110 RG PNC C33XV 000609

Autumn 2011
Site suitability report C33XV and CL004 or CL005

Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road or Phoenix Wharf
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.
110-RG-PNC-C33XV-000609 | Autumn 2011
Site suitability report C33XV and CL004 or CL005

Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road or Greenwich Pumping Station and Phoenix Wharf
Site suitability report C33XV and CL004 or CL005 - Greenwich Pumping Station
Thames Tunnel Site suitability report C33XV

List of contents
Page number
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Purpose and structure of the report ......................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................. 1 Consultation............................................................................................. 2 Site and surroundings .............................................................................. 2 Type of site .............................................................................................. 4
Site information ................................................................................................ 2 2.1 2.2
3 4
Proposed use of site construction phase ................................................... 5 Proposed use of site operational phase ..................................................... 6 4.1 4.2 Introduction .............................................................................................. 6 Restoration and after-use ........................................................................ 7 Access ..................................................................................................... 7 Construction works considerations .......................................................... 8 Permanent works considerations............................................................. 9 Health and safety..................................................................................... 9 Introduction .............................................................................................. 9 Planning applications and permissions.................................................... 9 Planning context .................................................................................... 10 Planning comments ............................................................................... 13 Introduction ............................................................................................ 15 Transport ............................................................................................... 16 Archaeology........................................................................................... 17 Built heritage and townscape................................................................. 17 Water resources hydrogeology and surface water ............................. 18 Ecology .................................................................................................. 18 Flood risk ............................................................................................... 19 Air quality ............................................................................................... 19
Engineering assessment ................................................................................. 7 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4
Planning assessment ...................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4
Environmental appraisal ............................................................................... 15 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8
7.9 7.10 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 10 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7
Noise ..................................................................................................... 19 Land quality ........................................................................................... 19 Introduction ............................................................................................ 20 Socio-economic profile .......................................................................... 20 Issues and impacts ................................................................................ 21 Introduction ............................................................................................ 22 Crown land and special land comments ................................................ 23 Land to be acquired ............................................................................... 24 Property valuation comments ................................................................ 25 Disturbance compensation comments................................................... 26 Discretionary purchase costs comments ............................................... 26 Offsite statutory compensation comments ............................................. 27 Site acquisition cost assessment ........................................................... 27 Introduction ............................................................................................ 27 Engineering ........................................................................................... 28 Planning................................................................................................. 28 Environment .......................................................................................... 29 Socio-economic and community ............................................................ 30 Property ................................................................................................. 31 Next steps in the site selection process................................................. 32
Socio-economic and community assessment............................................. 20
Property assessment ..................................................................................... 22
Site conclusions by discipline ...................................................................... 27
Appendices ............................................................................................................. 33 Appendix 1 Sources of information Appendix 2 Site location plan Appendix 3 Planning and environment plans Appendix 4 Photographs of the site and surroundings Appendix 5 Transport plan Appendix 6 Services and geology plan Appendix 7 Construction phase layout Appendix 8 Operational phase layout Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables
ii
List of tables
Page number
Table 3.1 Construction phase data ............................................................................ 6 Table 4.1 Operational phase data ............................................................................. 7
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 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
iii
TLRN TPA UDP UXO
Transport for London Road Network Thames Policy Area unitary development plan unexploded ordnance
iv
Site suitability report C33XV
1 1.1
1.1.1
Introduction Purpose and structure of the report

The Site selection methodology paper (May 2009 and revised August 2011) a outlines the process to be used to create the preferred list of main tunnel sites, and this process also applies to CSO sites. Paragraph 2.3.31 lists the type of general considerations that will be addressed in each site suitability report. Whether a consideration is relevant to the assessment of a site will depend on available information and professional judgement. This report was prepared through the assessment of information from the perspective of a number of technical disciplines: engineering, planning, environment, property and community. The reports have been prepared on the basis of the information listed in Appendix 1 and this level of information is considered to be appropriate to this stage of assessment. The Site selection background technical paper provides information on the requirements for different types of sites, their sizes and typical activities/ facilities within the sites. Each site suitability report considers a particular site on its own merits. In addition, an Engineering options report was produced, which relates to main tunnel and connection tunnel options. Information from both of these reports will feed into the technical assessment of how well the site may fit in with tunnel design options, ensuring combinations of sites spread across the length of the tunnel route provide a reasonable spatial distribution of sites (that will best assist with the construction of the tunnel, operation and maintenance). The outcomes are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.2
1.2.1
Background
The process for selecting sites is set out in the Site selection methodology paper. All sites have previously passed through the following parts of Stage 1: Part 1A Creation of the long list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites Part 1B Creation of a short list of potential main tunnel (and CSO) sites o o o Table 2.2: Long list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites an assessment against set considerations and values Table 2.3: Draft short list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites assessment against a list of more detailed considerations Workshops to consider each site to arrive at a short list of sites.
The amendments made in August 2011 do not change the site selection methodology process. The amendments only related to the introduction of a second phase of consultation (paragraphs 2.3.13-2.4.15) and minor factual updates.
Page 1
Site suitability report C33XV 1.2.2 The final part of Stage 1 includes this report. The following is an overall summary of all elements that apply to all the sites on the final short list: Part 1C Creation of the preferred list of main tunnel (and CSO) sites site data, site visits, site suitability reports, engineering options report and optioneering workshops that are reported in the Phase two scheme development report.
1.2.3
The Site selection methodology paper also contains a provision for a back-check process in paragraph 2.5.6 that states: If any sites for any of the main tunnel sites or intermediate sites (or CSO site) are eliminated for any reason, if there are significant changes of circumstances in relation to existing sites or combinations of sites, if new or replacement sites are required or found or if the engineering design develops in unexpected ways then a targeted repeat of stages 1-3 will need to be undertaken in order to fill in any site gaps.
1.3
1.3.1
Consultation
Thames Waters approach to engagement and consultation for the Thames Tunnel project is outlined in the Statement of Community Consultation and the accompanying Community Consultation Strategy. Thames Water has engaged regularly with all potentially affected London local authorities, other stakeholders and interested parties on sites and the project. Phase one consultation has been completed for all the preferred and shortlisted sites along with the three main tunnel route options. The analysis of the consultation responses is set out in the Report on phase one consultation and Interim engagement report. Any relevant site comments were considered at the post phase one consultation optioneering workshops. The outcomes of these workshops are reported in the Phase two scheme development report. After the workshops, engagement on sites has continued with key stakeholders, and the engineering design for sites has also continued in parallel. In autumn 2011, phase two consultation will provide another opportunity for people to comment on sites.
1.3.2
2 2.1
2.1.1
Site information Site and surroundings

This site is one of the shortlisted sites for Greenwich Pumping Station 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. Site C33XV is the Thames Water Greenwich Pumping Station and adjacent area of land between the pumping station and the elevated railway. C33XV is being considered in combination with two additional sites: Greenwich Industrial Estate, Norman Road to the east (Option1) and Phoenix Wharf to the north (Option 2). The site is also being considered on its own to intercept the CSO only without additional extra
2.1.2
Page 2
Site suitability report C33XV land to receive the connection tunnel (Option 3). All options are located within the London Borough of Greenwich. A site location plan is attached as Appendix 2. 2.1.3 C33XV is the Thames Water Greenwich Pumping Station grounds and a strip of land to the north beyond the Thames Water site, currently in use as a scaffolding contractors yard and a public footpath, between the elevated DLR line and the railway viaduct. The site is bounded to the south by Greenwich High Road, to the east by Norman Road and to the northwest by Deptford Creek. To the southwest lies land currently under development as residential property and to the southeast is a three-storey office building, Norman House, which fronts Norman Road. The site is surrounded by a mix of uses, with industrial and commercial uses to the north, east and west, and residential dwellings to the south. The Greenwich Pumping Station site comprises a large pumping station building and two large coal sheds. Both of these structures are listed. There are a small number of smaller ancillary buildings on the site which are not listed. To the south of Greenwich High Road lies the Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area, which comprises a small number of locally listed buildings, and to the north of the site is a railway viaduct, which is also listed. Greenwich Pumping Station can be accessed from both Greenwich High Road and Norman Road. A footpath and cycleway run through the site to the north of Greenwich Pumping Station, between the DLR line and the railway viaduct. The footpath and cycle path both run across Deptford Creek into the London Borough of Lewisham. There is road access to the site via Norman Road (B208), which is off the Greenwich High Road (A206), and also direct from Greenwich High Road through the existing main entrance to the pumping station. Greenwich railway station and Greenwich DLR station are near the site. Deptford Creek runs along the northwest of the site and this appears to be navigable during high tide. However, there are height restrictions caused by the road bridge (Creek Road, A200, although this bridge can be lifted) and width restrictions caused by the railway bridge and footbridge adjacent to the pumping station. There are boats that appear to be permanently moored behind the coal sheds to the west of the pumping station. A transport plan for the site is attached as Appendix 5.
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.1.6
Norman Road (CL004)

2.1.7 Option 1 considers the use of Greenwich Pumping Station in combination with Norman Road. The site at Norman Road is currently known as Greenwich Industrial Estate and lies opposite Greenwich Pumping Station, to the east of Norman Road. The site is currently vacant and subject to a planning application for mixed-use development. The site comprises a number of industrial units bounded to the north by an electricity substation which lies adjacent to the DLR line, to the east by Waller Way and to the south by buildings fronting Greenwich High Road, which comprises a mix
Page 3
Site suitability report C33XV of uses including a community centre, public house, commercial units and residential dwellings. The site is accessed from Norman Road.
Phoenix Wharf (CL005)

2.1.8 Option 2 considers the use of Greenwich Pumping Station in combination with Phoenix Wharf, which lies to the north of Greenwich Pumping Station. Phoenix Wharf is bounded to the north by large industrial uses, to the east by Deptford Creek and to the west by Norman Road. The southern boundary of the site lies beneath the listed railway viaduct, north of the DLR line. Phoenix Wharf is currently used as a builders merchant yard and is accessed from Norman Road. The sites considered within this report are within a number of areas designated in the Greenwich Unitary Development Plan (2006), including an area of archaeological potential. All the mapped designations, where data was available, are shown on the planning and environment plans in Appendix 3. Photographs of the site and surroundings, together with aerial photographs of the sites, are attached as Appendix 4. A number of preliminary transport plans for the site are attached as Appendix 5. Third-party assets and significant utilities are listed below and are shown on the services and geology plans in Appendix 6: 2.1.13 Greenwich Pumping Station building and associated sewers 110-114 Greenwich High Road, Norman House three-storey building DLR Deptford Creek Viaduct within the site Elevated railway lines immediately to the north of the site Multi-storey flats to the immediate west of the coal sheds, currently under construction.
2.1.9
2.1.10 2.1.11 2.1.12
The locations of other third-party assets, such as BT and fibre optic communication cables, are to be confirmed by further studies and utility searches and may not be shown on the services and geology plan. 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 Chalk.
2.1.14
2.2
2.2.1
Type of site
The site is being considered as a CSO site to intercept the incoming sewers to Greenwich Pumping Station and two potential different functions: as a 5m diameter, long connection tunnel drive site as a 5m diameter, long connection tunnel reception site.
2.2.2
Due to the constraints of the existing operational pumping station buildings and other structures, Greenwich Pumping Station (C33XV) is not sufficient
Page 4
Site suitability report C33XV on its own as a long connection tunnel drive site, therefore it is being considered in combination with two other sites, as follows: 2.2.3 Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road Option 2 C33XV and CL005: Greenwich Pumping Station and Phoenix Wharf.
Option 3 is to consider Greenwich Pumping Station to intercept the CSO but without the extra land to receive a long connection tunnel.
3
3.1.1
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: Option 1 the layout as a CSO site with a large diameter, long connection tunnel drive site and additional logistical land at Norman Road. Option 2 the layout as a CSO site with a large diameter, long connection tunnel drive site and additional logistical land at Phoenix Wharf. Option 3 the layout as a CSO site with a large diameter, long connection tunnel reception site. Potential access points for these options.
3.1.2
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).
3.1.4
3.1.5
Preliminary data associated with the construction phase are provided in Table 3.1.
Page 5
Site suitability report C33XV Table 3.1 Construction phase data Option 1 and Option 2: CSO with large diameter, long connection tunnel drive site 4 5 years Option 3 CSO CSO with large diameter, long connection tunnel reception site 2 4 years
Activity
Length of construction period Likely working hours (ie, night/day/weekend)/ working days tunnelling activities all other activities Primary means of transporting excavated material away from site Primary means of transporting materials to site
24 hrs/Mon Sun 12 hrs (7am to 7pm)/ Mon Sat Road*
n/a 12 hrs (7am to 7pm)/ Mon Sat Road
Road*
Road
*There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for Option 2.
4 4.1
4.1.1
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. For all options, all of the operational structures would be within the Thames Water Greenwich Pumping Station site (C33XV). No permanent structures would be left within either CL004 or CL005, as these sites would be only be used to support the construction activities on C33XV. 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. The underground infrastructure at this site would likely comprise an interception chamber, double flap valve chamber and a drop shaft with access openings. The above-ground infrastructure would likely comprise a ventilation column and electrical kiosk. The top structure to the drop shaft is envisaged to be finished to a minimum level of 104.5m tunnel datum (TD) (4.5mAOD) and since the mean ground level of this site is 103.5mTD (3.5mAOD), the top structures would finished approximately 1m above ground level. The top structure is to provide access and egress into the drop shaft and flap valve chamber.
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5 4.1.6
Page 6
Site suitability report C33XV 4.1.7 A hardstanding would be provided to the top structures. The site would be contained within the existing fence line of the Greenwich Pumping Station site. Preliminary data associated with the operational phase are provided in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 Operational phase data Level of inspections and maintenance and likely working hours, ie, (night/day/ weekend) frequency of visits No. of traffic movements One daytime visit every six months for electrical/instrument inspection. An additional one-week maintenance period for tunnel/shaft inspection required per ten years that could be night/day/weekend working. One van visit every six months. An additional one-week period of two to ten movements per day (estimated several vans and two cranes) every ten years.
4.1.8
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.
5 5.1
5.1.1
Engineering assessment Access

This section should be read in conjunction with Section 7.2.
Road (all options)

5.1.2 For the construction phase, the site would be accessed via Norman Road (B208) for HGV traffic. Light vehicles would access the site from the entrance on Greenwich High Road. For the operational phase, the permanent works can be accessed from Norman Road or direct through the (Thames Water owned) pumping station site off Greenwich High Road.
5.1.3
Rail (all options)

5.1.4 Greenwich railway station and DLR Greenwich Station would be near the site, but material transport is not considered to be practical. However, rail access is not considered to be a significant factor for CSO sites.
River (all options)

5.1.5 River access and jetty/wharfage facilities are not a requirement for CSO sites, but would be a possibility for Option 2. The pumping station site is
Page 7
Site suitability report C33XV adjacent to Deptford Creek, which could provide an opportunity for using barge transport, but the width restriction created by the railway bridge would limit the use of barges to 100 tonne barges, which would not be sufficient to move the required quantities of excavated material, given the limited tidal period when the creek is navigable. Option 2 does include wharfage on Phoenix Wharf downstream of the railway bridge, with fewer restrictions.
5.2
Construction works considerations Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
5.2.1 5.2.2
Demolition of existing buildings on the Greenwich Industrial Estate would be required. Data available on third-party assets and significant utilities show that the main items in this area of concern are the Greenwich Pumping Station, Norman House (a three-storey building), DLR Deptford Creek Viaduct and the elevated railway, which are in close proximity to the drop shaft location. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. In particular, the proximity of the drop shaft to the viaduct is a significant issue. The interception chamber and connection culvert to the drop shaft would both be within the site and therefore require no additional consideration. As the site would be split by Norman Road, slurry from the tunnelling operations would need to be pumped across Norman road, either in a buried pipe or a pipe bridge. It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme.
5.2.3 5.2.4
5.2.5
Option 2 C33XV and CL005: Greenwich Pumping Station and Phoenix Wharf
5.2.6 5.2.7 Demolition of existing buildings on the land to the north of the elevated railway viaduct may be required. Data available on third-party assets and significant utilities show that the main items of concern with this option would be the same as those in Option 1. The interception chamber and connection culvert to the drop shaft would both be within the site and therefore require no additional consideration. As the site would be split by the elevated railway, it should be possible to pump slurry from the tunnelling operations through a pipe that would run through one of the railway arches. It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme.
5.2.8 5.2.9
5.2.10
Page 8
Option 3 C33XV: CSO site with a large diameter, long connection tunnel reception site
5.2.11 5.2.12 No demolition is required. Data available on third-party assets and significant utilities show that the main items in this area of concern are the Greenwich Pumping Station, Norman House (a three-storey building) and DLR Deptford Creek Viaduct. Construction methods would be adopted, as appropriate, to mitigate potential settlement of these assets. In particular, the proximity of the drop shaft to the viaduct is a significant issue. The interception chamber and connection culvert to the drop shaft would both be within the site and therefore require no additional consideration. However, the interception chamber could potentially require more room to construct and this would impact on the excavated material storage area. Hence, relocation of the excavated material to the adjacent position would be viable, while reducing the internal material movements within the site. It is likely that the proposed works can be constructed within the overall construction programme.
5.2.13
5.2.14
5.3
5.3.1
Permanent works considerations

The top structures to the drop shaft and flap valve chamber would be 1m above ground level.
5.4
5.4.1
Health and safety

Construction movements would need to be co-ordinated with the operation of the pumping station and with appropriate safety considerations, if this were used for egress. There are no other unusual health and safety issues with this site.
5.4.2
6 6.1
6.1.1
Planning assessment Introduction

The planning assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Planning applications and permissions Planning context Planning comments.
6.2
6.2.1
Planning applications and permissions

An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Greenwich online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to the Greenwich Pumping Station site (site C33XV) itself. However, a planning application (11/0848/F) has been approved by the London Borough of Greenwich for a mixed-use, four- to five-storey development comprising ground floor
Page 9
Site suitability report C33XV retail/commercial units with 11 flats above to the south of Greenwich Pumping Station, and planning consent for a 150-room hotel development has been partially implemented to the west of the pumping station (ref 09/0092/F). These developments would increase the number of receptors sensitive to noise, dust and vibration associated with construction activities on site. 6.2.2 A planning application (ref 11/0271/F) for the mixed-use redevelopment of Greenwich Industrial Estate, Norman Road (CL004), to be used in combination with Greenwich Pumping Station in Option 2, was submitted in 2010. This application is for 181 residential units, 358 student residential units, 1,332sqm of education/office floorspace, 1,382sqm health club/leisure floorspace, 11 incubator/start-up business units totalling 635sqm, 200sqm extension to the rear of the Greenwich West Community Centre, a 360sqm nursery, 480sqm of retail foodstore floorspace and 37sqm caf/bike shop, a 104-bed, 3-star hotel and a 30-room boutique hotel and associated restaurant (which includes external works to the existing North Pole public house), together with an onsite energy centre, improvements to the existing public realm at Waller Way and new public realm, public art and onsite landscaping. A total of 57 car parking spaces plus two car club spaces and 439 cycle spaces would be provided. A resolution to grant planning permission has been passed by the London Borough of Greenwich; however, as this application is large enough to be considered a strategic planning application, this resolution is subject to referral to the Mayor of London for a decision. An initial desktop search of the London Borough of Greenwich online planning applications database did not identify any planning applications submitted within the last five years applicable to Phoenix Wharf (CL005).
6.2.3
6.3
6.3.1
Planning context
The current local statutory development plan for the London Borough of Greenwich comprises the saved policies from the Greenwich Unitary Development Plan, adopted in July 2006. The planning designations and policies that are applicable to the sites are detailed below.
Designations and policies applicable to Greenwich Pumping Station (C33XV), Greenwich Industrial Estate and Phoenix Wharf
6.3.2 6.3.3 All the sites under consideration are located wholly within an area of archaeological potential. Policy D30, Archaeology, states that the council will expect applicants to properly assess and plan for the impact of proposed developments on archaeological remains where they fall within areas of archaeological potential as defined on the constraints Map 10. In certain instances, preliminary archaeological site investigations may be required before proposals are considered. The council will seek to secure the co-operation of developers in the excavation, recording and publication of archaeological finds before development takes place, by use of planning conditions/legal agreements, as appropriate.
Page 10
Site suitability report C33XV 6.3.4 Policy D31 states that at identified sites of known archaeological remains of national importance, there will be a presumption in favour of the physical preservation of the remains in situ and to allow for public access and display, and to preserve their settings. For sites of lesser importance, the council will seek to preserve the remains in situ but where this is not feasible, the remains should be investigated, excavated and removed from the site, or investigated, excavated and recorded before destruction. Appropriate conditions/legal agreements may be used to ensure this is satisfied. The sites are wholly or partially located within an area at risk of a one-ina-hundred years tidal flooding event (but protected by existing defences against a one-in-a-1,000-years event until 2030; works ongoing to extend protection to 2100) (UDP Map 7, Flooding and Attenuation Area). Policy E19 ensures, in consultation with the Environment Agency, that new developments safeguard existing tidal and fluvial defences. Where works are carried out in proximity to a tidal or fluvial flood defence, the council will seek to safeguard and, where possible, extend public access to the waterfront and protect and enhance existing ecological features. Generally, consideration will be given to maintaining and/or improving the existing flood defences and access to flood defences for operational and maintenance purposes.
6.3.5
6.3.6
C33XV Greenwich Pumping Station

6.3.7 6.3.8 The site is located within the Deptford Creekside (West Greenwich) Mixed Use Area. Policy W3, Mixed Use Areas, permits development for a range of uses including business, residential and other appropriate uses. The council will seek an overall increase in employment-generating uses, and proposals that reduce the level of, or potential for, business/employment activity will be resisted. Proposals must comply with the site schedules, other plan policies and, where applicable, take into account more detailed guidance in planning briefs or approved master plans. The site comprises a number of listed buildings, including a pair of Beam Engine houses with linking boiler house and a number of coal sheds (Grade II listed). There are also a cluster of listed properties (numbers 98-104 Greenwich High Road) to the southwest of the site, opposite Greenwich Industrial Estate, and listed railway viaducts to the north of the site. Number 135 Greenwich High Road and West Greenwich House at 141 Greenwich High Road to the southeast of the site, and a number of properties in Ashburnham Place and Edgerton Drive to the south of Greenwich Pumping station are also locally listed. Policy D18, Listed Buildings, states there will be a presumption in favour of the preservation of listed buildings. Listed building consent will only be granted for demolition or partial demolition in exceptional circumstances, and will be assessed among others against the condition of the building and the merits of alternative proposals for the site.
6.3.9
6.3.10
Page 11
Site suitability report C33XV 6.3.11 Policy D23, Listed Buildings, states in considering proposals affecting buildings on the Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest, substantial weight will be given to protecting and conserving the particular characteristics that account for their designation. Consequently, proposals for the demolition or unsympathetic alteration of locally listed buildings will be discouraged. The southern boundary of Greenwich Pumping Station is located approximately 5m from the northern border of the Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area, which lies beyond Greenwich High Road. This conservation area is covered by an Article 4 directive which restricts the amount of permitted development allowed within this designated area. Policy D16, Conservation Areas, states that planning permission will only be granted for proposals which preserve or enhance the character or appearance of conservation areas, taking into account local scale, the established pattern of development and landscape, building form and materials. Where the character or appearance of a conservation area is threatened by inappropriate development, the council will seek to control these through the use of Article 4 directions. Development on sites in the vicinity of a conservation area, and which would have a visual effect on its character or appearance, should respect the setting of that area. A strategic view corridor crosses the site from the northwest to the southeast, roughly covering the central third of the Thames Water site. Policy D25, Strategic Views, states that strategic views of St Pauls Cathedral from Greenwich Park and Blackheath Point, shown on the proposal map, will be protected from the intrusion of new developments by limiting all proposed developments within the viewing corridor from Greenwich Park to a height of 30mAOD, and by careful consideration of proposals which could infringe on the development plane from Blackheath Point. The site is in close proximity to existing residential properties, with those closest located at 133 Greenwich High Road to the east of the site, and to the south on the corner of Greenwich High Road and Edgerton Drive within 60m of the site boundary. Further residential development is soon to be completed to the western side of the site. Policy E1, Pollution, seeks to protect the amenities of existing occupiers and users, particularly residential uses, from the impacts of development in terms of unacceptable emissions, noise and vibration.
6.3.12
6.3.13
6.3.14
6.3.15 6.3.16
6.3.17
6.3.18
CL004 Norman Road

