PEIR Main Report Vol7 Acton Storm Tanks

Preliminary environmental information report
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks site assessment

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

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

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

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

List of contents Non technical summary Part A: Preliminary project information Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4 Volume 5 Volume 6 Volume 7 Volume 8 Volume 9 Introduction (this document) Proposed development Alternatives Scoping Opinions and technical engagement (this document) Assessment methodology Project-wide assessment Acton Storm Tanks CSO interception and main tunnel reception site (this document) Hammersmith Pumping Station CSO interception site Barn Elms CSO interception site
Part B: Preliminary site information
Volume 10 Putney Bridge Foreshore CSO interception site Volume 11 Dormay Street CSO interception and connection tunnel sequential drive site Volume 12 King Georges Park CSO interception and connection tunnel reception site Volume 13 Carnwath Road Riverside main tunnel drive and reception, and connection tunnel reception site Volume 14 Falconbrook Pumping Station CSO interception site Volume 15 Cremorne Wharf Depot CSO interception site Volume 16 Chelsea Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Volume 17 Kirtling Street main tunnel double drive site Volume 18 Heathwall Pumping Station CSO interception site Volume 19 Albert Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Volume 20 Victoria Embankment Foreshore CSO interception site Volume 21 Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore CSO interception site Volume 22 Chambers Wharf main tunnel drive and reception shaft and connection tunnel reception site Volume 23 King Edward Memorial Park CSO interception site Volume 24 Earl Pumping Station CSO interception site
Page i
Volume 25 Deptford Church Street CSO interception site Volume 26 Greenwich Pumping Station CSO interception and connection tunnel drive site Volume 27 Abbey Mills Pumping Station main tunnel reception site Volume 28 Beckton Sewage Treatment Works site
Page ii
Thames Tunnel Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks site assessment

List of contents
Page number
1 2
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Site context ....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 2.2 Site location ............................................................................................. 2 Environmental context ............................................................................. 2 Overview.................................................................................................. 4 Operation ................................................................................................. 5 Construction ............................................................................................ 7 Design development and on site alternatives ........................................ 12 Base case .............................................................................................. 13 Introduction ............................................................................................ 14 Proposed development .......................................................................... 14 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 16 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 17 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 21 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 24 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 26 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 27 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 29 Introduction ............................................................................................ 30 Proposed development .......................................................................... 30 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 31 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 31 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 34 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 34 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 37 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 38 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 39
Proposed development.................................................................................... 4 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Air quality and odour ..................................................................................... 14 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9
Ecology - aquatic ........................................................................................... 30 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9
Page iii
Ecology - terrestrial ....................................................................................... 40 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 Introduction ............................................................................................ 40 Proposed development .......................................................................... 40 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 41 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 43 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 46 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 48 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 48 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 49 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 51 Introduction ............................................................................................ 52 Proposed development .......................................................................... 52 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 53 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 54 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 64 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 68 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 69 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 71 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 74 Introduction ............................................................................................ 75 Proposed development .......................................................................... 75 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 76 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 76 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 82 Operational assessment ........................................................................ 85 Approach to mitigation ........................................................................... 87 Assessment summary ........................................................................... 88 Assessment completion ......................................................................... 89 Introduction ............................................................................................ 90 Proposed development .......................................................................... 90 Assessment methodology...................................................................... 91 Baseline conditions................................................................................ 93 Construction assessment ...................................................................... 97 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 109
Historic environment ..................................................................................... 52 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9
Land quality .................................................................................................... 75 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9
Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 90 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6
Page iv
9.7 9.8 9.9 10 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 11 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 12 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 12.9 13 13.1 13.2 13.3
Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 112 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 114 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 117 Introduction .......................................................................................... 118 Proposed development ........................................................................ 118 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 118 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 119 Construction assessment .................................................................... 122 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 126 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 126 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 126 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 128 Introduction .......................................................................................... 129 Proposed development ........................................................................ 129 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 130 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 132 Construction assessment .................................................................... 146 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 157 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 167 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 169 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 176 Introduction .......................................................................................... 177 Proposed development ........................................................................ 177 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 181 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 183 Construction assessment .................................................................... 190 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 197 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 201 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 204 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 207 Introduction .......................................................................................... 208 Proposed development ........................................................................ 208 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 209
Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 118
Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 129
Transport ...................................................................................................... 177
Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 208
Page v
13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 14 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 15 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6
Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 209 Construction assessment .................................................................... 211 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 213 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 214 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 214 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 216 Introduction .......................................................................................... 217 Proposed development ........................................................................ 217 Assessment methodology.................................................................... 219 Baseline conditions.............................................................................. 220 Construction assessment .................................................................... 222 Operational assessment ...................................................................... 225 Approach to mitigation ......................................................................... 229 Assessment summary ......................................................................... 230 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 231 Introduction .......................................................................................... 232 Policy considerations ........................................................................... 233 Regulatory position .............................................................................. 233 Assessment of flood risk ...................................................................... 235 Flood risk - design and mitigation ........................................................ 242 Assessment completion ....................................................................... 245
Water resources surface water ................................................................ 217
Water resources flood risk ....................................................................... 232
Appendices ........................................................................................................... 246 Appendix A : Historic environment ..................................................................... 248 Appendix B : Land quality ................................................................................... 257 Appendix C : Noise and vibration ....................................................................... 259 Appendix D : Townscape and visual .................................................................. 264 Appendix E : Water resources - groundwater .................................................... 269 Glossary ................................................................................................................ 279 References ............................................................................................................ 294
Page vi
List of figures
Page number
Vol 7 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan .......................................................................... 2 Vol 7 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental setting plan ........................................................... 2 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.1 Demolition and site clearance plan 1............................................ 4 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.2 Demolition and site clearance plan 2............................................ 4 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.3 Construction - site setup and shaft construction ........................... 4 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.4 Construction - other structures and secondary lining ................... 4 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.5 Permanent works layout 1 ............................................................ 4 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.6 Permanent works layout 2 ............................................................ 4 Vol 7 Figure 4.4.1 Air quality monitoring locations ................................................... 19 Vol 7 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 habitat survey................................. 43 Vol 7 Figure 7.4.1 Historic environment features map ............................................. 55 Vol 7 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses......................................... 77 Vol 7 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality proposed borehole locations ............................... 80 Vol 7 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites ............... 80 Vol 7 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration residential receptors.................................... 93 Vol 7 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context ......................................................... 120 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual pattern and scale of development ...... 132 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation ......... 133 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape and visual distribution of open space .................. 133 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual - transport network ............................. 134 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape and visual character assessment ..................... 136 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations .......................... 141 Vol 7 Figure 12.2.1 Transport - construction traffic routes ..................................... 179 Vol 7 Figure 12.2.2 Transport - construction traffic profile ..................................... 180 Vol 7 Figure 12.4.1 Transport site plan .................................................................. 184 Vol 7 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk EA flood zones .................................................... 236
Page vii
List of tables
Page number
Vol 7 Table 3.3.1 Working hours ............................................................................. 11 Vol 7 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Acton Storm Tanks................................. 12 Vol 7 Table 4.3.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement ........................... 16 Vol 7 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations .................................. 17 Vol 7 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - measured PM10 concentrations ................................ 18 Vol 7 Table 4.4.3 Air quality - additional monitoring locations near the site ............. 19 Vol 7 Table 4.4.4 Air quality - background pollutant concentrations ........................ 19 Vol 7 Table 4.4.5 Air quality receptor values/sensitivities - construction .................. 20 Vol 7 Table 4.4.6 Odour complaints made to LB of Ealing ...................................... 21 Vol 7 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts and magnitudes at ground level - operation ........ 25 Vol 7 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts and magnitude at buildings - operation ............... 25 Vol 7 Table 4.8.1 Air quality and odour assessment summary - construction.......... 27 Vol 7 Table 4.8.2 Air quality and odour assessment summary - operational ........... 28 Vol 7 Table 5.3.1 Aquatic ecology stakeholder engagement ................................... 31 Vol 7 Table 5.4.1 Aquatic ecology receptors values/sensitivities ............................. 34 Vol 7 Table 5.6.1 Aquatic ecology impacts and magnitudes - operation ................. 35 Vol 7 Table 5.8.1 Aquatic ecology assessment summary - operation ..................... 38 Vol 7 Table 6.3.1 Terrestrial ecology - notable species surveys .............................. 42 Vol 7 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology - Phase 1 habitat survey................................ 43 Vol 7 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology assessment summary - construction ............. 49 Vol 7 Table 7.4.1 Historic environment - receptors and their significance ............... 64 Vol 7 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment summary of construction effects ................ 67 Vol 7 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment assessment summary - construction .......... 71 Vol 7 Table 7.8.2 Historic environment assessment summary - operation .............. 73 Vol 7 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land use summary ............................ 77 Vol 7 Table 8.4.2 Land quality summary of site geology and hydrogeology ............ 79 Vol 7 Table 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites ................... 80 Vol 7 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts and magnitudes - construction ................... 84 Vol 7 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptor values/sensitivities - construction .............. 85 Vol 7 Table 8.5.3 Land quality significance of effects - construction........................ 85 Vol 7 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts and magnitudes - operation ....................... 86 Vol 7 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptor values/sensitivities - operation .................. 86
Page viii
Vol 7 Table 8.6.3 Land quality significance of effects - operation ............................ 86 Vol 7 Table 8.8.1 Land quality significance of effects - construction........................ 88 Vol 7 Table 8.8.2 Land quality assessment summary - operation ........................... 88 Vol 7 Table 9.3.1 Noise and vibration stakeholder engagement.............................. 92 Vol 7 Table 9.4.1 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor ambient noise levels........ 94 Vol 7 Table 9.4.2 Noise and vibration sensitive receptors ....................................... 95 Vol 7 Table 9.4.3 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor data - construction .......... 97 Vol 7 Table 9.5.1 Construction noise at AS1, Stanley Studios ................................ 98 Vol 7 Table 9.5.2 Construction noise at AS2, 2-12 Greenend Road........................ 99 Vol 7 Table 9.5.3 Construction noise at AS3, 14-26 Greenend Road.................... 100 Vol 7 Table 9.5.4 Construction noise at AS4, 46-54 Greenend Road.................... 100 Vol 7 Table 9.5.5 Construction noise at AS5, 5-8 Worcester Drive ....................... 101 Vol 7 Table 9.5.6 Construction noise at AS6, 250-269 Longford Court ................. 102 Vol 7 Table 9.5.7 Construction noise at AS7, 1-66 Edison Court .......................... 103 Vol 7 Table 9.5.8 Construction noise at AS8, 1-40 Tesla Court............................. 103 Vol 7 Table 9.5.9 Construction noise at AS8, 3-5 Canham Road .......................... 104 Vol 7 Table 9.5.10 Vibration impacts and magnitudes - construction .................... 105 Vol 7 Table 9.5.11 Vibration human response during construction..................... 107 Vol 7 Table 9.5.12 Noise and vibration summary of construction effects .............. 108 Vol 7 Table 9.6.1 Noise (airbourne) impacts and magnitudes - operation ............. 110 Vol 7 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration significance of effects - operation............... 111 Vol 7 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration assessment summary - construction .......... 114 Vol 7 Table 9.8.2 Noise and vibration assessment summary - operation .............. 116 Vol 7 Table 10.3.1 Socio-economics stakeholder engagement ............................. 118 Vol 7 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economic receptor values/sensitivities .......................... 122 Vol 7 Table 10.5.1 Socio-economics summary of construction effects .................. 125 Vol 7 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economic assessment summary - construction ............. 127 Vol 7 Table 11.4.1 Open space type and distribution ............................................ 133 Vol 7 Table 11.4.2 Townscape and visual site components .................................. 135 Vol 7 Table 11.4.3 Townscape sensitivities to change .......................................... 141 Vol 7 Table 11.4.4 Visual viewpoint sensitivities to change ................................... 145 Vol 7 Table 11.5.1 Townscape and visual site component effects -construction ... 146 Vol 7 Table 11.5.2 Townscape magnitude of change - construction ..................... 150 Vol 7 Table 11.5.3 Visual significance of effects - construction ............................. 156 Vol 7 Table 11.6.1 Townscape and visual site effect, Year 1 of operation ......... 158
Page ix
Vol 7 Table 11.6.2 Townscape significance of effects - Year 1 of operation ......... 160 Vol 7 Table 11.6.3 Visual significance of effects - Year 1 of operation .................. 165 Vol 7 Table 11.8.1 Townscape assessment summary - construction .................... 169 Vol 7 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment summary - construction............................. 170 Vol 7 Table 11.8.3 Townscape assessment summary Year 1 of operation ........ 172 Vol 7 Table 11.8.4 Visual assessment summary Year 1 of operation................. 173 Vol 7 Table 12.2.1 Transport - site construction traffic .......................................... 177 Vol 7 Table 12.2.2 Transport - construction worker numbers ................................ 181 Vol 7 Table 12.3.1 Transport stakeholder engagement ......................................... 182 Vol 7 Table 12.4.1 Transport - bus service frequency ........................................... 185 Vol 7 Table 12.4.2 Transport receptor values/sensitivities..................................... 190 Vol 7 Table 12.5.1 Transport forecast construction vehicle movements............. 193 Vol 7 Table 12.8.1 Transport assessment summary - construction ....................... 204 Vol 7 Table 12.8.2 Transport assessment summary - operation ........................... 206 Vol 7 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater methods of construction ..................................... 208 Vol 7 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater - Thames Tunnel hydrogeological units ............. 209 Vol 7 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater sensitive receptors ............................................. 211 Vol 7 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts and magnitudes - construction .............. 212 Vol 7 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptor values/sensitivities - construction ......... 212 Vol 7 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater significance of effects during construction.......... 212 Vol 7 Table 13.6.1 Groundwater impacts and magnitudes - operation .................. 213 Vol 7 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater receptor values/sensitivities - operation ............. 214 Vol 7 Table 13.6.3 Groundwater significance of effects - operation....................... 214 Vol 7 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater summary of construction assessment ................ 215 Vol 7 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater summary of operation assessment .................... 215 Vol 7 Table 14.4.1: Surface water receptors........................................................... 220 Vol 7 Table 14.6.1 Surface water impact assessment - operation ......................... 227 Vol 7 Table 14.6.2 Surface water significance of effects - operation ..................... 229 Vol 7 Table 14.8.1 Surface water assessment summary - operation..................... 230 Vol 7 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk - runoff rates onsite ................................................. 240 Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 Flood risk - runoff rates and preliminary attenuation volumes . 243
Page x
List of abbreviations AADT ACE AM AOD APZ AQEG AQMA AQO ARS ASR ASSI ATC ATD AURN BAP BGS BMWP BOD BPIP BPM BS CABE CAMS CCI CCSS CCTV CDA CEMP CIRIA CLR CoCP CoPA CROW Annual Average Daily Traffic Arts Culture and Entertainment Morning Above Ordnance Datum Archaeological Priority Zone Air Quality Expert Group Air Quality Management Area Air Quality Objective Artificial Recharge Scheme Aquifer Storage and Recovery Area of Special Scientific Interest Automated Traffic Counter Above Tunnel Datum (defined at ~100m AOD) Automatic Urban and Rural Network Biodiversity Action Plan British Geological Survey Biological Monitoring Working Party Biochemical Oxygen Demand Building Profile Input Programme Best Practicable Means British Standard Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy Community Conservation Index Community Consultation Strategy Closed Circuit Television Critical Drainage Area Construction Environment Management Programmes Construction Industry Research and Information Association Contaminated Land Report Code of Construction Practice Control of Pollution Act Countryside and Rights of Way
Page xi
CSO dB dB LAeq,T
Combined Sewer Overflow Decibel a equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified time period T Department for Culture, Media and Sport Development Consent Order Department for Communities and Local Government Department for Culture media and Sport Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Department for Transport Development Management Plan Development Management Policies Document Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Dissolved Oxygen Development Plan Document Digital Terrain Mapping Environment Agency European Commission Ecological Impact Assessment Estimated Vibration Dose Value European Economic Area Environment Food and Rural Affairs Committee English Heritage Environmental Health Officer Environmental Impact Assessment European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme English Nature Environment Protection Agency Earth Pressure Balance Earth Pressure Balance Machine Equality Impact Assessment Environmental Quality Standard Environmental Statement European Union Frequently Asked Questions
Page xii
DCMS DCO DCLG DCMS Defra DfT DMP DMPD DMRB DO DPD DTM EA EC EcIA eVDV EEA EFRA EH EHO EIA EMEP EN EPA EPB EPBM EqIA EQS ES EU FAQ
FIDOR FRA GARDIT GI GiGL GIS GLA GLHER GQA GSHP GWB GWMU H2S ha HA HDV HEA HER HGV HIA HIAB HPA HQ HRA HTC HWR IEEM IEMA IMD IPC Iron Age JNCC kg km
Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness, Receptor Flood Risk Assessment General Aquifer Research Development and Investigation Team Ground Investigation Greenspace Information for Greater London Geographical Information System Greater London Authority Greater London Historic Environment Record General Quality Assessment (EA water quality classification) Ground Source Heat Pump Groundwater Body: distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer or aquifers Ground Water Management Unit Hydrogen sulphide hectares Highways Authority Heavy Duty Vehicle Historic Environmental Assessment Historic Environment Record Heavy Goods Vehicle Health Impact Assessment Hydrauliska Industri AB Company Health Protection Agency Headquarter Habitats Regulations Assessment Hammersmith Town Centre Hazardous Waste Regulations (2005) Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment Index of Multiple Deprivation Infrastructure Planning Commission 600 BC AD 43 Joint Nature Conservation Committee kilograms kilometre
Page xiii
kVA kW l/d l/s LA LAARC LAQM LAQN LB LBAP LDF LGV LHA LMB LNR loWR LSB LtB LTI LTT LUL LVMF m m AOD m ATD m/s MAGIC Mbgl MEICA Ml/d MoD MOL MOLA NE NESR
kilo watt amperes kilowatt litres per day litres per second Local Authority London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre Local Air Quality Management London Air Quality Network London Borough Local Biodiversity Action Plan Local Development Framework Light Goods Vehicle Local Highway Authority Lambeth Mottled Beds Local Nature Reserve List of Wastes Regulations 2005 Lower Shelly Beds Laminated Beds London Tideway Improvements London Tideway Tunnels London Underground Limited London View Management Framework metre metres above Ordinance Datum (see AOD) metres above temporary datum, (see ATD) metres per second Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside Metres below ground level Mechanical Electrical Instrumentation Controls Automation Megalitres per day (million litres per day) Ministry of Defence Metropolitan Open Land Museum of London Archaeology Natural England North East Storm Relief
Page xiv
NCR NGR NMR NNR NO2 NOx NPPF NPS NRMM NSIP NSRA NTS OCU Ofwat OS OUE PAH PCB PEI PEIR PEL PICP PIP PLA PM PM10 PPC PPE PPG PPS PPV PRoW PS pSPA PWS
National Cycle Route National Grid Reference National Monuments Record National Nature Reserve Nitrogen dioxide Oxides of nitrogen National Planning Policy Framework National Policy Statement Non Road Mobile Machinery Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project National Small-bore Rifle Association Non Technical Summary Odour Control Unit The Water Services Regulations Authority Ordnance Survey European Odour Unit Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Polychlorinated Biphenyl Preliminary Environmental Information Preliminary Environmental Information Report Probable Effect Levels Pollution Incident Control Plan Project Information Paper Port of London Authority Afternoon Particles on the order of ~10 micrometers or less Pollution Prevention and Control Personal Protective Equipment Pollution Prevention Guidance Planning Policy Statement Peak Particle Velocity Public Rights of Way Pumping Station Potential Special Protected Area Public Water Supply
Page xv
RAMS RAMSAR RB RBKC RBMP RDB RHS RPG RSPB RDB RTC RTD SA SAC SAM SCI SCL SFRA SI SINC SMI SNCI SO2 SoCC SPA SPD S-P-R SPZ SR SRN SSR SSSI STW SUDS
Risk Assessment Method Statement The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Royal Borough Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea River Basin Management Plans Red Data Book Royal Horticultural Society Regional Planning Guidance Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Red data book Real Time Control River Terrace Deposits Sustainability Appraisal Special Area of Conservation Scheduled Ancient Monument. More commonly referred to as Scheduled Monument Statement of Community Involvement Sprayed Concrete Lining Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Statutory Instrument Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan Importance Site Nature Conservation Importance Sulphur dioxide Statement of Community Consultation Special Protection Area Supplementary Planning Document Source-pathway-receptor Source Protection Zone Storm Relief Strategic Road Network Site Suitability Report Site of Special Scientific Interest Sewage Treatment Works Sustainable (Urban) Drainage Systems
Page xvi
SWMP SWMP t TA TAS TBC TBM TDP TEBP TEL TfL TFRM TH TLRN Tpa TPO TT TTQI TTSS TWU UDP UK UKHO UMB UPN UWWTD UWWTR UXO VDV VNEB OA WCA WEEE WFD WIA WRAP
waste - Site Waste Management Plan water Surface Water Management Plan tonne Transport Assessment Thames Archaeological Survey To be confirmed Tunnel Boring Machine Thames Discovery Programme Thames Estuary Benthic Programme Threshold Effect Levels Transport for London Tideway Fish Risk Model Tower Hamlets Transport for London Road Network tonnes per annum Tree Preservation Order Thames Tunnel Thames Tideway Quality Improvements Thames Tideway Strategic Study 2005 Thames Water Utilities Unitary Development Plan United Kingdom United Kingdom Hydrographic Office Upper Mottled Beds Upnor Formation Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations Unexploded Ordnance Vibration Dose Value Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area Wildlife and Countryside Act Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive Water Framework Directive Water Industry Act 1991 Waste Resources Action Programme
Page xvii
WSI WWT ZTV ZVI
Written Scheme of Investigation Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust Zone of Theoretical Visibility Zone of Visual Influence
Page xviii
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks
Section 1: Introduction
1
1.1.1 1.1.2
Introduction
This volume presents the preliminary environmental information for the Thames Tunnel proposal at Acton Storm Tanks. This document reports the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the Thames Tunnel project at Acton Storm Tanks. The planned activities to assist in completing the environmental impact assessment (EIA) include: a. Conclude baseline environmental surveys b. Confirm final design, informed by, amongst other things, feedback from public consultation c. Undertake design of possible mitigation to address adverse effects.
1.1.3
Once complete, the findings of the EIA will be reported in full in the Environmental Statement which will be submitted with the consent application This volume describes the site and environmental context in Section 2. The proposed development including construction and operation is described in Section 3. The design evolution for this site is set out in Section 3.4. Finally, Section 3.5 refers to other development schemes which have been submitted or with extant planning approval within or in proximity to the site. The development at Acton would link the existing Acton Storm Relief sewer through a Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Drop shaft to the main tunnel. The CSO currently discharges approximately 29 times a year at approximately 312,000 m3 per year. A description of the Thames Tunnel is included in Volume 2. This includes the planning context for the project as well as local planning policies relevant to this site. The alternatives which have been considered are described in Volume 3. Scoping and technical engagement is covered in Volume 4, while Volume 5 sets out the technical assessment methodology. A project-wide assessment is provided in Volume 6. The remaining Volumes 7 to 28 contain the site specific assessments.
1.1.4
1.1.5
1.1.6
Page 1
Section 2: Site context
2 2.1
2.1.1
Site context Site location

