREA OF TEMPORARY WORKS
AREA OF EXCAVATION (INDICATIVE)
ALTERNATIVE ACCESS ROUTE
TE WHI
Roy ic Serv nited al U e
Ban quet ing
HAL NS RDE L GA
Hou se
APPENDIX 6 SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN
Appendix 6 - Page 1
Printed 09/11/2010
1
2401 2402 AH
2
3409
6
Status: 14.9m
2535
N
3408 IL-0.97m
York Water
GEOLOGY
0767
Hungerford House
6.8m

N
VT RWH 2511 FB 1404 2534 IL4.32m RWH 1402 2518 NF 2519 2512 2524 3404 CL9.87m
(Site of)
TUE IL-2.36m 5431 3405 SE

Embankment
PC
Keyplan:
CL4.87m IL-0.86m VMH LS CL5.58m IL-0.21m 4404
Ground level 105 (m OD + 100)
DRAWING LOCATION
102 (m OD + 100) Base of Made Ground TUE NF LUL NORTHERN LINE LOOP and Superficial
PCs
Dolphin
SE RWH TUE
Theatre
80MM KM IL-1.04m IL-2.4m MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
IL1.85m 4301 5432
nd Buildings
2523
2307 RWH 2521 IL-0.7m
1301 VMH
3304 SE
AV
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
2518 IL1.97m
Hungerford Stairs
(site of)
Base of London Clay Formation

Embankment
67.00 (m OD + 100)
NOTES: 1. LIMITED FIBRE OPTIC AND BT COMMUNICATION CABLES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. DETAILS OF THESE CABLES AND OTHER SERVICES AND THIRD PARTY ASSETS TO BE CONFIRMED BY FURTHER STUDIES AND UTILITY SEARCHES. 2. INVERT LEVEL OF SHAFT SHOWN. BASE OF CONSTRUCTION WILL BE BELOW THIS LEVEL AND WILL DEPEND ON CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE. THIS IS ONLY PROVISIONAL AS DESIGN IS AT EARLY PRELIMINARY STAGE.
2526 RWH CAPPED IL1.25m 2527 VT IN SUBWAY 2528 RWH BS 1310

TCB 2303 SE RWH 2529
1 Embankment Place
Commonwealth
Transport)
IL-2.4m 4302
Festival Pier
Suggested invert level of shaft 60.93(m OD + 100)
3306 TUE SE IL0.51m
2532
IL1.46m
CL6.5m
Embankment
Base of Lambeth Group

Dolphin
49.00(m OD + 100)
VT DH CL6m NF IL-1.37m DH EV
LUL NORTHERN LINE
Northumberland House
DH IL0.66m
ST NF STEPS IL0.2m 2531 IL-1.8m

TCBs
MLW
1311 DH
House
Base of Thanet Sand Formation 39 (m OD + 100)
DH 4237 Metropole Buildings IN SUBWAY 2530 VMH LS
IL-2.36m
4216 SE
4.5m
(fixed red)
062 STEPS IL-0.98m
3222 SE
DH
FB
4213 SE
PS VT WW FV
LEGEND
DC 3386 4206 MLW
Navigation Lights
B
IL1.15m 0300
1201 SE
FV SE
POST OFFICE TUNNEL
FOUL WATER
WO
CHEL.HYD. CON17
Statue
SURFACE WATER
4.9m
IL1.12m
CLEAN WATER
2219
1613 VMH LS 3"RWH CL4.12m IL1.41m 3"RWH
2210
(fixed red)
South Bank
MP .25
GAS
2217 SE PS PS
DH FV CON190N
FIBRE OPTICS CON16
3207 SE
IL-2.38m
SL
Chalk TELECOMMUNICATIONS
1614 1208 ZBV036164 DH
(fixed red)
LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
1669
Royal Festival Hall

VT WW PS IL-2.33m
3218 SE
York Place
FV FV 3214 SE
HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES
DB EXISTING TUNNELS SYNTHETIC GEOLOGICAL PROFILE DERIVED FROM THE BGS LONDON LITHOFRAME50 MODEL, HISTORICAL BOREHOLES AND BERRY (1979). PLEASE NOTE, GROUND CONDITIONS MAY VARY AND THIS DATA SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DETAILED ENGINEERING PURPOSES
IL-2.45m IL-2.45m
DH
Statue
SL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
WATER - ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS
C22XC
IL-1.58m LS VMH CL4.69m IL-1.53m 1668
IL-2.29m
SITE BOUNDARY
Statue
STORM & FOUL SEWERS
HFR019
OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS: TELECOMS ELECTRICITY - ONLY FIBRE OPTIC CABLES - HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES - LARGE BANKS OF LOW VOLTAGE CABLES - LOW PRESSURE ABOVE 300mm DIAMETER - INTERMEDIATE, MEDIUM OR HIGH PRESSURE 200mm 0 100 m SCALE 1 : 1000
Iss Description Dsgnr Chkd Appd Date
2104 SE
IL-1.52m
GAS
C
3"RWH VT VT IL-2.22m
Statue
8103 10 m
2102 VMH HW
Whitehall Palace Palace Gate
(site of)
HW
3"RWH BAKERLOO LINE
2110 1003 0252

(site of)
2101 SE
3"RWH 3101
VMH
0253 2111
Steps Car Park
500
1105
3005 3006
4.6m
LB
Revision History
0321
IL-1.18m
SE 6002
PS IL1.52m
AA
DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
AG
DD
GT
26.03.2010
DISTRICT & CIRCLE LINE IL-2.2m 6001 SE
2001
IL-1.26m VT
3"RWH
166
Royal United Service
Kings Gate
1001
CHEL.HYD.
7001
Statue
Ministry of Defence
IL-1.28m 100
Centre
Memorial
3001 SE
Embankment
DH
0306
4.4m Whitehall Stairs
IL-2.17m
115
1903 RWH
(site of)
Statue
3902 SE
Jubilee Gardens
N/A
Project Group:
OS
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
Ministry of Defence 2268
1904 1909 0358

Embankment
LTTDT
Location / Town:
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

(Whitehall
DC
3901 SE
Site Name:
1905
3918 SE
Statue
Project Name:
Extension)
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
IL-1.47m
Statue
IL-2.05m DC
Landing Stage
IL-1.38m
London Eye
3.9m