6.3.19 This site is subject to a UDP proposal for mixed-use development and interchange enhancement, including a significant proportion of B1 office/ business space, active uses including retail at street level and residential as part of a mix (proposal site MU33). Policy W3, Mixed Use Areas, permits development for a range of uses including business, residential and other appropriate uses. The council will seek an overall increase in employment generating uses, and proposals that reduce the level of, or
Page 12
Site suitability report C33XV potential for, business/employment activity will be resisted. Proposals must comply with the site schedules, other plan policies and, where applicable, take into account more detailed guidance in planning briefs or approved master plans. 6.3.20 6.3.21 Greenwich Industrial Estate may have historically been subject to contaminative uses and therefore may include contaminated land. Policy E11, Contaminated Land, requires that a preliminary site investigation, prior to the determination of a planning application, will normally be required if a site is known or is likely to have been in contaminative uses. Where contamination is found, the council will need to be assured that the development can be built and occupied safely without any adverse environmental or health impacts, otherwise conditions requiring full remedial action will be imposed. The site is also in close proximity to existing residential properties, with those closest located to the south of Greenwich High Road, approximately 60m from the southern boundary of the site, and to the east of Waller Way, approximately 40m from the sites eastern boundary. Policy E1, Pollution, seeks to protect the amenities of existing occupiers and users, particularly residential uses, from the impacts of development in terms of unacceptable emissions, noise and vibration.
6.3.22
CL005 Phoenix Wharf

6.3.23 This site is subject to a UDP proposal for light industry, small business units/offices. In the longer term, the UDP identifies that there may be scope for comprehensive redevelopment around Greenwich Station, whereupon this site may have scope for more intensive mixed business and residential use (proposal site J7). There may be an opportunity to utilise barge transport should this site be selected with Greenwich Pumping Station. Policy W6, Floating Vessels, states that proposals to moor temporary or permanent floating vessels on the Thames, including the use of any additional areas to service or support activities on a moored vessel, must sympathetically relate to historic waterfront and riverside areas, positively contribute to the rivers life and scene, not compromise existing or potential river transportation nor adversely affect existing or potential wharfage operations, not unduly impact on the river, its foreshore and environs through ecological disruption, noise and pollution, and not conflict with residential amenity.
6.3.24
6.4
6.4.1
Planning comments
There are a number of planning applications and permissions relevant to the use of the sites under consideration and these have been identified in Section 6.2. There are also a large number of planning designations and policies that are applicable, both on and adjacent to the proposed sites. These designations and policies have been identified and described in Section 6.3.
Page 13
Site suitability report C33XV 6.4.2 All three options involve the use of Greenwich Pumping Station. The following paragraphs therefore focus on the use of this site, followed by a review of the two drive options under consideration. The separation distance between the shaft and the offices within Norman House is approximately 70m. The separation distance from residential properties on Greenwich High Road and the shaft is approximately 150m, which is considered sufficient to safeguard these existing residential receptors from potential construction impacts. However, further residential development is soon to be completed to the western side of the site, and planning applications are under consideration for residential development to the south of the pumping station and for mixed-use development of Greenwich Industrial Estate to the east. Mitigation, including the control of construction working hours, is likely to be required in order to comply with Policy E1. The site is within a designated mixed-use area. Use of the Greenwich Pumping Station site for the Thames Tunnel project would be consistent with the Pumping Station sites existing use and should not therefore adversely impact on this designation. The site working area is in close proximity to several listed buildings, including the pumping station and coal sheds located to the south of the proposed working area and railway viaduct to the north. However, the buildings on the site are currently used in association with the existing Thames Water pumping station and therefore works in and around the pumping station would be consistent with the existing operational use. Consideration should also be given to the setting of the listed pumping station and coal sheds in terms of detailed site layout. Plant machinery and screening boards required during construction should not be of a scale which would impede the strategic view across the site to St Pauls, and should not have an unacceptable impact on the appearance of the adjacent conservation area or the setting of nearby listed buildings. Similarly, any new permanent structures should not impede the strategic view or detract from the character of the conservation area and setting of the listed buildings. The site falls within a designated archaeological priority zone. The appropriate level of site investigation should be agreed with the LPA, in accordance with Policy D30. Further appraisal of the archaeological potential on the site is provided in Section 7 of this report. The site falls within the borough flooding and attenuation area and any development proposals are required to consider existing tidal and fluvial flood defences.
6.4.3
6.4.4
6.4.5
6.4.6 6.4.7
6.4.8
6.4.9
Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
6.4.10 The use of the Norman Road site, in combination with the Greenwich Pumping Station site, would have additional planning implications.
Page 14
Site suitability report C33XV 6.4.11 This site is subject to a UDP proposal for mixed-use development and interchange enhancement, including a significant proportion of B1 office/ business space, active uses including retail at street level and residential as part of a mix (proposal site MU33). The use of this site would be contrary to this proposal and Policy W3, Mixed Use Areas, which permits development for a range of uses including business, residential and other appropriate uses. The use of this site could compromise or delay the implementation of planning application (11/0271/F) for the redevelopment of the site, should it be permitted in due course. In addition, if permitted, this application would increase the number of receptors sensitive to noise, dust and vibration associated with construction activities on site. The Norman Road site, as an industrial estate, may have historically been subject to contaminative uses and therefore may include contaminated land. Policy E11, Contaminated Land, requires that a preliminary site investigation, prior to the determination of a planning application, will normally be required if a site is known or is likely to have been in contaminative uses. Where contamination is found, the council will need to be assured that the development can be built and occupied safely without any adverse environmental or health impacts, otherwise conditions requiring full remedial action will be imposed.
6.4.12
6.4.13
6.4.14 The use of Phoenix Wharf, in combination with the Greenwich Pumping Station site, would be acceptable in planning terms. While the site is subject to a UDP proposal for light industry, small business units/offices, the site is not identified for residential development and no planning applications have been submitted for the development of this site for any use. There may be an opportunity to utilise barge transport should this site be selected with Greenwich Pumping Station, which would accord with wider sustainability and transport planning policies. The use of barges should be managed so as to accord with the requirements of UDP Policy W6.
6.4.15
7 7.1
7.1.1
Environmental appraisal Introduction

The following sections summarise specialist assessments which are provided in Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables.
Page 15
7.2
Transport Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road, and Option 2 C33XV and CL005: Greenwich Pumping Station and Phoenix Wharf
7.2.1 7.2.2
The site is suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2. Option 1 is made up of two site areas (also see Appendix 5 Transport plan). One is located on the existing pumping station land west of Norman Road and the second is located on the eastern side of Norman Road at Greenwich Industrial Estate. Four site accesses are proposed for the construction phase: three existing accesses on Greenwich High Road and Norman Road, with a fourth access located on the eastern side of Norman Road. Permanent access is assumed to be via Greenwich High Road, with a potential road access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints. Option 2 is made up of two site areas (also see Appendix 5 Transport plan). One is located on the existing pumping station land west of Norman Road and the second is located to the north of the railway bridge on the eastern side of Norman Road at an existing builders yard. Five site accesses are proposed for the construction phase: three existing accesses on Greenwich High Road and Norman Road, with the remaining two accesses located to the north of the railway bridge on Norman Road. Permanent access is assumed to be via Greenwich High Road. There is a potential access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints. The railway bridge on Norman Road features no visible height restriction. For both options 1 and 2, the layout of the site means that excavated material would need to be transported along Norman Road. This may pose a hazard to other road users. Therefore, traffic signals may need to be used to control traffic flows on Norman Road. If required, there is a potential rail access route which would be possible with some constraints in the form of traffic calming and on-street parking, which would require removal. The site is remote from the River Thames, although river access is not essential for this site. For both options, there is reasonable potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided on site for the workforce but there is limited parking available on surrounding roads. On-street parking opposite the site accesses would require removal.
7.2.3
7.2.4
7.2.5
7.2.6
7.2.7 The site is suitable as a CSO and (long) connection tunnel reception site for Option 3, using an existing access onto Norman Road, with egress
Page 16
Site suitability report C33XV assumed to be taken through the existing access to the pumping station on Greenwich High Road. There is a potential road access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints. Use of rail is unlikely to be required due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site although, if required, a potential rail access route would be possible with some constraints in the form of traffic calming and on-street parking, which will require removal. The site is remote from the river, although river access is not essential for a CSO site. There is reasonable potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided on site for the workforce but there is limited parking available on surrounding roads. On-street parking diagonally opposite the site access would require removal.
7.3
7.3.1
Archaeology
Based on current information, both options 1 and 2 are considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site and Option 3 is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site. This is because there is no direct evidence for the presence of archaeological remains within the site and substantial disturbance has taken place during the last 150 years. While no direct evidence has been revealed, peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have commonly been recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the River Thames.
7.3.2
7.4
Built heritage and townscape Option 1 C33XV and CL004, and Option 2 C33XV and CL005
7.4.1
From a built heritage perspective, this site is less suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2. This is because it has the potential to impact on a number of built heritage receptors and local views, especially during construction. The site is intercepted by the Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework). Both options 1 and 2 would directly impact on the 'coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station' and the 'southernmost of pair of coal sheds to southwest of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station', both listed at Grade II. This may require additional consents and detailed methodologies. Both options also involve the construction of both a TBM stockyard and shaft and segment storage area adjacent the Grade II listed 'sewage pumping station'. This has the potential to adversely impact on the buildings setting and historic character. The development also has the potential to impact on the setting of Grade II listed buildings, the setting of and views to and from the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas and local views. Mitigation in the
7.4.2
7.4.3
Page 17
Site suitability report C33XV form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would be required to reduce these effects. 7.4.4 From a townscape perspective, this site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2 if mitigation is undertaken and the permanent structures are carefully designed to integrate into the local industrial character.
Option 3 C33XV
7.4.5 From a built heritage perspective, this site is considered suitable for use as Option 3 as a CSO with a (long) reception connection tunnel because there are no direct impacts on any of the historic assets. Option 3 does, however, have the potential to impact on the setting of Grade II listed buildings and the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas. The development also has the potential to impact on the setting of seven Grade II listed buildings, the setting of the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would be required to reduce these adverse effects. From a townscape perspective, this site is considered suitable for use as Option 3 as a CSO with a (long) reception connection tunnel if mitigation is undertaken and the permanent structures are carefully designed to integrate into the local industrial character.
7.4.6
7.4.7
7.5
7.5.1
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water

In terms of hydrogeology, this site is considered to be less suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and less suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because the drop shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (principal aquifer) and the site lies within the source protection zone (SPZ 2) of one Environment Agency licensed abstraction borehole from the Chalk. Dewatering of the Chalk and superficial deposits (secondary aquifer) would be required. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 54m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. While there is no direct pathway to either the Deptford Creek or the River Thames for pollution, standard mitigation measures would still be required. This assessment has been based on an assumption that river transport is unlikely to be feasible at this site, and therefore that no campsheds will be required within the creek.
7.5.2
7.6
7.6.1
Ecology
This site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. However, the possible presence of
Page 18
Site suitability report C33XV black redstart on or around this site may require amended working practices. The northern area of the Greenwich Pumping Station section of the site also contains wasteland, which is a London BAP habitat and any loss of this habitat may require compensatory provision.
7.7
7.7.1
Flood risk
This site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because the site is defended from flooding from the River Thames and Deptford Creek and there is also space available for sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS).
7.8
7.8.1
Air quality
This site is less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and less suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because there are residential properties in close proximity to the site and, during construction, there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts could be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas which are already of a poor air quality. This could be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
7.9
7.9.1
Noise
This site is considered to be suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2 and as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because although the distance between the site and the nearest residential receptors is relatively short, the noise levels around the site will be relatively high due to the busy A206 to the south. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase has the potential to cause an adverse noise impact to properties located on Greenwich High Road. Perimeter hoarding would reduce potential noise impact but would be relatively ineffective at shielding noise from the upper floor properties of the nearest residential receptors.
7.10
7.10.1
Land quality
This site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for Option 1 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from the sewage pumping station and associated tanks, works, industrial estate, printers and railway lines on site and the engineering works and further tanks in the vicinity of the site. The site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for Option 2 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from the sewage
7.10.2
Page 19
Site suitability report C33XV pumping station and associated tanks and railway lines on site, and the engineering works and further tanks in the vicinity of the site. 7.10.3 The site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from the sewage settlement tank and fuel tanks on site, and the engineering works and pumping station adjacent to the site. For all three options, this potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport.
7.10.4
8 8.1
8.1.1
Socio-economic and community assessment Introduction

The socio-economic and community assessment builds on the advantages and disadvantages reported in Table 2.3 and covers the following areas: Socio-economic profile Socio-economic and community issues and impacts.
8.2
8.2.1
Socio-economic profile
The site is located within the Greenwich West ward of Greenwich. Statistics from ONS 2001 Census data show the following indicators for the ward, in comparison to the rest of Greenwich, London and England as a whole: Higher proportion of full-time employees than Greenwich, London and England. A higher proportion of people with Level 4 or 5 educational qualifications and a correspondingly high proportion of people in managerial or professional occupations. A lower proportion of owner-occupied households and a higher proportion of housing rented from the local council. A higher proportion of people aged between 20 and 44, also a slightly higher proportion of children aged 0 to 4. Approximately 76 per cent of ward residents were born in the UK and there is a higher proportion of people who describe themselves as black African or black British African people.
8.2.2
These statistics indicate the presence of highly educated working professionals in the area. However, many residents still rent from the council, indicating pockets of deprivation in the area. The ethnic profile is mixed and there is a relatively high proportion of young children, indicating growing families in the area.
Page 20
8.3
Issues and impacts Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
8.3.1
This option makes use of Thames Waters existing Greenwich Pumping Station as the location for the CSO interception and construction of a connection tunnel, with the additional land on the site of the Greenwich Industrial Estate providing the space required for handling the excavated materials associated with a connection tunnel drive site. The area in proximity to the site is mainly industrial and commercial. However, there are a number of potentially sensitive receptors in the vicinity which may be impacted by the proposed construction works. A new development to the southwest of the site, adjacent to the coal sheds, includes a large number of residential properties which appear likely to be affected by any construction works in this location. There are also a number of boats that appear to be permanently moored behind the coal sheds to the west of the pumping station. However, the CSO interception and shaft construction workings are at a distance from these properties, with offices, welfare facilities and parking being located opposite the new development and houseboats. It should be possible to mitigate the impact of these activities. There are further residential properties in the form of flats and terraced houses to the south of the site, on the opposite side of Greenwich High Road. These properties appear likely to be partially screened from the majority of the works by the existing pumping station building and Norman House, and are also separated from the works by the Greenwich High Road. It is proposed that access to the site for personnel and light vehicles is to be from Greenwich High Road, but it should be possible to effectively mitigate any potential impacts on these properties. A builders merchant uses the land between the pumping station and the elevated railway which is proposed will form part of the site. This land is predominantly used for storage and it should be possible to effectively relocate this activity, so that there should be limited impact on the business or potential to affect the local economy. There is, however, a footpath and cycle route running underneath the railway which would need to be temporarily diverted. An office building, Norman House, located adjacent to the site to the south, is likely to be impacted by any construction works on site. The building is side on to the main construction area so impacts may be limited and easier to mitigate. There is also a community centre and the North Pole pub located in the vicinity to the east of the site. These are in close proximity to the proposed materials handling area. Otherwise, the site is generally surrounded by industrial areas, with the currently vacant Greenwich Industrial Estate to the east (providing the proposed location for materials handling) and the Faircharm Trading Estate opposite the site to the west, across Deptford Creek. The creek is
8.3.2
8.3.3
8.3.4
8.3.5
8.3.6
8.3.7
Page 21
Site suitability report C33XV likely to shield the estate from any significant adverse construction related impacts.
8.3.8 The potential impacts on the local community from this proposed site layout option are very similar to that detailed above for Option 1; the only significant difference being that instead of the vacant Greenwich Industrial Estate being used for materials handling from the connection tunnel drive, this activity would instead be undertaken on Phoenix Wharf, located to the north of the pumping station site. It appears that a builders merchant and one other commercial business operate out of the buildings on the site and these would need to be relocated. Given the general industrial nature of the area, this should be possible without impacting the local economy. The other commercial businesses operating out of the premises adjacent and opposite the proposed materials handling area appear unlikely to be affected by the use of this site. Phoenix Wharf also appears to provide the potential to use river transport to remove excavated materials from this site, which would help reduce the potential impact of additional road traffic associated with the works and should help reduce the impact on the local community.
8.3.9
8.3.10 Of the three proposed options, it appears likely that the third option would have the least impact on the local community due to the reduced scope and level of construction activities required for a connection tunnel reception site. This option concentrates the works area in the vicinity of the existing pumping station, reducing the potential impact on the residential properties to the southwest and south of the site. For all three site options, operational phase impacts are likely to be minimal, since after-use structures would be restricted to the north-eastern corner of the pumping station site adjacent to the viaduct.
8.3.11
8.3.12
9 9.1
9.1.1 9.1.2
Property assessment Introduction

This report builds on the advantages and disadvantages in Table 2.3 and the assessment provides more up-to-date information. The site options comprise different current uses and ownerships as follows: C33XV is mostly Thames Waters Greenwich Pumping Station and, in addition, includes a strip of land immediately to the north owned by Network Rail and mainly occupied by Access Scaffolding Limited. A public footpath crosses the northern part of the site between Norman
Page 22
Site suitability report C33XV Road and the Deptford Creek footbridge. The DLR owns the viaduct crossing the northern part of the site as a flying freehold and owns the footprint of the viaduct piers. CL004 is currently the disused Greenwich Industrial Estate, comprising a number of industrial/warehouse units, owned by the London Borough of Greenwich and Cathedral Group. CL005 is known as Phoenix Wharf, currently occupied by Jewson Limited as a builders merchant, and is partly owned by Network Rail and partly by Halliard Property Company Limited.
9.2
9.2.1
Crown land and special land comments

Title information is only available for parts of the site.
C33XV Greenwich Pumping Station site

9.2.2 Referencing information indicates that the Greater London Authority may own the freehold of the southern part of the pumping station land. The freehold interest in the DLR viaduct may also be vested in the Greater London Authority. Further investigation to clarify the nature and extent of these ownerships and whether they affect the identified site is recommended. In this assessment, it is assumed that no part of the DLR viaduct will be affected by the project. A small part of the site is owned by Network Rail. The majority of the Network Rail land is let to a commercial tenant and therefore it does not appear to be core to Network Rails undertaking. While it may be technically possible for Thames Water to acquire land from a statutory body using compulsory purchase powers, an attempt to do this without Network Rails co-operation will create risk. Preliminary discussions with Network Rail have indicated its general support for the project, and further negotiations will be required to establish whether agreement to use the land can be reached.
9.2.3
CL004 Norman Road

9.2.4 The site is believed to be owned by the London Borough of Greenwich but subject to an agreement with Cathedral Group for redevelopment. The site would therefore not appear to be core to the councils undertaking. While it may be technically possible for Thames Water to acquire land from a statutory body using compulsory purchase powers, an attempt to do this without the councils co-operation will create risk. Should the site be taken forward, it will be necessary to enter into discussions with the council to establish whether use of the site can be agreed.
CL005 Phoenix Wharf

9.2.5 The southern part of the site is owned by Network Rail. The land is let to a commercial tenant and therefore it does not appear to be core to Network Rails undertaking. While it may be technically possible for Thames Water to acquire land from a statutory body using compulsory purchase powers, an attempt to do this without Network Rails co-operation will create risk.
Page 23
Site suitability report C33XV The railway viaduct is, however, required as part of the core undertaking, and Section 16 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 is likely to apply to any use of any part of the viaduct (for example, arches within the viaduct). Section 16 provides that land may not be acquired unless the Minister certifies that there will be no detriment to the owner, or that the land can be replaced. Preliminary discussions with Network Rail have indicated its general support for the project, and further negotiations will be required to establish whether agreement to use the land can be reached. 9.2.6 The northern part of site C005 is in private ownership and use and is therefore not Crown land or special land.
9.3
9.3.1
Land to be acquired
The majority of C33XV is in Thames Water ownership as an operational pumping station. The strip of land between the northern boundary of the pumping station and the main railway viaduct, within Network Rail ownership, would be required temporarily under Option 1 C33XV and CL004, and Option 2 C33XV and CL005, as both options need additional land to support the connection tunnel drive works, but would not be required under Option 3 C33XV. It is assumed that this strip would be acquired on a temporary basis, via the acquisition of new rights, for the period of the works set out in the engineering section above. For all three options, the operational phase would require the permanent use of an area in the northern part of the pumping station site, with dimensions approximately 20m x 20m, plus an adjacent site for a ventilation building of 15m x 5m. These areas are within the existing Thames Water ownership.
9.3.2
9.3.3 Under this option, the eastern part of site CL004 (Greenwich Industrial Estate) is required temporarily as additional land to support construction works on the pumping station site, but no permanent works would be sited on this additional land. In view of the development proposals for the whole of the Greenwich Industrial Estate site, the compensation assessment assumes that the worksite would be acquired temporarily, via the acquisition of new rights for the period of the works stated in the engineering section above.
9.3.4 In this option, site CL005 (Phoenix Wharf) is required to support construction works on the pumping station site, but no permanent works would be sited on this additional land. The property is in commercial use and, given the estimated duration of the works, the compensation assessment assumes that the additional site would be acquired on a permanent basis and released for subsequent disposal on completion of the project.
Page 24
Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

9.3.5 No additional land is required under this option, and the CSO and connection tunnel reception site works would be accommodated within the existing pumping station site. For all options, the site has direct street frontage, therefore rights of way to the worksite would not be required. Under both options 1 and 2, it will be necessary to divert the existing public footpath along the northern boundary of the pumping station site during the period of the works.
9.3.6 9.3.7
9.4
9.4.1
Property valuation comments

For all three options, part of the site lies under the DLR railway viaduct. This assessment assumes the DLR can continue to operate normally during the works. The planning assessment reports no recent planning permissions for the existing pumping station site or the builders yard premises immediately to the north (site CL005). A planning application has been submitted for a major mixed-use redevelopment of the Greenwich Industrial Estate (site CL004), and the London Borough of Greenwich has resolved to grant planning permission, subject to a referral to the Mayor for decision as a strategic development. The planning application drawings show a substantial mainly residential block sited approximately on the area required under Option 1.
9.4.2
9.4.3 The acquisition costs for the western part of site CL004 and the northern strip of C33XV have been assessed on a market rental value basis for the duration of the temporary occupation, plus an allowance for compensation for the deferral of the development of the required part of CL004. The acquisition cost is therefore expected to be significant but within acceptable limits; however, should planning permission for the proposed development be granted and implemented prior to acquisition for the project (which appears likely), the costs are expected to rise to an unacceptable level.
9.4.4 The acquisition costs for the Phoenix Wharf site (CL005) to the north of the main railway viaduct have been assessed on the basis of freehold acquisition. The site is in use as a builders merchant, while the small site to the south of the viaduct is let to a scaffolding contractor, and the acquisition costs are therefore expected to be significant but within acceptable limits. The planning assessment reports that site CL005 is currently allocated for light industrial use, but may have potential for more
Page 25
Site suitability report C33XV intensive alternative use, including residential in the longer term, and an allowance for development potential has been included in the valuation assessment. Again, if planning permission for alternative use was to be granted prior to acquisition, this would increase costs, although these are expected to remain within acceptable bounds.