The site is located in the London Borough (LB) of Ealing. It comprises land largely within the curtilage of a Thames Water operational facility, which includes Acton Storm Tanks and associated pumping station covering an area of approximately 2ha. The site is shown in Vol 7 Figure 2.1.1. Vol 7 Figure 2.1.1 Site location plan (see Volume 7 Figures document)
2.1.2
The site is bounded to the north by Canham Road and industrial units. The east and southeast of the site are bounded by Warple Way and residential properties. To the southwest and west it is bounded by third party lands consisting of a private car park and associated infrastructure. The site lies in close proximity to the boundaries of the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham to the east and LB of Hounslow to the south. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character and the nearest residential properties are a number of residential houses on the southern boundary of Canham Road (immediately north-east of the site) and high rise flats on the east side of Warple Way Existing site access is on to Canham Road via a small access road. This access road intersects with Canham Road at the junction with Warple Way but outside of the Warple way entrance road marking. Warple Way is a narrow, one-way, no through route and provides local access only to two car parks (southern section of Warple Way only). There is no rail network local to the site. Acton Central railway is approximately 1km away. The site is remote from the River Thames and other watercourses and as such has no wharfage or jetty facilities. The site encompasses what is currently open space. The site is predominantly hardstanding and consists of the existing pumping station in the east of the site, the six open storm tanks, and associated infrastructure. A landscaped area exists in the south eastern part of the site. The site also encompasses two small portions of the car park to the south west and west of the storm tanks.
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.2
2.2.1
Environmental context
Environmental designations for the site and immediate surrounds are shown in Vol 7 Figure 2.2.1. Vol 7 Figure 2.2.1 Environmental setting plan (see Volume 7 Figures document)
2.2.2
The site is 250m west of Wendell Park Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) is of local importance (Grade L), which is located within the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham. There are three Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) within 2km of the site: Gunnersbury Triangle to the west, Wormwood Scrubs to the north, northwest and Chiswick Eyot to the south. Chiswick Eyot is also a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC
Page 2
Section 2: Site context
Grade 4). The Acton Storm Relief CSO that is to be intercepted at the site discharges in to the River Thames at Chiswick Eyot. 2.2.3 There are no heritage features of note within the site. Bedford Park Conservation Area is 125m to the south of the site. Acton Park Conservation Area lies 355m to the north-west. There are no Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) recorded within the site. The site is in the Ealing Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and next to the Hammersmith AQMA. Local roadside monitoring indicates exceedences of the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) air quality standards. Local road traffic contributes to the noise climate in the area. Previous site investigations show that the surrounding area contains historic and present contamination sources such as works, depots and substations. There is therefore medium to high potential for contamination to be present on site. There are 2m of superficial deposits and made ground, 44m of London Clay (unproductive strata), 15m Lambeth Group (secondary aquifer) and 9m of Thanet Sand (secondary aquifer). Most of the site is in Flood Zone 1. There is also an area of defended Flood Zone 3 to the south of the site.
2.2.4
2.2.5 2.2.6
2.2.7
Page 3
Section 3: Proposed development
3 3.1
3.1.1
Proposed development Overview