Drawing Title:
1906 1601 1143 x 762
Statue Monument
CON15
SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN REGENT ST - C22XC

7901
Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
20\04\10
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
3697 IL-1.71m x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\cs22x\100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162001.dgn IL-1.71m
3903 SE
LVHTCABGWF
WFGHV
484
100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162001
1:1000
A1
AA
150
SW
SWFGHV
APPENDIX 7 CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT
Appendix 7 - Page 1
6
TCB
N
Status:

Keyplan:
N
MLW
DRAWING LOCATION
House
A
TCBs
(fixed red)
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Metropole Buildings
4.5m
ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
CSO FLAP VALVE CHAMBERS
MLW
FB
4.9m
CSO DROP SHAFT 9m I.D.
Statue
CSO CONNECTION TUNNEL
EGRESS
(fixed red)

400m 50m LUL BAKERLOO LINE SECONDARY CRANE 100m
REGENT ST SEWER
50m CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION BY STANDARD INTERCEPTION CHAMBER UNLIKELY TO BE VIABLE. DESIGN TO BE DEVELOPED AND AGREE D
KEY: LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION CHAMBER ENTRY EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING AREA
York Place
PRIMARY CRANE STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES
OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN
Statue
CSO DROP SHAFT, CSO CONNECTION CULVERT, PRIMARY CRANE, SECONDARY CRANE AND CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 1500m DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
SITE BOUNDARY AREA= 8403m
10 m
100 m
SCALE 1 : 1000
LUL DISTRICT AND CIRCLE LINES
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
AG
DD
GT
26.03.2010
Statue
Whitehall Palace
100 LOW LEVEL SEWER NO.1
(site of)
Steps
D 4.6m
LB
Location Code:
OS Reference:
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
OS
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT REGENT ST - C22XC - SMALL SITE

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
20\04\10
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\cs22x\100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162002.dgn
100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162002
1:1000
A1
AA
150
200mm
6
TCB
N
Status:

Keyplan:
N
MLW
DRAWING LOCATION
House
A
TCBs
(fixed red)
Metropole Buildings
4.5m
CSO FLAP VALVE CHAMBERS
MLW
500m
FB
4.9m
Statue
CSO CONNECTION TUNNEL
(fixed red)

1200m
LUL BAKERLOO LINE SECONDARY CRANE
REGENT ST SEWER
CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION BY STANDARD INTERCEPTION CHAMBER UNLIKELY TO BE VIABLE. DESIGN TO BE DEVELOPED AND AGREE D
KEY: EGRESS LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION CHAMBER EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING AREA
York Place
PRIMARY CRANE STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES
1000m OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN
Statue
CSO DROP SHAFT, CSO CONNECTION CULVERT, PRIMARY CRANE, SECONDARY CRANE AND CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 1500m DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
SITE BOUNDARY AREA= 8403m
10 m
100 m
1000m
SCALE 1 : 1000
LUL DISTRICT AND CIRCLE LINES
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
AG
DD
GT
26.03.2010
Statue
ENTRY
Whitehall Palace
100 LOW LEVEL SEWER NO.1
(site of)
Steps
D 4.6m
LB
Location Code:
OS Reference:
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
OS
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT REGENT ST - C22XC - LARGE SITE

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
20\04\10
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162012
1:1000
A1
AA
150
200mm
APPENDIX 8 OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT
Appendix 8 - Page 1
6
TCB
N
Status:

Keyplan:
N
MLW
DRAWING LOCATION
House
A
TCBs
(fixed red)
Metropole Buildings
4.5m
MLW
FB
4.9m
PERMAMNENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS
10m HIGH VENILATION COLUMN
Statue
CSO CONNECTION TUNNEL 2m x 0.6M x 1.5m HIGH ELECTRICAL CONTROL KIOSK
(fixed red)

6m x 4m TOP STRUCTURE @ GROUND LEVEL ACCESS
LUL BAKERLOO LINE
REGENT ST SEWER
SECONDARY CRANE
B
6.8m x 3.8m INTERCEPTION CHAMBER LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION BY STANDARD INTERCEPTION CHAMBER UNLIKELY TO BE VIABLE. DESIGN TO BE DEVELOPED AND AGREE D
ACCESS
PENSTOCK ACCESS LOW LEVEL SEWER INTERCEPTION CHAMBER 3m x 3m FLAP VALVE CHAMBERS @ GROUND LEVEL
York Place
PERMANENT ACCESS
PENSTOCK ACCESS
Statue
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATIONAL PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
10 m
100 m
SCALE 1 : 1000
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
DRAFT - FIRST ISSUE
AG
DD
GT
26.03.2010
Statue
Whitehall Palace
100
(site of)
Steps
D 4.6m
LB
Location Code:
OS Reference:
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
OS
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT REGENT ST - C22XC

Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
20\04\10
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-C22XC-162003
1:1000
A1
AA
150
200mm
6
VENTILATION COLUMN (CSO)
Status:
WORK IN PROGRESS
Keyplan:
N
A
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND 107m (AOD +100) REMOVABLE COVER ABOVE WEIR (LOCKABLE) DATABASE RIGHT 2008. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
NOTE:
4m
3m
6m
1. STRUCTURE TO BE PROTECTED BY REMOVABLE HANDRAILS IN THE TEMPORARY CASE. 2. POSITION OF COVERS ARE VARIABLE WITHIN 10m FROM THE EDGE OF THE STRUCTURE, AND THE LOCATION IS BASED ON SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT 3. CLADDING OF VENTILLATION BUILDING TO SUIT LOCATION AND AESTHETICS. 4. ALL TOP STRUCTURES TO HAVE:ACCESS STAIRS/LADDER TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT HAND RAILING 5. ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. GROUND LEVEL
10000
5m
REMOVABLE COVERS ARE SPLIT UP INTO SECTIONS AND SUPPORTED BY BEAMS, WHICH ARE ALSO REMOVABLE
1m DIA
SCALE 1:50
DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF TOP STRUCTURE ABOVE CSO SHAFTS ELECTRICAL CONTROL KIOSK (CSO)
- - - - - - 1500 - - AB DRAFT-SECOND ISSUE IL RS

Dsgnr
GT DS
Chkd
GT CH
Appd
27-11-09 - 22-05-09
Date
AA DRAFT-FIRST ISSUE
Iss Description
60
2000
N/A
Project Group:
---
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
WASTE LONDON N/A 50

THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
SCALE 1:25
GENERIC ELEVATION AND TOP STRUCTURE FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - CSO SITES
Drawing No.:
PLOTTED ON
04\12\09
BY
Andy.Purdy
LOCATION :
x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DH-GEN-00000-000001.dgn
100-DH-GEN-00000-000001
NTS
A1
AB
100
150
200mm
VARIBLE DEPENDING ON
APPENDIX 9 ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL TABLES
Transport Site considerations Comments Access to road network Site located in Victoria Embankment Gardens and would access onto the TLRN, Victoria Embankment (A3211). The site requires the construction of a construction site access and egress, in addition to a permanent site access. The access/egress points would have left-in/left-out arrangements due to the central reservation on Victoria Embankment (A3211). The site accesses/egress would require the removal of mature trees in the park and on the footway, in addition to street furniture. Access would also require removal of the park boundary fence. Victoria Embankment (A3211) and Northumberland Avenue are subject to a 30mph speed limit and are street lit. Victoria Embankment (A3211) would require closure for the construction of the low level sewer interception. Direct access onto the TLRN (A3211) is achievable for northbound travel. This route however, is heavily congested throughout the day. The low level interception chamber for the site is located in the shared foot/cycleway (used by Thames Path) which requires the temporary closure of the foot/cycleway. It is likely that a larger area including part of the Victoria Embankment southbound carriageway would also require closure during the construction of the interception chamber. In addition temporary closure of the northbound carriageway may be required for construction of the connection tunnel. A temporary crossing would need to be provided to the south to Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions The proposed site accesses/egress provide direct access to the TLRN (A3211), and would have left-in/left-out arrangements. The access points identified would also require the removal of mature trees and street furniture in both cases. Victoria Embankment (A3211) would require closure for the construction of low level sewer interception and combined sewer interception chamber respectively.
Appendix 9 - Page 1
Transport Site considerations Comments allow users to cross the road and bypass any closure. The Thames Path would need to be diverted and several loading/coach parking bays would require removal to accommodate the new crossing. See Transport Access Plan in Appendix 5. Access to river Site within close proximity to the river, although river access not essential as excavated material would be transported to a main site by road. Use of rail is unlikely to be required due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site. Potential rail access at Charing Cross station during off peak and night periods, although significant constraints and issues with loading would exist. Distance 0.6km to rail access point from site and 2.1km from rail access point to site. River access not essential as excavated material would be transported to a main site by road. Use of rail is unlikely to be required due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site. If required, route to potential rail link at Charing Cross station is possible although it passes through high street areas and is heavily congested throughout the day. Potential rail access at Charing Cross station during off peak and night periods, although significant constraints and issues with loading would exist. Potential for some parking onsite. No suitable parking available in the vicinity for workforce. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Access to rail
Parking
Potential for some parking onsite for workforce, but limited on street parking within the vicinity of the site due to Victoria Embankment being red route. Surrounding roads have residential permit holder parking restrictions. PTAL 5-6 (high), as identified within Table 2.3. Construction of the low level sewer and connection tunnel would require closure of Victoria Embankment. A section of the foot/cycleway used by the Thames Path must be closed to allow for the construction of the sites interception chamber. It is likely that a larger area including part of the Victoria Embankment southbound carriageway would also require closure during the construction of the interception
Public transport accessibility Traffic Management
Good potential for workforce to utilise public transport to access site. Construction of a construction site access, in addition to a permanent site access with left in/left out arrangements. Closure of Victoria Embankment required for construction of low level interception chamber. Several on street loading/coach parking bays require removal. Trees and street furniture would require removal.
Appendix 9 - Page 2
Transport Site considerations Comments chamber. In addition the northbound carriageway would require temporary closure for construction of the connection tunnel. The footway and Thames Path therefore require a temporary diversion to accommodate the high number of pedestrians that currently use the foot/cycleway. The provision of a temporary crossing approximately 30-40m south of the existing crossing would allow pedestrians and cyclists to use the footway on the western side of the road. The existing crossing on Victoria Embankment can then be used to rejoin the foot/cycleway beyond the closure. Several on street loading/coach parking bays require removal. Construction of site accesses/egress with left-in/left-out arrangements. Trees and street furniture would require removal. Summary The site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site as it would require closure of part of the TLRN for the construction of the interception chamber. The site accesses directly onto the TLRN, Victoria Embankment (A3211). It requires the construction of a construction site access and egress in addition to a permanent site access with left-in/left-out arrangements. This may require the removal of mature trees to enable access. Temporary traffic management is required for the closure of Victoria Embankment (A3211), the resulting footway diversions and the construction of the site accesses/egress. Rail access is possible, although the use of rail transport is unlikely to be required due to the small volumes of excavated material produced from a CSO site. The site is located within close proximity to the river, although river access is not essential for CSO sites. Some parking could be provided onsite for the workforce. Parking on surrounding roads is unsuitable due to the red route and permit holder restrictions. However, there is good potential for the workforce to use public transport to access the site. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 3
Archaeology Site considerations Comments Designations, including Archaeological Priority Areas Summary of historical uses The site is within the Westminster Archaeological Priority Areas. The site is historically within the Registered Park of Victoria Embankment Gardens. The main historical feature of the gardens is the water gate at its north west corner, built in 1626 as the triumphal entry to the Thames for the Duke of Buckingham. The water gate was part of York House, which once stood on the site, the home to the Archbishops of York, before becoming the Duke's residence. Although the water gate is in its original position, because of the embankment of the Thames, it is now 330 feet from the edge of the river. No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. A WWII concrete pill box is located in the south east corner of the site. No other archaeological receptors of medium are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of Medium value being within the site. Construction impact of potential waterlogged deposits containing archaeological remains may cause dewatering. This potential impact should be considered given the site is in close proximity to the River Thames. A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium value with the potential to be directly affected
A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected
Appendix 9 - Page 4
Archaeology Site considerations Comments Extent of existing disturbance (if known) The construction of the Victorian Sewer through the site location would have disturbed archaeological remains of an earlier date to a large extent. Borehole data in the area suggests made ground of 4m some of which could be archaeological in nature. The gardens were created in 1874 after Sir Joseph Bazalgette built the northern intercept sewer and the northern embankment of the river Thames. Victoria Embankment Main Garden formerly Adelphi Gardens was the second of the four gardens to be created. The gardens as a whole are the home to numerous statues and monuments to the great and the good as well York House Watergate which marks where the River Thames originally ran prior to the building of the intercept sewer. With the currently available information it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Detailed design proposals, and an outline method statement would be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts, and to inform mitigation proposals. Summary Based on current information this site is suitable as a small or large CSO site, as no archaeological receptors are shown to be present. It is possible that archaeological receptors of high or medium value could be located on or near the site. While no direct evidence has been revealed peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have been commonly recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the River Thames. Given the location of the site, and wider evidence for historical occupation along the river, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest waterlogged remains of archaeological value may be present. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions A detailed desk based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Potential issues
Mitigation methods could include: Review/production of existing desk based assessments Production of deposits model Archaeological monitoring of geotechnical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation.
Appendix 9 - Page 5
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Designations including Conservation Areas, including trees Listed Buildings Dover House, Grade I: 175m 25 Whitehall, Grade II: 215m 37 & 39 Whitehall, Grade II: 215m Whitehall House, Grade II: 210m 55 Government Offices, Grade II* 140m Gwydyr House, Grade II*: 140m 55 Government Offices, Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food: Grade II*: 220m Admiralty House, Grade I: 215m The National Liberal Club, Grade II*: 0m War Office, Grade II*: 60m Former Paymaster Generals Office, Grade II*: 210m Horse Guards, Grade I: 190m Treasury Buildings, Grade I: 190m Hungerford House, Grade II: 105m Trafalgar Buildings, Grade II: 240m Northumberland House, Grade II: 140m 9 Northumberland Avenue, Grade II: 130m 1,2 Robert Street, Grade II*: 240m 3 Robert Street, Grade II*: 235m Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions In the case of listed buildings, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens and protected views, a high quality scheme design and adequate screening for the development may be required, as discussed below. A detailed desk-based assessment in conjunction with archaeology work would be required to further determine the likely impact of the development and to inform more detailed mitigation proposals. On the basis of currently available information (August 2009) and on the basis of certain receptors not being present within 250m of C22XC, mitigation would not be applicable in the case of locally listed buildings and locally listed parks and gardens.
Appendix 9 - Page 6
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Whitehall Court, Grade II*: 0m 21 John Adam Street, Grade II: 240m Nos. 27 and 29, John Adam Street, Grade II: 205m Charring Cross Station Hotel, Grade II: 210m 1 Craven Passage, Grade II: 205m Nos. 2 and 3 Craven Passage, Grade II: 160m Nos. 11 and 12, Grade II: 180m Nos. 13 and 14, Grade II: 160m No 15, Craven Street, Grade II: 160m Playhouse Theatre, Grade II: 40m Nos 25 to 30 (consec), Craven Street, Grade II: 90m No. 31, Craven Street, Grade II: 125m No. 32, Craven Street, Grade II: 130m Nos 33 and 34, Craven Street, Grade II: 140m No. 35 Craven Street, Grade II:155m No. 36 Craven Street, Grade II: 165m No. 37 Craven Street, Grade II: 170m No. 38 Craven Street, Grade II: 180m No. 39 Craven Street, Grade II: 180m No. 40 Craven Street, Grade II: 200m No. 41 Craven Street, Grade II: 205m Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 7