9.4.5 9.4.6 It is assumed that no acquisition costs would be incurred in respect of the pumping station site where Thames Water is the owner. For each option, the land would be reinstated as a part of the engineering works after the works are complete, and therefore reinstatement costs are not included in the compensation assessment.
9.5
9.5.1
Disturbance compensation comments

The land required within the existing pumping station comprises areas of primarily undeveloped land and use of this part of the site is unlikely to give rise to a claim for disturbance, assuming the DLR can continue to operate.
9.5.2 The additional land required within the strip is occupied by a scaffolding contractor and displacement of this business will give rise to a claim for disturbance, although the costs are expected to be acceptable. Greenwich Industrial Estate (CL004) appears to be disused and the industrial units are vacant, and it is therefore unlikely that a claim for business disturbance will arise from this part of the site unless redevelopment commences on site prior to acquisition.
9.5.3 In addition to the scaffolding contractor, Phoenix Wharf is occupied as a builders merchant depot and displacement of these businesses will give rise to claims for disturbance, although the costs are expected to be acceptable.
9.6
9.6.1
Discretionary purchase costs comments

The land immediately to the southwest of the pumping station site is being developed with residential flats and commercial premises. While the temporary worksite does not require any part of this development site, under options 1 and 2, some construction activity comprising the site offices and welfare facilities are shown situated adjacent on the site of the listed coal sheds. The new buildings will be complete and occupied before the tunnel construction works commence, although will be some distance from the main construction activity, which will be to the north of the existing pumping station building
Page 26
Site suitability report C33XV 9.6.2 New residential properties are also planned for the western part of Greenwich Industrial Estate, on the eastern side of Norman Road and relatively close to the tunnel drive site. However, this development has not yet been granted planning permission and the development would take place with knowledge of the Thames Tunnel project. Construction work for the connection tunnel drive will be continuous, including night-time working, and this increases the potential for discretionary purchases. Appropriate mitigation measures will be required to limit the impact on the adjacent residential properties. Use of the site as a CSO and connection tunnel reception site under Option 3, with reduced construction activity, would limit the potential for discretionary purchase costs significantly.
9.6.3
9.6.4
9.7
9.7.1
Offsite statutory compensation comments

There should be limited potential for offsite statutory compensation under Section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, as there is unlikely to be any physical interference with public or private property rights. There should also be limited potential for claims under Part 1 of the Land Compensation Act 1973, as the completed works are unlikely to result in diminution in value to property.
9.7.2
9.8
Site acquisition cost assessment Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
9.8.1
The statutory acquisition costs in respect of the additional land required under Option 1 are likely to be significant but acceptable unless planning permission is granted for redevelopment of Greenwich Industrial Estate and implemented prior to acquisition, in which case, the costs would rise to an unacceptable level.
9.8.2 The statutory acquisition costs in respect of the additional land required are expected to be significant but acceptable.

9.8.3 No statutory acquisition costs are expected as the site is within Thames Water ownership, and no additional land is required under this option.
10 10.1
10.1.1
Site conclusions by discipline Introduction

The conclusions presented in this section are drawn from each disciplines assessment, and are designed to inform the workshop where a final
Page 27
Site suitability report C33XV conclusion is reached on whether the site can be taken forward as a potential preferred site, subject to its fit with possible drive strategies in the case of Greenwich connection tunnel sites.
10.2
Engineering Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
10.2.1
The site is suitable as a CSO and a long connection tunnel drive site, noting that slurry from the tunnelling machine would need to be pumped across Norman Road, either in a buried pipe or a pipe bridge. The interfaces between the construction site and the Thames Water operational parts of the site would need to be carefully managed to minimise any associated health and safety hazards.
10.2.2
10.2.3 The site is suitable as a CSO and a long connection tunnel drive site, noting that slurry from the tunnelling machine would need to be pumped through the railway arches. The interfaces between the construction site and the Thames Water operational parts of the site would need to be carefully managed to minimise any associated health and safety hazards.
10.2.4

10.2.5 The site is suitable as a CSO site. The interfaces between the construction site and the Thames Water operational parts of the site would need to be carefully managed to minimise any associated health and safety hazards. Whether a CSO site of this size is appropriate or not for the interception of the Greenwich Pumping Station CSO would be considered at the next stage, in conjunction with the drive strategy that is developed in the Engineering options report.
10.2.6
10.3
Planning Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
10.3.1
This option is considered less suitable as a CSO and a long connection tunnel drive site. The use of Greenwich Industrial Estate would be contrary to the mixed use designation and policies which are in place at the site, and could compromise or delay the implementation of the planning application for the redevelopment of the site which is currently under consideration. In addition, given the current status of this application, it is possible that the application could be permitted and
Page 28
Site suitability report C33XV implemented prior to the Thames Tunnel project being approved and would therefore involve the potential loss of new residential properties, which would not meet the criteria in our site selection methodology. 10.3.2 Use of the Greenwich Pumping Station site would be consistent with the existing land use, which includes Thames Water operational activities. Further consideration of the detailed site layout is required to reduce potential visual and physical impacts on the listed pumping station and other listed buildings on site. In addition, with a number of planning permissions for residential use in the vicinity of the site, mitigation is likely to be required to ensure development is not contrary to amenity and pollution planning policies.
10.3.3 This option is considered suitable as a CSO and a long connection tunnel drive site. The use of Phoenix Wharf is considered acceptable in planning terms. Use of the Greenwich Pumping Station site would be consistent with the existing land use, which includes Thames Water operational activities. Further consideration of the detailed site layout is required to reduce potential visual and physical impacts on the listed pumping station and other listed buildings on site. In addition, with a number of planning permissions for residential use in the vicinity of the site, mitigation is likely to be required to ensure development is not contrary to amenity and pollution planning policies.

10.3.4 Option 3 is considered suitable as a CSO with a long connection tunnel reception site. Use of the Greenwich Pumping Station site would be consistent with the existing land use, which includes Thames Water operational activities. Further consideration of the detailed site layout is required to reduce potential visual and physical impacts on the listed pumping station and other listed buildings on site. In addition, with a number of planning permissions for residential use in the vicinity of the site, mitigation is likely to be required to ensure development is not contrary to amenity and pollution planning policies.
10.4
10.4.1 10.4.2
Environment
Overall, all three options are considered suitable. Based on current information, the site is suitable from the perspectives of transport, archaeology, townscape, water resources (surface water), ecology, flood risk and noise. For Option 3, the site is also suitable from a built heritage perspective. This site is considered less suitable from the perspectives of water resources (hydrogeology), air quality and land quality. For options 1 and 2, the site is also less suitable from a built heritage perspective.
10.4.3
Page 29
Site suitability report C33XV 10.4.4 Overall, the site is considered suitable, although further investigation would be required as to whether built heritage, hydrogeology, air quality and land quality impacts could be adequately mitigated. Likely mitigation considerations could include the following: Built heritage for options 1 and 2, a high-quality scheme design to minimise impacts on a number of built heritage receptors and the local views, including the Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework). Further investigation into the feasibility of deconstructing the two Grade II listed coal sheds and reassembling post-construction this would also require additional planning consents and detailed methodologies. Hydrogeology determine the necessary mitigation to facilitate the construction of the drop shaft within a source protection zone of an Environment Agency licensed abstraction borehole from the Chalk. Air quality measures to ensure dust is adequately mitigated for the closest receptors. Land quality any required remediation of contamination (at this moderate risk site) and/or measures to ensure no mobilisation of contaminants retained in situ.
10.5
Socio-economic and community Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
10.5.1
This site is less suitable for use as a CSO and long connection tunnel drive site from a community impact perspective with configuration proposed in Option 1. Construction work may have some impact on the newly-built residential development to the west of the coal sheds and offices in Norman House, so appropriate mitigation is likely to be needed to reduce impacts on these properties. Further residential properties to the south, a pub and community centre and the builders merchant business to the north may also be affected but this appears likely to be to a lesser extent. A footpath and cycle route which run under the railway lines would also need to be relocated. The need to remove excavated materials by road from this site appears likely to cause further disruption to the local community. Mitigation may involve discussions around minimising noise levels and potentially limiting site working hours.
10.5.2
10.5.3 10.5.4
10.5.5 This site is suitable as a CSO and long connection tunnel drive site from a community impact perspective with configuration proposed in Option 2.
Page 30
Site suitability report C33XV 10.5.6 Construction work may have some impact on the newly-built residential development to the west of the coal sheds and offices in Norman House, so appropriate mitigation is likely to be needed to reduce impacts on these properties. Further residential properties to the south and the builders merchant business to the north may also be affected but this appears likely to be to a lesser extent. A footpath and cycle route which run under the railway lines would also need to be relocated. Two businesses operating out of the premises on Phoenix Wharf will also need to be relocated and those operating out of the surrounding properties may face some disruption. However, the potential to use Deptford Creek to remove excavated materials differentiate the use of this option from Option 1 above, but this depends on the navigational feasibility of Deptford Creek. Mitigation may involve discussions around minimising noise levels and potentially limiting site working hours.
10.5.7
10.5.8

10.5.9 This site is suitable as a CSO and long connection tunnel reception site from a community impact perspective with configuration proposed in Option 3. Given the greatly reduced scope of work required in this option, it appears unlikely that the proposed activities would impact on the neighbouring residential properties or commercial and industrial land uses.
10.5.10
10.6
Property Option 1 C33XV and CL004: Greenwich Pumping Station and Norman Road
10.6.1 10.6.2
The site is considered less suitable as a CSO and a connection tunnel drive site using site CL004 as temporary additional land. The advantages of the site are as follows: The main part of the site is already within Thames Water ownership. Acquisition costs for temporary use of additional land are expected to be acceptable (unless redevelopment of CL004 commences prior to acquisition). The grant of planning permission for redevelopment of site CL004 appears likely prior to acquisition, which would increase acquisition costs. If redevelopment of this site commenced prior to acquisition, the assessment would change to not suitable. A small part of the site is within Network Rail ownership, which may add acquisition risk. A business occupier will be displaced.
10.6.3
The potential disadvantages of the site are as follows:
Page 31
Site suitability report C33XV There is a possibility that discretionary purchase costs will be incurred in respect of new flats under construction on the adjoining site.
10.6.4 10.6.5 The site is considered suitable as a CSO and a connection tunnel drive site, using site CL005 as temporary additional land. The advantages of the site are as follows: 10.6.6 The main part of the site is already within Thames Water ownership. Acquisition costs for temporary use of additional land are expected to be acceptable. Parts of the site are within Network Rail ownership, which may add acquisition risk. Business occupiers will be displaced. There is a possibility that discretionary purchase costs will be incurred in respect of new flats under construction on the adjoining site.
The potential disadvantages of the site are as follows:

10.6.7 10.6.8 The site is considered suitable as a CSO and a connection tunnel reception site. The advantages of the site are as follows: The site is already within Thames Water ownership, and acquisition costs are expected to be insignificant. No significant disadvantages have been identified under this option.
10.7
10.7.1
Next steps in the site selection process

It should be noted at this point the above conclusions do not represent an overall recommendation on the suitability of a site. The disciplines discuss their site suitability report conclusions at optioneering workshops along with Greenwich connection tunnel drive strategy options. Therefore, a preferred site can only be identified through a series of Greenwich connection tunnel drive option comparisons. The outcome of this two-step process (sites and then drive option comparisons) is set out in the Phase two scheme development report.
Page 32
Site suitability report C33XV Appendices
Appendices
Page 33
Site suitability report C33XV Appendices
Page 34
Site suitability report C33XV Appendix 1
Appendix 1 Sources of information Engineering

Traffic Management and Access Roads/Rail URS Scott Wilson Access River BMT Isis Services (Utilities) and Third Party Assets Thames Tunnel and utility companies Geology British Geological Society and Thames Tunnel Construction and Operational Layout Template Thames Tunnel Site selection background technical paper Thames Tunnel
Planning
London Borough of Greenwich online planning applications database Saved policies in the Greenwich Unitary Development Plan, adopted in 2006 The London Plan, adopted July 2011
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
Archaeology Historic Environment data from Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (GLAAS) National Monuments Record for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre (LAARC) Local authority websites Bing maps
Appendix 1 Page 1
Site suitability report C33XV Appendix 1 Built heritage and townscape Local authority lists of Locally Listed Buildings National Monuments Record for some additional information regarding registered historic parks and gardens Unitary development plan and DPDs Local authority websites Bing maps
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Local authority details of unlicensed abstractors Environment Agency abstraction licence details Environment Agency groundwater levels and contour maps (2009-11) Environment Agency water quality (surface water and groundwater) Environment Agency Groundwater Source Protection Zones Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Envirocheck British Geological Survey (BGS) logs BGS 1:50,000 Geological Sheets Solid and Drift Editions (England and Wales) BGS Geology of London Special Memoir for 1:50,000 Geological sheets 256 (North London), 257 (Romford), 270 (South London) and 271 (Dartford) (England and Wales) Crossrail (2005) Assessment of Water Impacts Technical Report: Appendix C Baseline Data. Figure C.4: Extent of Saline Intrusion based on 177 mg/l *5mmol/l) Isochlor
Ecology Thames Estuary Partnership (2002) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan London Biodiversity Action Plan www.lbp.org.uk Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) www.magic.gov.uk - statutory designated sites London Wildweb wildweb.london.gov.uk - non-statutory site of importance for nature conservation Black redstart distribution in London www.blackredstarts.org.uk/ pages/.html National Biodiversity Network http://searchnbn.net - distribution of protected species Google Maps aerial views of habitat features BAP habitats www.natureonthemap.org.uk
Appendix 1 Page 2
Site suitability report C33XV Appendix 1 Priority habitats and species on national and local scales www.ukbap.org.uk
Flood risk Environment Agency Flood Map www.environment-agency.gov.uk Environment Agency National Flood and Coastal Defence Database Envirocheck
Air quality Local authority websites London Air Quality Network www.londonair.org.uk Defra UK-AIR, air quality information resource www.airquality.co.uk Defra Air Quality Management Areas http://aqma.defra.gov.uk Defra Local Air Quality Management http://laqm.defra.gov.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 Envirocheck Data Sheets provided as a GIS Database British Geological Survey (BGS) logs
Socio-economic and community

Statistics from the Office of National Statistics 2001 Census data Creekside Studios www.creeksidestudios.co.uk/contact.html
Property
Mouchel referencing data Promap Multimap Google Earth aerial photographs Site visit VOA rating records
Appendix 1 Page 3
Appendix 1 Page 4
Appendix 2 Site location plan
Appendix 2 Page 1
TI AL
EN
! (
CS32X Deptford Storm Relief
TOWER HAMLETS
FI D
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
GREENWICH
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Site CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station
# *
! (
25
50
100
150
200
Metres
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. Crown copyright and database right 2011. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019345 CH2M HILL accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way. Map Ref : ............................ 1PL04-SS-01993 Date : .................................. 2011/10/25 Projection : .......................... British National Grid
LEWISHAM
CL005
C33XV
Greenwich Pumping Station
CL004
Thames Water Utilities
* #
The Point, 7th Floor, 37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF
Title:
This is an indicative working draft plan which has been produced for the purpose of confidential discussions only. Accordingly, the draft plan must not be copied, distributed or shown to any third party without the express written permission of Thames Water Utilities Limited. It provides an indication of sites that, following discussions with local authorities and other stakeholders, may be confirmed as being on the shortlist of construction sites for the proposed Thames Tunnel. Inclusion of a site on this draft plan should not be taken to mean that such site will be selected as a construction site to form part of the Thames Tunnel scheme.
APPENDIX 2 SITE LOCATION PLAN C33XV SITE
Appendix 3 Planning and environment plans
Appendix 3 Page 1
TI AL
FI D
HO BERT
EN
N STR
EET
R ST AN RO
T EE
AY SW VE R TA
T EE
N RA
P LL DA
CE LA
Area of Main Map
E S TR BRONZ
&
EET
AF
NORMAN ROAD
TA RV ES
R EA DP L O
TR NS SO
Legend
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Site Pumping Station
WA Y
# *
STRAIGHTSMOUT H
CL005 LEWISHAM
TS M O UT
STR AI GH
15
30
60 Metres
90
120
CL004
CREEKSIDE
GREENWICH C33XV
* #

ROAD LANGDALE
Mapping reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. Crown copyright and database right 2011. 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.
S O UT H STR EET
N DRIVE
EGERTO
ASHBURNHAM GR
* #
M M
OVE
M M
* Areas of Opportunity #
Regeneration Areas
GREE N
E GR
W EN
* #
* Proposals Sites #
WICH
H IC
H IG
ASH BURNHAM RETREAT
AD RO
ASHBURNHAM PLACE
Legend
Protected/Strategic Views Protected/Strategic Views Development Sites
Map Ref : ............................ 1PL04-SS-02055 Date : .................................. 2011/10/27 Projection : .......................... British National Grid
RIV This is an indicative working draft plan which has been produced for the purpose of confidential discussions only. Accordingly, the draft plan must not be copied, distributed or shown to any third party without the express written E permission of Thames Water Utilities Limited. It provides an indication of sites that, following discussions with local authorities and other stakeholders, may be confirmed as being on the shortlist of construction sites for the proposed Thames Tunnel. Inclusion of a site on this draft plan should not be taken to mean that such site will be selected as a construction site to form part of the Thames Tunnel scheme.
DE VO NS
R Mixed Use AreasOYA Title: LH ILL Town Centres

Defined Employment Area
HIR
ED
APPENDIX 3A PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT PLAN C33XV SITE
TI AL
FI D
HO BERT
N STR
EET
E BRONZ
&
STREE
AF
NORMAN ROAD
TA RV ES
ET RE ST N A Green Corridor/Chains RO Sites of Metropolitan ! ! ! Nature Conservation Importance ! ! ! WAY S Sites of Borough E E RV AC Nature Conservation Importance TA PL LL A Local Nature Reserve ND RA Contaminated Sites #### T EE # !#! #! # TR Open Space NS O RS Open Space Deficiency Local EA DP L O Green Space
Legend
EN
Area of Main Map
Legend
WA Y
Tree Preservation Orders Flood Risk Zone 3 Flood Risk Zone 2
# *
CL005 LEWISHAM
STRAIGHTSMOUT
TS M O UT
STR AI GH
15
30
60 Metres
90
120
NOR MAN R OA D
CL004
CREEKSIDE
GREENWICH
C33XV
* #

ROAD LANGDALE
S O UT H STR EET
N DRIVE
GREE N
EGERTO
E GR
W EN
WICH
H IC
HI
GH
ASH BURNHAM RETREAT
AD RO
ASHBURNHAM PLACE
ASHBURNHAM GR
OVE
DE VO NS
RO YA LH
ILL
Title:
HIR
ED
APPENDIX 3B PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT PLAN C33XV SITE
TI AL
Legend
EN
FI D
BERT
T T RE E HO N S
!
AY SW VE R TA
ET RE ST N A Listed Building (point) RO
Listed Building (polygon) Archaeological Areas E AC Conservation Area PL LL A ND Site World Heritage RA
E S TR BRONZ
&
EET
AF
NORMAN ROAD
TA RV ES
R EA DP L O
TR NS SO
T EE
Area of Main Map
Legend
WA Y
# *
STRAIGHTSMOUT H
CL005 LEWISHAM
TS M O UT
STR AI GH
15
30
60 Metres
90
120
CL004
CREEKSIDE
GREENWICH C33XV
* #

ROAD LANGDALE
S O UT H STR EET
N DRIVE
GREE N
EGERTO
E GR
W EN
WICH
H IC
HI
GH
ASH BURNHAM RETREAT
AD RO
ASHBURNHAM PLACE
ASHBURNHAM GR
OVE
DE VO NS
RO YA LH
ILL
HIR
ED
APPENDIX 3C PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT HERITAGE PLAN C33XV SITE
Title:
Appendix 4 Photographs of the site and surroundings
Appendix 4 Page 1
TI AL
EN
! (
CS32X Deptford Storm Relief
TOWER HAMLETS
FI D
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
GREENWICH
Local Authority Boundary Short Listed CSO Site CSO (Directly Controlled) Pumping Station
# *
! (
25
50
100
150
200
Metres
LEWISHAM
CL005
C33XV
CL004
* #
Title:
APPENDIX 4 AERIAL PLAN C33XV SITE
Greenwich Pumping Station.
Coal sheds located to the south of the Greenwich Pumping Station site.
Appendix 4 Page 3
Viaduct which passes across the northern section of the Greenwich Pumping Station site.
Greenwich Industrial Estate (CL004) from Norman Road looking east.
Appendix 4 Page 4
View of the site looking southeast towards Greenwich High Road.
Appendix 4 Page 5
Appendix 4 Page 6
Appendix 5 Transport plan
Appendix 5 Page 1
FI D
EN
TI AL
&
Area of Main Map
AF
Parking
Legend
# *
LEWISHAM C33XV CL004
Transport Access Route TfL Road Network London Cycle Routes
* #
GREENWICH
25
50
100
150
200
Metres
Title:
APPENDIX 5 TRANSPORT PLAN C33XV SITE
FI D
EN
TI AL
&
Area of Main Map
Legend
AF
CL005
# *
Transport Access Route TfL Road Network London Cycle Routes
C33XV LEWISHAM GREENWICH
* #
Parking
0 25 50 100 Metres 150 200
Title:
APPENDIX 2 TRANSPORT PLAN C33XV SITE
6
DO NOT SCALE - IF IN DOUBT ASK
8 4
3.9m
Bollard
Builders Yard
ML W
L i f t i n g Br i d g e
CSO DROP SHAFT 15m ID PEDESTRIAN / CYCLE DIVERSION ROUTE
M HW
A
MP 5.25
SL
3.8m
Foot Bridge
MLW
INTRODUCTION OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS TO ACCOMMODATE PASSING VEHICLES. DETAILS TO BE AGREED WITH LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY.
4 1
6 5 1 1
4.0m
0 1 9
1 1
Post
Greenwich Industrial Estate

L Twr
S t a t i o n
p i n g
a g e
P u m
S e w
o t
4 11
0 11
a t e r
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
19
Mud
o t
42
i g h
e a n
BS TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL
El Sub Sta
10 m 0 40 m
El Sub Sta
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
5 2 1
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
LB
AA
FIRST ISSUE
JSHE
EPER
PSTV
29/09/2011
1 0 1
96a
72
TCB
PH
7 8
M A H N R U B H S A
o t
E C A L P
Location Code: OS Reference:
3 8
5 8
an d
N DRI VE
Location / Town:
GREENWICH - CS33X - GREENWICH PS C33XV - GREENWICH PS
1 to 6
7 to 12
Site Name:
Lamley House
HAM R ETREA T
Project Name:
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
EG ERT O
Drawing Title:
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN C33XV & CL004 (OPTION 1)