The development at Acton would link the existing Acton Storm Relief sewer through a CSO Drop shaft to the main tunnel. The shaft would be situated in the north of the site. It would receive the main tunnel Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) from Carnwath Road Riverside and secondary lining of the main tunnel would commence from the site to Carnwath Road Riverside. Vol 7 Figure 3.1.1 to Vol 7 Figure 3.1.4 show the demolition and site clearance, construction phasing and permanent works plans. Vol 7 Figure 3.1.1 Demolition and site clearance plan 1 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.2 Demolition and site clearance plan 2 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.3 Construction - site setup and shaft construction Vol 7 Figure 3.1.4 Construction - other structures and secondary lining Vol 7 Figure 3.1.5 Permanent works layout 1 Vol 7 Figure 3.1.6 Permanent works layout 2 (see Volume 7 Figures document)
3.1.2
Construction of the main works at this site is scheduled to commence in late 2018 (Year 1) and be completed by 2021, taking approximately three and a half years. Early works, such as utility connections and diversions may be undertaken in advance of the main works. The site would be operational in 2023. Further detail of the construction programme is described in Section 3.3. The following lists the structures required at this site: a. a drop shaft b. an above ground interception chamber with above ground access cover(s) c. a below ground valve chamber with ground level access cover(s) d. an underground connection culvert with access via the shaft and/or valve chamber e. an above ground CSO overflow structure with above ground access cover(s) f. an underground CSO overflow connection culvert g. a ventilation building consisting of air management systems including filtration, pumps and ventilation ducting h. a ventilation column (separate to the ventilation building) i. j. underground culverts for ventilation of the shaft and pits and ducts for cables and hydraulic pipelines permanent restoration of the temporary construction site comprising levelling, infilling and making good, and landscaping works to
3.1.3
Page 4
incorporate maintenance vehicle hardstanding and access to chamber covers. 3.1.4 The following construction related elements would be required: a. Gates to temporary site entrance and exit b. Hoardings and other means of enclosure, barrier or screening c. Office and welfare accommodation and facilities d. Workshops and stores e. Plant and machinery f. Power generation plant and lighting g. Highways access and internal site roads h. Material storage and handling areas and treatment facilities i. j. 3.1.5 Concrete plant, power supply, and cage lay down area The carrying out or maintenance of other such works.
Further details of these methods and the relevant phases are given in Section 3.3 where these are relevant to the technical assessments that follow.
3.2
3.2.1
Operation
Once developed the project would divert the majority of current CSO discharges from the Acton Storm Relief sewer via the CSO shaft to the main tunnel for treatment at Beckton Sewage Treatment Works. The number of CSO discharges in a typical year would be reduced from 29 spill events to zero spill events per year. The four remaining storm tanks at the site would be hydraulically isolated from the sewer network.
Permanent structures
3.2.2 A plan of the permanent structures is shown in Vol 7 Figure 3.1.4. The area of operational land required by the project is less than that required for the construction phase. The land which is not required for operational purposes would be restored following completion of construction. Once constructed and operational there would remain on site the structures listed in the following sections. The design and finishing proposed for the above ground features would be further developed during the period up to the application.
3.2.3 3.2.4
Shaft
3.2.5 The CSO drop shaft would have an internal diameter of approximately 15m and would be approximately 31m deep. The Acton CSO shaft would be constructed in the north of the site on the line of the main tunnel and would serve as a reception shaft for the main tunnel. A full description of this tunnel is provided in Volume 2. The shaft would be finished to existing ground levels.
3.2.6
Page 5
Interception chambers and culverts

3.2.7 The interception chamber would be finished approximately 2m above existing ground levels this is required for hydraulic and operational reasons. Flow would be conveyed via an existing channel to the interception chamber. A penstock would be provided within this existing channel to control flows into the tunnel. The valve chamber would be finished to existing ground levels. A below ground connection culvert would transfer the flow from the interception chamber to the shaft via the valve chamber.
3.2.8
Tunnel
3.2.9 The site would serve as the reception site for the main tunnel Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) which would be driven from Carnwath Road Riverside. The internal diameter of the main tunnel would be approximately 6m at this location.
Ventilation structures
3.2.10 A building containing ventilation control systems would be provided in the north of the site. This building would serve to provide ventilation and odour control for the main tunnel. A brown roof is proposed for this building. The size of this building would be approximately 26m by 10m by 9m high. A 15m ventilation column would sit in the north-west corner of the site, immediately west of the proposed ventilation building.
3.2.11
Electrical kiosk
3.2.12 Electrical plant would be accommodated within the mechanical control cabinet (MCC) room of the existing control and standby generator building. This part of the building currently houses the switchboards and controls for the pumping station and storm tanks associated with the Thames Water facilities.
Paved areas
3.2.13 The area around the shaft would be finished with hardstanding to allow crane access to the covers on top of the shaft. This hardstanding would not be publicly accessible. The area around the ventilation building would be provided with sufficient hardstanding to provide vehicular access and would be integrated with a landscaping arrangement which is currently under design development. The hardstanding arrangement that would be employed allows areas of land formerly made up of hardstanding to be returned to landscaped finish.
3.2.14
3.2.15
Access and maintenance works

3.2.16 Access to the Thames Water Acton Pumping Station site would continue to be through the existing access onto Canham Road. In addition two new vehicular access gates would be installed along Canham Road immediately north of the ventilation building.
Page 6
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks 3.2.17
The northern site boundary fence line would be set back from the existing alignment. The area between this fence line and the rear of the Canham Road footpath would be retained in Thames Water ownership Access to the site and ventilation building would be required for a light commercial vehicle on a three to six monthly maintenance schedule. This would be carried out during normal working hours and would take approximately half a day. There would be no aerial lighting. Access would be via the existing access from Canham Road Additionally once every ten years, more significant maintenance work would be carried out. This would be carried out in normal working hours. Two cranes would be required for these visits. For this operation the new access off Canham Road would be utilised. Access for unplanned maintenance or repairs would also be required.
3.2.18
3.2.19
3.3
3.3.1
Construction
The construction works at this site would encompass the existing Thames Water site and minor strips of the third party lands to the south west and west of the site. Vol 7 Figure 3.1.1 show the demolition and site clearance and construction phasing to be undertaken at the site. The methods, order and timing of the construction work outlined herewith are indicative only, but representative of a practical method to construct the works and suitable upon which to base the assessment. It is recognised that, following further design development and selection of contractors, alternate methodology and scheduling may be proposed. The following sections describe: a. Construction works including construction of the shaft, tunnel and CSO interception and processes and working methods to be applied b. Access and movement c. Completion of works and site restoration d. Construction programme and working hours.
3.3.2
3.3.3
Code of Construction Practice

3.3.4 3.3.5 All works would be undertaken in accordance with the Thames Tunnel Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) (a draft is appended to Volume 2). The CoCP sets out a series of measures to protect the environment and limit disturbance from construction activities as far as reasonably practicable. These measures would be applied throughout the construction at this site.
3.3.6
Construction works
3.3.7 The following physical construction works are described: a. Site setup (see Construction Layout Vol 7 Figure 3.1.1) b. Shaft construction (see Construction Layout Vol 7 Figure 3.1.2) c. Tunnelling
Page 7
d. Construction of other structures (see Construction Layout Vol 7 Figure 3.1.3) e. Reinstatement and commissioning. Site setup 3.3.8 Prior to any works commencing the site boundary would be established and secured. The boundary would be built to an appropriate height for the site. Welfare and office facilities would also be set up with utility and power connections installed. New access gates would provide access from Canham Road. The existing two tanks (tanks five and six) that would be occupied by the shaft would be decommissioned. Tanks one to four would need to be modified to increase capacity to allow the subsequent demolition of tanks 5 and 6. This would be done by increasing the wall heights by up to 1m by in situ concrete capping to the top of the existing walls. In addition, the south east hoarding would be constructed to prevent overspill leaving the site, should an overspill occur in an extreme storm event. Shaft construction 3.3.10 Plant and material storage areas (including displaced slurry storage), waste skips, muck bin and delivery vehicle turning area would be established. Craneage, concrete silos, water tanks, mixing pan, excavator and dumper for excavated material handling are among the items of plant that would all be likely to be required on site. The base of the tank would be stitch drilled and broken out to suit the shaft external diameter. In advance any required structural support to the tank to enable the shaft opening would be installed. This may be a reinforced concrete ring beam or a steel propping. The CSO shaft is anticipated to be fully in the London Clay. As the shaft is currently required to have a secondary lining, a sprayed concrete lined (SCL) shaft is anticipated. If the secondary lining is not required a precast concrete segmental lined shaft may be appropriate. It is intended to stockpile as much excavated material as possible arising from shaft excavation on site to use for infilling tanks five and six. Initial excavation would be carried out from the base of the tanks, but the shaft would be raised in suitable stages to existing ground level as the excavation progresses. The upper section of the shaft would be built up in situ reinforced concrete or precast concrete shaft linings with in situ concrete jacket. The remainder of the shaft (and any subsequent works) would be constructed from this final level. The shaft would be advanced in incremental cycles. After each stage has been excavated, the primary SCL would be constructed. The process of excavating and spraying are repeated until the shaft reaches the required depth. A steel bar reinforced portal would be incorporated within the shaft lining to accommodate reception of the main tunnel boring machine.
3.3.9
3.3.11
3.3.12
3.3.13
3.3.14 3.3.15 3.3.16
Page 8
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Tunnelling 3.3.17
There are no tunnelling works to be commenced from this site but the TBM from Carnwath Road Riverside would be received and removed from this shaft. A tunnel reception eye would be formed in unreinforced SCL within the portal in the shaft lining to accommodate the reception of the TBM into the shaft. The TBM would be lifted out of the shaft by heavy lift mobile crane (500 to 1000t), cleaned then dismantled and transported off site. A bunded area would be prepared to contain and capture the wash off, which in turn would be disposed of at a licensed waste transfer site. Construction of other structures Interception and valve chambers
3.3.18
3.3.19
3.3.20
The interception chamber, valve chamber and connection culvert to the CSO drop shaft would be constructed within the infilled tank area to take flows from the existing inlet structure. The new penstock would be accommodated in this existing inlet structure. The structures would be constructed by in situ concrete techniques within a sheet pile supported excavation. The excavation would be undertaken and supported to formation level. Additional support to the existing structure may be required to form the new opening. The reinforced concrete structures would be constructed, including the base slab followed by walls in suitable lifts. Concrete would be poured using a crane and skip. Internal penstocks may be fitted prior to constructing the soffit for ease of access and use the crane to lift into position. A new overflow weir, piped culvert and outlet chamber would be constructed to connect the overflow to the Acton Storm Relief CSO. The chamber would be constructed by in situ concrete techniques within a sheet pile supported excavation. Prior to the piling and excavation, the existing CSO would be surveyed and strengthening measures and /or lining works undertaken to ensure its integrity and to maintain flow. This chamber would be connected (along the western side of the tanks) to the new weir overflow chamber. This would be undertaken by cut and cover methods. The excavation is likely to be supported by a trench box support system with pipes installed sequentially. The reinforced concrete weir chamber would be constructed to adjoin the existing weir from the Stamford Brook Sewer. It is anticipated that these works would be constructed within temporary sheet piled excavations with the new structure formed by in situ concrete techniques. It is anticipated that there would be some modification to the existing structure which would require both percussive and non percussive concrete breaking techniques. The works would be undertaken around the existing system.
3.3.21 3.3.22
3.3.23
3.3.24
Page 9
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ventilation building 3.3.25
The ventilation building would be erected. This would typically be a steel framed building with cladding but this will depend on the final architectural design. The ventilation column would be erected. Prior to construction the existing area would be cleared of obstructions. The below ground ventilation ducts from the CSO drop shaft and to the column and control equipment would be installed in shallow excavations. Existing storm tanks Tanks one to four would be hydraulically isolated through the construction of a permanent barrier within the existing inlet structure to those tanks. Reinstatement and commissioning Once the main elements of construction are completed, the final landscaping works would be undertaken including final treatments and surfaces, planting and installation of street furniture. Testing and commissioning would also be undertaken once construction is complete. For the purposes of the assessment, completion of the commissioning stage represents the end of construction and the commencement of the operational development.
3.3.26
3.3.27
3.3.28
3.3.29
Access and movement

3.3.30 For the purposes of this report one vehicle movement is defined as a vehicle either accessing or egressing the site. For the purposes of construction logistics, site traffic is measured in units of lorries or barges where one lorry/barge is equivalent to a single lorry/barge accessing and then egressing the site. A new site access would be provided midway along Canham Road with some minor kerb realignment potentially required to enable lorries to turn left out of the site access and right into Stanley Gardens. Minor works to other junctions are likely to be required. The site access would require a dropped kerb along the southern footpath of Canham Road. Full pedestrian access would be retained along this stretch and appropriate site access signing would be provided to inform and remind pedestrians and lorry drivers of crossing vehicles/pedestrians. Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens are used extensively for parking. To enable sufficient turning space, it is proposed to temporarily remove parking on Warple Way north of the junction with Canham Road, along the northern kerb of Canham Road, as well as around the junction of Stanley Gardens with Canham Road and The Vale. Peak vehicle movements would be associated with specific site activities. The highest lorry movements at the site would occur during tunnel secondary lining. The daily vehicle movements at this time, averaged over a one month period, would be 20HGV lorries, equivalent to 40 movements per day. It is envisaged that vehicles coming from the A4 would route north via the A3220, west along the A40 (Westway), exit at Savoy Circus to head south
3.3.31
3.3.32
3.3.33
3.3.34
3.3.35
Page 10
through Old Oak Road, west along the Vale, and then access through Warple Way and Canham Road. Vehicles coming via the eastbound A40 would also exit at Old Oak Road and proceed towards Warple Way/Canham Road. 3.3.36 As per the existing one-way system Warple Way and Canham Road would be used for access only and existing vehicles would route via Stanley Gardens onto the Vale. Vehicles returning towards the A4 and A40 would use the same route as above. Alternatively, lorries destined to access the westbound M40, can be routed westbound along The High Street, Uxbridge Road and north via Hanger lane to the A40. Due to a weak bridge (17 tonnes), Steyne Road and Horn Lane would not be used. A traffic management plan for the site will be prepared.
3.3.37
3.3.38
Construction programme and working hours