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Harrington House, Grade II*: 200m 8 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 210m 9 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 200m 10 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 190m 11 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 185m 12 Buckingham Street, Grade I: 180m 13 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 175m 14 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 150m 17 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 195m 18 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 200m 19 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 210m 20 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 220m 21 Buckingham Street, Grade II*: 235m York Watergate, Buckingham Street, Grade I: 175m 22 Buckingham Street, Grade II: 235m Nos. 6 and 7 York Buildings, Grade II: 225m No. 1 Great Scotland Yard, Grade II: 210m Ministry of Defence, Grade I: 20m 1-8 Richmond Terrace, Grade II: 220m The Admiralty and Admiralty Screen: 220m Thirty-Four Catenary Lamp Standards, Victoria Embankment, Grade II, varying distances. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 8
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Banqueting House, Grade I: 125m Royal United Services Institute, Grade II*: 125m Statue of Sir Wilfred Lawson, Grade II: 230m Imperial Camel Corps Memorial, Grade II: 230m Statue of Field Marshal Viscount Wolseley, Grade II: 235m Statue of the Field Marshal Earl Haig, Grade II: 160m Statue of Sir Bartle Frere, Grade II: 0m Statue of General Gordon, Grade II: 25m Statue of the eight Duke of Devonshire, Grade II: 145m Plimsoll Memorial, Grade II: 0m Memorial to Sir W S Gilbert, Grade II: 110m Statue of Sir Walter Raleigh, Grade II: 190m Royal Air force Memorial Whitehall Stairs, Grade II: 85m Statute of Lord Trenchard, Grade II: 145m Memorial to Sir J Bazalgette, Grade II: 30m Queen Marys steps and fragment of Whitehall Palace, Grade I: 30m Forecourt railings, gates and guardhouses to Horseguards, Grade I: 190 K6 Telephone Kiosk by Hungerford Bridge, Grade II: 90m Statue of Field Marshall Earl Roberts, Grade II: 225m Richmond Terrace Balustrade and 5 lamps on it, Grade II*: Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 9
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments 220 Statue of William Tyndale, Grade II: 0m Cadiz Memorial, Grade II: 230m Statue of Sir James Outram, Grade II: 0m Statue of the Duke of Cambridge, Grade II: 180m Gateway and railings across south end of street with retaining wall steps down to Victoria Embankment Gardens, Grade II: 180m Embankment wall cast iron lamp standards, Victoria Embankment, Grade II: 30m Locally Listed Buildings There are no locally listed buildings within 250m of C22XC. Conservation Areas South Bank Conservation Area: 155m Savoy Conservation Area: 30m Trafalgar Square Conservation Area: 35m Adelphi Conservation Area: 140m Whitehall Conservation Area: 0m (whole site located within conservation area). Registered Historic Parks & Garden St Jamess Park, Grade I, 235m Victoria Embankment Gardens, Grade II*: 0m. Locally Listed Parks and Gardens Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 - Page 10
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of the development site. Protected Views King Henry VIIIs Mound, Richmond Park: 0m Westminster Pier to St. Pauls Cathedral: 230m Parliament Hill to Palace of Westminster: 220m Primrose Hill to Palace of Westminster: 200m Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly affected There is potential for six listed structures, one protected view, one conservation area and one registered historic park and garden to be directly impacted upon by the development. The proposed location of structures within the current work site would not have a direct impact on any of the listed structures (Statue of Sir Bartle, Plimsoll Memorial, Statue of William Tyndale, Statue of Sir James Outram, The National Liberal Club) located within the site. However, construction of the low level sewer inception sewer could have a direct impact upon the listed Embankment wall and associated lamp standards on Victoria Embankment. The proposed development would also directly impact on Whitehall Conservation Area, the Grade II* listed Victoria Embankment Gardens Registered Historic Park and Garden and King Henry VIIIs Mound, Richmond Park Protected View Mitigation in the form of a high quality and sensitive scheme design and/or screening would be extremely difficult to achieve due to the sensitive nature of the site. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential Not Applicable Not Applicable Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
There is potential for 86 listed buildings including eight Grade I, 23 Grade II*, one protected view, four conservation areas and one registered park and garden to be indirectly affected
Of the 86 listed structures identified only 7 would potentially be indirectly affected, these include a selection of the collectively listed thirty four catenary lamp standards, the playhouse
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments to be indirectly affected by the development proposals. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions theatre, the statue of general Gordon, the National Liberal club (Grade II*), Royal Air Force Memorial Whitehall stairs, memorial to Sir J Bazalgette, Queen Marys steps and fragment of Whitehall Palace (Grade I). The three protected views are located outside of the development site and would therefore not be visually impacted upon and as such would not require mitigation. Of the conservation areas identified only the Savoy Conservation Area, Trafalgar Square Conservation Area and South Bank Conservation Area would be visible to and from the development site. Mitigation in the form of a high quality and sensitive scheme design and/or screening would be extremely difficult to achieve due to the sensitive nature of the site. The Grade I listed St James Park Registered Historic Park and Garden is not located within the visual envelope of the site and as such would not require any mitigation. Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Not Applicable Not Applicable
Sensitive landscape character areas likely to be affected, including trees and TPOs
Site in Thames Policy Area, Site in Conservation Area, site is Open Space site of Local Importance, site is designated as Metropolitan Open Land. Sensitive site in Victoria Embankment Gardens, Ministry of Defence and other administrative buildings to the west, River Thames and the London Eye to the east, Charing Cross Railway Station, Hungerford Rail Bridge, and the rest of the Victoria Embankment Gardens to the north, The Great Hall
Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to re-instate or enhance the character of the Gardens and relate to the river frontage. This site is in a sensitive river front location with prominent landmarks in the vicinity, hence, is not suitable. The proposals
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments and southern part of the Victoria Embankment Gardens to the south. The removal of mature vegetation on the site would increase openness. The presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the Gardens and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas and the River. Permanent elements would have an adverse impact on the character of the open space and that of the River and its frontage. Potential views likely to be affected Part of site in Strategic View 9 in the London View Management Framework. Open views from within the Gardens and Hungerford Bridge. Partially interrupted views from the River, Ministry of Defence, Victoria Embankment, Horse Guards Avenue, Northumberland Avenue and Whitehall Place. During construction, the cranes could intercept the Strategic View, and be visible from the properties listed above, Waterloo Bridge, and Westminster Bridge, and possibly visible from St. James Square, and The Mall. Permanent elements mainly visible from within the Gardens, and the Ministry of Defence. Seasonal views from the River, Victoria Embankment, Horse Guards Avenue, Northumberland Avenue and Whitehall Place. During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimize visual impact. Design of finished appearance of top structure and ventilation column to be given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant. Integrated landscape scheme in the Gardens to enhance visual amenity and reduce visual impact. This site is not suitable since part of it lies in the Strategic View 9 of the London View Management Framework and the cranes could intercept the View. The proposals would have an adverse visual impact on the Park and its surroundings, both, during construction and operation. The temporary works area spreads across the Gardens; hence, the magnitude of the visual impact is greater. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions would have an adverse impact on the character of the Gardens and the River frontage and its surroundings. The temporary works area spreads across the Gardens which would have a further adverse impact on its character.
Built heritage and townscape Site considerations Comments Particular considerations on sites where new permanent structures are required Permanent structures at C22XC have the potential to directly impact upon six listed structures, one protected view, one conservation area, one registered historic park and garden and also to have an impact upon the local townscape character and local views. Construction and operation of the development could result in a direct impact upon six listed structures, one protected view, one conservation area, one registered historic park and garden and indirect impacts upon seven listed structures, three conservation areas, the local townscape character and local views. Mitigation is highly unlikely due to the development sites sensitive location. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation in the form of a high quality and sensitive scheme design and/or screening and landscaping would be extremely difficult to achieve due to the sensitive nature of the site.
Potential issues
Due to development sites sensitive location, suitable mitigation is likely to be extremely difficult to achieve satisfactorily.
Summary
The site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site due to the potential direct and indirect adverse impacts it would have on a small number of listed structures, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens and protected views. The site would also potentially severely and adversely impact both the townscape character and local views, during both construction and operation. Due to the highly sensitive location of the site, mitigation to reduce these potential adverse impacts upon all of these receptors would be difficult to satisfactorily achieve.
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments Hydrogeological conditions (Groundwater and Surface Water) From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (4m) London Clay (35m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet Sand (10m) Hydrogeology Piezometric Level in Chalk Aquifer: ~ -41 mAOD (~47mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater Monitoring Location EA Hydrometry Sites: No hydrometry site nearby Watercourses Adjacent to River Thames SPZs and groundwater users SPZ Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA EA Licensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No public water supply borehole within 2km radius 25 licensed abstraction borehole within 2km radius
Licence Numbers: 1. 28/39/42/0069 (4 boreholes) 2. 28/39/42/0004 (2 boreholes) 3. 28/39/39/0236 (1 borehole)
Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions The drop shaft would be constructed to an invert level of approximately 45.07mbgl therefore the shaft would be founded (1) in the Lambeth Group. Piezometric head in Chalk is approximately 1.93m below the base of the construction. If the shaft depth was to go deeper or piezometric head was found to be higher, then dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design.
A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the 400 days travel times of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows:
Licensed abstraction boreholes 1. 452m 2. 165m 3. 203m 4. 472m 5. 241m
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments

4. 28/39/39/0232 (2 boreholes) 5. 28/39/39/0229 (1 borehole) 6. 28/39/39/0228 (1 borehole) 7. 28/39/39/0224 (4 boreholes) 8. 28/39/39/0223 (1 borehole) 9. 28/39/39/0212 ( 2 boreholes) 10. 28/39/39/0209 (1 borehole) 11. 28/39/39/0139 (2 boreholes) 12. 28/39/39/0138 (2 boreholes) 13. 28/39/39/0046 (1 borehole) 14. 28/39/39/0006 (2 boreholes) Locations: 1. 395m southeast of the site 2. 1.26km northeast of the site 3. 421m northwest of the site 4. 1.87km southwest of the site 5. 1.79km northeast of the site 6. 1.99km northwest of the site 7. 511m southwest of the site 8. 1.77km southwest of the site 9. 480m northwest of the site 10. 1.49km southwest of the site 11. 1.99km southwest of the site 12. 1.73km northwest of the site 6. 313m 7. 564m 8. 388m 9. 156m 10. 101m 11. 311m 12. 85m 13. 85m 14. 113m
Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
The shaft is located within the catchment areas of two abstractions (28/39/42/ 0069 and 28/39/39/0224). These abstractions are from the Chalk aquifer.

13. 771m southwest of the site 14. 868m west of the site Operator: 1. The South Bank Board Limited 2. Beetham Landmark London Ltd 3. St Martin-In-The Fields Limited 4. Terrace Hill (Wilton Road) Nominee No 1 & No 2 Limited 5. Global Grange Limited 6. Caprice Holdings Limited 7. Corporate Officer Of The House Of Commons 8. London Underground Ltd 9. The National Gallery 10. Westminster Gardens Limited 11. Panoramic Management Co Ltd 12. Great Capital Partnership (G.P.) Limited 13. The Central Hall 14. Army & Navy Club Abstracted Aquifer Unit: 1. information pending 2. information pending 3. information pending 4. information pending 5. information pending 6. information pending