Drawing No.: Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
PLOTTED ON
04/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
7 5
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_4\dms04464\100-DE-TRA-C33XV-873101.dgn
c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008
PH
SHBUR N
100-DE-TRA-C33XV-873101
SITE SUITABILITY REPORT
r af t
1:500
A1
AA
5 0
27
21
15
10
5 1 o t 7 1
4 1 o t 1 1
0 3
e e l i b u J e h T
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
JYAS
LONDON TIDEWAY TUNNELS
WASTE
1 0 0
W N E E R G
H C I
H G I H
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
74 to
4 9
D A O R
54
60 66
on f i de nt i al
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
PH
0 2 1 o t 6 0 1
1 3 1
a 4 3 1 o t 2 2 1
4 0 1
8 9
o3 1t
Faircharm Trading Estate
1 3
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
12
5 5t o7 1
NO RM AN RO AD
THIS DRAWING
y wa b Su
n o i t a t S h c i w n e e r G
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2011. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN
El Sub Sta
CSO DROP SHAFT 15m ID
SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
8 1
3 1 t o 3 9
2 8
2 7
nH a Me
d Mu
y B Bd &L t s n o Co r Bo
NOTES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW: 1. PARTIAL CLOSURE OF LCN65 CYCLE ROUTE, DIVERSION PROVIDED. INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS CONTROLLING ACCESS TO SITE ARES AND NORMAN ROAD. INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN NORMAN ROAD TO PREVENT PARKING IN SITE AREA. DETAILS TO BE AGREED WITH LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY.
hW g i r e t a
n a Me h g Hi
dC r o f t p De
W CCL
r e t Wa
2.
1 2
3 2 2 2
Post
Posts
3.
7 1
159
L Twr
1 6 1
PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 18-20 MONTHS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - 18-20 MONTHS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 1
k e e r
9 5 1
7 5 1
LEGEND
AREA OF ROAD/FOOTWAY CLOSURE
Community Centre
TEMPORARY WORKS
EXCAVATION
1 4 1
SITE WORKING AREA
PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE DIVERSION ROUTE
N m or an
H
TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE
CONSTRUCTION ROUTE
e s ou
BUS STOP
I n d u s t r i a l s t a 2E t e
ub S l E
5
4
6
Status:
N
3
a t S
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
d u M
7
W t n e K
A
f r a h
ud
84
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
d r a Y
W W n B u S f r a h
4 2
e s u o h e r a
d r a l l o B
s r e d l i u B
e dg i Br
LW
ng i t f Li
HW
L S
e g d i r B t o o F
H P
W L M
B o r o
1 3 1
P M
5 2 . 5
TEMPORARY WORKS
e a n
u d
H i g h
C o n s t & L B C
Pu mp i n g St a t i o n
1 2 5
a t e r
C D L W e p t f o r d
B d y
N o r ma nH o u s e
BS
AD
4 7
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL
RO
10 m
40 m
Se wa g e
e d i s k e e r e t r n C e C
DE I S EK RE
14
HI GH
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
EE NW
Th eJ u b i l e e
Wa t e r
l E t a S b u S
a t S b u S l E
B C T
m 3 . 3
8 5
37 North Wharf Road, Paddington, London W2 1AF

B L
B F
an d
M HW
a t S b u S l E
Site Name: Project Name:
C33XV - GREENWICH PS
SITE BOUNDARY AREA
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
m 3 . 3
s t s o P
k T
Drawing Title:
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN C33XV & CL005 (OPTION 2)

PLOTTED ON
04/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_2\dms04464\100-DE-TRA-C33XV-873102.dgn
m 3 . 3
100-DE-TRA-C33XV-873102

12
r af t
A g n i d l i u B
Location / Town:
GREENWICH - CS33X - GREENWICH PS
1:500
A1
AA
5 0
0 1 o t 1
9 3 o t 1 3
d u M
8 3
C g n i d l i u B
Me a n
8 7
d u M
H P
The Point, 7th Floor,
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
JYAS
WASTE
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
m t e r a a t h s c r E i a g F n i d a r T
M HW
B g n i d l i u B
8 o t 12
I CH
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
JSHE
EPER
PSTV
29/09/2011
1 0 1
GR
Hi g h
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
C r e e k
1 1 0 t o1 1 4
0 1
9
a t S b u S l E
2 2 3 2
THIS DRAWING
m 9 . 3
55
1 2
o t 71
N O R M N A R O D A
7 1
PEDESTRIAN / CYCLE DIVERSION ROUTE
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT,
9 5 1
FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
m 8 . 3
e t a t s 5 E 1 l a i r t s r u w d T n I L 4 1 h c i w n e e r G
6 1
7
t s o P
NOTES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW:
y t i n u m e m r t o n C e C
1.
PARTIAL CLOSURE OF LCN65 CYCLE ROUTE, DIVERSION PROVIDED. INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS CONTROLLING ACCESS TO SITE ARES AND NORMAN ROAD. INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN NORMAN ROAD TO PREVENT PARKING IN SITE AREA. DETAILS TO BE AGREED WITH LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY.
2.
3.
1 1
0 1
INTRODUCTION OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS TO ACCOMMODATE PASSING VEHICLES. DETAILS TO BE AGREED WITH LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY.
PROVISIONAL DURATIONS: MAIN SITE - 18-20 MONTHS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - 18-20 MONTHS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PHASES - 1
m 0 . 4
1 t o 3
LEGEND AREA OF ROAD/FOOTWAY CLOSURE
M n a e H h g i W r e t a
94
EXCAVATION
SITE WORKING AREA
PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE DIVERSION ROUTE
TRAFFIC DIVERSION ROUTE
CONSTRUCTION ROUTE
B L
BUS STOP
1 8t o3 0
1 5 t o 1 7
8 o t 12
1 1 t o1 4
8 2
8 o t
7 2
Appendix 6 Services and geology plan
Appendix 6 Page 1
O AND
TH WI
1
1 8
8 1
2
5505B
5 7 3
3
M
U n d
4
ha r f
ud
5
m m 0 5 1
9502
6
Status:
NED
o 1t
WO EV
91 4
25m 1
1 3
2 1
o 3t 1
Trinity Laban
WO
5 3
3 7
WO
SE
5 6 1 1 Z
9 4
1 37 2
0 5
BS
Thanet Wharf
WO
WO
8 3
WO
5503
4.1m
8"
" 3
9 21 1
m m 0 0 1
1 7
WO
3"
A B A N ESS D O N E D
P
45 1
0 6 8 5
8501
W L C C
3 1 x 8
d u M
SE VMH LS
7 5
0 2 o t 5 1
2 4
4502
"
5 0 3
FH
4 "
S T
1 4
WO
m m 0 8 1 5 0 3
5511
P
4 1
5 0 3
HP PE "
0m m
360 7
o t 5 7
PE 1 00
1 5
Playground
Bollard
9 1 4
3 4 1 1
"
Hiltons Wharf
9406
11
33
1 3 7 2
4 "
E N O D N " A 4 B A
3.7m
"
" 4
o t
2 6 7
S E V R A T D
4 4
T E E R T NS O H T R E B
LA R
M e n r u o b s n e v a R
R C
Bollard
E M
m m 5 0 0 3 8 s 1 n o i s n a m m 0 0 2
8 "
m m 0 0 2
" 3
P
55
A B A N D O N E D
Depot
7 0
1 25 mm
3.9m
9405
5
C O P TT LA A C G E
S E W
35
38
WO
E R
6 4
LI 2 T " T LE
t o
AWAITING OS DATA
1 t o 7 8
81 3
I C H
13
3 05
WI TH
8 GRE " EN
E A S T
552
T E E R T ES Z N O R B
4.6m
1 00 m
1 21 9
4 " F I R E
1 t o 3 3
9404
LI NE D
AB AN DO NE D
4 0 Fi n c hH o u s e
SE WE R
SL I P
t o
1 50m m
1t o
Mu d
6 "
7401 2 " CP
6
ST RE ET
2 4
2 2 5
0 4 o t 1
1 t o 3 5
PROPOSED NETWORK PENDING
ADOPTION AGREEMENT
RANDALL PLACE AWAITING OS DATA
KN OT T
CI
e s u o H s r e g n o C
1
9403
" 6"
5305
5 0 3
SU 4302
5 0 3
554
5 0 3
" 3
4.5m
3 0 5
Sun Wharf
2 4
BS 5306 IL-0.56m
Warehouse
7001
8"
0 4 o t 1
5302 VMH
1 00 m m
e s u o H r e r r a F
x 8 1 3
1 21 9 PE1 00 HPPE"
8 4
3.9m
Bollard
39
4.3m
M HW
M e c h a n i c s P a t h
CL005 (6373m)
Builders Yard
2 2 5
LS VMH CL4.03m IL-9999m

5 2 2
ML W
7302 SE
MP 5.25
WO BS
3.8m
WI TH 25mm CREEKS 1
SL
5 2 2
0309
UT H
2 2 5
5 2 2
9301
TS MO
x 91 4
1869
2 2 5 BOC 1445
I DE
ST RA I GH
3 0 5
2134
1870
Posts
5301
) H C N A R Y B E S D N O M R E B 1( . O R N WE E L S VE E W L O L 4 3 1 2
1 372
225
Foot Bridge
DB BS
2 1 3 4
DP
Creekside
nH a Me
4 3 1 2
MLW
d Mu
IL-2.27m DS IL0.48m
5206
Centre
4 3 1 2
" 6" CI SLI P LI NED 305
El Sub Sta
N I A M 1( . O R N WE E L S VE E W L O L ) E N I L
AN DO NE
4306
2 1 3 4
DP
SE
5 0 9 1
0 6 o t 1
7204
e s u o H n e d l o H
D E R E T E " M 4
R E
4 1 9 x
7201
W E S W N E E R G T S A E H C I
AB
R WE E F S E I L E H R C WI N E E R T G S A E
4212
3.3m
2 o1 8t
2 o1 8t
2 7 3 1
Building B
CASCADE IL-5.88m IL-4.57m IL-5.49m
4.0m
5208
LB
Building C
0 1 9
40
7223
6 2
PS
TB
STORM STATION - GREENWICH SPS GREEP1BZ
ABANDONED 9204 SE 0208
1 to 60
e s u o wH a h s l Wi
8 3 4 2
305
IL-5.88m
PS
S t a t i o n
4 0 0 0
5211
8 3 4 2
3.3m
VMH VC
Building A
0 0 4 2
p i n g
PS
4217
a g e
6"
F I R E
H
Mud
4 11
1 0 6 7
D R O F T P E D
8 2 0 1
SE
8204
WO
S e w
0 11
42
PS
a t e r
381
i g h
El Sub Sta
x 2 4 3 8
FV
8130
IL-0.67m
IL-0.68m
2 7 3 1
7209
19
Mud
3 5 0 5
BS
o t
VT
e a n
5t o7
Warehouse
GREENWICH TERMINAL SPS
PH
1 3 1
GREEP1ZZ ALSO GREEP1AZ FV
1 0 6 7
El Sub Sta
Wa r e h o u s e
a t e r
7116 PS PS
1 0 6 7
IL-0.73m SE
3200
305
Crane
5 2 1
5 0 5 3
" 3
E E L D N A
i g h
0 1
1 2
8120 SE
IL-0.69m
Z 5 5 9 / 5 6 8 / 6 1 1 / 8 0 4 / 8 4 8
W D E N I L
5 0 3
H T 5 I 0
3
7 6 0 1
4.7m
4104 SU
W E S V E L H G I H L E R E 1 . O N N I A M (
) E N I L 7 6 0 1
TCB
W N E E R G 3083
SYPHON SHAFT
H C I
1143 SYPHON SHAFT74
x 686
SOUTHERN OUTFALL SEWER NO.2 (GREENWICH SECTION)
1104
1147
IL-0.59m LS
SE
to
1372
60 66
96a
x 762 8102
72
305 8101
CL6.77m IL-0.78m
305
IL-0.58m
8 1
100
54
1105
49
44
1 50mm
7 6 0 1
3 8
4109 SE
N DRI VE
W MH
W E S H C N A R B
R E
SE
IL-0.74m
EG ERTO
7 6 0 1
6005 SE
4 1 9
ASHBU RN
) E N I N L I A M 1( . O N
Deptford Creek
Mud
SEW ER ( EGER TON ROAD DI V ER SI ON)
381
1 2"
1149
6002
0 1 6 x
PW
2
PH
2 5
3"
D
6
7 6 0 1
1 3
1 9
an d
4"
x 68 6
1 50mm
at er
1 0 0
1 1 43
i gh
ea n
3 Miller
"
1 00 m
1 2
1 00 m
4 0
OV E
e l a n i H e o u Kl s e ei n
3"
"
6 1 0
3 0 4 8
39
Deptford Creek
MLW
1 2
Mortuary
1 50m m
9 1 4
4 8
W MH
Mud
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
3 "
e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_4\dms04464\100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173301.dgn
152
1 2 "
1 8 1 8 a
" 3
IL0.68m
7002
3 "
0008
4"
Mud
1 2"
1 t o 8
Binnie Court
9 t o 1 6
3 "
81 CA TH ER I NE
y d B d r a B&W L
"
Mud
"
PW
3"
6001
H o u s e
3 0 5
0 0 1
6.1m
1 2 3 1 2 5
GR
3 0 5
1 2 1
4 4
S C
D 1817 E V O N S H P I R l E y m D o R u I V t h E
1 5 2
Drawing Title:
SERVICES AND GEOLOGY PLAN - C33XV CL004/CL005 -GREENWICH CONNECTION TUNNEL

9 3 a
Drawing No.:
30 5
4 8
y d B t s n o C o r o B
5 0
2 2 9
3 0 5
5 5
Warehouse
SE
F I R E 6007
7001
6 1
Mud
6 5
r e t Wa h g i H n a e M
3 6006 "
6000
W N E E R G
Tks
8001
Ashburnham
7 4
7004
1 3 4
H C I
House
RAV ENSB OURN E AN D LE E GR EEN
D A O R
3 "
8 1
1 8
W E S
B a r n s t a p l e 9 t H o o 1 6 u s e
8 8
Skill Centre
R E
1 t o 8
3 "
4 "
A S H B U R N H A MG R O V E
WO 242
LB
Site Name:
1 3 6
10.5m
Project Name:
3 0 5
WO 1815
0011
8 7
3 "
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
CP CL10.56m IL9.19m
9 1
1001
R O Y A L
r af t
F I R E
1 372
A S H B U R N H A G M R O V E
SE
0009
WO
8 5
Location / Town:
Scale:
Sheet Size:
Rev:
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173301
1:1000
A1
AA
5 0
0.75m
3 9
4 0 a 4 0
4 3
1 6 2 5
7
37
Skill Centre
2
3 8 1
3 5
1 7
3 0
1 8
2 6
LLL 6S
3122
1 to 10
6010 CP
RAV EN SBOURN E AND LEE GR EEN S EW ER ( MAI N LI NE)
7 6 0 1
7 5 6009

7 7
BS
IL0.57m
r e t a hW g i H n a Me
BOC 2529
PH
2 7
D E S 3 O 3 5 P O R P
4 1 o t 1 1
8 4 0 3
3 "
3 0 5
8002
6t o1 1
3 1 t o 3 9
hW g i nH a Me
BOC 1799
Mud
A R F F E
0 1 6 x
0 5 8 8 #
2 8
SITE BOUNDARY
Lamley House
HAM R ETREA T
Surgery
3 0 5
S TM A R K SC L O S E
0004 SE
8003
9001A
Ada Kennedy
0010
Court
IL0.59m
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
A r l i n g t o n P l
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
6.0m
2 6
Project Group:
0005
WASTE
1 0 0
2 2
r e t a
1 to 6
7 to 12
s C h ( u U r n c i h t e d R e f o r m e d w We i t h s t G r e e n w i c M h e t h o d i s t C h u r c h )
S t M a r k
381
1150
1t o5
SE
39
LS
4 0
38
37
5 1 o t
7 1
N I A M (
DP
35
28
27
21
7107
WO
15
10
f r a h nW y l e v E
67 0 1
) E N I L
0 3
IL1.63m
o t
" 6 "
5 8
e e l i b u J e h T
8 1
I C
R C
P E I D I L S K S E E
0 5 1
PH
7 8
7105B
3505
LS VMH
7104 SE
M A H N R U B H S A
8108 SE
PLACE
3505
3"
" 3
PS
3 "
A S H B U R N H A MP L A C E
2 0
0 0 1
5 0 5 3
VMH LS
4 "
9.5m
DC
1814
8105 SE
1813
0105
on f i de nt i al
m m 5 2 1
5 0 3
5101
BOC 2700
1 0 1
H G I H
4 9
0 0 1 41 P E
D A O R
DB
0106 SE
PS
1 5 0
5 7
" E P P H
PS IL-0.54m 1067
381
AV
" 4
IL-0.65m
V A R
G RE ENW I CH S O UT H ST REET
Harold Wharf
e a n
PS
LB
SE
3 0 4 8
" 3 7106 " 2 1
AV
4 "
8 9
1826
E N R U O B S N E
4 0 1
WB
IL-0.69m
W E S N E E R G R E
N O T R E G E (
3"
8103B " 3
0 2 1 o t 6 0 1
BF
3082
V I D D A O R
) N O I S R E
a 4 3 1 o t 2 2 1
Tk
E S O L C
WO
GAS
- LOW PRESSURE ABOVE 300mm DIAMETER - INTERMEDIATE, MEDIUM OR HIGH PRESSURE 0 100 m
1103
1812
10 m
4 1
El
SE
Sub Sta
1106
SCALE 1 : 1000
9.1m
4 9
El Sub Sta
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
0114
AA
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
2 0 0 mm
o t
3 2
7227
M R O T S
2 2
P u m
5207
E G R A H C S I D
1 4 1
SE
" 3
6 o t 1
D N A L T I A M
Lambard House
305
8 1
V L U C
T R E
Centre
9218 8202
IL-0.72m
1828
D E S O P O R P
3 1
2 1 o t 7
2 1
4 5 7
" 6
Community
m m 0 0 0 1
8 5 2 1
2 4
PS
7202 E R I F
7201A CP
2 1
2 5
El Sub Sta
8 3 4 2
C33XV (18434m)
CL PS 7208
7 5 4
" 2 1
VT
WO SE
4 1
0 4
9205
8 3
Posts
6 2 1 2 2
o3 1t
PS
7 5 1
SE
3076
a 2 1
" 3
7 3
3.5m
3.3m
IL-4.65m
FB
) E N I N L I A M 2 ( . O R N WE E L S VE E W L O L
ABANDONED
9202A
1151
9217
5 3
" 3
E R I F
PS SE
VT
023
9209 SE
AV
5 0 5 3
VMH LS
9 5 1
6 3 1
DC
VT
8 3 1
CL004 (10557m)
4 1
15
6 1
11

L Twr
Post
1 3
0 1
5315
0 . 7 5 "
2 3
1 5 0 m m F I R E
El Su b St a
Business Park
1 0 0 m m
1 5 0
8401
3 "
Greenwich
1 t o 3 9 1 1
8 3 o t 1
3 2 o t 1
19
21
T A R V E S
6 "
W A Y
15
5100
29
5 0 9 1
0308
5 2 2
9300
9302
CP
Depot
5 2 2
9201
El Sub Sta
0312
T T
9 6 1
TCB
5 0 3
IL-0.4m 0209
21
3 2 2 2
Post
Posts
5 6 1
RAMP
7 1
" 3
3 "
6.7m
244
9211
159
L Twr
3 6 1
IL-0.77m
1 6 1
" 2 1
BS
7 1 o t 1 1
E P P m H m 5 D E N O D N A B A
Mud
B I n r d o u 2 o s k t m r i a a l s E r h s t a t e
5
4
1868
2 2 5
9 1 4
2 3
Kent Wharf
3 4
o t
7 5 7 5 1 1 7 5 2 2 7 5 3 3 7 4 5 4
Bollard
0115
3 o4 3t 3
2958
4.6m
D E N O D N A B A
Hi l t on s
(HE)
1866
2 1
T E E R T TS N O 5 0 M 3 E R A L C
GEOLOGY
m
E" HPP 00 PE1
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
5 m m
1935
" 3
1863
P
6 0 o1 1t
m 25m 1
Ground level
L
AWAITING OS DATA
105 (m OD + 100)
Haddo House
t o 32
2 9t o3 3 1 9t o2 3
9t o1 3
1 5 0
" 3
3 4 1 1 3 4 1 1
2 6 7
m 00m 1
4 3
4 9
97 (m OD + 100)Base of Made Ground

" 1861 4
0405 0406
and Superficial THIS DRAWING
47
51
1862
oH d d a H
6 0 o1 1t e s u o
" 3
Y A
mm 00 1
r i ma e T
e s u o H
MAPPING REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF ORDNANCE SURVEY Base of Thanet Sand Formation 83 (m OD + 100) ON BEHALF OF HMSO. ' CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2011. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ORDNANCE SURVEY LICENCE NUMBER 100019345
57 59
9401
e s u o 4 H o4 r i 1t a m e T
ot 83
49
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS
WO
O T
51
PROPOSED NETWORK PENDING
ADOPTION AGREEMENT
ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE Suggested invert level of shaft 52.67(m OD + 100) THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
El Sub Sta
RANDALL PLACE
2
5 2 5
E B
2 6
0 1
6 3 o t
0 2 2 6
m m 0 5 1
9402
D OL
ON S R A E P
T E E R T S
D E N O D N A B A
mm 50 1
2 2
T E E R T NS O S 5 R 2 A E 5 DP L O
1 o t 4 3 5 2
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO THE TUNNEL DATUM
IL-4.21m
3"
e s u w Ho a h s l Wi
0 o6 1t
WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
5 0 3
NOTES:
27
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.
1 8
5 0 3
12
5 5t o7 1
NORM AN ROAD
Subway
LEGEND
FW FW
229
FOUL WATER
SW
SW
SURFACE WATER
y wa b Su
CLEAN WATER
Chalk
G G
GAS
CABTV
Hotel
CABTV
FIBRE OPTICS
1 4
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
y B Bd &L t s n o Co r Bo W CCL
hW g i r e t a
n a Me h g Hi
LV
LV
LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
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-0.7m
dC r o f t p De
HV
HV
HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES
V RA
r e t Wa
E RN OU SB EN
EXISTING TUNNELS
D AN
k e e r
4 "
0205
1 38
E LE
1 7
SE
College
9
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
WATER - ALL TW ASSETS - ALL TW ASSETS
N EE GR
R I
1 0
W SE
305
ER
1 1
AN RM NO ( AD RO
l e p a Ch
2 5
1203 SE
243
1204
STORM & FOUL SEWERS

9 1 4
2 7
1 1 1 6 1 7 2
2 o1 8t
8.8m
) ON I CT SE
OTHER SIGNIFICANT UTILITIES ARE DEFINED AS:

WO
2 9
2
8 9 4 1 9 03 1 8 1 4 7 2 1 5 2 6 2
TELECOMS ELECTRICITY
- ONLY FIBRE OPTIC CABLES - HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES - LARGE BANKS OF LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
3 1
1 8 3
3 "
3 1 a 3 3
8 o1 3t 1
524 1
8 "
3"
N m or an H
7 5 0 2 3 2
AD E RO AL ANG D L
e s ou
4"
RE 6" FI
305
3 1
5 1
1 0 1 9
6 5
M HW
R I F
E R I F RE I E " R 6 " F I E F 6 R I F
6
1 3 2 2
"
"
-->
4 0
m m 0 0 1 F R I E
9 5
Appendix 7 Construction phase layout
Appendix 7 Page 1
Hi g h
RM
e a n
2
a t S b u S l E
AN
6
o 1t 7
NO
0 9
o 7t 0 1
N
34 t o
2 2 1
Play Centre
8 o9 1t 9
T R U O DC R O F U R B
Status:
Wharf (GLC)
M
U n d
ha r f
ud
8 1
1 8
o 3t 1
Trinity Laban
(HE)
5 5
4.6m
5 3
Hi l t on s
1 5
T E E R T TS N O M E R A L C
Playground
3 5
3 7
9 4
Thanet Wharf
4.1m
P
6 0 o1 1t
0 5
8 3
1 7
ESS
A
D Fn
0 6 8 5
W L C C
d u M
7 5
4 1 o t 7
6 o t 1
0 2 o t 5 1
P
4 1
2 4
1 4
E M
2 2 o t 1
s n o i s n a M e n r u o b s n e v a R
y d BB &L t s n o C o r o B T E E R R T C NS O H T R E B
Bollard
9 3
0 4
47
P
51
LA R
R C
R C
y d BB &L t s n o C o r o B
Playground Bollard P
6.2m
Hiltons Wharf
11
EXISTING EAST GREENWICH SEWER
Depot
51
7 0
3.9m
C O P TT LA A C G E
t o
6 4
35
13
LI TT LE
4.6m
1
1 t o 7 8
o u s e
Mud
Fi n c hH
T E E R T YS E F F O C
4 0
Mu d
B I n r d o u 2 o s k t m r i a a l r s E h s t a t e
5
4
1 t o 3 3
1t o
1 t o 2 4
5.8m
0 4 o t 1
1 t o 3 5
1
6
Greenwich Business Park
1 1
1 t o 3 9
8 3 o t 1 15 3 2 o t 1 19
4.5m
Sun Wharf
2 4
Warehouse
0 4 o t 1
S T RE E T
1 8
8 4
3.9m
Bollard
SITE ACCESS EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING AREA
4.3m
Builders Yard
ML W
4.9m
M HW
C33XV SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 18434m
El Sub Sta
MP 5.25 SL
FOOTPATH DIVERSION
CREEKSI DE
3.8m
Swimming Pool
SITE ACCESS
Foot Bridge Lifting Bridge
Posts
Post
1 4
Creekside
nH a Me
El
0 6 o t 1
m 0 5 2
5.2m
Centre
EXISTING EAST GREENWICH STORM RELIEF SEWER
Sub Sta
750m
n a Me
Library
6e o 1t s u n Ho e d l Ho
GANTRY CRANE
2000m
9 6 1
3.3m
EXISTING INCOMING LOW LEVEL SEWERS