Construction programme 3.3.39 Construction at Acton Storm Tanks is anticipated to take approximately three and a half years and would involve the following steps (with some overlaps): a. Year 1 Site setup (approximately 4 months) b. Year 1 - Shaft construction (approximately 7 months) c. Years 1 to 3 Construction of other structures (approximately 22 months)
d. Year 2 Secondary lining (approximately 7 months) e. Years 3 to 4 Completion of works and site restoration (approximately 13 months) f. 3.3.40 System-wide commissioning would take place following site restoration and is not included in the above programme.
Construction activity at Acton Storm Tanks would peak during tunnel secondary lining. Working hours The following working hours set out in Vol 7 Table 3.3.1 would apply for the construction at this site. Vol 7 Table 3.3.1 Working hours Overall construction works Standard working hours Consist of: Core working hours core working hours mobilisation period maintenance and support period.
3.3.41
08:00 to 18:00 Weekdays
Page 11
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Overall construction works
08:00 to 13:00 Saturdays Extended standard working hours These are intermittent and are required to cover certain construction activities that require more than the Standard Working Hours to be completed. 18.00 to 22.00 Weekdays 13.00 to 17.00 Saturdays Mobilisation period Up to 1 hour before and after the core working hours 07:00 to 08:00 and 18:00 to 19:00 Weekdays 07:00 to 08:00 and 13:00 to 14:00 Saturday Maintenance and support period 13:00 to 17:00 Saturdays 10:00 to 16:00 Sundays 24 Hour working. Monday to Sunday.
Main tunnel secondary lining works (if required) Continuous working
3.4
3.4.1
Design development and on site alternatives

The current design was completed in advance of finalising technical surveys and assessments. The final design may alter significantly in response to this as well as feedback from phase two consultation. The design of the proposals at this site has developed since phase one consultation and following the Design Council CABE reviews, as described in the table below. Vol 7 Table 3.4.1 Design development at Acton Storm Tanks Design development Increase in shaft diameter. Decommissioning of the existing storm tanks. Reason New tunnelling strategy and change in proposed use of the site. Modifications to existing weir overflow chamber and the provision of a new overflow pipe would isolate spills to the tanks in response to comments received at phase one consultation. To accommodate a larger shaft and to reduce impact during construction upon the local residents.
3.4.2
Shaft location moved to the northern part of the site.
Page 12
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Design development Access to the site on Canham Road. Confirmation that a new ventilation building is required.
Section 3: Proposed development Reason To further reduce the effects on the residents of Warple Way. Modified scheme-wide air management proposals and requirement of the site as a main tunnel reception shaft.
3.4.3
Further information on how the design has evolved at this site is included in the Design Development Report, which is also available as part of phase two consultation. Design development information, and the reasons for the choice of the final design at this site, including environmental design factors, will also be provided in the ES.
3.4.4
3.5
3.5.1
Base case
The assessment undertaken for this site takes account of relevant development projects which have been submitted or with extant planning permission. Because of the other developments the future environmental conditions within and around this site irrespective of the Thames Tunnel are likely to change. This is termed the base case. The Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tideway Quality Improvement (TTQI) projects (improvement works at Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Long Reach and Riverside Sewage Treatment Works) will be operational by the time construction of the Thames Tunnel commences. The base case would therefore be the water quality in the Tideway with the TTQI projects and the Lee Tunnel in place. As a result, by 2021 discharge from the CSO at Acton Storm Tanks will be 325,800m3 with 30 spills. The projected spill volumes and spill frequencies for the baseline conditions for the Thames Tunnel (which is with the improvements applied to the STWs, and the Lee Tunnel in place) would still not be a sufficient level of CSO control to meet the UWWTD (see also Volume 2, Section 2.6). There are no known other relevant schemes within or adjacent to the site.
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5.5
Page 13
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks
Section 4: Air quality and odour
4 4.1
4.1.1
Air quality and odour Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant air quality and odour effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The proposed development has the potential to affect local air quality and odour due to: a. Construction traffic on the road (air quality) b. Temporary closure of lanes during construction (air quality) c. Emissions from construction plant (air quality) d. Dust nuisance from construction-generated dust (air quality) e. Operation of the tunnel (odour).
4.1.2
4.1.3
Each of these is considered within the assessment. This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment, and sets out what will be provided in the ES when the full assessment is available. Operational air quality effects from transport were scoped out of the assessment at the scoping stage due to the very limited number of maintenance visits required and hence the low number of vehicular movements. Odour is considered for the operational phase.
4.1.4
4.2
4.2.1
Proposed development
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to air quality and odour are as follows.
Construction
Road traffic 4.2.2 4.2.3 During the proposed construction period, there would be road traffic movements in and out of the site. The highest number of lorry movements at the Acton Storm Tanks site would occur during the tunnel secondary lining works (Year 2 of construction). The peak number of vehicle movements at that time would be 40 lorry movements per day (averaged over a one month period). All materials would be transported by road. The construction traffic routes for the key material supply stages, traffic management and access to the site can be found in the Section 12 of this volume. River barges 4.2.5 There is no access to the river at this site, so all transport would be by road.
4.2.4
Page 14
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks Construction plant 4.2.6
There are a number of items of plant that would be used on site that may produce emissions that could affect local air quality. Construction dust Activities with the potential to give rise to dust emissions from the proposed development during construction are as follows: a. Site preparation and establishment. b. Demolition of existing infrastructure and buildings. c. Materials handling.
4.2.7
4.2.8
The potential for these processes to impact at sensitive receptors is dependent on many factors including the following: a. Location of the construction site. b. Proximity of sensitive receptors. c. Extent of demolition. d. Extent of any intended excavation. e. Nature, location and size of stockpiles and length of time they are on site. f. Occurrence and scale of dust generating activities; necessity for onsite concrete crusher or cement batcher.
g. Number and type of vehicles and plant required on site. h. Potential for dirt or mud to be made airborne through vehicle movements. i. 4.2.9 Weather conditions. Appropriate dust and emission control measures are included in the draft CoCP in accordance with the London Councils Best Practice Guidance 1. Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce air quality impacts include measures in relation to vehicle and plant emissions, measures to reduce dust formation and re-suspension, measures to control dust present and to reduce particulate emissions. These would be observed across all phases of demolition and construction.
Operation
4.2.10 The ventilation building would house two active odour control units (OCU) that could treat up to 20m3/s in total. The air having passed through the OCU would be released from the ventilation column. The maximum air release rate during a typical year is expected to be 40m3/s, which would occasionally exceed the capacity of the OCU. When air flows are greater than 20m3/s, as could occur during a heavy storm, the excess air would be released through a bypass vent in the ventilation column. The net area of the bypass vent is expected to be 2m2.
Page 15
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks 4.2.11
During the typical year scenario, air would be released from the ventilation column for 389 hours of which 13 hours would include emissions from the bypass vent. This information on the ventilation structures provided the input data for the dispersion model used to assess odour dispersion at the site.
4.2.12
4.3
4.3.1
Assessment methodology Scoping and engagement

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below. Vol 7 Table 4.3.1 Air quality and odour stakeholder engagement Organisation Comment LB Ealing Odour monitoring required given complaints. Monitoring in accordance with the revised Environment Agency 'Odour Management H4 Guidance'. A minimum of one years data will be required prior to construction. Response The Environment Agency advises that there is no single method of reliably measuring or assessing odour pollution. Consideration is being given to carrying out H2S monitoring near CSOs or vents for the sewerage system. Near sites where there are no CSOs or vents for the sewerage system, background odour has been assumed to be negligible. Dust monitoring will be undertaken using light scattering monitors at all Thames Tunnel construction sites. This would begin one year prior to the commencement of construction. NO2 monitoring has commenced to establish the baseline. This monitoring will continue where appropriate. Locations agreed with the Regulatory Services Officer-Pollution. Provided by the Regulatory Services Officer-Pollution.
LB Ealing
LB Ealing
The site is in an AQMA and will result in an increase in NO2 and PM10 in the surrounding area. Monitoring for both of these pollutants will be required prior to and during the construction phase. A minimum of one years data (preferably two) will be required prior to construction for both pollutants. Monitoring locations
Odour complaints
Page 16
Baseline
4.3.2 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Construction
4.3.3 The construction phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Operation
4.3.4 The operational phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Assumptions and limitations

4.3.5 For the purposes of the PEIR it has been assumed that background odour concentrations are negligible in the future base case. However, complaints have been made to LB of Ealing and Thames Water in the last five years so background concentrations may be raised on occasions. If raised background concentrations were to occur during the few hours in the year when air is released from the tunnel, then the total concentration could be higher than that predicted. Baseline hydrogen sulphide monitoring is currently being undertaken at all sites (in August 2011 with repeat monitoring to be undertaken in Autumn 2011) to inform assumptions to be used for the assessment to be reported in the ES.
4.3.6
4.4
Baseline conditions Local air quality