7. Chalk 8. information pending 9. Chalk 10. Chalk 11. Chalk 12. Chalk 13. Chalk 14. Chalk 15. Chalk Abstraction Purposes: 1. Industrial, commercial and public service (business parks - non evaporative cooling and general use relating to secondary category) 2. Private water supply (process water and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 3. Industrial, commercial and public service (heat pump) 4. Industrial, commercial and public service (non-evaporative cooling) 5. Industrial, commercial and public service (hotels, public houses and conference centres - drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 6. Private water supply (non-evaporative cooling) 7. Industrial, commercial and public service (public administration -non evaporative cooling and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 8. Industrial, commercial and public service (transport - non-evaporative cooling) 9. Industrial, commercial and public service (holiday sites, camp sites & tourist attractions - evaporative cooling and drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 10. Private water supply (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing)

11. Industrial, commercial and public service (non evaporative cooling) 12. Industrial, commercial and public service (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 13. Industrial, commercial and public service (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) 14. Industrial, commercial and public service (drinking, cooking, sanitary, washing) Abstraction Quantity (annual): 1. 257,000m3 2. 34,095m3 3. 52,000m3 4. 280,000m3 5. 73,000m3 6. 123,462m3 7. 400,000m3 8. 189,216m3 9. 30,558m3 10. 12,810m3 11. 121,510m3 12. 9,126m3 13. 136,364m3 14. 15,911m3
Local Authorities (LA) Unlicensed Groundwater Abstractions and Details No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Westminster Council Boundary
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments No abstraction borehole within 1km radius inside Lambeth Council Boundary Borehole locations and depths There are 35 historical records of water wells: 48 deep wells and 11 shallow wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 65.0 244.14m Depth range: 7.7 17.37m Potential impacts on surface water features The site is located adjacent to the River Thames. The site is behind flood defences so the pollution risk is through drainage to the Thames. Depending on the design, there could potentially be a direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution via the Low Level Sewer Interception Chamber. Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality) Impact may be expected on groundwater at depth since the drop shaft is to be constructed in Lambeth Group (minor aquifer) which is in hydraulic continuity with Chalk. The proximity of the shaft depth to the piezometric surface in the Chalk means that if the shaft depth was to go deeper or piezometric head was found to be higher, then dewatering may be required during construction. At shallow depth, the shaft is located in Alluvium which is classified as a minor aquifer. Limited impact on shallow aquifer if water is excluded from the excavation by sheet piling. Mitigation may be required as construction of the shaft would take place within the 400 day capture zone of two EA licensed abstractions. If the shaft depth was to go deeper or piezometric head was found to be higher, then the dewatering required may affect these two licensed abstractions. See below (likely types of mitigation measures that would be required). Work needs to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23. Not applicable Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Likely types of mitigation measures that would be required
Possible provision of alternative groundwater supply
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Comments Potential issues The drop shaft to be excavated in Lambeth Group above piezometric head in Chalk. If the shaft depth was to go deeper or piezometric head was found to be higher, then dewatering may be required during construction. Limited impact on flow in shallow aquifer due to sheet piling. Summary In terms of hydrogeology, this site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site because the drop shaft is to be constructed in Lambeth Group (minor aquifer) which is in hydraulic continuity with Chalk (major aquifer). Additionally, the site lies within the catchment area of two Environment Agency licensed abstraction boreholes. The proximity of the shaft depth to the piezometric surface in the Chalk means that if the shaft depth went deeper or the piezometric head was found to be higher, dewatering may be required during construction. The Chalk piezometric head may potentially need to be considered in the engineering design. The superficial deposits are Alluvium which is classified as a minor aquifer at the drop shaft site. There would be limited impact on flow in the shallow aquifer due to sheet piling. In terms of surface water resources, this site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site. Depending on the design, there could potentially be a direct pathway to the River Thames for pollution via the Low Level Sewer Interception Chamber and specific mitigation may be required. Notes (1) Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions Piezometric head in Chalk may potentially need to be considered as part of geotechnical design.
Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Comments Statutory designations Non-statutory designated wildlife sites None within 2km Site is adjacent to River Thames & Tidal Tributaries SMI. This site covers Victoria Embankment Gardens: Whitehall Garden site of Local Importance. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions None required No landtake from the river or foreshore is anticipated. Care would need to be taken to avoid discharge or run-off into the river. Works would require compensatory habitat provision. There is likely also to be post-works restoration required. BAP priority habitats Foreshore consists of BAP habitat mudflats. The Tidal Thames is a London BAP habitat The site comprises London BAP habitat Parks, Squares and Amenity Grassland. Protected or otherwise notable species within the Study Area There is a possibility of trees onsite being used by roosting bats. No direct impact on aquatic receptors. No further issues identified No landtake from the river or foreshore is anticipated. Care would need to be taken to avoid discharge or run-off into the river. Loss of parkland habitat would require compensatory provision. In the very unlikely events of bat roosts being found to be present, mitigation would be required, possibly including offsite provision. None required. Potential issues Summary Not applicable
This site is considered less suitable for use as a small or large CSO site. It has heightened sensitivity due to the requirement for temporary and permanent landtake from Victoria Embankment Gardens Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation. There would be landtake from London BAP habitat within this Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation, which means there would be a requirement for offsite mitigation/compensation solutions as well as potentially arduous post-works restoration requirements.
Flood risk assessment Site considerations Comments Flood Risk Zone The majority of the site is in Flood Zone 3a (1 in 200 year flood extent) but defended to the 1 in 1000 year flood level there is a residual risk of a breach for which mitigation would need to be considered as part of the FRA. However, some of the work on the Low Level Sewer Interception Chamber would likely require alterations to the flood defences on the Victoria Embankment. Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible according to table D.2 of PPS25. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions An FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site. Mitigation would be required to provide temporary flood defence replacement for works on the interception chamber which affect the current defences along the embankment. Temporary defences would have to be implemented during construction to the same standard of protection to that of the current defences. Post construction, replacement defences would be required (to the same standard of protection as current) but also allow for the future raising of the defences to provide protection against increases in tidal level likely as a result of climate change. Not applicable
Assessment of conditions for SuDS
There is space for SuDS, although the site is already developed and the geology is silty, peaty, sandy clay, which may not be suitable for infiltration SuDS. More investigation is therefore needed to determine whether this site has the potential for SuDS. No further issues identified
Potential issues Summary
Not applicable
This site is less suitable for use as a small or large CSO site because works required to construct the interception chamber would likely require alterations to (and replacement of) the existing flood defences along the Victoria Embankment. The site itself is currently defended from flooding from the River Thames. However, further investigation would be required into the feasibility of using Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) onsite.
Air quality Site considerations Comments AQMA Sensitive Receptors The air quality objectives for NO2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties, and a hospital located on the A4. The nearest residential properties are located some distance from the site. Existing traffic issues Existing sources of significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring Potential issues The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A4, A400, A3212 and A3211 corridors. See above. There is no data at likely access to A3211 and the nearest existing data indicates existing exceedance of AQLV. The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is low. Summary Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. There are few relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route the construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works.