2 o1 8t
2.5m SQUARE CONNECTION CULVERT

2 o1 8t
4200m
4 1
15
6 1
Building B
T E E R T NS I F F I G
LB
Building C
4.0m
0 1 9
11
Post

L Twr
TCB
TW OPERATIONAL AREA
Posts
Faircharm
El Sub Sta
7 5 1
2 o1 8t
S t a t i o n
1 to 60
Trading Estate
250m
p i n g
Community Centre
1 4 1
P u m
Building A
5.3m
T E E R T MS A H K N A R F
4.7m
a g e
e s u o H s r e p e e k l o o h c S
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 9995m
3.3m
0 o6 1t
CL004 SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 10557m

6 o t 1
2 1 o t 7
10 m
D N A L T I A M
40 m
S e w
SCALE 1 : 500
E S O L Revision History C
Mud
W
to
a t e r
Tk
i g h
e a n
Cremer House
El Sub Sta
5t o7
PH
1 3 1
El Sub Sta
a t e r
Wa r e h o u s e
H i g h
Crane
5 2 1
e a n
Harold Wharf
1 to 46
LB
F r a n k h a mH o u s e
500m
4 9
SITE ACCESS
1 0 1
4.7m
TCB
96a
72
El Sub Sta
2
HAM R ETREA T
N DRI VE
D A O DR L A N I G E R
5.2m

W MH
PH
3 2
EG ERTO
ASHBU RN
Deptford Creek
M HW
PH
7 5
Fl e t c h e rP a t h
NEW BUTT LANE
at er
MH W
PW
2
i gh
ea n
4 1
3 1
t o B 8 a r n s t a p l e H o u s e 1
8 8
Drawing Title:
Skill Centre
Miller House
OV E
Tks
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT - C33XV + CL004 OPTION 1 - GREENWICH CT DRIVE

0 2
1 9
GR
Weir
TH ER I NE
PLOTTED ON
09/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
Warehouse
5 5
6 1
Mud
6 5
9 t o 1 6
Ashburnham
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173205
Skill Centre
2 23 24
7 4
8 1
1 to 10
Mud
Site Name:
1
7
Project Name:
1 3
1 9
PH
2 5
THAMES TUNNEL
2 6
3 0
Contract Name:
6.0m
r af t
2 6
r e t a hW g i nH a Me
Location / Town:
1:500
A1
AA
5 0
4 1 o t 1 1
2 7
113
111
109
105 103
101 99
107 97
D
65 69 71
67
3 1 t o 3 9
Mud
an d
2 8
Evelyn r e t a W Wharf h g i nH a Me
1 to 6
7 to 12
Lamley House
28
27
21
5 1 o t 7 1
EXISTING PUMPING STATION DISCHARGE SEWERS
15
10
f r a h nW y l e v E
o t
0 3
3 8
8 1
E D I S K E E R C
LISTED COAL SHEDS TO BE DISMANTLED, STORED AND REINSTATED FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION
PH
7 8
5 8
W N E E R G
H C I
PLACE M A H N R U B H S A
e e l i b u J e h T
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
WASTE
1 0 0
H G I H
D A O R
74 to
4 0 1
650m
El Sub Sta
54
60 66
49
44
on f i de nt i al
WB
1 5 0
a 4 3 1 o t 2 2 1
19
Primary School
Mud
o t
TW OPERATIONAL AREA
TW OPERATIONAL AREA
e s ou
42
Tidemill
14
0 11
o t
4 11
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
0 2 1 o t 6 0 1
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
2 0 0 mm
8 9
3.5m
3.3m
FB
INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
300m
1 3
o3 1t
CR O S S F I E L D
7 0
T A R V E S
7
A Y
TEMPORARY WORKING AREA = 4500m OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN
El Sub Sta
21
3 2 2 2
Post
Posts
5 6 1 3 6 1 1 6 1
7 1
159
L Twr
2 3
Kent Wharf
3 4
CL004
9 5 1
o t
7 5 7 5 1 1 7 5 2 2 7 5 3 3 7 4 5 4
Bollard
S T
7 3 o t 5 7
e s u o oH d d a H
6 0 o1 1t
6 0 o1 9t 9
3 o4 3t 3
2 3
0 1
50
0 5 1 o t 2 8
1 1 1 3 1 1 7 8 5 89 0 1 1 19 1 1 9 7 5 0 8 5 0 1 3 8 1 8
3 7 9 1 5 1 99 1 7 1 19 9 2 1 37 0 7 1 17 0 5 1 9 7 9
R C
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
o 1t 6
Playground Bol
23
DE I EKS CRE
0 1
CR
o 1t 1 3
2 1
HUR O RD C DEPTF REET CH ST

CR
THIS DRAWING
45 32
2 9t o3 3 1
1 t o
1 9t o2 3
Haddo House
9t o1 3
S E V R A Y T A W THIS
4 3
4 9
IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN
PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED,
S E V R A T W Y A
3.7m
55
57
DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES
o 4 H o4 r i 1t a m e T e s LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, u
49
59 ot 83
FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE
El Sub Sta
SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
2 6
6 3 o t
0 2 2 6
2 2
D L O
T E E R T NS O S R A E P
CR
El Su b St a
KEY:
12
5 5t o7 1
NORM AN RO AD
STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES
y wa b Su
e wn o Br e s u Ho
o 1t 4 1
Depot
CSO DROP SHAFT, CSO CONNECTION CULVERT, PRIMARY CRANE, SECONDARY CRANE AND CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
d Mu
PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING
hW g i r e t a
h g Hi
dC r o f t p De
r e t Wa
RD TFO DEP CHU RCH EET STR
k e e r
5 o4 1t
e s u Ho l l e t s Ca
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
N m or an H
17 18
25 26
15 16
61 63
e a n
2
a t S b u S l E
Hi g h
5
RM AN
6
o 1t 7 0 9
o 7t 0 1
NO
2 2 1
Play Centre
8 o9 1t 9
Wharf
U n d
ha r f
ud
(GLC)
1 8
8 1
o 3t 1
Trinity Laban
(HE)
Hi l t on s
1 5
3 5
5 3
3 7
9 4
Thanet Wharf
4.1m
0 5
8 3
1 7
A
D Fn
0 6 8 5
W L C C
d u M
7 5
4 1 o t 7
6 o t 1
0 2 o t 5 1
P
4 1
2 4
S T
1 4
9 3
0 4
R C
T E E R T NS O H T R E B
LA R
s n o i s n a M e n r u o b s n e v a R
R C
Bollard
E M
2 2 o t 1
P
51
6.2m
R C
y d BB &L t s n o C o r o B
Playground Bollard
59
Hiltons
EXISTING EAST GREENWICH SEWER
Wharf
11
Depot
51
7 0
3.9m
C O P TT LA A C G E
6 4
35
LI TT LE
t o
13
4.6m
1 t o 7 8
Mud
T E E R T YS E F F O C
4 0 Fi n c hH o u s e
1t o
0 4 o t 1
4.5m
Sun Wharf
2 4
0 4 o t 1
S T RE E T
1 8
8 4
3.9m
Bollard
SITE ACCESS EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING AREA
4.3m Builders Yard 4.9m

M HW
ML W
4200m
El Sub Sta
MP 5.25 SL
3.8m
Swimming Pool
CREEKSI DE
Posts
FOOTPATH DIVERSION
Foot Bridge
Post
1 4
Creekside
nH a Me
MLW
d Mu
m 0 5 2
5.2m
El
0 6 o t 1
Centre
SITE ACCESS
Sub Sta
750m
Library
GANTRY CRANE
2000m
EXISTING EAST GREENWICH STORM RELIEF SEWER

9 6 1

21
4 1
3.3m
EXISTING INCOMING LOW LEVEL SEWERS

Building B
SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 17222m

159 L Twr
1 6 1 3 6 1
4.0m
0 1 9
T E E R T NS I F F I G
LB
Building C
11
Post
TCB
TW OPERATIONAL AREA 300m

Posts

7
1 to 60
2 o1 8t
El Sub Sta
250m
S t a t i o n
W
Building A
p i n g
4.7m
T E E R T MS A H K N A R F
e s u o H s r e p e e k l o o h c S
5.3m
3.3m
0 o6 1t
P u m
S e w
to
0 11
42
Tidemill Primary School
o t
4 11
a g e
Mud
14
a t e r
i g h
El Sub Sta
Cremer House
19
Mud
e a n
Warehouse
5t o7
PH
0 2 1 o t 6 0 1
1 3 1
El Sub Sta
4 0 1
a t e r
650m
5 2 1
El Sub Sta
i g h
Crane
1 to 46
Harold Wharf
LB
F r a n k h a mH o u s e
500m
H G I H
4 9
D A O R
SITE ACCESS
1 0 1
4.7m
TCB
96a
72
3 8
El Sub Sta
2

HAM R ETREA T
N DRI VE
D A O DR L A N I G E R
5.2m
PH
3 2
EG ERTO
Fl e t c h e rP a t h
NEW BUTT LANE
1
7
1 3
MH W
PW
2
1 9
PH
2 5 2 6
3 0
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
6.0m
at er
8 B a r n s t a p l e 9 t H o o 1 6 u s e
8 8
Drawing Title:
i gh
Skill Centre
ea n
1 t o
Miller House
Tks
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT - C33XV + CL005 OPTION 2 - GREENWICH CT DRIVE

0 2
1 9
Weir
PLOTTED ON
09/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
5 5
Warehouse
6 1
Mud
6 5
Ashburnham
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173204
Skill Centre
2
4 1
3 1
r af t
Mud
7 4
8 1
1 to 10
r e t a hW g i H n a Me
ASHBU RN
Deptford Creek
PH
7 5
Location / Town:
1:500
A1
AA
5 0
4 1 o t 1 1
3 1 t o 3 9
2 7
2 6
113
109
111
105 103
107
101
99
97
D
65 69 71
67
Mud
an d
hW g i nH a e M
2 8
r e t a
1 to 6
7 to 12
Lamley House
Location Code:
OS Reference:
5 1 o t 7 1
C33XV SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 18434m
28
27
21
15
10
f r a h nW y l e v E W MH
0 3
o t
5 8
e e l i b u J e h T
8 1
E D I S K E E R C
LISTED COAL SHEDS TO BE DISMANTLED, STORED AND REINSTATED FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION
PH
7 8
M A H N R U B H S A
PLACE
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
WASTE
1 0 0
W N E E R G
H C I
74 to
54
60 66
49
44
on f i de nt i al
Wa r e h o u s e
WB
e a n
1 5 0
a 4 3 1 o t 2 2 1
Tk
o t
8 9
o3 1t
7 5 1
TW OPERATIONAL AREA
Community Centre
2 1 o t 7
10 m
40 m
EXISTING PUMPING STATION DISCHARGE SEWERS
6 o t 1
D N A L T I A M
SCALE 1 : 500
TW OPERATIONAL AREA
E S O L C
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
2 0 0 mm
3.5m
3.3m
FB
1 3
CR O S S F I E L D
7 0
Warehouse
2 3
0 1
5.8m
Mu d
B I n r d o u 2 o s k t m r i a a l r s E h s t a t e
2 4
1 t o 3 3
1 t o
1 t o 3 5
Greenwich Business Park

1 1
1 t o 3 9
3 2 o t 1
8 3 o t 1
CL005
7
T A R V E S
A Y
El Sub Sta
3 2 2 2
Post
Posts
5 6 1
2 3
Kent Wharf
3 4
9 5 1
o t
7 5 7 5 1 1 7 5 2 2 7 5 3 3 7 4 5 4
Bollard
3 o4 3t 3
50
0 5 1 o t 2 8
5 1 1
5 5
4.6m
T E E R T TS N O M E R A L C
Playground
P ESS
P
45
1
7 3 o t 5 7
oH d d a H
6 0 o1 1t e s u o
15
6 0 o1 9t 9
5 0 1
3 7 9 1 5 1 99 1 7 1 9 1 9 2 1 3 7 0 7 1 17 0 5 1 9 7 9
1 1 1 3 1 1 7 8 89 0 19 1 0 9 17
1 8
Status:
t o
T R U O DC R O F U R B
34
R C
Playground Bol
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
o 1t 6
DE I EKS CRE
23
0 1
CR
o 1t 1 3
2 1
HUR O RD C DEPTF REET CH ST

CR
6 0 o1 1t
THIS DRAWING
1 t o 32
2 9t o3 3 1 9t o2 3
Haddo House
9t o1 3
4 3
4 9
47
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN

S E V R A T
3.7m
Y A
PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES
e s LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, u
55
57 ot 83
49
o 4 H o4 r i 1t a m e T
FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE
El Sub Sta
SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
2 6
6 3 o t
0 2 2 6
2 2
D L O
T E E R T NS O S R A E P
CR
El Su b St a
19
21
KEY:
12
5 5t o7 1
NORM AN RO AD
STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES
y wa b Su
OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN

e wn o Br e s u Ho
o 1t 4 1
Depot
CSO DROP SHAFT, CSO CONNECTION CULVERT, PRIMARY CRANE, SECONDARY CRANE AND CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
PARKING / VEHICLE MARSHALLING
hW g i r e t a
n a Me
h g Hi
dC r o f t p De
r e t Wa
RD TFO DEP CHU RCH EET STR
2 o1 8t
2 o1 8t
k e e r
5 o4 1t
e s u Ho l l e t s Ca
N m or an H
e s ou
25 26
17 18
23 24
15 16
63
61
M HW
3
8 4
4 3.9m
1 3
6
Status:
12
Bollard
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
5 5t o7 1
NO RM AN ROAD
Builders Yard
ML W
CSO DROP SHAFT 12m I.D.
M HW
MP 5.25
BEWARE CLEARANCE TO DLR VIADUCT / TRACKS PARTICULARY FOR CLEARANCES WHEN USING CRANES FOR LIFTING ETC
THIS DRAWING
SL
50m
3.8m
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, SECONDARY CRANE FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER
Foot Bridge
Creekside
nH a Me
MLW
d Mu
El Sub Sta
EAST GREENWICH RELIEF SEWER
STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
1 4
Centre
hW g i r e t a
n a Me h g Hi
PRIMARY CRANE
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO THE TUNNEL DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
dC r o f t p De
NOTE : ACCESS
W CCL
r e t Wa
1. MEANS OF INTERCEPTION IS REPRESENTATIONAL AND FINAL DESIGN SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT.
400m
4 1
6 5 1 1
7 1
2 o1 8t
k e e r
Building B
4.0m
0 1 9
Building C
B
1 1
Post

L Twr
159
100m
El Sub Sta
CSO CONNECTION CULVERT 2.5m SQUARE
50m STOCKYARD, WORKSHOP AND STORES
S t a t i o n
EGRESS
Building A
p i n g
a g e
Mud
P u m
S e w
a t e r
Tk
Mud
i g h
0 11
o t
4 11
e a n
El Sub Sta
4 0 1
a t e r
i g h
Crane
5 2 1
10 m
40 m
SCALE 1 : 500
Harold Wharf
e a n
LB
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
1 0 1
SITE BOUNDARY AREA = 18434m
W N E E R G
TCB
H C I
H G I H
74 to
66 96a
72
PH
7 8
M A H N R U B H S A
o t 0 3
5 8
3 8
e e l i b u J e h T
N DRI VE
EG ERT O
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Drawing Title:
PH
CONSTRUCTION PHASE LAYOUT C33XV - CT RECEPTION & CSO SITE

7 5
02/11/2011 BY LOCATION : e:\async working dir\pw-ttp\_pdf_svc_2\dms04464\100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173302.dgn
PLOTTED ON
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173302
r af t
Lamley House
Location / Town:
1:500
A1
AA
5 0
5 1 o t 7 1
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3777
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
1 to 6
7 to 12
WASTE
1 0 0

8 1
on f i de nt i al
15
10
4 9
D A O R
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
8 9
o3 1t
FB
FLAP VALVE CHAMBER
CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
PH
1 3 1
7
KEY: EXCAVATED MATERIAL AND HANDLING AREA
Community Centre
1 4 1
CSO DROP SHAFT, CSO CONNECTION CULVERT, PRIMARY CRANE, SECONDARY CRANE AND CSO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER OFFICES, WELFARE AND CANTEEN
N m or an H
e s ou
4 1 o t 1 1
0 1 o t 1
3 1 t o 3 9
2 7
2 8
M HW
Appendix 8 Operational phase layout
Appendix 8 Page 1
L i f t i n g Br i d g
6
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
Keyplan:
N
3.8m
THIS DRAWING
A
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, VENTILATION BUILDING 15m x 5m x 5m HIGH FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
MLW
PERMANENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS
NOTES: 1. HARDSTANDING INDICATED FULLY ENCOMPASSING SHAFT/ TOP STRUCTURE. REDUCTION IN AREA CAN BE CONSIDERED.HARD STANDING TO BE INCORPORATED INTO EXISTING ROADS. 2. PERMANENT HARDSTANDING COULD BE DELETED WITH CRANES UTILISING EXISTING ROADS 3. ACCESS OPENING TO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER IS INDICATIVE ONLY DROP SHAFT 15m I.D.
n a Me
6 x 4m TOP STRUCTURE @ 104.5m (AOD+100)
h g Hi
AA
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE DARD
IGLR
12/11/2010
P u m
an d
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
TQ3677
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
a g e
4 1 1

Location / Town: Site Name: Project Name:
WASTE 5 0
Sheet Size: Rev:
GREENWICH - CS33X - GREENWICH PS C33XV - GREENWICH PS
a t e r
0 1 1
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
Drawing Title:
i g h
OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT C33XV - GREENWICH CT - DRIVE SITE

Drawing No.: Scale:
PLOTTED ON
02/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173203
r af t
S e w
o t
1:250
A1
AB
1 0 0
on f i de nt i al
p i n g
S t a t i o n
1 5 0
PENSTOCK ACCESS
10 m
10 m
SCALE 1 : 250
Revision History
Iss
Description
Dsgnr
Chkd
Appd
Date
AB
AMENDED TITLE BLOCK
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
2 0 0 mm
o3 1t
dC r o f t p De
C
VENTILATION COLUMN
W CCL
r e t Wa
4 x 3m FLAP VALVE CHAMBER @104.5m (AOD+100)
PERMANENT ACCESS
EAST GREENWHICH RELIEF SEWER
k e e r
2.5m SQUARE CONNECTION CULVERT ACCESS
4.0m
0 1 9
1 1
Post
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATIONAL PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
N m or an H
e s ou
6
Status:
FOR INFORMATION
0 1
Keyplan:
N
8 4
3.9m
Bollard
A Builders Yard
ML W
M HW
MP 5.25 SL
PERMANENT HARDSTANDING FOR FUTURE CRANE ACCESS
VENTILATION BUILDING 15m x 5m x 5m HIGH
3.8m
6 x 4m TOP STRUCTURE @ 104.5m (AOD+100)
Foot Bridge
DROP SHAFT 12m I.D. COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. 2 x 0.6 x 1.5m HIGH ELECTRICAL CONTROL KIOSK ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO THE TUNNEL DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
Creekside
nH a Me
MLW
d Mu
4 x 3m FLAP VALVE CHAMBER @107m (AOD+100)
Centre
PERMANENT ACCESS
EAST GREENWICH RELIEF SEWER
4 1
6 5 1 1
Building B
4.0m
0 1 9
ACCESS
Building C
1 1
Post

L Twr
VENTILATION COLUMN
S t a t i o n
Building A
p i n g
P u m
a g e
Mud
S e w
a t e r
Tk
Mud
i g h
10 m
40 m
e a n
PH
0 2 1 o t 6 0 1
1 3 1
SCALE 1 : 500
Revision History
El Sub Sta
Iss Description Dsgnr Chkd Appd Date
AA
FIRST ISSUE
SDYE
PSTV
DARD
12/08/2011
a t e r
5 2 1
LB
1 0 1
66 96a

72
an d
TCB
W N E E R G
PH
7 8
H C I
H G I H
74 to
Security Reference:
Drawn By:
N/A
TQ3777
UBR
Sub Process:
APUR
M A H N R U B H S A
o t 0 3
Project Group:

WASTE 5 0
Sheet Size: Rev:
5 8
3 8
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:
ERTO N DRI VE
1 to 6
7 to 12
Drawing Title:
Lamley House
OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT C33XV - CT RECEPTION & CSO SITE

Drawing No.: Scale:
PLOTTED ON
09/11/2011
BY
LOCATION :
100-DL-PNC-C33XV-173303
r af t
e e l i b u J e h T
1:500
A1
AA
1 0 0
15
10
4 9
D A O R
on f i de nt i al
i g h
e a n
1 5 0
2 0 0 mm
0 11
o t
4 11
4 0 1
8 9
o3 1t
3.8m x 6.8m INTERCEPTION CHAMBER
FB
PENSTOCK ACCESS
1 3
12
5 5t o7 1
NO RM AN ROAD
THIS DRAWING
THIS IS AN INDICATIVE WORKING DRAFT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS ONLY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DRAFT PLAN MUST NOT BE COPIED, DISTRIBUTED OR SHOWN TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THAMES WATER UTILITIES LIMITED. IT PROVIDES AN INDICATION OF SITES THAT, FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, MAY BE CONFIRMED AS BEING ON THE SHORTLIST OF CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR THE PROPOSED THAMES TUNNEL. INCLUSION OF A SITE ON THIS DRAFT PLAN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN THAT SUCH SITE WILL BE SELECTED AS A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO FORM PART OF THE THAMES TUNNEL SCHEME.
El Sub Sta
NOTES: 1. HARDSTANDING INDICATED FULLY ENCOMPASSING SHAFT/ TOP STRUCTURE. REDUCTION IN AREA CAN BE CONSIDERED AND HARD STANDING TO BE INCORPORATED INTO EXISTING ROADS. 2. PERMANENT HARDSTANDING COULD BE DELETED WITH CRANES UTILISING EXISTING ROADS 3. ACCESS OPENING TO INTERCEPTION CHAMBER IS INDICATIVE ONLY
5 1 o t 7 1
8 1
3 1 t o 3 9
2 8
1 4
hW g i r e t a
n a Me h g Hi
dC r o f t p De
W CCL
r e t Wa
1 2
7 1
2 o1 8t
k e e r
159
Community Centre
1 4 1
DISCLAIMER: INDICATIVE OPERATION PHASE ARRANGEMENT. BASED ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
N m or an H
e s ou
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
COORDINATES ARE TO ORDNANCE SURVEY DATUM OSGB36. ALL LEVELS ARE IN METRES AND RELATE TO A LOCAL HEIGHT DATUM WHICH IS 100 METRES BELOW ORDNANCE DATUM NEWLYN.
NOTE:
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 150 0 50
Scale: Sheet Size: Rev:
- - 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
Location Code: OS Reference: Security Reference: Drawn By:
N/A
Project Group:
---
UBR
Sub Process:
AP
LTTDT
WASTE LONDON N/A
THAMES TUNNEL
Contract Name:

Drawing Title:
SCALE 1:25
GENERIC ELEVATION AND TOP STRUCTURE FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE LAYOUT - CSO SITES
Drawing No.:
100-DH-GEN-00000-000001
PLOTTED ON 04\12\09 BY Andy.Purdy LOCATION : Thames Tideway Tunnel x:\project\371840\cad\design data\cad thames\drawings\planning-consents\Routewide\100-DH-GEN-00000-000001.dgn c Thames Water Utilities Ltd 2008
NTS
A1
AB
100
200mm
VARIBLE DEPENDING ON
Appendix 9 Environmental appraisal tables

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Access to road network Comments Site split between two parcels of land. Both are situated on land north of Greenwich High Road, with one west of Norman Road within and around the sewage pumping station and one east of Norman Road. Four accesses are proposed for the construction site; Access 1 is located on Greenwich High Road and will utilise the existing access to the Mitigation required and conclusions Site located on two parcels of land. One is located on land within the pumping station and the second is to the east of Norman Road in Greenwich Industrial Estate. The four proposed construction site accesses are located on Norman Road and Greenwich High Road. There is a rail bridge just to the north of the site entrance on Option 2 Comments Site split between two parcels of land. Both are situated on land north of Greenwich High Road with one west of Norman Road within and around the sewage pumping station and one north of the railway line, also to the west of Norman Road. Five accesses are proposed for the construction site. Accesses 1 to 3 are the same as Option 1. Accesses 4 and 5 Mitigation required and conclusions Site located on two parcels of land. One is located on land within the pumping station and the second is to the north of the pumping station at an existing builders yard. The five proposed construction site accesses are located on Norman Road and Greenwich High Road. There is a rail bridge between the site areas on Norman Road, Option 3 Comments Site situated on land north of Greenwich High Road and west of Norman Road within the sewage pumping station land. Temporary site access uses existing access to site on Norman Road. Site egress onto Greenwich High Road. Adequate visibility available from the site egress (existing access to pumping station). Norman Road is street lit and subject to a Mitigation required and conclusions Site located on land within pumping station. The proposed access uses an existing access on Norman Road and egress via existing access to pumping station on Greenwich High Road. There is a rail bridge just to the north of the site entrance on Norman Road, however there is no apparent height restriction and in any case it is not envisaged that site traffic will
Appendix 9 Page 1

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions sewage pumping Norman Road, station and be however there is used for no apparent personnel and height restriction light vehicles. and in any case it is not envisaged Access 2 is that site traffic will located on use this route. Norman Road at an existing, albeit Permanent disused access to access has been assumed to be the pumping station. The third taken through the main entrance to access is also the pumping located on station on Norman Road at Greenwich High an existing Road. access to a private road. Some existing This access has on-street parking a 3.9m height located opposite restriction and is the access on therefore not Norman Road will likely to be require removal. suitable for all This will displace construction five spaces. vehicles. Route to TLRN The fourth access possible with no Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions are located to the however there is north of the no apparent railway line at height existing accesses restriction. to the builders Permanent yard. access has been assumed To enable to be taken access, parking on Norman Road through the main entrance to opposite accesses 2 and 3 the pumping station on will need to be Greenwich High removed. Road. Adequate visibility appears Some existing to be available on-street from all five parking located access points. opposite the access on Both Greenwich Norman Road High Road and Norman Road are will require removal. This street lit and will displace five subject to a spaces. 30mph speed limit. There is a rail bridge located between the two Comments Option 3 Mitigation required and conclusions 30mph speed limit. use this route. There is a rail Site egress and bridge just to the permanent north of the site access has been entrance on assumed to be Norman Road, taken through the however there is main entrance to no visible height the pumping restriction and in station on any case it is not Greenwich High envisaged that site Road. traffic will use this Some existing route. on-street parking Permanent access located provided within the diagonally pumping station opposite the boundary. It has access may been assumed require removal. vehicles will obtain This will displace access through five spaces. the main entrance Existing footpath/ to pumping station cycle route will on Greenwich require diversion High Road. or closure. There are some Route to TLRN on-street parking possible with no metered bays visible Comments
Appendix 9 Page 2

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments is located on the eastern side of Norman Road at an existing access to the Greenwich Industrial Estate. To enable access, parking on Norman Road opposite accesses 2 and 3 will need to be removed. Adequate visibility appears to be available from all four access points. Both Greenwich High Road and Norman Road are street lit and subject to a 30mph speed limit. There is a rail bridge just to Mitigation required and conclusions visible constraints. Option 2 Comments site areas on Norman Road. However, there is no visible height restriction at the bridge. Route to TLRN and permanent access same as for Option 1. A preliminary transport access plan is attached as Appendix 5. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments adjacent to the proposed access and also to the north of the site access. There are several existing accesses to industrial businesses in the vicinity of the proposed access on Norman Road. The existing on-street parking will require removal for large vehicles to gain access to the site. Access to the TLRN (A2) from the site is gained by west on the A206 Greenwich High Road. Route joins the A2 to the southwest of the site at Mitigation required and conclusions constraints.
Appendix 9 Page 3

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments the north of the site entrances on Norman Road, however there is no visible height restriction and in any case it is not envisaged that site traffic will use this route. It has been assumed that permanent access will be provided within the pumping station boundary. Vehicles will therefore obtain access through the main entrance to the pumping station on Greenwich High Road. Access to the TLRN (A2) from Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Deptford Bridge. No visible constraints identified on the route to the TLRN. Distance from the site to the A2 is approximately 0.5km. A preliminary transport access plan is attached as Appendix 5. Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 4

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments the site is gained by heading south on Norman Road and west on the A206 Greenwich High Road. Route joins the A2 to the southwest of the site at Deptford Bridge. No visible constraints identified on the route to the TLRN. Distance from the site to the A2 is approximately 0.5km. A preliminary transport access plan is attached as Appendix 5. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 5

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Access to river Comments Site not located near the River Thames. River access is not essential as excavated material may be transported away by road. Use of rail is unlikely to be feasible due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site. If required, access to the East London Line Depot via Norman Road, Greenwich High Road on to the A2 and then Mitigation required and conclusions Site not located near the river Thames. River access not essential as excavated material may be transported away by road. Use of rail is unlikely to be feasible due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site. If required, route to East London Line Depot contains some constraints, but can be considered possible. Option 2 Comments Same as for Option 1. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as for Option 1. Option 3 Comments Same as for Option 1. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as for Option 1.
Access to rail
Same as for Option 1.
Appendix 9 Page 6

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments northbound along Deptford Church Street (A2209) under rail bridge with 4.8m height restriction. Route follows on to Creek Road (A200), Deptford High Street, Edward Street under two rail bridges (both with 3.7m height restrictions) and Milton Court Road. The route to the rail depot contains some constraints in the form of on-street parking, speed cushions on Edward Street. The East London Line Depot has Mitigation required and conclusions Route runs through residential area and under three rail bridges with height restrictions. On-street parking and traffic calming on Edward Street and Milton Court Road will require removal. East London Line Depot has the potential to be used during the day, although significant use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 7

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments the potential to be used during the day, although significant use constraints and issues with loading would exist. Distance of 2.4km to rail access point from temporary construction access point. Parking Some parking could potentially be provided on site for the workforce. Limited informal on-street parking available on Norman Road, north of the site access. Parking in the Some parking could potentially be provided on site for the workforce. Limited on-street parking available on Norman Road, north of the site access. Parking in the vicinity of the site Same as for Option 1. Same as for Option 1. Same as for Option 1. Same as for Option 1. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 8

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments vicinity of the site access will require removal. Public transport accessibility PTAL Rating 4 (medium) Mitigation required and conclusions access will require removal. Medium potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. On-street parking located diagonally opposite the site entrance will need to be removed. Traffic management may be required to remove some on-street parking and traffic calming on Edward Street and Milton Court Road to provide rail access. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Traffic management
On-street parking located opposite the site accesses on Norman Road will need to be removed. On-street parking and traffic calming on Edward Street and Milton Court Road may need removal to provide access to rail. The layout of the site means that excavated
Same as for Option 1. A preliminary transport management plan is attached as Appendix 5.
On-street parking located diagonally opposite the site entrance will need to be removed. On-street parking and traffic calming on Edward Street and Milton Court Road may need removal to provide access to rail.
On-street parking located diagonally opposite the site entrance will need to be removed. Traffic management may be required to remove some on-street parking and traffic calming on Edward Street and Milton Court Road to provide rail access.
Appendix 9 Page 9

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments material will need to be transported along Norman Road. This may pose a hazard to other road users. Therefore, traffic signals may need to be used to control traffic flows on Norman Road. A preliminary transport management plan is attached as Appendix 5. Summary Mitigation required and conclusions The layout of the site means that excavated material will need to be transported along Norman Road. This may pose a hazard to other road users. Therefore, traffic signals may need to be used to control traffic flows on Norman Road. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
The site is suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2. The site is also suitable as a CSO and (long) connection tunnel reception site for Option 3. Option 1 is made up of two site areas: one is located on the existing pumping station land west of Norman Road and the second is located on the eastern side of Norman Road at Greenwich Industrial Estate. Four site accesses are proposed for the construction phase: three existing accesses on Greenwich High Road and Norman Road, with a fourth access located on the eastern side of Norman Road. Permanent access is assumed to be via Greenwich
The site is suitable as a CSO and (long) connection tunnel reception site, using an existing access onto Norman Road with egress assumed to be taken through the existing access to the pumping station on Greenwich High Road. There is a potential road access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints.
Appendix 9 Page 10

Transport Option 1 Site considerations Comments Option 2 Option 3 Mitigation required and conclusions Use of rail is unlikely to be required due to the small quantities of excavated material produced by a CSO site although, if required, a potential rail access route would be possible, with some constraints in the form of traffic calming and on-street parking, which will require removal. The site is remote from the river, although river access is not essential for a CSO site. There is a reasonable potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided on site for the workforce but there is limited parking available on surrounding roads. On-street parking diagonally opposite the site access would require removal. Comments
Mitigation Mitigation required and Comments required and conclusions conclusions High Road, with a potential road access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints. Option 2 is made up of two site areas: one is located on the existing pumping station land west of Norman Road and the second is located to the north of the railway bridge on the eastern side of Norman Road at an existing builders yard. Five site accesses are proposed for the construction phase: three existing accesses on Greenwich High Road and Norman Road, with the remaining two accesses located to the north of the railway bridge on Norman Road. Permanent access is assumed to be via Greenwich High Road. There is a potential access route to the TLRN (A2) at 0.5km, with no visible constraints. The railway bridge on Norman Road features no visible height restriction. For both options 1 and 2, the layout of the site means that excavated material would need to be transported along Norman Road. This may pose a hazard to other road users. Therefore, traffic signals may need to be used to control traffic flows on Norman Road. If required, there is a potential rail access route which would be possible, with some constraints in the form of traffic calming and on-street parking, which would require removal. The site is remote from the River Thames, although river access is not essential for a CSO site. For both options, there is reasonable potential for the workforce to utilise public transport to access the site. Some parking could be provided on site for the workforce but there is limited parking available on surrounding roads. On-street parking opposite the site accesses would require removal.
Appendix 9 Page 11

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Designations, including archaeological priority areas Comments The site is within the Greenwich Archaeological Priority Area (APAS). Mitigation required and conclusions 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. Option 2 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Option 3 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left.
Summary of historical uses
The 19th century OS maps show the shaft site located immediately to the north of the sewage pumping station (ML024265) within an area partly occupied by parkland within the grounds of the metropolitan pumping station.
The 19th century OS maps show the shaft site located immediately to the north of the sewage pumping station (ML024265) within an area partly occupied by parkland within the grounds of the metropolitan pumping station.
Same as Option 1, see left.
Appendix 9 Page 12

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments The parkland disappeared in the early 20th century, when the proposed shaft location was occupied by two large tank structures which have remained in this location ever since. In the 19th century, the southern and eastern sides of the site (Greenwich High Road and North Pole Street) were lined by terraced housing with back garden plots extending to the rear. By the mid20th century, the terracing along the southern side Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments The land to the north in Option 2 is shown as undeveloped. The parkland to the south of the railway disappeared in the early 20th century, when the proposed shaft location was occupied by two large tank structures which have remained in this location ever since. In the 19th century, the southern and eastern sides of the site (Greenwich High Road and North Pole Street) were lined by terraced housing with back Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 13

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments of the site had gone. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments garden plots extending to the rear. By the mid20th century, the terracing along the southern side of the site had gone. A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Potential receptors of very high or high value with the potential to be directly affected
No archaeological receptors of high value are recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of high value being within the site. No archaeological receptors of medium value are
Potential receptors of medium value with the potential
A detailed desk-based assessment is required to
Appendix 9 Page 14

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations to be directly affected Comments recorded within the site. This does not preclude the possibility of unrecorded archaeological receptors of medium value being within the site. Although a number of built heritage receptors (pumping station, coal sheds, railway bridge) are located on the site (see built heritage report), there are no known below-ground archaeological receptors. Construction Mitigation required and conclusions sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Other receptors with the potential to be directly affected
A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the archaeological resource and define risk to potential development.
Although a number of built heritage receptors (pumping station, coal sheds, railway bridge) are located on the site (see built heritage report), there are no known below-ground archaeological receptors. Construction
Construction impact of significant archaeological remains is unlikely due to extensive previous disturbance. This potential impact on waterlogged remains should be considered where below-ground works are
Appendix 9 Page 15

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments impact of significant archaeological remains is unlikely due to extensive previous disturbance. This potential impact on waterlogged remains should be considered where below-ground works are proposed. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments impact of significant archaeological remains is unlikely due to extensive previous disturbance. This potential impact on waterlogged remains should be considered where below-ground works are proposed. Option 2 utilises an area of land to the north of the railway but as this is for storage only, there will be no significant below-ground disturbance. MLO7517, located Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments proposed. Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 16

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments immediately outside and to the east of the northern part of the proposed site, is a record of an evaluation undertaken by Dick Bluer for Museum of London Archaeology Service, December 1998; site code NRM98. In the W of two evaluation trenches, a compacted deposit of crushed chalk may have been a yard surface or thoroughfare. It was sealed by a deposit of ashy waste containing Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 17

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments a localised dense concentration of 19th century date. The W trench had been subjected to heavy disturbance in modern times, with the surviving deposits interpreted as ground raising dumps, probably associated with 19th century industrial activity. No further periods recorded under this site code. Extent of existing There is clear disturbance evidence for (if known) significant previous disturbance in the area of the A detailed desk-based assessment is required to sufficiently understand the Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 18

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments proposed shaft site. Ground landscaping may have taken place prior to the installation of the large tanks in this location and this too is likely to have disturbed potential archaeological remains. Borehole data in the general area suggests made ground of 8m, some of which could be archaeological in nature. Mitigation required and conclusions archaeological resource and define risk to potential development. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 19

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Potential issues Comments Detailed design proposals and an outline method statement would be required to enable initial assessment of development impacts, and to inform mitigation proposals. The former use of the site for back garden plots of properties fronting the High Road may well have earlier, possibly medieval origins. With the currently available information, it is not possible to highlight specific potential issues. Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation methods could include: Option 2 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Option 3 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left.
Review/ production of existing desk-based assessments (report exists) Production of deposits model Archaeological monitoring of geotechnical investigations Archaeological evaluation Archaeological watching brief Archaeological excavation.
Appendix 9 Page 20

Archaeology Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: Based on current information, both Options 1 and 2 are considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site and Option 3 is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site. This is because there is no direct evidence for the presence of archaeological remains within the site and substantial disturbance has taken place during the last 150 years. While no direct evidence has been revealed, peat deposits containing archaeological material may be present at depth. These have commonly been recorded throughout London in a similar proximity to the River Thames.
Appendix 9 Page 21
Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Designations including conservation areas, including trees Comments Listed buildings Pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Works, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 0m. Coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 0m. Southernmost of the pair of coal sheds to the Mitigation required and conclusions In the case of listed buildings, locally listed buildings, conservation areas 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, would be required to further inform the likely impact of the development and to determine Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Listed buildings Pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Works, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 5m. Coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 100m. Southernmost of pair of coal sheds to southwest of beam engine houses with linking Mitigation required and conclusions As Option 1
Listed buildings As Option 1 Pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Works, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 0m. Coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 0m. Southernmost of the pair of coal sheds to the
Appendix 9 Page 22

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions southwest of the more detailed beam engine mitigation houses with proposals. linking boiler On the basis of house at Deptford currently Sewage Pumping available Station, information (May Greenwich High 2011), mitigation Road, Grade II: would not be 0m. applicable in the Railway viaduct case of registered extending from historic parks and platforms of gardens and Greenwich locally listed Station to parks and Deptford Creek, gardens. Norman Road, Grade II: 5m. Mumfords Grain Silo, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 210m. 2 Burgos Grove, Grade II: 180m. Miller General Hospital, Royal Comments Option 2 Comments southwest of the beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 0m. Railway viaduct extending from platforms of Greenwich Station to Deptford Creek, Norman Road, Grade II: 5m. Mumfords Grain Silo, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 210m. 2 Burgos Grove, Grade II: 180m. Miller General Hospital, Royal Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 125m. Railway viaduct extending from platforms of Greenwich Station to Deptford Creek, Norman Road, Grade II: 15m. Miller General Hospital, Royal Kent Dispensary, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 230m. Miller General Hospital, Miller General Wing (Rehabilitation Department), Greenwich High Road, Grade II: Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 23

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Kent Dispensary, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 95m. Miller General Hospital, Miller General Wing (Rehabilitation Department), Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 120m. 1-6 Egerton Drive, Grade II: 241m. 98 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 60m. 100-104 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 60m. 136, 138 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 200m. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Kent Dispensary, Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 95m. Miller General Hospital, Miller General Wing (Rehabilitation Department), Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 120m. 1-6 Egerton Drive, Grade II: 241m. 98 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 60m. 100-104 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 60m. 136, 138 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 200m. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments 245m. 98 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 165m. 100-104 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 171m. 165 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 240m. 167 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 245m. K2 Telephone Kiosk outside 171 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 250m. Locally listed buildings The borough of Greenwich maintains a list of Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 24

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments 165 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 130m. 167 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 220m. K2 Telephone Kiosk outside 171 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 240m. Queen Elizabeth Almshouses, Grade II: 250m. Greenwich Station, Grade II: 240m. Locally listed buildings The borough of Greenwich maintains a list of locally listed buildings. Those within 250m of Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments 165 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 210m. 167 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 220m. K2 Telephone Kiosk outside 171 Greenwich High Road, Grade II: 240m. Queen Elizabeth Almshouses, Grade II: 250m. Locally listed buildings The borough of Greenwich maintains a list of locally listed buildings. Those within 250m of C33XV are: 4-6 Burgos Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments locally listed buildings. Those within 250m of C33XV are: Devonshire Drive Baptist Chapel: 55m. 7 Egerton Drive: 225m. 8 Egerton Drive: 220m. 9-10 Egerton Drive: 205m. 11 Egerton Drive: 195m. 12-13 Egerton Drive: 175m. 17-19 Egerton Drive: 145m. 21-24 Egerton Drive: 145m. 25-26 Egerton Drive: 175m. 27-32 Egerton Drive: 190m. Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 25

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments C33XV are: 4-6 Burgos Grove: 175m. 8-24 Burgos Grove: 198m. 1-5 Catherine Grove: 230m. 10-14 Catherine Grove: 185m. Devonshire Drive Baptist Chapel: 85m. 11 Egerton Drive: 183m. 12-13 Egerton Drive: 185m. 17-19 Egerton Drive: 160m. 21-24 Egerton Drive: 160m. 25-26 Egerton Drive: 180m. 27-32 Egerton Drive: 183m. Holy Trinity/ Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Grove: 175m. 8-24 Burgos Grove: 198m. 1-5 Catherine Grove: 230m. 10-14 Catherine Grove: 185m. Devonshire Drive Baptist Chapel: 85m. 11 Egerton Drive: 183m. 12-13 Egerton Drive: 185m. 17-19 Egerton Drive: 160m. 21-24 Egerton Drive: 160m. 25-26 Egerton Drive: 180m. 27-32 Egerton Drive: 183m. Holy Trinity/ St Pauls C of E Church, Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments 65-74 Ashburnham Grove: 155m. 1-24 Ashburnham Grove: 70m. 10-11 Ashburnham Place: 75m. 13-17 Ashburnham Place: 90m. 135 Greenwich High Road: 45m. 141 Greenwich High Road: 85m. 161-163 Greenwich High Road: 180m. The borough of Lewisham maintains a list of locally listed buildings but this was unavailable at the time of this Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 26

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments St Pauls C of E Church, Devonshire Drive: 163m. 43-45 Devonshire Drive: 215m. 65-74 Ashburnham Grove: 205m. 44-61 Ashburnham Grove: 235m. 1-24 Ashburnham Grove: 145m. 26-40 Ashburnham Grove: 200m. 10-11 Ashburnham Place: 120m. 13-17 Ashburnham Place: 125m. 37 and 38 Ashburnham Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Devonshire Drive: 163m. 43-45 Devonshire Drive: 215m. 65-74 Ashburnham Grove: 175m. 44-61 Ashburnham Grove: 235m. 1-24 Ashburnham Grove: 105m. 26-40 Ashburnham Grove: 215m. 10-11 Ashburnham Place: 85m. 13-17 Ashburnham Place: 95m. 37 and 38 Ashburnham Place: 230m. 79 Greenwich Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments assessment. Conservation areas Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area: 15m. West Greenwich Conservation Area 230m. Registered historic parks and gardens There are no registered historic parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Locally listed parks and gardens There are no Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 27

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Place: 205m. 79 Greenwich High Road: 28m. 135 Greenwich High Road: 25m. 141 Greenwich High Road: 40m. 161-163 Greenwich High Road: 100m. 169 Greenwich High Road: 137m. James Wolfe Primary School, 230m. 84-88 Straightsmouth, 215m. 78-82 Straightsmouth, 240m. 66-70 Straightsmouth, 250m. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments High Road: 80m. 135 Greenwich High Road: 25m. 141 Greenwich High Road: 110m. 161-163 Greenwich High Road: 195m. 169 Greenwich High Road: 230m. The borough of Lewisham maintains a list of locally listed buildings but this was unavailable at the time of this assessment. Conservation areas Ashburnham Triangle Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Protected views The Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework) passes through the centre of the site (0m). Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 28

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Prince of Orange Public House, 189 Greenwich High Road, 250m. The borough of Lewisham maintains a list of locally listed buildings but this was unavailable at the time of this assessment. Conservation areas Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area: 15m. West Greenwich 195m. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Conservation Area: 15m. Registered historic parks and gardens There are no registered historic parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Locally listed parks and gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Protected views The Blackheath Point protected view (as Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 29

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Registered historic parks and gardens There are no registered historic parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Locally listed parks and gardens There are no locally listed parks and gardens within 250m of C33XV. Protected views The Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework) Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments designated in the London Views Management Framework) passes through the centre of the site (0m). Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 30