Pollutant concentrations
4.4.1 4.4.2
The current conditions with regard to local air quality are best established through long-term air quality monitoring. As part of their duties under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995, local authorities, especially in urban areas where air quality is a significant issue, undertake long-term air quality monitoring within their administrative areas. The LB of Ealing currently has one continuous monitoring station (EA2) and four diffusion tubes, which collect data pertinent to the Acton Storm Tanks site. The NO2 monitoring data are given in the table below, and the PM10 monitoring data is given in Vol 7 Table 4.4.2. Vol 7 Table 4.4.1 Air quality - measured NO2 concentrations Annual Mean (g/m3)
4.4.3
Monitoring Site EA2 Acton Town Hall
Site Type
Number of Exceedences of Hourly Standard
2010* 2009 2008 2007 2010* 2009 2008 2007 Roadside 54 62 59 57 4 13 26 31
Page 17
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks Monitoring Site First Avenue Warple Way 44 Acton Lane Southfields First and Middle School Site Type
Section 4: Air quality and odour Annual Mean (g/m3) Number of Exceedences of Hourly Standard
2010* 2009 2008 2007 2010* 2009 2008 2007 Roadside Roadside Roadside Urban Background 44 61 57 55 49 51 52 58 59 NA NA NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM
36
39
41
NA
NM
NM
NM
NM
* 2010 data not fully ratified. NM indicates not measured. NA indicates not available. 3 Emboldened figures indicate an exceedence of the objective / limit value which is 40g/m for the 3 annual mean and 200g/m for the hourly mean which can be exceeded 18 times per year.
4.4.4
NO2 monitoring indicates that four of the five sites (all roadside) are measuring continual exceedences of the annual mean NO2 standard (40g/m3). The site at Southfields Schools (urban background) measured an exceedence in 2008, but not in the 2009 and 2010. Vol 7 Table 4.4.2 Air quality - measured PM10 concentrations Annual Mean (g/m3)
Monitoring Site EA2 Acton Town Hall
Site Type Roadside
Number of Exceedences of Daily Standard
2010* 2009 2008 2007 2010* 2009 2008 2007 23 25 25 26 6+ 13 19 25
* 2010 data not fully ratified. + Data capture of 85%. 3 Embolden figures indicate an exceedence of the objective/limit which is 40g/m for the annual 3 mean and 50g/m for the daily mean which can be exceeded 35 times per year.
4.4.5 4.4.6
The PM10 monitoring site achieved both the PM10 annual and daily standards in the last four years of monitoring. As a result of these NO2 exceedences and those in previous years, the LB Ealing has declared an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) for NO2 and PM10. This area covers the whole Borough. The site is very close to the boundaries with LB Hammersmith and Fulham and LB Hounslow. Both have declared AQMAs for NO2 which cover the whole Borough. LB Hammersmith and Fulham has also declared the whole Borough as an AQMA for PM10. In addition to the local authority monitoring, diffusion tube monitoring has been set up as part of the project to monitor NO2 concentrations in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site. This monitoring comprises eight diffusion tubes based at the locations detailed in Vol 7 Table 4.4.3. A triplicate site has been established next to a continuous monitoring station
4.4.7
4.4.8
Page 18
in Putney for bias adjustment purposes; otherwise all the monitoring locations have single tubes. 4.4.9 All identified existing and new sites relating to the Acton Storm Tanks site (as well as other sites where they are in close proximity) are shown in Vol 7 Figure 4.4.1. Vol 7 Figure 4.4.1 Air quality monitoring locations (see Volume 7 Figures document) Vol 7 Table 4.4.3 Air quality - additional monitoring locations near the site Monitoring Site High Street/The Vale A4020 (Acton 1) Warple Way/Cobbold Road (Acton 2) Canham Road (Acton 3) Stanley Gardens (Acton 4) Warple Way (Acton 5) Stamford Brook Road (Acton 6) Emlyn Road (Acton 7) Cobbold Road (Acton 8) 4.4.10 Grid Reference 520734, 180031 521343, 179598 521206, 179755 521041, 180050 521240, 179785 521702, 179076 521523, 179387 521401, 179626
This monitoring will be used in conjunction with existing local authority monitoring to provide the baseline situation and also provide input to model verification. A full baseline will be reported in the ES. In addition to monitoring data, an indication of baseline pollutant concentrations in the vicinity of the site can also be obtained from looking at background data on the air quality section of the Defra website where mapped background pollutant concentrations are available for each 1km by 1km grid square within every local authoritys administrative area for the years 2008 to 2020 2. The background data relating to the proposed site are given in the table below for 2010 (baseline year). Vol 7 Table 4.4.4 Air quality - background pollutant concentrations Pollutant NOX (g/m ) NO2 (g/m ) PM10 (g/m3) Receptors
3 3
4.4.11
2010 46.1 28.9 19.4
* Annual mean for 1km grid square centred on 521500, 179500
4.4.12
The Acton Storm Tanks site is located in a mixed use area comprising residential, commercial and educational premises. The closest residential properties are located immediately to the south-east of the site in Warple Way and to the south-west of the site (both less than 10m from the site
Page 19
boundary), and just south of Canham Road at the north-east corner of the site, which is also less than 10m from the site boundary. 4.4.13 Commercial and industrial premises are located to the north of the site, just north of Canham Road (the closest premises are within 10m from the site boundary) and to the east of the site along Warple Way (which are 15m from the site boundary). The Southfield Primary School is located over 100m to the south-west of the site boundary. All these receptors are relevant, albeit to different levels of sensitivity, to the emissions sources identified in the local air quality assessment. The sensitivity of identified receptors has been determined using the criteria detailed in Volume 5. This identifies their sensitivity in relation to both local air quality and dust nuisance, as shown in the table below. These receptors are relevant to the assessment of emissions from construction road traffic and construction plant, as well as the assessment of construction dust. Vol 7 Table 4.4.5 Air quality receptor values/sensitivities construction Receptors (relating to all identified emissions sources) Residential properties Value/sensitivity and justification
4.4.14
Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. High sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Not relevant with regard to ambient air quality standards. Low sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance. Not relevant with regard to ambient air quality standards. Low sensitivity to local air quality. Low sensitivity to dust nuisance. Exposure relevant to annual mean and daily mean standards. High sensitivity to local air quality. Medium sensitivity to dust nuisance.
Commercial
Industrial
School
Odour
4.4.15 LB Ealing has compiled a list of odour complaints relating to Acton Storm Tanks dating back to 2002. The complaints are shown in the table below. The complaints originated in areas surrounding the Storm Tanks and were generally made in the summer3.
Page 20
Vol 7 Table 4.4.6 Odour complaints made to LB of Ealing Date 30/07/2002 01/07/2003 02/07/2003 20/05/2004 06/07/2005 23/09/2005 23/09/2005 31/07/2006 08/08/2007 09/08/2007 28/01/2009 01/07/2009 02/07/2009 02/07/2009 03/07/2009 29/06/2010 4.4.16 Location Emlyn Gardens, Ealing, W12 9UE Warple Way, Acton, W3 0RG Emlyn Gardens, W12 9UH Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AJ Hatfield Road, Chiswick, W4 1AF Westpoint, Warple Way, Acton, W3 0RG Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AH Westpoint, Warple Way, Acton, W3 0RG Woodstock Road, Ealing, W4 1EG Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AJ Emlyn Road, Hammersmith, W12 9TB Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AJ Saltcoats Road, Chiswick, W4 1AR Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AJ Greenend Road, Chiswick, W4 1AJ Emlyn Road, Hammersmith, W12 9TB
Complaints have also been recorded in the Thames Water odour database for Acton. There were two complaints related to Acton Storm Tanks site in 2005, 11 in 2006, nine in 2007, three in 2008, ten in 2009, four in 2010 and six in 2011 (up to July 2011). Thames Water was also notified of complaints made to the LB Ealing in 2006, 2007 and 2009. The nearest sensitive receptors are described in paras. 4.4.12 - 4.4.14 above. For the purposes of the odour assessment, the sensitivity of these receptors has been determined in accordance with the criteria in Volume 5. The residential areas and school are of a high sensitivity to odour whilst the commercial and industrial premises are of medium sensitivity.
4.4.17
4.5
4.5.1
Construction assessment Construction base and development cases

The peak construction year (Year 2 of construction) is used as the year of assessment for construction effects (road transport, construction plant and construction dust) in which the development case will be assessed against the base case to identify likely significant effects for the Thames Tunnel project. The base case conditions for the construction assessment year will change from the current conditions due to modifications to the sources of the air pollution in the intervening period.
4.5.2
Page 21
For road vehicles, there will be a change in the penetration of new Euro standards to the fleet composition between the current situation and the future peak construction year. The uptake of newer vehicles with improved emission controls should lead to a reduction in existing NO2 and PM10 concentrations. However, the uptake of newer vehicles has not improved NO2 concentrations greatly in the last ten years in London, so as a worst case the NOx contribution from diesel vehicles was assumed to be the same for Euro 1 to 5 standard vehicles in line with Defra advice 4. Reduced emission factors from the introduction of Euro 6 standard diesel vehicles in the future and an ongoing tightening of Euro standards for petrol engined vehicles will reduce the base case concentrations when compared to the 2010 baseline. Other emissions sources should also reduce due to local and national policies. Therefore, the non-road sources of the background concentrations used in the modelling will be reduced in line with Defra guidance LAQM.TG(09) 5.
4.5.4
Construction assessment area

4.5.5 The assessment areas for the local air quality study covers a square area of 700m by 700m centred on the Acton Storm Tanks site. This assessment area is used for the assessment of road transport, construction plant and construction dust and has been selected on the basis of professional judgement to ensure that the effects of the Acton Storm Tanks site are fully assessed. A distance of 200m is generally considered sufficient to ensure that any significant effects are considered the selected assessment area exceeds this by some margin.
Construction effects
Emissions from road traffic 4.5.6 Road traffic is likely to affect local air quality in two ways: from emissions from the construction traffic; and from enhanced emissions from other road vehicles due to congestion or re-routing due to lane closures. A qualitative assessment of road traffic effects has been undertaken. When traffic surveys are complete, a more detailed quantitative assessment using air quality modelling will be undertaken, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. Based on professional judgement for the purposes of the assessment, it is predicted that the impacts due to construction traffic are expected to be small (ie, small magnitude of change according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5) due to the number of additional lorries during construction (see para 4.2.3). Given that the residential properties and the school have a high sensitivity to local air quality, the likely significance of the construction traffic is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria in Volume 5). At the commercial and industrial receptors, which have a low sensitivity to local air quality, the significance of effect would be negligible.
4.5.7
4.5.8
4.5.9
Page 22
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks Emissions from plant 4.5.10
Construction plant is likely to affect local air quality in two ways: from direct exhaust emissions; and from construction dust associated with the use and movement of the plant around the site. This part of the assessment considers exhaust emissions while construction dust from plant movement is considered in the following section. Emission factors will be assigned to each item of plant. More data are being gathered regarding the operation of these items of plant in terms of expected usage through the construction phase. This will be reported in the ES. A qualitative assessment has been undertaken. Modelling is currently being undertaken, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. Based on professional judgement it is predicted that the impacts due to construction plant are expected to be small (ie, small magnitude of change according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5), given the localised nature of the emissions, ie, emissions are only generated on the construction site. Compared to the traffic flows in the surrounding area, the amount of plant and their emissions are likely to have a negligible impact. At the residential properties and the school, which have a high sensitivity to local air quality, the likely significance of the effect is a minor adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). At the commercial and industrial receptors, which have a low sensitivity to local air quality, the significance of effect would be negligible. Construction dust Construction dust would be generated from both on-site activities and from road vehicles assessing and servicing the site. Dust sensitive receptors have been identified in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site in accordance with the criteria in Volume 5, as described in Vol 7 Table 4.4.5. In line with the London Councils guidance 6, the site has been categorised using the criteria given in Volume 5 which takes into account the area taken up by the development and the potential impact of the development on sensitive receptors close to the development. The specific site details relating to the site with respect to these criteria are: a. Site would have a maximum construction area of approximately 20,000m2 b. The project is a non-residential development c. Main construction at the site would last approximately three and a half years
4.5.11
4.5.12 4.5.13
4.5.14
4.5.15 4.5.16
4.5.17
4.5.18
d. There are likely to be intermittent impacts on identified sensitive receptors 4.5.19 On this basis, the development has been classified as a high risk site.
Page 23
Given that the receptor sensitivity of residential and commercial receptors is identified as medium and the closest such receptors are within 10m of the construction site boundary, the likely significance of the construction dust effects is deemed to be a moderate adverse effect (according to the criteria detailed in Volume 5). A moderate adverse effect is also predicted for industrial premises which although of low sensitivity, are located very close to the site. As the school is located further away at over 100m from the Acton Storm Tanks site, the likely significance of the construction dust effects is considered to be a minor adverse effect with respect to this receptor. The effects would be reduced by the implementation of the measures contained in the CoCP (see Section 4.2). This would result in a minor adverse effect at the residential, commercial and industrial properties within 10m of the site and a negligible effect at the school. Overall construction effects When considering the overall local air quality construction effects (ie, effects from construction road traffic and plant), it is concluded that the overall significance of effects is likely to be minor adverse at residential properties and the school, and negligible at commercial and industrial receptors. With regard to construction dust, the likely significance of effects is minor adverse at residential, commercial and industrial receptors. The effect at Southfield Primary School is assessed as a negligible effect. On this basis no significant construction effects are predicted.
4.5.21
4.5.22
4.5.23
4.5.24
4.6
4.6.1 4.6.2
Operational assessment Operational base and development cases

The assessment undertaken for a typical use year (as described in Volume 5) applies equally to all operational years. Base case conditions would not differ significantly from current conditions with respect to background odour concentrations although background odour in the development case would be considerably reduced as the Storm Tanks would not be used when the tunnel in use. .
Operational assessment area

4.6.3 Odour dispersion modelling was carried out over an area of 1,100m by 1,000m centred on the site. The assessment area was selected on the basis of it being considered the potential maximum extent of the impact area.
Operational effects
4.6.4 Vol 7 Table 4.6.1 shows the predicted maximum ground level odour concentrations at the Acton Storm Tanks site. These are the highest concentrations that could occur at the worst affected ground level receptor at or near the site. In accordance with the odour criterion set up by the Environment Agency and in the draft NPS 7, results are presented for the
Page 24
98th percentile of hourly average concentrations in the year (or the 176th highest concentration in the year) and the number of hours in a year with concentrations above 1.5ouE/m3. The number of hours with concentrations above 1.5ouE/m3 gives an indication of the number of hours in a year that an odour might be detectable at the worst affected receptor. The table also identifies the magnitude of the identified impacts in accordance with the criteria detailed in Volume 5. 4.6.5 Vol 7 Table 4.6.2 gives similar results for the predicted impacts at the worst affected buildings, where concentrations at ground level and at height have been considered. Vol 7 Table 4.6.1 Odour impacts and magnitudes at ground level operation Year Typical Maximum at ground level locations 98th percentile < 0.1 (OUE/m3) No. of hours > 6 1.5OUE/m3 Impact magnitude, and justification Negligible 98th percentile concentration is less than 0.1 ouE/m3
Vol 7 Table 4.6.2 Odour impacts and magnitude at buildings operation Year Typical Maximum at building locations 98th percentile (OUE/m3) No. of hours > 1.5OUE/m3 4.6.6 <0.1 8 Impact magnitude, and justification Negligible 98th percentile concentration is less than 0.1 ouE/m3
The maximum 98th percentile concentration was predicted to be 0.1ouE/m3, which is well within odour criterion set by the Environment Agency and Defra. The highest concentrations would occur at the industrial estate north of Canham Road, which is a medium sensitivity receptor. The highest concentrations at a residential receptor occur at properties in Valetta Way with 0.006ouE/m3. This represents an impact of negligible magnitude. With regard to the significance of effects at ground level and building locations, given that the predicted odour concentrations at all locations and at buildings do not exceed the 98th percentile criterion of 1.5ouE/m3, it is considered that an overall significance effects would be negligible in relation to the Acton Storm Tanks site. No significant effects are therefore predicted in relation to odour.
4.6.7
Page 25
4.7
4.7.1
Approach to mitigation Construction