Additional vehicle emissions have a moderate potential to interfere with local air quality action plan policies. See above. Collect a minimum of 6 months diffusion tube data at site access to the A3211 or other point of access to major road network. Minimise HGV movements on the local road network during the peak hour. Standard dust control measures would minimise the effect of fugitive dust on nearby sensitive receptors.
This site is suitable for use as a small or large CSO site. There is sufficient distance from the site to potential dust sensitive receptors for there to be a low risk of a perceptible impact at the nearest residential receptors provided standard dust control measures are in place. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts. However, this can be mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
Noise Site considerations Comments Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Information from Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of between 58 and 63 dB LAeq and night-time noise levels of between 50 and 55 dB LAeq at residential properties located at Whitehall Court next to the proposed site. The residential properties at Whitehall Court which face the site are likely to experience moderately high daytime and night-time noise levels due to the A400 and the mainline railway serving Charing Cross Station. Noise levels from the Defra noise maps provide an indication of prevailing noise levels only, and would not be employed in any detailed assessments for chosen sites. Sensitive Receptors There are sensitive receptors located to the west of the site at Whitehall Court. These consist of 8 storey high residential dwellings. Sensitive receptors at Whitehall Court are located at a distance of approximately 4m from the sites western boundary. The site is also adjacent to Victoria Embankment Gardens The site access route is proposed to be from Victoria Embankment and may give rise to an adverse noise impact from HGV traffic on receptors at Whitehall Court. Existing traffic issues Existing sources of significant noise emissions Local road traffic, including the road traffic on the A400 to the north. Local road traffic, including the road traffic on the A400 to the north and the mainline railway serving Charing Cross Station would contribute to the local noise climate in the area. Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable
Noise Site considerations Comments Potential issues Construction: The construction period is estimated at 0.5 to 2 years and working hours would be 12 hours (7am 7pm) Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to any sensitive receptors in close proximity to the site. A relatively high number of daily HGV movements are anticipated. This number of vehicle movements is likely to result in adverse noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors at Whitehall Court. The immediate site area is relatively large and, whilst the shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant in the eastern area of the site would maximise the distance between them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities however it would not provide any attenuation to higher floor levels at residential flats located at Whitehall Court. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed shaft location are at a distance of approximately 15m and it is unlikely that vibration levels would result in minor cosmetic damage during shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case by case basis at particular sensitive locations. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Siting of noisy equipment and construction activities as far as is practicable from sensitive receptors. Provision of site boundary noise fences.
Noise Site considerations Comments Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and top chamber should not result in adverse noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Summary This site is less suitable as a small or large CSO site due to the relatively short distances between the site and the nearest residential receptors at Whitehall Court. There is also anticipated to be a fairly large number of vehicles associated with the construction phase and the access route is proposed along Victoria Embankment. This may cause an adverse noise impact on residential receptors at Whitehall Court. Any shielding afforded by the site perimeter barriers would be largely ineffectual due to the height of these receptors. Small and large Mitigation required and conclusions
Land quality Site considerations Site location Current site use Grid reference: 530340, 180193 100% of site is used as a public garden. It is a well-maintained public open space used by locals, pedestrians, tourists as a thoroughfare and general place to have lunch and relax. There are several sections of the garden that are being prepared for new flower beds and plantings. There was no indication of any future development or planning of site. Flat gardens adjacent to Victoria Embankment (A3211) and River Thames. There were no observed odours on the site. There were two piles of rubbish neatly piled near the small wood rubbish bins. North: Northumberland Avenue, sports activity commercial shop, entrance via stairwell to Hungerford bridge East: A3211, partial view of London Eye, ship/cafe South: Horse Guards Avenue, Victoria Embankment Gardens West : National Liberal Club, One Twenty-One Two restaurant terrace overlooking site Adjacent to the east of the site is the A3211 and Victoria Embankment. An iron fence with extensive greenery (including trees, shrubs, bulbs, bushes and summer bedding) encloses the gardens from the A3211, blocking the view of the road and Thames river. Adjacent to the west of the site is the National Liberal Club, a large, period building with commercial premises that include a terrace that directly overlooks and connects into the site via a locked gate. Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata
1
Small and large
Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site)
Geology (thickness) Superficial Geology and Made Ground (4m) London Clay (35m) Lambeth Group (18m) Thanet Sand (10m)
Land quality Site considerations Underlying aquifer classes Non-Aquifer: London Clay Minor Aquifer: River Terrace Deposits, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sands, Harwich Formation Major Aquifer: Chalk Groundwater vulnerability/ Soil classification (High/Intermediate/Low/ 2 Not applicable) Source Protection Zone details Surface water receptor Not located in a Source Protection Zone defined by EA River Thames (35m east) River Terrace Deposits - Minor Aquifer High Leaching Potential of Soils (U)
1.
Small and large
Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site Historical potentially contaminating activities Onsite Historical maps show the land use has remained unchanged since 1882. The site is shown as being open land/gardens since 1882. Offsite Metropolitan District Railway, later shown as Underground railway (8m east) 1882 present Tanks including potential fuel related tanks to the west and northwest of the site (closest 27m west) 1888 - 1964 Railway lines (37m north) 1882 present Historical building plans listing numerous incidents of asbestos west, southwest and north of the site (closest 41m north) 1946 1970 Above ground fuel tanks west and northwest of site (closest 50m west) Hungerford Bridge (60m northeast) 1882 present Three Electrical substations (61m west, 103m southwest, 120m north) 1952 - 1964 Charing Cross Station (70m northwest) 1882 present Whitehall Stairs (97m southeast) 1882 present Charing Cross Pier (105m northeast) 1896 present
Land quality Site considerations War Office (125m west) 1938 present Royal United Service Museum (130m southwest) 1966 present York Buildings (180m north) 1896 present Whitehall (200m west) 1896 present Swimming Bath (210m northeast) 1896 1898 Treasury Buildings, later Cabinet Office (223m southwest) 1896 - present Horse Guards Parade (235m west) 1882- present Buildings later listed as Government Buildings (Ministry of Defence) (28m south, 30m west, 156m west) 1896 present New Scotland Yard (250m south) 1896 - present Pollution incidents to controlled waters Two: Unknown sewage, minor incident (18m east) Oils unknown, minor incident (188m southeast) Landfill sites Other waste sites Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/Depots Contemporary trade directory entries None None None None Four: Charing Cross Station, active (70m northwest) Government Buildings, active (closest 28m south) Museum, active (130m southwest) New Scotland Yard, active (280m south) Small and large Historical building plans listing oil use and oil storage (closest 113m north) 1958 - 1966
Land quality Site considerations Site classification based on above information Activity Potential site contaminants derived from surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site 1) Not applicable as site remains unchanged natural ground. Distance and direction to site 1) Not applicable as site remains is unlikely to contain significant quantities of Made Ground 1) closest 27m west 2) 37m north 2) Railway operations 3) closest 61m west 3) Electrical Substations 4) 70m northwest 4) Charing Cross Station (including made ground) Potential contamination pathways to site (Conceptual Site Model)
3
Small and large
Contaminants 1) Not applicable as site remains is unlikely to contain significant quantities of Made Ground 1) TPH, Metals, PAHs, Solvents 2) Metals, , TPH, PAHs, 3) PCBs 4) Metals, TPH, PAHs
1) Underground/above ground storage tanks
Source 1 A1, A3, B4, C5 Source 2 D6, E1, F7 Category 1 Assessed as Low Risk The site is suitable as a small or large CSO site based on the low potential for contamination from historical onsite and offsite activities.
Contamination category Summary Notes:
1. From BGS Geological Model giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river. 2. Soil information for urban areas is based on fewer observations than elsewhere in the country. Therefore a worst case vulnerability (H) is assumed until proven otherwise. 3. Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathway-receptors.
Contacts
For information about the Thames Tideway Tunnel Call: 0800 0721 086 Lines are open 24 hours a day Visit: www.thamestidewaytunnel.co.uk Email: info@tidewaytunnels.co.uk For our language interpretation service call 0800 0721 086
For information in Braille or large print call 0800 0721 086