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments passes through the centre of the site (0m). Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be directly affected Development has the potential to directly impact on three Grade II listed structures. Owing to the construction of offices, welfare and canteen in addition to parking may have a direct impact on the two coal sheds in the southwest of the site (coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, If there is to be a physical connection between the proposed TBM stockyard and the Grade II pumping station, this would need to be mitigated through the implementation of high-quality design. Listed building consent would be required. In order to mitigate impact on the listed coal sheds, the structures would need to be dismantled in a Same as Option 1, except Option 2 has the potential to impact on the sewage pumping station with the shaft and segment storage area in close proximity. If there is to be a physical connection between the proposed TBM stockyard, sewage pumping station with the shaft and segment storage area, and the Grade II pumping station, this would need to be mitigated through the implementation of high-quality design. Listed building consent would be required. The proposed development does not directly affect any historic assets. Further desk-based assessment would be required to more fully identify potential impacts arising from the development and to consider mitigation measures in more detail. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 31

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Greenwich High Road, Grade II; southernmost of the pair of coal sheds to the southwest of the beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station, Greenwich High Road, Grade II). Development also has the potential to directly impact on the Grade II listed pumping station due to the creation of a TBM stockyard. As the Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in Mitigation required and conclusions sensitive way according to a method statement to be agreed with English Heritage. Provisions will be made for its secure storage and agreements will need to be in place for its re-erection as soon as possible after completion of the works. This work will be subject to listed building consent being granted. In order to mitigate potential direct impacts arising from construction and operation of C33XV, upon the Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 32

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions the London Views Blackheath Point Management protected view, Framework) consideration passes through would need to be the centre of given to the C33XV, it has the scheme design potential to be and some form of directly affected screening may be by development required. at the site, Further particularly during desk-based construction. assessment would be required to more fully identify potential impacts arising from the development upon the protected view and to consider mitigation measures in more detail. Issues such as the amount of screening Comments Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 33

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions provided by adjacent buildings would need to be taken into account. Not applicable. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be directly affected Potential receptors of medium to very high importance with the potential to be indirectly affected
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable
Not applicable
There is potential for 17 listed buildings and two conservation areas to be indirectly affected by the development.
Of the 17 Grade II listed buildings that have the potential to be indirectly affected by the development, four (railway viaduct extending from platforms of Greenwich Station to Deptford Creek; 98 Greenwich High Road; 100-
There is potential for 16 listed buildings and one conservation area to be indirectly affected by the development.
Of the 16 Grade II listed buildings that have the potential to be indirectly affected by the development, three (railway viaduct extending from platforms of Greenwich Station to Deptford Creek; 98 Greenwich
There is potential for 11 Grade II listed buildings and two conservation areas to be indirectly affected by the development.
Of the 11 Grade II listed buildings which have the potential to be indirectly affected by the development, seven (pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Works; coal shed immediately to
Appendix 9 Page 34

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions 104 Greenwich High Road; 165 Greenwich High Road) are likely to share a visual relationship with C33XV. Therefore, as the development could impact on the setting of these listed structures, mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening is likely to be required. Particular attention would need to be paid to the potential impact of the development upon the setting Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions High Road; 100104 Greenwich High Road) are likely to share a visual relationship with C33XV. Therefore, as the development could impact on the setting of these listed structures, mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening is likely to be required. Particular attention would need to be paid to the potential impact of the development upon the setting Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station; southernmost of pair of coal sheds to southwest of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station; railway viaduct extending from platforms of Greenwich Station to Deptford Creek; Miller General Hospital, Royal Kent Dispensary; 98 Greenwich High Road; and 100-104
Appendix 9 Page 35

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions of the three listed structures which form part of the Deptford Sewage Pumping Station. In the case of the other 13 Grade II listed structures, these are unlikely to share a visual relationship with C33XV because of screening provided by existing buildings. Therefore, these structures would not experience any impact as a result of the development and no mitigation would be required. The Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions of the three listed structures which form part of the Deptford Sewage Pumping Station. In the case of the other 13 Grade II listed structures, these are unlikely to share a visual relationship with C33XV because of screening provided by existing buildings. Therefore, these structures would not experience any impact as a result of the development and no mitigation would Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Greenwich High Road) are likely to share a visual relationship with C33XV. Therefore, as the development could impact on the setting of these listed structures, mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening is likely to be required. Particular attention would need to be paid to the potential impact of the development upon the setting of the three listed structures which
Appendix 9 Page 36

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions conservation areas lie in close proximity to C33XV. Therefore, development of the site has the potential to impact on the setting of and views to and from the designated area. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would help reduce any potential visual effects upon the Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich conservation areas. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions be required. The Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area lies in close proximity to C33XV. Therefore, development of the site has the potential to impact on the setting of and views to and from the designated area. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would help reduce any potential visual effects upon the Ashburnham Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions form part of the Deptford Sewage Pumping Station. In the case of the other nine Grade II listed structures, these do not share a visual relationship with C33XV because of screening provided by existing buildings. Therefore, these nine listed structures would not experience any impact as a result of the development and no mitigation would be required. The Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich
Appendix 9 Page 37

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Triangle Conservation Area. Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions conservation areas lie in close proximity to C33XV. Therefore, development of the site has the potential to impact on the setting of and views to and from the designated area. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would help reduce any potential visual effects upon the Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich conservation areas.
Appendix 9 Page 38

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Other receptors of lesser importance with the potential to be indirectly affected Comments There is potential for 30 locally listed buildings to be indirectly affected by the development. Mitigation required and conclusions There is potential for three locally listed buildings to be indirectly affected by the development. 135 Greenwich High Road, 141 Greenwich High Road and 161-163 Greenwich High Road are likely to share a visual relationship with C33XV. Therefore, the development could impact on the setting of these structures. The lesser importance of these assets means that no specific mitigation is likely to be Option 2 Comments There is potential for 25 locally listed buildings to be indirectly affected by the development. Mitigation required and conclusions None of the 23 locally listed buildings within 250m of C33XV are likely to share a visual relationship with the site. Therefore, there is not expected to be any impact on their setting arising from the development. As a consequence, no mitigation would be required. Option 3 Comments There is potential for 17 locally listed buildings to be indirectly affected by the development. Mitigation required and conclusions None of the 17 locally listed buildings within 250m of C33XV are likely to share a visual relationship with the site. Therefore, there is not expected to be any impact on their setting arising from the development. No mitigation would be required.
Appendix 9 Page 39

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions required. There is likely to be no impact on the remaining 27 locally listed buildings. Retention of trees where possible and protection in accordance with BS 5837. Introduction of landscape scheme to include appropriate surface treatments and planting to replace lost vegetation and enhance the character of the site. This site is considered Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Sensitive landscape character areas likely to be affected, including trees and TPOs
The site is located at Greenwich Pumping Station and Greenwich Industrial Estate, with Norman Road bisecting the site. Railway lines are to the north, with industrial development along Deptford Creek further north. Norman House offices are to the south and Greenwich Industrial Estate stretches further
The site is located at Greenwich Pumping Station and Jewsons Builders Merchants, with railway lines on viaducts bisecting the site. Railway lines split the site into three sections, with industrial development dominating to the north and west along the Deptford Creek. Norman House offices are to the
Same as for Option 1, see left.
The site is on Greenwich Pumping Station. Railway lines to the north, with industrial development along Deptford Creek further north, Norman House adjacent to the east along Norman Road and industrial development further east, Greenwich High Road to the south with residential development further south,
Appendix 9 Page 40

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments eastwards. Greenwich High Road is to the south, with some residential properties. To the west is further industrial development along Deptford Creek. The site has an industrial character, with mature trees enclosing the pumping station along Norman Road. Other boundaries are surrounded by industrial estates and/or railways on viaducts. Loss of mature vegetation would potentially result Mitigation required and conclusions suitable if the above mitigation is undertaken and the permanent structures are carefully designed to integrate into the local industrial character. Option 2 Comments south and Greenwich Industrial Estate to the east. Greenwich High Road is to the south with some residential properties. The site has an industrial character, with mature trees enclosing the pumping station along Norman Road. Industrial estates enclose the site to the north and south. Deptford Creek to the west. Loss of mature vegetation would potentially result in temporary, adverse direct Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments industrial development to the west along Deptford Creek. The site is quite enclosed in character. Loss of mature vegetation and the presence and operation of machinery, materials stores and buildings would potentially result in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the site and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 41

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments in temporary, adverse direct impacts on the character of the site and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would be in keeping with the industrial character of the site. Potential views likely to be affected The majority of the site lies within the Blackheath Point Strategic View. Open views from sewage pumping station, Norman House and buildings to the During construction, the use of hoardings and appropriate lighting would minimise visual impact. Design of permanent structures to be Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments impacts on the character of the site and temporary, adverse indirect impacts on neighbouring areas. Permanent elements would be in keeping with the industrial character of the site. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments potentially adversely impact the character of the site. Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 42

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments west of site. Partially interrupted views from Greenwich High Road, Norman Road, and Deptford Creek. During construction, views of cranes from the sewage pumping station, neighbouring roads, railways and residential properties on Greenwich High Road. Permanent elements would mainly be visible from the Sewage Pumping Station and the railway. Mitigation required and conclusions given careful consideration. Planting to screen permanent plant. Integrated landscape scheme to enhance visual amenity and reduce visual impact. Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 43

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Particular considerations on sites where new permanent structures are required Comments Any permanent structures at the site have the potential to result in a direct impact on the Blackheath Point protected view and three Grade II listed structures, and an indirect impact on the setting of four Grade II listed buildings, three locally listed buildings, two conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views. Mitigation required and conclusions Any permanent structures would need to be of a high-quality design, sensitively located and/or screened and landscaped in order that impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view, four Grade II listed buildings, the Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views are minimised. More detailed desk-based assessment is Option 2 Comments Any permanent structures at the site have the potential to result in a direct impact on the Blackheath Point protected view and an indirect impact on the setting of three Grade II listed buildings, one conservation area and the character of the local townscape and local views. Mitigation required and conclusions Any permanent structures would need to be of a high-quality design, sensitively located and/or screened and landscaped in order that impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view, three Grade II listed buildings, the Ashburnham Triangle Conservation Area and the character of the local townscape and local views are minimised. More detailed desk-based assessment is Option 3 Comments Any permanent structures at the site have the potential to result in a direct impact on the Blackheath Point protected view and an indirect impact on the setting of seven Grade II listed buildings, two conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views. The design and location of any permanent structures within the site would need to be given careful consideration, and some screening and landscaping Mitigation required and conclusions Any permanent structures would need to be of a high-quality design, sensitively located and/or screened and landscaped in order that impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view, seven Grade II listed buildings, the Ashburnham Triangle and West Greenwich conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views are minimised. More detailed desk-based assessment is
Appendix 9 Page 44

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions likely to be required to define the potential impacts on these built heritage assets and to establish appropriate mitigation measures. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening and landscaping in order that the impacts on the identified historic assets, the Blackheath Point protected view, and the character Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions likely to be required to define the potential impacts on these built heritage assets and to establish appropriate mitigation measures. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening and landscaping in order that the impacts on the identified historic assets, the Blackheath Point protected view, and the Option 3 Comments during construction and operation may be required. Mitigation required and conclusions likely to be required to define the potential impacts on these built heritage receptors and to establish appropriate mitigation measures. The scheme design would need to be of a sufficiently high quality and may need to incorporate some screening and landscaping in order that the impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view, seven Grade II listed buildings, the Ashburnham
Potential issues
Construction and operation of the development could result in impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view, three Grade II listed buildings and indirect impacts on the setting of four Grade II listed buildings, two conservation areas, three
Construction and operation of the development could result in impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view and three Grade II listed buildings, and indirect impacts on the setting of three Grade II listed buildings, one conservation area, and on the
Construction and operation of the development could result in impacts on the Blackheath Point protected view and an indirect impact on the setting of seven Grade II listed buildings, two conservation areas and on the character of the local townscape and local views.
Appendix 9 Page 45

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments locally listed buildings and on the character of the local townscape and local views. However, there is potential to mitigate any adverse impacts through a high-quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. Mitigation required and conclusions of the local townscape and local views are minimised. Option 2 Comments character of the local townscape and local views. However, there is the potential to mitigate any adverse impacts through a high-quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. Mitigation required and conclusions character of the local townscape and local views are minimised. Option 3 Comments However, there is the potential to mitigate any adverse impacts through a high-quality scheme design and/or screening and landscaping. This may be particularly relevant for the temporary offices, welfare and canteen adjacent to the Grade II pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Works, Greenwich High Road, while the CSO drop shaft will lie adjacent to the Grade II railway Mitigation required and conclusions Triangle and West Greenwich conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views are minimised.
Appendix 9 Page 46

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 2 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments viaduct. The works will affect the setting of these listed buildings and will therefore require careful consideration. Summary From a built heritage perspective, this site is less suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2. This is because it has the potential to impact on a number of built heritage receptors and local views. The site is intercepted by the Blackheath Point protected view (as designated in the London Views Management Framework). Both options 1 and 2 would directly impact on the 'coal shed immediately to southwest of pair of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station' and the 'southernmost of pair of coal sheds to southwest of beam engine houses with linking boiler house at Deptford Sewage Pumping Station', both listed at Grade II. This would require additional planning consents and detailed methodologies. Both options also involve the construction of both a TBM stockyard and shaft and segment storage area adjacent the Grade II listed 'sewage pumping station'. This has the potential to adversely impact on the buildings setting and historic character. The development also has the potential to impact on the setting of Grade II listed buildings, the setting of and views to and from the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas and local views. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would be required to From a built heritage perspective, this site is considered suitable for use as Option 3 as a CSO with a (long) reception connection tunnel because there are no direct impacts on any of the historic assets. Option 3 does, however, have the potential to impact on the setting of Grade II listed buildings and the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas The development also has the potential to impact on the setting of seven Grade II listed buildings, the setting of the Ashburnham and West Greenwich conservation areas and the character of the local townscape and local views. Mitigation in the form of a high-quality scheme design and/or screening would be required to reduce Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 47

Built heritage and townscape Option 1 Site considerations Comments Option 2 Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Mitigation Mitigation required and Comments required and conclusions conclusions reduce these adverse effects. From a townscape perspective, this site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2 if mitigation is undertaken and the permanent structures are carefully designed to integrate into the local industrial character.
these adverse effects. From a townscape perspective, this site is considered suitable for use as Option 3 as a CSO with a (long) reception connection tunnel if mitigation is undertaken and the permanent structures are carefully designed to integrate into the local industrial character.
Appendix 9 Page 48
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations 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 Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Geology (thickness) Mitigation required and conclusions The drop shaft would be constructed to an invert level of approximately 60.25mbgl and therefore the drop shaft would be founded in the Chalk. The piezometric head(1) in the Chalk would be approximately 54.25m above the base of the construction. Therefore, dewatering would be required and should be considered as part of geotechnical design.
Superficial geology and made ground (8m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of drop shaft) Hydrogeology Piezometric level in Chalk aquifer: ~ -3mAOD (~6mbgl) from EA Jan 08 water level contouring Groundwater monitoring location EA hydrometry sites: TQ37-254A, BL, BU 73m northeast of the site (water levels to May 2009) Watercourses Adjacent to Deptford Creek River Thames lies to the north approximately 600m away
SPZ
SPZs and groundwater users
Located in a source protection zone (SPZ 2) defined by EA EA licensed groundwater abstractions and details 1 public water supply borehole within 2km radius
Licence numbers: 28/39/43/0019 (12 boreholes)
A simple volumetric approach has been used to calculate the total catchment zone of the abstraction borehole. A conservative mean annual recharge of 100mm/year was used to calculate a radius for licensed abstraction boreholes as follows: Public water supply abstraction borehole Defined by EA Licensed abstraction boreholes 126m
Appendix 9 Page 49
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Location 630m southwest of the site Operator Thames Water Utilities Ltd Abstracted aquifer Chalk Abstraction quantity (annual) 8,296,624 m3 Mitigation required and conclusions The drop shaft is located within the catchment area of the source protection zone (SPZ 2) of abstraction (28/39/43/0019) as defined by EA.
One licensed abstraction borehole within 2km radius

Licence numbers: TH/039/0044/003 (1 borehole) Locations: 921m northeast of the site Operator: Trustees of National Maritime Museum
Appendix 9 Page 50
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Abstracted aquifer unit: Chalk Abstraction purposes: Private water supply (general use) Abstraction quantity (annual): 20,000m3 Unlicensed groundwater abstractions and details Mitigation required and conclusions
No abstraction borehole within 1km radius

Borehole locations and depths Potential impacts on surface water features There are ten historical records of water wells within 1km radius. Depth range: 8.9 92.96m Both site options are located adjacent to the Deptford Creek and the site is behind flood defences so the pollution risk is through drainage to the Deptford Creek and the River Thames. An impact on groundwater is likely since the drop shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (principal aquifer) overlain by superficial deposits (secondary aquifer) which is in hydraulic continuity with Chalk and would need to be dewatered. Not applicable
Work will need to be undertaken in consideration of Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1, PPG5 and PPS23. See below (likely types of mitigation measures that would be required).
Potential impacts on groundwater (resources and quality)
Appendix 9 Page 51
Water resources hydrogeology and surface water Site considerations Likely types of mitigation measures that would be required Potential issues Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Mitigation may be required as construction of the drop shaft would take place within the source protection zone (SPZ 2) of one EA licensed abstraction and dewatering may affect water users. The drop shaft is to be excavated in Chalk below the piezometric head, therefore dewatering of the Chalk and superficial deposits would be required. Possible saline intrusion caused by dewatering may occur. Mitigation required and conclusions Possible provision of alternative groundwater supply.
Piezometric head in Chalk to be considered as part of geotechnical design. The issue of the appropriate disposal of discharges from dewatering to be considered. Dewatering to be kept to a minimum.
Summary: In terms of hydrogeology, this site is considered to be less suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and less suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because the drop shaft is to be constructed in Chalk (principal aquifer) and the site lies within the source protection zone (SPZ 2) of one Environment Agency licensed abstraction borehole from the Chalk. Dewatering of the Chalk and superficial deposits (secondary aquifer) would be required. The Chalk piezometric head is likely to be approximately 54m above the base of construction and should be taken into account in the engineering design. In terms of surface water resources, this site is suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. While there is no direct pathway to either the Deptford Creek or the River Thames for pollution, standard mitigation measures would still be required. This assessment has been based on an assumption that river transport is unlikely to be feasible at this site, and therefore that no campsheds will be required within the Creek. (1) Piezometric head is a specific measurement of water pressure above a datum.
Appendix 9 Page 52
Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Statutory designations Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Sue Godfrey Nature Park LNR is within 400m of this site. Brookmill Road LNR is within 1km. Mudchute Park Farm LNR is within 2km. Site is immediately adjacent to Deptford Creek, part of River Thames and Tidal Tributaries SMI. The Greenwich Pumping Station section of the site, common to options 1, 2 and 3, extends to the north towards the railway line. This area contains wasteland which is also a London BAP habitat. Trees may have potential to support roosting bats. Black redstart are known to breed in buildings in this area. There is low potential for reptile species to be present on site. No direct impact on aquatic receptors other than the risk of incidental contamination as mentioned above. Mitigation required and conclusions None required
Non-statutory designated wildlife sites BAP priority habitats
Care would need to be taken to avoid discharge or runoff into the creek. Loss of parkland, amenity grassland or wasteland habitat may require compensatory provision
Protected or otherwise notable species within the study area
If bat roosts were found to be present, mitigation would be required, possibly including offsite provision. Placement of lighting to minimise illumination of surrounding habitat is likely to be required. If foraging black redstart were found to be present, some mitigation might be required but should be easily accomplished. If breeding black redstarts were shown to be present adjacent to this site, working practices would need to avoid disturbance. This might involve screening to reduce visual or noise impact. Mitigation would be possible for reptile species but may require offsite provision. None required as no direct impact on aquatic receptors.
Appendix 9 Page 53
Ecology (terrestrial and aquatic) Site considerations Potential issues No further issues Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions Not applicable
Summary: This site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. However, the possible presence of black redstart on or around this site may require amended working practices. The northern area of the Greenwich Pumping Station section of the site also contains wasteland which is a London BAP habitat and any loss of this habitat may require compensatory provision.
Appendix 9 Page 54
Flood risk assessment Site considerations Flood risk zone Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Flood Zone 3 (one in 200-year flood extent) but defended to the one in 1,000-year flood level. There is a residual risk of a breach, for which mitigation would need to be considered as part of the FRA. Sewage transmission infrastructure is considered to be water compatible, according to Table D.2 of PPS25. There is space for SUDS and the site is existing greenfield. More investigation is required to determine if the site is suitable for infiltration SUDS as a result of the superficial geology. No further issues. Mitigation required and conclusions An FRA would be required to assess the residual risk of flooding to the site.
Assessment of conditions for SUDS
Not applicable
Potential issues
Not applicable.
Summary: This site is considered suitable as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because the site is defended from flooding from the River Thames and Deptford Creek and there is also space available for sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS).
Appendix 9 Page 55
Air quality Site considerations AQMA Sensitive receptors Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments The air quality objectives for NO 2 exceeded on major roads in vicinity of site. There are residential properties along Greenwich High Road (A206) and along the access route to the A200. The nearest residential property is the public house on Greenwich High Road. Although not yet completed, a large residential development is under construction to the immediate south of the coal sheds, and is likely to be occupied by the time tunnel construction begins. The main traffic issue in this area is exhaust emissions from vehicles along the A200, A206 and A2211 corridors. Mitigation required and conclusions There is a need for more site specific data. There are relevant air quality sensitive receptors present along the route the construction traffic is likely to take and close to the proposed construction works.
Existing traffic issues
Additional vehicle emissions have a moderate potential to interfere with local air quality action plan policies. See above Collect a minimum of six months diffusion tube data at site access to the A206 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.
Existing sources of See above significant air pollutants Notable gaps in existing air quality monitoring Potential issues There is no data at likely access to A206 and the nearest existing data indicates existing exceedance of AQLV. The risk from additional exhaust emissions from construction HGVs is undefined at present. The risk from dust impacts at residential properties is moderate.
Appendix 9 Page 56
Air quality Site considerations Options 1, 2 and 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: This site is less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for options 1 and 2 and less suitable as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because there are residential properties in close proximity to the site and during construction there is potential for fugitive emissions of dust to have a perceptible impact at these properties. These impacts could be minimised with standard dust control measures. There is potential for HGV movements on the local road network to cause localised air quality impacts in areas which are already of a poor air quality. This could be somewhat mitigated by minimising the movement of HGVs during peak hours.
Appendix 9 Page 57

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Noise band level (from Defra noise maps) Mitigation required and conclusions Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Option 3 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left.
Information from Not applicable Defra noise maps indicates daytime noise levels of between 63 and 74dB L Aeq and night-time noise levels of between 55 and 65dB L Aeq at the nearest residential properties located to the site. The residential properties closest to and facing the site are likely to experience relatively high daytime and night-time noise levels due to their proximity to the A206. Noise levels from the Defra noise maps provide an
Appendix 9 Page 58

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions indication of prevailing noise levels only, and would not be employed in any detailed assessments for chosen sites. There are sensitive receptors close to the southern and south-eastern boundaries of the site. The closest potential receptors are located at a (currently disused) public house on Greenwich High Road (no. 85-87). Sensitive receptors are also located at other locations Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Sensitive receptors
Not applicable
Appendix 9 Page 59

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions along Greenwich High Road. The potential sensitive receptor at the currently disused public house on Greenwich High Road is located to the south of the site and consists of a three-storey building. There is an office building (Norman House) located to the east of the site and is located on the site boundary. Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 60