All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to air quality and odour are summarised in Section 4.2. No mitigation is required.
Operation
4.7.2 No mitigation is likely to be required.
Page 26
4.8
Effect Minor adverse None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Vol 7 Table 4.8.1 Air quality and odour assessment summary - construction
Receptor
Residential
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant Minor adverse Negligible None required None required
Effects from construction dust
Minor adverse Negligible
Commercial
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant Minor adverse Negligible
None required None required
Minor adverse Negligible
Industrial
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant emissions Minor adverse Minor adverse
None required None required
Minor adverse Minor adverse
Southfields Primary School Negligible
Local air quality effects from construction road traffic and plant
None required
Negligible
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 27
Vol 7 Table 4.8.2 Air quality and odour assessment summary - operational Effect Odour Odour Odour Odour Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Negligible None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Receptor
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Southfields Primary School
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 28
4.9
4.9.1
Assessment completion
The following work is required in order to complete the local air quality and odour assessment for the Acton Storm Tanks site: a. Diffusion tube monitoring has been set up at eight sites to monitor NO2 concentrations in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site. This monitoring will be used to provide a baseline to the assessment and as an input for model verification. b. For the assessment of road traffic emissions, air quality modelling will be undertaken to predict the effects on local air quality. c. The nature, quantities and operation of the construction plant are being finalised. The appropriate emission factors will then be applied to the plant in order to initialise the modelling work. These models will then be run and the effects of construction plant on local air quality predicted.
d. The assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. e. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for air quality and odour within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
Page 29
Section 5: Ecology - aquatic
5 5.1
5.1.1
Ecology - aquatic Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant aquatic ecology effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. For the purposes of the assessment of the Thames Tunnel scheme aquatic ecology includes plants and animals that live in and depend on the tidal River Thames and its tidal tributaries (known collectively as the Thames Tideway). The topic includes the habitats, mammals, fish, invertebrates and algae which occur in the Thames Tideway in the vicinity of the site. Animals, plants and habitats which occur above the mean high water level are assessed in the Terrestrial ecology Section 6. Waterfowl, including those which occur on the Thames Tideway are also included under Terrestrial Ecology. Further details of the scope of the assessment are provided in Volume 5. This assessment considers the operational improvements on water quality on aquatic ecology receptors in the Thames Tideway as a result of the CSO interception. There would be no in-river works associated with this site, which is located 1.5km inland from the River Thames. The construction phase was scoped out at the scoping stage and therefore is not considered in this assessment.
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
5.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to aquatic ecology are as follows. Operation The Acton Storm Relief sewer currently discharges into the River Thames at Chiswick Eyot in the LB of Hounslow. The sewer would be intercepted at Acton Storm Tanks as part of the proposed development. Taking account of the base case (which includes permitted Thames Tideway sewage treatment works upgrades, and the Lee Tunnel scheme, as well as projected population increases) discharges from this CSO are anticipated to be 325,800m3 per annum over a total of 27 discharge events (or spills) by 2021. The discharge is projected to reduce to zero once the Thames Tideway scheme, including the Thames Tunnel, is operational. Further information about projected changes in discharge as a result of the project is presented in Volume 2. Improvements in water quality are anticipated both in the local area around the discharge point for Action Storm Relief CSO and in the wider Thames Tideway. The assessment of operational impacts on the Thames Tideway as a whole are contained within the project-wide assessment Volume 6. Water quality improvements would also have implications for aquatic ecology receptors and that is assessed in this report.
5.2.2
5.2.3
Page 30
5.3
5.3.1
Assessment methodology
Scoping and technical engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below. Vol 7 Table 5.3.1 Aquatic ecology stakeholder engagement Organisation Environment Agency Scoping Opinion item Grey seals known to use Chiswick Eyot as haul out and rest area. Response Information regarding grey seals will be incorporated into the assessment
Baseline methodology 5.3.2 5.3.3 Details of the approach to assessment of sites are described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Details of the background data sets are provided in Volume 5. Invertebrate data is available for sites up and downstream of the Acton Storm Relief discharge, at Hammersmith Bridge (1.4km upstream) and Barnes (1.2km downstream). Fish data are available for Hammersmith 1.2km downstream of the discharge. Although these sampling sites are remote from the discharge point, the fish and invertebrate communities they reflect are considered to be representative of this section of the upper Tideway, and therefore they provide a robust baseline.
Operation
5.3.4 The methodology for assessing operational effects is described in Volume 5. There are no deviations from the standard assessment methodology.
5.4
5.4.1
Baseline conditions Designations

There are no statutory nature conservation sites within the local area of this site. The outfall discharges directly into two non statutory sites; River Thames and Tidal Tributaries Site of Metropolitan Importance and Chiswick Eyot Site of Metropolitan Importance and Local Nature Reserve. These sites are described below. River Thames and Tidal Tributaries SMI The outfall discharges directly into the non statutory River Thames Tidal Tributaries Site of Metropolitan Importance (SMI). The SMI (Site Reference: M31) is adopted by all Boroughs which border the River Thames, recognises the range and quality of estuarine habitats including mud flat, shingle beach, reedbeds and the river channel itself. Over 120 species of fish have been recorded in the Tideway, though many of these are only occasional visitors. The more common species include dace (Leuciscus leuciscus), bream (Abramis brama) and roach (Rutilus rutilus)
5.4.2
Page 31
in the freshwater reaches, and sand-smelt (Atherina presbyter), flounder (Platichtyhys flesus) and Dover sole (Solea solea) in the estuarine reaches. Important migratory species include Twaite shad (Alosa fallax), European eel (Anguilla anguilla), smelt (Osmerus eperlanus), salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (S. trutta). A number of nationally rare snails occur, including the brackish water snail Pseudamnicola confusa, and an important assemblage of wetland and wading birds. 5.4.3 The Tidal Thames is also the subject of a Habitat Action Plan under the London Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)8. The Habitat Action Plan (HAP) identifies a number of flagship habitats and species which characterise the estuary, such as gravel foreshore, mudflat and saltmarsh. A number of these habitats and species, including mudflat, are also the subject of action plans under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.
Chiswick Eyot SMI

5.4.4 The Eyot is a densely vegetated island with marginal vegetation. It provides nesting and roosting habitat for a number of bird species, most notably Grey Heron. It is known to support several rare mollusc species including the two lipped door snail (Lacinaria biplicata), German hairy snail (Perforatella rubiginosa) and depressed river mussel (Psuedanodonata complanata). The undisturbed shores of the Eyot are used as a haul out area for grey seals. A high population of the invasive Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) is known to be present. The London Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)9 includes a Habitat Action Plan (HAP) for the Thames Tideway which identifies a series of target habitats and species. The HAP divides the river into the zones; freshwater, brackish and marine. The Acton Storm Relief discharge is in the freshwater zone. The habitat is not specifically identified as the UKBAP priority habitat mudflat on the Natural England website www.natureonthemap.co.uk. LB of Hounslow also has a Habitat Action Plan (HAP) for the River Thames. Flounder and salmon, as well as the rare molluscs, depressed river mussel, German hairy snail and two-lipped door mussel are identified as flagship species within the action plan.
5.4.5
5.4.6
Mammals
5.4.7 Records compiled by the Zoological Society of London for 2003 2011 indicate that harbour porpoise, bottlenose dolphin and various seal species (grey and common) migrate through the Tideway. A record of grey seal and common seal were received for Chiswick Eyot, and the site is known to be a haul out area for the species.
Fish
5.4.8 The Environment Agency carry out annual surveys for fish within the Thames Tideway using a variety of methods including trawling and seine netting, with data available over 18 years from 1992 to 2010. The nearest sampling site to the Acton Storm Relief CSO discharge is Hammersmith.
Page 32
A range of freshwater and estuarine resident fish species were recorded at this site over the 18 year period, including bass, bream, dace, flounder, thin lipped grey mullet, smelt, sand smelt and gobies. Only small numbers of fish (10-25 individuals for all species) were recorded during each sampling visit throughout the period. All of these species are widespread in the Thames Tideway, with freshwater species such as roach and bream most frequent in the upper Tideway, and estuarine residents such as sand smelt, goby and flounder common in the lower Tideway. The species age classes represented most widely in the data sets are dace (range of age classes), flounder (0+ [0 -1 year old] and 1+, [1-2 year old fish]), bream (range of age classes), roach (range of age classes), smelt (0+,1+), gobies (0+), thin-lipped grey mullet, eels. It is important to note, that Colclough et. al. (2002) 10 regard upstream Tideway sites, including Hammersmith to be within the spawning zone for common smelt (a species listed under section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 & Priority UKBAP species).
5.4.10
Invertebrates
5.4.11 The Environment Agency samples are taken using a number of techniques, including cores and kick sampling in the intertidal and day grab and core samples in the subtidal. Sampling at Hammersmith was undertaken on an approximately monthly basis over the period 1989 and 1993 whilst at Barnes samples are taken every two months between 2005 and 2010. A total of 49 taxa were recorded at Hammersmith over the four year period in which samples were collected. The taxa Oligochaeta, which is often indicative of organic pollution was most abundant, together with other pollution tolerant species such as the snail Potamopyrgus antipodarum. A total of 23 species were recorded at Barnes, the nearest sampling location, in the period between 2005 and 2010. The Oligochaete worm Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri was the most common species at this site during the period of recording, with other abundant species being Radix bathica, Gammarus zaddachi, Theodoxus fluviatilis and Potamopyrgus antipodarum. Given the greater diversity of habitats associated with the Chiswick Eyot, the range and diversity of species may be expected to be greater than the two EA sampling sites described above. However, given the presence of the CSO discharge, pollution tolerant taxa/species such as Oligochaeta and Potamopyrgus are likely to be amongst the most abundant. Of the rare mollusc species associated with the Eyot the German hairy snail and the two-lipped door snail are likely to occur in moist terrestrial habitats on the island, whilst the depressed river mussel is a freshwater species.
5.4.12
5.4.13
5.4.14
Algae
5.4.15 Existing algae data has been requested and will be assessed and reported in the ES.
Page 33
Aquatic ecology receptor values and sensitivities

5.4.16 Using the baseline set out above the value accorded to each receptor considered in this assessment is set out in the table below. The definitions of the receptor values and sensitivities used in this evaluation are set out in Volume 5. Vol 7 Table 5.4.1 Aquatic ecology receptors values/sensitivities Receptor Foreshore habitat (including intertidal and subtidal habitat) Mammals Value/sensitivity and justification Medium (Metropolitan) value. Habitats form part of two Sites of Metropolitan Importance. Low (Local) value. Only occasional records of seal and harbour porpoise exist from the area and very little intertidal habitat is available for use as a haul out site by seals. Medium (Metropolitan) value based on relatively high diversity of freshwater and estuarine species. Medium (Metropolitan) value due to the possible presence of depressed river mussel. To be completed following receipt of data.
Fish
Invertebrates
Algae
5.5
5.5.1
Construction assessment
As stated in para. 5.1.3 the construction phase was scoped out at the scoping stage because there are no in-river works associated with this site and thus no construction effects on aquatic ecology are anticipated. Therefore the construction phase has not been assessed.
5.6
5.6.1
Operational assessment Operational impacts