For information about acceptance of our application and the examination process please contact the Planning Inspectorate. Call: 0303 444 5000 Visit: http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD: Victoria Embankment Gardens

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD: Victoria Embankment Gardens

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

100-RG-PNC-C22XC-900001 | Spring 2010

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

SITE SUITABILITY REPORT C22XC AND CLLAD

SITE INFORMATION 2.1 2.2 Site and surroundings Type of site

9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

4 4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2

5.4 5.4.1 6 6.1 6.1.1

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

9 9.1 9.1.1 9.1.2

9.3.3 9.3.4 9.3.5

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

9.5 9.5.1 9.6 9.6.1 9.6.2

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendices

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 1

APPENDIX 1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 1

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 1

Property Mouchel referencing data Multimap/Live maps

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN

Area of Main Map

CSO (Directly Controlled)

CITY OF WESTMINSTER CLLAD

CS22X Regent Street CSO

200 Metres 300 400

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-01547 Date : .............2010/04/26 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities

APPENDIX 2 C22XC SITES SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Suitability Report C22XC and CLLAD Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLANS

Thames Policy Area

Protected/Strategic Views MOD Safeguarding Area Central Activity Zones

Background Assessment Areas

Area of Main Map

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-01456 Date : .............2010/03/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities

APPENDIX 3A C22XC SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

Sites of Metropolitan Nature Conservation Importance

Map Ref : .......1PL04-SS-01458 Date : .............2010/03/25 Projection : .....British National Grid

Thames Water Utilities

APPENDIX 3B C22XC SITES PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN

Queen Mary's Steps

Boro Cons t, GL A sly Con st & LB Bdy CCLW

Royal United Service Institution

Registered Historic Parks and Gardens

Royal Commonwealth Society