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Existing traffic issues Mitigation required and conclusions Road traffic on local roads and on the A206 Greenwich High Road to the south would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. Road traffic on local roads and on the A206 Greenwich High Road to the south would contribute to the existing noise climate in the area. There is a railway to the north of the site which may also contribute to the noise climate in the area. There are no significant Comments Not applicable Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left. Option 3 Comments Same as Option 1, see left. Mitigation required and conclusions Same as Option 1, see left.
Existing sources of significant noise emissions
Not applicable
Appendix 9 Page 61

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions industrial noise sources noted in the immediate surrounding area. Construction: The construction period is estimated at four to five years and working hours would be 24 hours per day, Monday to Sunday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site, particularly at night from the excavated material and handling area. Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments Mitigation required and conclusions
Potential issues
Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Siting of noisy equipment and construction activities as far as is practicable from sensitive receptors. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Noisy construction activities, or activities that may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime
Construction: The construction period is estimated at four to five years and working hours would be 24 hours per day, Monday to Sunday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site, particularly at night. A relatively high number of daily HGV movements
Adherence to the good site practices provided in BS5228. Siting of noisy equipment and construction activities as far as is practicable from sensitive receptors. Provision of site boundary noise fences. Noisy construction activities, or activities that may cause vibration, be undertaken during daytime
Construction: The construction period is estimated at three to four years and working hours would be 12 hours per day (7am-7pm), Monday to Saturday. This has the potential to result in adverse noise impacts to sensitive receptors surrounding the site. A relatively high number of daily
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.
Appendix 9 Page 62

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions A relatively high number of daily HGV movements are anticipated. This has the potential to have an adverse impact on residential receptors located on Greenwich High Road. The immediate site area is fairly large and, while the drop shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant to the northern area of the site would Comments hours only to reduce the noise impact during night-time construction. Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions are anticipated. This has the potential to have an adverse impact on residential receptors located on Greenwich High Road. The immediate site area is fairly large and, while the drop shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant to the northern area of the site would maximise the distance between them and the Mitigation required and conclusions hours only to reduce the noise impact during night-time construction. Option 3 Comments HGV movements are anticipated. This has the potential to have an adverse impact on residential receptors located on Greenwich High Road. The immediate site area is fairly large and, while the drop shaft location may be fixed, ancillary plant should be sited as far as is practicable from surrounding sensitive receptors. Situating plant to the northern area of the site would maximise the distance between Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 63

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions maximise the distance between them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest residential receptors to the Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest residential receptors to the proposed drop shaft location are at a distance Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments them and the nearest sensitive receptors and minimise potential disturbance. Proposed 3m site boundary fencing would provide useful noise mitigation to some plant and construction activities. Vibration resulting from general construction works is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact. The nearest receptors to the proposed drop shaft location are at a distance of Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 64

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions proposed drop shaft location are at a distance greater than 100m and it is unlikely that vibration levels would result in minor cosmetic damage during drop shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case-by-case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions greater than 100m and it is unlikely that vibration levels would result in minor cosmetic damage during drop shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case-by-case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and top chamber should result in adverse Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments greater than 100m and it is unlikely that vibration levels would result in minor cosmetic damage during drop shaft sinking but may give rise to annoyance. Vibration from tunnelling should be considered on a case-by-case basis at particular sensitive locations. Operation: With appropriate attenuation (if necessary), there is no reason why noise from the ventilation column and top chamber should result in adverse Mitigation required and conclusions
Appendix 9 Page 65

Noise Option 1 Site considerations Mitigation required and conclusions column and top chamber should result in adverse noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Comments Option 2 Mitigation required and conclusions noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Mitigation required and conclusions Option 3 Comments noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Mitigation required and conclusions
Summary: This site is considered to be suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for both options 1 and 2 and as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3. This is because although the distance between the site and the nearest residential receptors is relatively short, the noise levels around the site will be relatively high due to the busy A206 to the south. The number of vehicles associated with the construction phase has the potential to cause an adverse noise impact to properties located on Greenwich High Road. Perimeter hoarding would reduce potential noise impact but would be relatively ineffective at shielding noise from the upper floor properties of the nearest residential receptors.
Appendix 9 Page 66

Land quality Site considerations Site location Current site use Option 1 Grid reference: 537743, 177180 Greenwich Pumping Station, which consists of 50% hardstanding/ buildings and 50% green space/trees. Option 2 Grid reference: 537743, 177180 Southern area: Greenwich Pumping Station, which consists of 50% hardstanding/buildings and 50% green space/trees. Northern area: Builders merchants and light industry consisting of 100% hardstanding/buildings Same as for Option 1, see left. Same as for Option 1, see left. Option 3 Grid reference: 537720, 177268 Within the grounds of Greenwich Pumping Station. Site comprises mainly soft landscaping with access paths. Two small buildings are located on the west boundary
Topography Field evidence of contamination (ie, visual/ olfactory) Current surrounding land use (immediately adjacent to site)
Relatively flat None identified from the site visit.
Same as for Option 1, see left. Same as for Option 1, see left.
North: A railway line, on a raised structure. There is a footpath underneath the railway. East: Norman Road with Norman House, adjacent to the site, on the eastern boundary. This is a council housing office (three floors); Greenwich Industrial Estate but this appears empty; along Greenwich High Road, there is a public house (the North Pole), some other businesses and a car repair centre; adjacent to the south-eastern corner
North: Light industrial development, including builders merchants A railway line, on a raised structure, separates the northern and southern site areas. There is a footpath underneath the railway. East: Norman Road with Norman House, adjacent to the site, on the eastern boundary. This is a council housing office (three floors); Greenwich Industrial Estate but this appears empty; along Greenwich High Road, there is a public house
North: Railway lines and beyond these, a builders yard. East: Greenwich Industrial Estate South: Sewage pumping station West: Deptford Creek
Appendix 9 Page 67

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 of the site there is Greenwich Community Centre. South: Greenwich High Road, some residential and business properties (up to four storeys high) on the south side of the road. West: Warehouses and industrial buildings. Option 2 (the North Pole), some other businesses and a car repair centre. Further east, there is Greenwich Community Centre. South: Greenwich High Road, some residential and business properties (up to four storeys high) on the south side of the road. Although not yet completed, a large residential development is under construction immediately to the south of the coal sheds and is likely to be occupied by the time tunnel construction begins. West: Sewage pumping station; warehouses and industrial buildings. Same as for Option 1, see left. Superficial geology and made ground (8m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of the drop shaft) Secondary aquifer: River terrace deposits Principal aquifer: Chalk Option 3
Geological and hydrogeological information Geological strata1
Superficial geology and made ground (8m) Chalk (to beyond the depth of the drop shaft)
Secondary Aquifer: River terrace deposits Principal Aquifer: Chalk
Underlying aquifer classes
Appendix 9 Page 68

Land quality Site considerations Groundwater vulnerability/ Soil classification (High/ Intermediate/ Low/Not applicable)2 Option 1 River terrace deposits secondary aquifer High leaching potential of soils (U)1 Option 2 Same as for Option 1, see left. Option 3 River terrace deposits secondary aquifer High leaching potential of soils (U)1
Source Located in a source protection zone protection zone as defined by the Environment details Agency. Southern region lies within SPZ I, central/northern region lies within SPZ II and a small part of the northern region lies within SPZ III. Surface water receptor Deptford Creek (adjacent west of the site) On site
Located in a source protection zone (SPZ 2) as defined by the Environment Agency.
Deptford Creek (west)
Relevant information within a 250m radius of the site Site history information and historical potentially contaminating activities (based on mapping data) On site On site
Site is within the grounds of Greenwich Sewage Pumping Station. Land use consists of the pumping station building (central region), soft landscaping, access paths and a few office buildings, 1909-present
Site is within the grounds of Greenwich Sewage Pumping Station. Land use consists of the pumping station building (central region), soft landscaping, access paths and a few office buildings, 1909-present
Vegetation and paths, 1864-1896 Sewage settlement tanks (northern region), 1909-1996 Historical building plans list an above-ground fuel tank (southeast region), 1947-1972 Historical building plans list a fuel
Appendix 9 Page 69

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 tank (east boundary), 1943 Off site
A settling tank is present in the northern region of the site, 19091996 Residential housing (southern site boundary), 1862-1898 Railway lines (northern region), present Electricity substation (southwest region), present Builders yard (northern boundary), present Works (eastern region, adjacent Norman Road), 1972-1988 Greenwich Industrial Estate (east, adjacent Norman Road), 1976present Above-ground tanks (2 no.) contents unknown (eastern region adjacent to Norman Road), 19091920 Electricity substation (southeast region), 1943-1967 Tanks contents unknown (2 no.), (southern region), 1952 Historical building plans list an above ground oil tank (eastern
A settling tank is present in the northern region of the pumping station site area, 1909-1996 Residential housing (southern site boundary), 1862-1898 Railway lines (northern region), present Builders merchants (northern region), present Electricity substation (southwest region), present Electricity substation (southeast region), 1943-1967 Tanks contents unknown (2 no.), (southern region), 1952 Historical building plans list an above-ground oil tank (eastern boundary), 1943-1967 Historical building plans list above-ground oil tanks and underground petrol tanks (northern area), 1943-1967 Historical building plans list a potentially fuel-related tank (north-eastern region), 1943 - 1967 Historical building plans list
Sewage pumping station, (adjacent south), 1862-present Historical building plans list asbestos (8m north), 1943 Railway lines (20m north), 1862present Wharf (30m north), 1896-1920 Chemical works (60m west), 18621895 Asphalt and paving works (70m northwest), 1896-1920 Gas works (80m northwest), 18621895 Brewery (100m east), 1947-1972 Works (110m north), 1972-1996 Works (110m east), 1972-1977 Brewery (150m east), 1896-1898
Appendix 9 Page 70

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 region), 1943-1967 Option 2 asbestos (northern region), 1943 Option 3
Historical building plans list a potentially fuel related tank (northeast region), 1943 Historical building plans list numerous above-ground oil tanks and instances of petrol/diesel use (within the pumping station building), 1951-1967 Historical building plans list an above-ground oil tank (south of pumping station building), 19511967 Historical building plans list asbestos (within the pumping station building), 1958-1967 Historical building plans list asbestos (southern boundary), 1943-1967 Historical building plans list asbestos (northern boundary), 1943 Historic building plans list a gas engine (southwest), 1897
Off site
Railway lines (northern region), 1862-present Historical building plans list numerous above-ground oil tanks and instances of petrol/diesel use (within the pumping station building), 1951-1967 Historical building plans list an above-ground oil tank (south of pumping station building), 19511967 Historical building plans list asbestos (within the pumping station building), 1958-1967 Historical building plans list asbestos (southern boundary), 1943-1967 Historic building plans list a gas engine (southwest), 1897
Off site
Historical building plans list an oil
Historical building plans list an oil store (adjacent south), 1897 Historical building plans list an above-ground oil tank (adjacent
Appendix 9 Page 71

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 store (adjacent south), 1897 Option 2 southwest), 1897 Option 3
Historical building plans list an above-ground oil tank (adjacent southwest), 1897 Railway lines (4m north), 1862present Tramway (6m south), 1896-1920 Historical building plans list numerous potentially fuel-related tanks in a southwest direction (closest located 7m southwest), 1897-1961 Engineering works (10m southwest), 1947-1972 Historical building plans list a potentially fuel-related sunk tank (10m southwest), 1897 Historical building plans list numerous records of asbestos in a southwest direction (closest located 13m southwest), 19511961 Works (15m south), 1972-1988 Works use not specified (25m east), 1972-1977 Railway wharf (27m north), 1909-
Tramway (6m south), 1896-1920 Historical building plans list numerous potentially fuel-related tanks in a southwest direction (closest located 7m southwest), 1897-1961 Engineering works (10m southwest), 1947-1972 Historical building plans list a potentially fuel-related sunk tank, (10m southwest), 1897 Historical building plans list numerous records of asbestos in a southwest direction (closest located 13m southwest), 19511961 Works (15m south), 1972-1988 Greenwich Industrial Estate (20m east), 1976-present Machinery: Engines, building and general industry (manufacture), (20m east), 1898 Works use not specified (25m east), 1972-1977 Works (25m east), 1972-1988
Appendix 9 Page 72

Land quality Site considerations 1972 Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Railway wharf (27m east), 19091972 Chemical works (38m west), 18621895 Above-ground tanks (2 no.) contents unknown (31m east), Machinery: Engines, building and 1909-1920 general industry (manufacture), (53m northeast), 1898 Depot (36m northeast), present Warehouse (59m northwest), Chemical works (38m west), 1862present 1895 Works (66m west), 1972-1988 Asphalt and paving works (40m west), 1896-1920 Hospital (90m south), 1909-1920 Works (50m east), 1972-1996 Asphalt and paving works (93m northwest), 1896-1920 Engine works (50m north), 18621895 Works (97m northeast), 1972-1996 Warehouse (59m northwest), Vitreous enamel works (100m present northeast), 1947-1972 Hospital (103m south), 1947-1972 Works (66m west), 1972-1988 Hospital (90m south), 1909-1920 Warehouse (106m southwest), present Vitreous enamel works (66m northeast), 1947-1972 Wharf (117m southwest), 19091920 Hospital (103m south), 1947-1972 Depot (117m northeast), present Gas mantle works (106m northeast), 1947-1972 Gas mantle works (120m northeast), 1947-1972 Gas works (106m northeast), 1862-1895 Rag and metal warehouse (123m west), 1947-1972 Warehouse (106m southwest),
Appendix 9 Page 73

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 Option 2 present Option 3
Warehouse (134m west), present Gas works (150m northwest), 1862-1895 Oil refinery (150m west), 19471972 Engine works (163m north), 18621895 Brewery (170m northeast), 18961898 Oil refinery (177m southwest), 1947-1972 Laundry (182m west), 1909-1920 Timber yard (211m southwest), 1896-1898
Pollution incidents to controlled waters Landfill sites Other waste sites One
Wharf (117m southwest), 19091920 Rag and metal warehouse (123m west), 1947-1972 Warehouse (134m west), present Oil refinery (150m west), 19471972 Brewery (170m east), 1896-1898 Oil refinery (177m southwest), 1947-1972 Laundry (182m west), 1909-1920 Timber yard (211m southwest), 1896-1898
One One
Oils unknown, minor incident (50m north)

None Two registered waste transfer sites:
Oils unknown, minor incident (onsite northern area)

Oils unknown, minor incident (60m north)

Toulouse Plant Hire Ltd, operational as far as known, medium (=/>25,000 < 75,000 tonnes p/a), (90m north) Silverchem Services, site exempt
Toulouse Plant Hire Ltd, operational as far as known, medium (=/>25,000 < 75,000 tonnes p/a), (37m east) Silverchem Services, site exempt
Toulouse Plant Hire Ltd, operational as far as known, medium (=/>25,000 < 75,000 tonnes p/a), (85m north) Silverchem Services, site exempt
Appendix 9 Page 74

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 from license, very small (</= 10,000 tonnes p/a), (122m west) Registered radioactive substances Fuel stations/ depots None Option 2 from license, very small (</= 10,000 tonnes p/a), (122m west) None Option 3 from license, very small (</= 10,000 tonnes p/a), (120m west) None
Two fuel stations:
One fuel station:
None
Jet, closed (170m southwest) Meridian, obsolete (207m east)

Eleven
Jet, closed (170m southwest)

Nineteen Four
Contemporary trade entries
Printer, inactive (on site, east of Norman Road) Railways, active (9m north) Furniture manufacturers home and office, inactive (21m southwest) Central heating supplies and equipment, inactive (21m southwest) Waste disposal services, active (29m north) Telecommunications equipment and systems, inactive (30m south) Blacksmiths and forge masters, inactive (37m south) Ceramic manufacture, supplies
Waste disposal services, active (on site northern area) Car body repairs, active (10m north) Garage services, active (10m east) Wrought iron works, inactive (15m east) Furniture manufacturers home and office, inactive (21m southwest) Central heating supplies and equipment, inactive (21m southwest) Telecommunications equipment and systems, inactive (30m south) Blacksmiths and forge masters,
Waste disposal services, active (35m north) Printers, inactive (55m east) Builders merchants, active (66m north) Railways, inactive (77m east)
Appendix 9 Page 75

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 and services, inactive (47m south) Option 2 inactive (37m south) Option 3
Commercial cleaning services, inactive (58m south) Builders merchants, active (65m north) Printers, inactive (83m southwest)
Ceramic manufacture, supplies and services, inactive (47m south) Printer, inactive (50m east) Commercial cleaning services, inactive (58m south) Glass engravers and decorators (60m north) Railways, active (77m east) Concrete and mortar ready-mix (77m north) Laboratories, active (69m east) Graffiti removers, active (77m east) Car dealers, inactive (85m east) Printers, active (93m east) Printers, inactive (83m southwest)
Distance and direction to site 1) On site and directly Distance and direction to site 1) On site and directly
Site classification based on above information Distance and direction to site 1) On site and directly Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH Contaminants 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH
Activity
Activity
Activity
Potential site contaminants derived from
1) Some potential for made
Appendix 9 Page 76

Land quality Site considerations surface sources (eg, contaminants in made ground) Option 1 ground from potential filling operations during development 2) Aboveground oil tanks and fuel use 3) Gas engine 4) Electricity substations 5) Sewage pumping station 6) Railway lines adjacent to site 2) On site 3) On site 4) On site 5) On site 6) On site 7) On site 8) On site 9) On site 10) On site and directly adjacent to site 6) Metals, PAHs, TPH 7) Asbestos 8) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, PAHs, TPH 3) Metals, PAHs, TPH 4) PCBs 5) Metals, phenols, PAHs, TPH, cyanide ground from potential filling operations during development 2) Aboveground oil tanks and fuel use 3) Gas engine 4) Electricity substations 5) Sewage pumping station 6) Railway lines Option 2 adjacent to site 2) On site 3) On site 4) On site 5) On site 6) On site 7) On site 8) On site 6) Metals, PAHs, TPH 7) Asbestos 8) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, PAHs, TPH 3) Metals, PAHs, TPH 4) PCBs 5) Metals, phenols, PAHs, TPH, cyanide ground from potential filling operations during development 2) Fuel tanks 3) Sewage tanks Option 3 adjacent to site 2) On site 3) On site 3) Metals, PAHs, TPH, pathogens
2) Metals, PAHs, TPH
Appendix 9 Page 77

Land quality Site considerations 7) Asbestos listed in historical building plans 8) Works 9) Printers 10) Industrial estate Potential site contaminants derived from offsite sources and transported to site 1) Oil store 2) Aboveground oil tanks 3) Railway lines 4)Tramway 1) Adjacent south 2) Adjacent southwest 3) 4m north 4) 6m 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, PAHs, TPH 3) Metals, PAHs, TPH 1) Oil store 2) Aboveground oil tanks 3) Asbestos 4)Tramway 1) Adjacent south 2) Adjacent southwest 3) 4m north 4) 6m 1) Metals, PAHs, TPH 2) Metals, PAHs, TPH 3) Asbestos 4) Metals, 1) Sewage pumping station 2) Asbestos 3) Railway lines 1) Adjacent south 2) 8m north 3) 20m north 1) Metals, phenols, PAHs, TPH, cyanide 2) Asbestos 3) Metals, PAHs, TPH Option 1 9) Metals, PAHs, TPH, solvents Option 2 Option 3
7) Asbestos listed in historical 10) Metals, building plans PAHs, TPH 8)Builders merchants
Appendix 9 Page 78

Land quality Site considerations 5) Engineering works 6) Potential sunk fuel tank 7) Works Option 1 south 5) 10m southwest 6) 10m southwest 7) 15m south 4) Metals, PAHs, TPH 5) Metals, PAHs, TPH 6) Metals, PAHs, TPH 7) Metals, PAHs, TPH 5) Engineering works 6) Railway lines 7) Potential sunk fuel tank 8) Works Option 2 south 5) 10m southwest 6) 10m north 7) 10m southwest 8) 15m south PAHs, TPH 5) Metals, PAHs, TPH 6) Metals, PAHs, TPH 7) Metals, PAHs, TPH 8) Metals, PAHs, TPH Option 3
Appendix 9 Page 79

Land quality Site considerations Identified sourcepathwayreceptor risk assessment at CSO construction stage (Conceptual Site Model)2 Contamination category Summary Option 1 Source 1: A1, A3, B4 Source 2: D6, E1, F7 Option 2 Source 1: A1, A3, B4 Source 2: D6, E1, F7 Option 3 Source 1: A1, A3, B4 Source 2: D6, E1, F7
Category 2 assessed as moderate risk This site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for Option 1 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from sewage pumping station and associated tanks, works, industrial estate, printers and railway lines on site and the engineering works and further tanks in the vicinity of the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas
Category 2 assessed as moderate risk The site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) drive connection tunnel site for Option 2 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from sewage pumping station and associated tanks and railway lines on site and the engineering works and further tanks in the vicinity of the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential
Category 2 assessed as moderate risk The site is considered less suitable for use as a CSO and (long) reception connection tunnel site for Option 3 based on the moderate potential for contamination of the site to have occurred, specifically from sewage settlement tank and fuel tanks on site and the engineering works and pumping station adjacent to the site. This potentially poses a risk to construction workers and adjacent human receptors through direct contact and inhalation exposure pathways, as well as ground gas risks. Additionally, the potential
Appendix 9 Page 80

Land quality Site considerations Option 1 risks. Additionally, the potential exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. Option 2 exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport. Option 3 exists for contaminants to be drawn to the deeper Chalk aquifer, and for migration to surface water receptors to occur through shallow groundwater transport.
Notes: 1. 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.
2. 3.
Refer to schematic Conceptual Site Model for explanation of site-specific source-pathway-receptors
From BGS Geological Model, giving average ground condition profile. Local near surface conditions may vary, particularly within the river.
Appendix 9 Page 81
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

110 RG PNC C33XV 000609

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

110 RG PNC C33XV 000609

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autumn 2011

Site suitability report C33XV and CL004 or CL005

110-RG-PNC-C33XV-000609 | Autumn 2011

Site suitability report C33XV and CL004 or CL005

Thames Tunnel Site suitability report C33XV

Site information ................................................................................................ 2 2.1 2.2

Engineering assessment ................................................................................. 7 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

Planning assessment ...................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

Socio-economic and community assessment............................................. 20

Property assessment ..................................................................................... 22

Site conclusions by discipline ...................................................................... 27

TLRN TPA UDP UXO

Site suitability report C33XV

Introduction Purpose and structure of the report

Site information Site and surroundings

Norman Road (CL004)

Phoenix Wharf (CL005)

2.1.10 2.1.11 2.1.12

Proposed use of site construction phase

24 hrs/Mon Sun 12 hrs (7am to 7pm)/ Mon Sat Road*

n/a 12 hrs (7am to 7pm)/ Mon Sat Road

*There may be feasible opportunities to use barge transport for Option 2.

Proposed use of site operational phase Introduction

Restoration and after-use

Engineering assessment Access

Road (all options)

Rail (all options)

River (all options)

Site suitability report C33XV

Permanent works considerations

Health and safety

Planning assessment Introduction

Planning applications and permissions

C33XV Greenwich Pumping Station

CL004 Norman Road

CL005 Phoenix Wharf

Environmental appraisal Introduction

Site suitability report C33XV

Water resources hydrogeology and surface water

Socio-economic and community assessment Introduction

Site suitability report C33XV

Property assessment Introduction

Crown land and special land comments

C33XV Greenwich Pumping Station site

CL004 Norman Road

CL005 Phoenix Wharf

Site suitability report C33XV

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Property valuation comments

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Disturbance compensation comments

Discretionary purchase costs comments

Offsite statutory compensation comments

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Site conclusions by discipline Introduction

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

The potential disadvantages of the site are as follows:

The potential disadvantages of the site are as follows:

Option 3 C33XV: CSO and long connection tunnel reception site

Next steps in the site selection process