The potential impacts arising from operation of the project at this site would be large reduction in the volume of sewage effluent discharged from the CSO. These impacts are described below. The definitions of the different magnitudes of impact referred to in this assessment are given in Volume 5. Reduction in the volume of sewage effluent discharged from the CSO Discharges from the Acton Storm Relief CSO are anticipated to have increased to 325,800m3 per annum by 2021. The discharge is projected to reduce to zero once the Thames Tideway scheme, including the Thames Tunnel, is operational.
5.6.2
Page 34
This would result in localised improvements in water quality, and a contribution to Thames Tideway wide improvements, as outlined in para. 5.2.3. Water quality improvements would consist of increases in dissolved oxygen concentrations, reduction in microbial activity (known as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)) and suspended solids, and a reduction in sewage debris. The magnitude of the impact is considered to be medium positive and to be probable and permanent. Vol 7 Table 5.6.1 Aquatic ecology impacts and magnitudes operation Impact Improvement of local water quality through CSO interception. Magnitude Medium positive impact Permanent. Probable.
5.6.4
Operational effects
5.6.5 The effects of the operational activities on ecological receptors are described in detail below. The way in which the magnitude and reversibility of each impact has been combined with the value of each receptor to determine the significance of the effect is set out in Volume 5. Unless stated the effects described below apply to both Year 1 and Year 6 of operation. Mammals Increase in the number and/or change in the distribution of marine mammals due to improvements in water quality. 5.6.6 No change in the use of Chiswick Eyot as a haul out site for grey seals is anticipated as a result of the interception of the discharge. Improvements in habitat quality may make the habitat more favourable, although the factor determining its use by seals relates predominantly to the lack of disturbance rather than water quality. Effects are considered negligible. Fish Reduction in the occurrence of dissolved oxygen related fish mortalities. 5.6.7 The microbial activity associated with untreated sewage effluent (BOD) causes depletion in the levels of dissolved oxygen downstream of a discharge. This is often referred to as an oxygen sag. Oxygen sags are more common in the summer months when water temperatures are higher and oxygen is less soluble. Impacts on fish health occur when dissolved oxygen levels drop beneath 4mg/l, and significant mortalities begin to occur when levels drop beneath this threshold. Fish mortality due to low dissolved oxygen concentrations is referred to as hypoxia. Such hypoxia events are currently relatively common in the Thames Tideway, particularly during the summer months when heavy storms follow
5.6.8
Page 35
periods of low flow and water temperatures are relatively high. Up to 2004, there had been at least 154 hypoxia events when dissolved oxygen levels have been below 4mg/l 11. This will be further investigated as part of the ES. 5.6.9 Interception of the CSOs throughout the Thames Tideway would improve sewerage system capacity and result in far fewer hypoxia events. The exact number of anticipated events will be predicted using the Tideway Fish Risk Model3 and reported in the ES. Details of the Tideway Fish Risk Model are presented in Volume 5.Interception of the Acton Storm Relief sewer would contribute to this Thames Tideway wide improvement, but would also result in improvements in the local area. Given the range of diversity of freshwater species in particular in the upper Tideway, and the potential value of this site as a nursery area for juvenile fish the effect is moderate beneficial. Improvements across the Thames Tideway as a whole will be assessed in Volume 6. Increase in the distribution of pollution sensitive fish species. 5.6.10 The Tideway supports a number of rare fish species: salmon, sea trout, twaite shad and river lamprey. A number of factors limit the use of habitats by these species, including salinity, substrate type and current, but pollution is known to be a significant factor in determining colonisation (eg, Maitland, PS and Hatton-Ellis, TW. Ecology of the Allis and Twaite Shad. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No. 3. English Nature). Changes in the diversity of fish communities, including recruitment of more sensitive species is a process which would occur at a wider scale, and will be assessed in Volume 6. Given that the impact is considered to be medium beneficial, and the value of the receptors is medium (Metropolitan) the effect is thus considered to be negligible in the short term (Year 1 of operation), increasing to moderate beneficial in year six of operation. Invertebrates Localised improvements in invertebrate diversity and abundance. 5.6.12 As well as causing low dissolved oxygen events, untreated sewage effluent contains nutrients which cause enrichment of the water column and sediments in the river. Excessive nutrient enrichment causes phenomenon such as algal blooms, and is known as eutrophication. Such enrichment tends to favour a small number of pollution tolerant species at the expense of a wider range of pollution sensitive species. For example, certain species of Oligochaete worm are indicative of polluted conditions because they are able to tolerate the low dissolved oxygen conditions and multiply rapidly in the enriched sediments. Oligochaeta was the most abundant taxa at the EA sampling points up and downstream of the site, and so it is reasonable to assume that they will also be dominant at this site.
5.6.11
Page 36
By intercepting the CSO the source of sewage related nutrients would be cut off and the sediments in the vicinity of the outfall would begin to return to a more natural state. As nutrients reduce in concentration a wider range of invertebrate species, including more pollution sensitive species such as the river neretid (Theodoxus fluviatilis), would begin to colonise the sediments. The effect is considered to be negligible in Year 1 of operation, rising to moderate beneficial in year six of operation. Increase in the distribution of rare and pollution sensitive invertebrate species.
5.6.14
The Thames Tideway currently supports a small number of rare invertebrate species including swollen spire snail and tentacled lagoon worm. A number of factors limit the colonisation of habitats by these species, including salinity, substrate type and current, but pollution is known to be a significant factor in determining colonisation. Improving water and sediment quality would facilitate the spread of those pollution sensitive species which are currently being impeded by poor water and sediment quality. Removal of the CSO discharge at this location may facilitate the spread of the rare depressed river mussel, which is known to occur in the vicinity of the site. Effects on invertebrates diversity are thus considered to be negligible in Year 1 of operation, increasing to moderate beneficial by year six of operation. Algae
5.6.15
5.6.16
Effects on algae will be assessed and reported in the ES.
5.7
5.7.1
Approach to mitigation
As effects are likely to be beneficial, no mitigation is required.
Mitigation of operational effects

5.7.2 No mitigation is required since the effects on aquatic ecology receptors are associated only with the improvements in water quality arising from interception of the CSO.
Page 37
5.8
Vol 7 Table 5.8.1 Aquatic ecology assessment summary - operation Significance Year 1 of operation Negligible Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial Year 6 of operation None required due to positive effect None required due to positive effect None required due to positive effect None required due to positive effect None required due to positive effect Negligible Moderate beneficial. Moderate beneficial. Moderate beneficial. Moderate beneficial Mitigation
Assessment summary
Operation
Residual Significance
Receptor
Effect
Mammals Moderate beneficial Negligible Negligible Negligible
Increase in the number and/or change in Negligible the distribution of marine mammals
Fish
Reduction in the occurrence of low dissolved oxygen related fish mortalities Increase in the distribution of pollution sensitive fish species
Invertebrates
Localised improvements in invertebrate diversity and abundance
Increase in the distribution of rare and pollution sensitive invertebrate species
Algae
To be completed for the ES
Page 38
5.9
5.9.1
Algal data and assessment of effects on algae will be reported in the ES. In addition, an assessment of cumulative effects will be undertaken as part of the ES.
Page 39
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial
6 6.1
6.1.1
Ecology - terrestrial Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant terrestrial ecology effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. Likely significant effects on aquatic ecology are reported in Section 5. Elements of the proposed works that have particular relevance to terrestrial ecology comprise site clearance, piling, and wider construction activities. The assessment of terrestrial ecology during operation was scoped out for the Acton Storm Tanks site at the scoping stage. The site design has since evolved and the shaft location has changed. However, operational activity would remain limited to occasional maintenance works which are considered unlikely to have significant effects on terrestrial ecology receptors. A brown roof is proposed on the odour ventilation building. This design feature is considered unlikely to result in significant terrestrial ecology effects and therefore does not require assessment. The operational phase is therefore not considered further in this assessment.
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.2
6.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to terrestrial ecology are as follows.
Construction
a. Piling, ground excavation and construction traffic movements and the use of construction machinery, will produce noise, vibration and lighting effects. b. Site mobilisation, including clearance activities commencing in the first year of construction.
Code of construction practice

6.2.1 Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce terrestrial ecology effects include those that would ensure that terrestrial ecology receptors are appropriately managed during construction. The document sets out procedures that would be adhered to both scheme wide and at individual sites. The draft CoCP outlines that works would be undertaken in compliance with legislation, and with due regard to relevant nature conservation policies and guidance, including the Mayors Biodiversity Strategy 12 and local Biodiversity Action Plans. Each site would have an Ecological Management Plan, which would detail the approach to management of effects on ecological receptors with reference to the results of the terrestrial ecology assessment. Where species are protected by specific legislation, approved guidance would be followed, appropriate mitigation would be proposed and any necessary licences or consents obtained.
6.2.2
Page 40
Measures not specifically outlined under the ecology section of the draft CoCP are also of relevance, for example the management of noise and vibration, and water resources.
6.3
6.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site relating to terrestrial ecology.
Baseline
6.3.2 The baseline data collection follows the methodology detailed in Volume 5. Baseline data presented within this report assessment is derived from desk study and Phase 1 Habitat Survey data. All subsequent survey data will be reported in the ES. In summary, the following baseline data has been collated and is presented in this volume: a. Desk study including data base searches (for ecological records within a 2km radius from the site boundary, which is the industry standard), web-based searches and review of existing available documents in relation to protected and notable species and habitats. Desk study data within 500m of the site are reported here as the works are unlikely to affect species and designated sites beyond this distance. Records dated prior to 2000 have not been included as the information since this date provides the most appropriate data to assess the site baseline conditions b. Phase 1 Habitat Survey on 26th November 2010 following the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey Methodology, 2010. The survey included the site and adjacent habitat considered, using professional judgement, to be potentially affected by the proposed works. c. A wintering bird survey visit was undertaken on 21st December 2010. The survey included the site only as no suitable adjacent habitat was identified. Based on the low number of bird observations made during this visit and professional judgement, no further wintering bird survey visits were deemed necessary.
6.3.3
d. A bat triggering survey was carried out in May 2011. This is an initial survey using remote recording equipment (Anabat detectors) to determine whether subsequent activity/emergence surveys were required. The survey area includes the site and adjacent features that are assessed (using professional judgement) to be potentially affected by the project. Preliminary results of the bat triggering surveys have been provided below. Further surveys have been identified as required. 6.3.4 Species surveys identified as being required following the desk study and Phase 1 Habitat Survey have commenced and are detailed below. The results of these surveys will be provided in the ES.
Page 41
Vol 7 Table 6.3.1 Terrestrial ecology - notable species surveys Survey Bat activity and dawn surveys Survey area Around suitable features within and immediately adjacent to the site Within suitable habitat within the Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site boundary. Timing June to October 2011
Reptile surveys
Ten survey days divided between April, May and September 2011
Construction
6.3.5 The construction phase assessment methodology follows this standard methodology provided in Volume 5, which is based on the IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) 13. The following ecological receptors are assessed as part of this assessment: a. habitats b. bats c. breeding birds d. reptiles e. other notable species: f. 6.3.7 Invertebrates. Three designated sites have been identified within 500m of the site. Due to the localised nature of the proposed works and the isolation of the designated sites from the proposed works, no effects on these sites have been identified. Therefore, the designated sites outlined in para. 6.4.3 are not considered in the assessment. As contaminated runoff and atmospheric pollution will be controlled through the implementation of the CoCP, no likely significant effects are anticipated on ecological receptors. Therefore, this is not considered any further in the assessment. The assessment year for construction is the start of site mobilisation and clearance (Year 1 of construction). This is likely to be the peak year for effects on terrestrial ecology as this is when initial clearance of vegetation would occur. Assuming that the site would continue to be managed as they are at present then the base case for Acton Storm Tanks is considered to be the same as the current baseline conditions as described in para. 6.3.11.
6.3.6
6.3.8
6.3.9
6.3.10
Page 42

6.3.11 It is assumed for the purposes of assessment that the current site management regime of the Acton Storm Tanks site would continue. The assessment assumes that the measures within the draft CoCP would be implemented as part of the development. All surveys have been and will be undertaken at appropriate times of the year. No other site specific limitations or assumptions have been identified.
6.4
6.4.1
Baseline conditions
The following section sets out the baseline conditions for terrestrial ecology receptors at the site and surrounds, including their value.
Designated sites
On site 6.4.2 6.4.3 There are no designated sites on the Acton Storm Tanks site. Surrounding area The following local (low) value designated sites were identified within 500m of the site: a. Southfields Recreation Ground Nature Area SINC (Grade L i) is located approximately 220m west of the site and comprises a woodland of interest for stag beetle presence. b. Wendell Park SINC (Grade L) comprises grassland with scattered parkland trees and is located 250m east of the site. c. 6.4.4 Acton Park Nature Conservation Area and East Aton Lane Sports Ground SINCs (Grade L) are located 380m north of the site.
These are not considered further in the assessment due to their remoteness from the site and the localised nature of the works at the Acton Storm Tanks site.
Habitats
6.4.5 The site encompasses London Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitat Built Up Areas and Gardens. The habitats recorded within the survey area during the Phase 1 Habitat Survey are detailed below, and shown on Vol 7 Figure 6.4.1. Target notes (TN#) are indicated on this figure and are referred to within the text below. Vol 7 Figure 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology Phase 1 habitat survey (see Volume 7 Figures document) Vol 7 Table 6.4.1 Terrestrial ecology - Phase 1 habitat survey Habitats Buildings Habitat Description The survey area has a number of modern buildings associated with the Thames Water site (TN1) present at the northern end of the
SINC (Grade L) = Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade I of Local importance)
Page 43
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Habitats
Section 6: Ecology - terrestrial Habitat Description site; these appear in good condition
Amenity grassland
The majority of the habitat present within the survey area is amenity grassland, which is species poor. An area dominated by nettle Urtica dioica, dock Rumex sp. and false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius is present within the southernmost section of the survey area. This area appeared unused. The eastern boundary and northern boundary of the survey area are lined with pollarded lime Tilia sp. A mature hawthorn Crataegus monogyna is also present. A number of mature cherry Prunus sp. trees are present within the grounds of Acton Storm Tanks. There are also trees along the boundary to the south of the survey area, outside the Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site Buddleia Buddleia davidii and privet Ligustrum ovalifolium were recorded along the northern boundary and on a wood and excavated material pile in the southern end of the site. An area of dense bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. and hawthorn scrub is present within the survey area to the north west.
Tall ruderal
Scattered trees
Dense scrub
Hardstanding and storm tanks
Hardstanding is present around the survey area in the form of pathways. The large concrete tanks were empty at the time of survey, creating a large expanse of concrete within the survey area.
On site 6.4.6 The amenity grassland is species-poor and provides limited supporting ecological function. Therefore, this habitat is considered to be of site (low) value. Tall ruderal vegetation is not a BAP priority habitat although it can have supporting functions for invertebrates and species that feed on invertebrates. The habitat is considered to be of local (low) value. The trees and dense scrub on site include some native species. These have limited intrinsic value and are not UK or London BAP priority species. However, trees and scrub provide supporting habitat for a range of birds, bats and invertebrates. Therefore, the trees on site are considered to be of local (low) value.
6.4.7
6.4.8
Page 44
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Surrounding area 6.4.9
Trees along the boundaries adjacent to the site are considered to be of local (low) value as they support a wide range of biodiversity but would not qualify for designation at greater than local level.
Notable species
Bats On site 6.4.10 There is some low potential for bats to be present within the structures on site and the trees are sub-optimal as roosting habitat. The trees, scrub and tall ruderal vegetation provides potential foraging habitat for bats while the tree lines may provide commuting routes. Initial bat triggering surveys indicate the possibility of a bat roost being present nearby and bat foraging activity on site. The baseline and value of the site will be reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.4.11 The pipistrelle bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Noctules bat Nyctalus noctula have been recorded within 500m of the site. Trees and buildings adjacent and near to the site may support roosting bats. The baseline and value of the bat resource in the surrounding area will be reported in the ES. Breeding birds On site 6.4.12 The house sparrow Passer domesticus has been recorded on site. Birds that are anticipated to be nesting within the trees, scrub and buildings on site are likely to be species common to the area and potentially including some that are listed as London and UK BAP priority species and also Red List species. However, the number of nests that the trees and scrub could support is considered to be small. The breeding bird resource on site is therefore considered to be of local (low) value. Surrounding area 6.4.13 It is considered likely that the tree adjacent to the site provide some nesting habitat for small numbers of birds during the breeding season. Therefore, the bird resource adjacent to the site is considered to be of local (low) value. Reptiles On site 6.4.14 The tall ruderal vegetation and grassland provides potential foraging habitat for reptiles. Wood and material piles on site may provide refuge for reptiles. Reptiles may be found within the boundary wall to the old railway line to the south of the site. The baseline and value of the reptile resource on site will be reported in the ES.
Page 45
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Surrounding area 6.4.15
The desk study revealed no records of reptiles within 500m of the site. Potential habitat for reptiles is present along the western boundary of the Acton Storm Tanks site (adjacent to the site) within the tall ruderal vegetation and along the boundary wall to the south of the site (adjacent). Confirmation of the baseline and value of the reptile resource adjacent to the site will be reported in the ES. Other notable species On site
6.4.16
6.4.17
The trees, scrub, tall ruderal vegetation, and dead wood and material piles on site are likely to support an assemblage of invertebrates that would not qualify for designation but have some biodiversity value. This may include the stag beetle Lucanus cervus, which has been recorded within 500m of the site. Therefore, the invertebrate resource is considered to be of local (low) value. Surrounding area Tall ruderal vegetation and trees adjacent to the site are likely to support a limited assemblage of invertebrates and are considered to be of site (low) value.
6.4.18
6.5
Construction assessment Habitats

On site
6.5.1
Site clearance would result in the permanent loss of several trees of local (low) value from the western and northern site boundaries, an area of dense scrub from the north west of the site and tall ruderal vegetation from the site access points. A significant effect at the local level (minor adverse effect) is certain. The pruning of tree branches is not considered to be significant as the trees would be able to maintain their ecological function on the site. The permanent loss of amenity grassland is certain to be significant at the site level (minor adverse effect). Wood and excavated material piles would be removed from the south east area of the site as part of site clearance works. These have no intrinsic value and therefore this loss is considered to be not significant (negligible). Surrounding area Works within and near to the root zones of trees adjacent to the site would be controlled through root protection measures detailed in the CoCP. No significant adverse effects are anticipated.
6.5.2 6.5.3
6.5.4
Page 46
Notable species
Bats On site 6.5.5 Site clearance would result in a permanent loss of trees, scrub and tall ruderal vegetation, likely to provide a bat foraging resource, and boundary trees that are likely to provide bat commuting routes. The significance of effects on individual bats and populations will be assessed in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.6 Lighting, noise and vibration from the works could cause disturbance to bats such as displacement from foraging areas and roost sites. The significance of these effects on individual bats and populations will be assessed in the ES. Breeding birds On-site 6.5.7 Site clearance would result in the loss of an area of trees and scrub that provide nesting habitat for a range of common bird species that are listed on the UK and London BAPs. It is probable that this would result in a reduction in the local population of common bird species. Therefore, a significant effect at the local level (minor adverse effect) is probable. Surrounding area 6.5.8 Activities on site that cause temporary noise, vibration and lighting effects could disturb birds that are nesting in vegetation adjacent to the site resulting in temporary displacement of birds from adjacent trees and scrub. This is unlikely to affect the breeding ability of these birds as disturbance would be intermittent and alternative habitat is available within the wider area. Therefore the effect on birds is unlikely to be significant (negligible effect). Reptiles On-site 6.5.9 If reptiles are present then the works are likely to result in the loss of a small area of reptile habitat. Construction works could also create a temporary barrier to their movement across the site. The significance of the loss of reptile habitat and the barrier effect caused by construction works will be assessed and reported in the ES. Surrounding area 6.5.10 Construction works could create a temporary barrier to the movement of reptiles, if present, across the site. The significance of effects on adjacent reptile populations will be assessed and reported in the ES. Other Notable Species On-site 6.5.11 Site clearance would result in the permanent loss several trees, dense scrub and tall ruderal vegetation that provide habitat for a range of
Page 47
common invertebrate species. The dead wood and excavated material pile that could support the stag beetle would also be lost. A significant effect on invertebrate populations at the local level (minor adverse effect) is probable as a result of the loss of invertebrate habitat. Surrounding area 6.5.12 No effects on invertebrates adjacent to the site are anticipated.
6.6
6.6.1
Operational assessment
As stated in para. 6.1.3, the operational phase is not considered to result in significant effects on terrestrial ecology and therefore this is has not been assessed.
6.7
6.7.1

All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to terrestrial ecology are found in paras. 6.2.1 - 6.2.3. The ecological management plan described in the CoCP will include long-term management of habitats and species on site post-construction. It would be prepared following planning approval and prior to commencement of works on site. In addition to measures detailed in the CoCP, the following measures are likely to be required: a. Replacement tree and scrub planting in advance of clearance to mitigate habitat loss and effects on bats, breeding birds and invertebrates. b. Re-instatement of grassland habitat after works to mitigate habitat loss. c. Relocation of the dead wood and excavated material pile to an area unaffected by works, to mitigate effects on invertebrates.
6.7.2
d. Other mitigation measures for potential effects associated with the presence of protected and/or notable species (eg, bats and reptiles) if required. e. Protection of open excavations to avoid death or injury to animals, as far as it is reasonably practicable.
Page 48
6.8
Assessment summary
Construction
Effect Significance Mitigation Residual significance Not significant (negligible) Local (minor) beneficial effect Negligible
Vol 7 Table 6.8.1 Terrestrial ecology assessment summary - construction
Receptor
Habitats Certain, Local (minor adverse effect) Certain, Site level (minor adverse effect) Negligible None required Wildflower seeding of landscaped area, brown roof Replacement planting in advance of clearance.
Trees, dense scrub, Permanent loss of trees, dense tall ruderal vegetation scrub and tall ruderal vegetation on site (On site)
Amenity grassland (On site)
Permanent loss
Wood and excavated material piles
Permanent loss
Notable species Subject to survey results. To be reported in ES. Subject to survey results. To be reported in ES.
Bats (On site and surrounding area)
Effects to bat populations and Subject to survey individual bats from permanent results. To be loss of foraging resource on site reported in ES. and temporary disturbance to bats on and adjacent to the site from lighting, noise and vibration Probable, Local level (minor adverse effect)
Breeding birds (On site)
Permanent loss of nesting habitat on site resulting in reduction in local population of common bird species.
Replacement planting on site or in the local area in advance of clearance.
Not significant (negligible)
Page 49
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Effect Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Subject to survey results. To be reported in ES. Not required Unlikely to be significant (negligible) Subject to survey results. To be reported in ES. Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
Breeding birds (Surrounding area)
Temporary disturbance to birds adjacent to the site.
Reptiles (On site and surrounding area)
Effects on reptile populations on Subject to survey and adjacent to the site as a results. To be result of habitat loss and the reported in ES. barrier effect to the movement of reptiles across the site
Other Notable Species Probable, Local level (minor adverse effect) Provision of habitat piles adjacent to the site and replacement planting in advance of clearance. Not significant (negligible)
Invertebrates (On site and surrounding area)
A decline in invertebrate populations as a result of permanent loss of invertebrate habitat
Page 50
6.9
6.9.1
Bat and reptile surveys are ongoing in 2011 as summarised in para. 6.3.4 and Vol 7 Table 6.3.1. The results of these surveys will be used to value the receptors and assess the effects on ecological receptors. This will be reported in the ES. Where required, appropriate mitigation to avoid or minimise effects to terrestrial ecological receptors will be developed in consultation with stakeholders and a final assessment will be made of the significance of any residual effects to ecological receptors in the ES. Consideration will be given to biodiversity enhancement measures. Where possible, further mitigation and enhancement measures will be embedded in the project design.
6.9.2
Page 51
Section 7: Historic environment
7 7.1
7.1.1
Historic environment Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant effects on heritage assets at the Acton Storm Tanks site. These are aspects of the historic environment which are considered to be significant because of their historical, evidential, aesthetic or communal interest (these terms are defined in Volume 5). These might comprise below and above ground archaeological remains, buildings, structures, monuments or heritage landscapes within or around the site 14. This section should be read in conjunction with Volume 6 which sets the site in its broad topographic, geological, archaeological and historical context and discusses the project-wide landscape and topic themes in respect of the historic environment. These themes only touched upon briefly here where they are relevant to the site, to avoid repetition.
7.1.2
7.2
7.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to the historic environment are as follows.
Construction
7.2.2 Those aspects of specific relevance to the historic environment assessment, since they could lead to effects on heritage assets, are as follows: a. Enabling works will require decommissioning of the northern storm tanks; breaking out of existing hard standing and rising main chamber; amendment and realignment of existing rising main, breaking out of existing inlet chamber; diversion of local drainage; construction of storage, office and welfare facilities and the diversion of existing services b. Permanent works comprise the construction of a CSO drop shaft (within the footprint of two existing storm tanks), an interception chamber; a new connection culvert to the CSO drop shaft; overflow culvert connection to the Acton CSO; weir overflow chamber; valve chamber (also within the footprint of the storm tank),ventilation ducting, ventilation building and ventilation column. 7.2.3 Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce impacts on the historic environment include protective measures where appropriate such as temporary support, hoardings, barriers and screening around heritage assets within and adjacent to work sites, and advance planning of plant and working methods for use where heritage assets are close to work sites, or attached to structures within work sites. The CoCP also includes provisions for the contractor to prepare a site specific Heritage Management Plan.
Page 52
Operation
7.2.4 The proposed operation of the infrastructure at Acton Storm Tanks is described in Volume 3. The particular components that are relevant to the assessment, in terms of historic environment setting, comprise the permanent structures visible above ground.
7.3
7.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site, relating to the historic environment. It should also be noted that Volume 5 details the approach to the assessment of effects on the historic setting of heritage assets which it has been agreed, following the formal scoping process, will be covered in the assessment of construction and operational effects. This assessment will be completed for the ES.
7.3.2
Baseline
7.3.3 The baseline methodology follows that set out in Volume 5, with a key component being a desk based assessment, consulting a broad range of archaeological, documentary and cartographic sources, along with a site walkover survey. The results of geotechnical investigations, some of which were archaeologically monitored, have also been incorporated. The 800m-radius study area used for the assessment is considered through professional judgement to be most appropriate to characterise the historic environment potential of the site.
7.3.4
Construction
7.3.5 7.3.6 The construction phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. Effects on the historic environment could arise throughout the construction phase from activities likely to remove, disturb or alter above ground or buried heritage assets, as a result of enabling or construction works. The methodology has been informed by an understanding of the nature and extent of proposed ground disturbance, in relation to known or potential heritage assets. The base case (future baseline) for the assessment of construction effects would be the same as at present. Archaeological remains are a static resource, which have reached equilibrium with their environment and do not change (ie, decay or grow) unless their environment changes as a result of human or natural intervention. In terms of the base case (future baseline) during the assessment year, no changes are anticipated for above or below ground heritage assets, since these are a static resource. There are also no known non-Thames Tunnel schemes which could change the base case through affecting the setting or condition of any heritage assets.
7.3.7
7.3.8
Page 53
Operation
7.3.9 7.3.10 7.3.11 The operational phase methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below The operational phase assessment will be undertaken for Year 1 of operation. In terms of the base case (future baseline) during the assessment year, no direct changes are anticipated in the condition or significance of above ground heritage assets. There are also no known non-Thames Tunnel schemes which could change the base case through affecting the setting or condition of any heritage assets.
Assessment assumptions and limitations

7.3.12 Volume 5: Methodology sets out the generic assumptions and limitations of the assessment. In summary, the main limitation is the nature of the archaeological resource (buried and not visible) and acknowledgement of the difficulty of attempting to predict the presence/extent, date, nature, survival and significance of possible, previously unrecorded, buried heritage assets, based solely on a desk based study and site visit. In particular, no intrusive archaeological investigation has been carried out on the site in the past and few have been carried out in the study area around the site. Notwithstanding this limitation, the assessment presented here is robust, based on reasonably available information, and conforms to the requirements of local and national guidance and planning policy (as detailed in Volume 5). Typically, appropriate standard archaeological prospection and evaluation techniques are utilised post-consent to reduce the uncertainties inherent in any desk based study, as part of an overall EIA mitigation strategy (see Mitigation section below for the proposed mitigation at this site).
7.3.13
7.4
7.4.1
Baseline conditions
The following description of baseline conditions comprises seven subsections which set out: a. A description of historic environment features, with an introduction to the features map (which shows the location of known historic environment features within the 800m-radius study area around the site) and the study area b. A description of statutorily and locally designated assets within the site and its vicinity (ie, within a 100m-radius of the site) c. A description of the site location, topography and geology to set the context of the site
d. A summary of past archaeological investigation within the study area, providing an indication of how well the area is understood archaeologically e. A summary of the archaeological and historical background which sets out what is known about the site and its environs
Page 54
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks f.
A statement of significance for above ground assets within and around the site, describing the features which contribute to their significance
g. A discussion of potential for buried heritage assets, taking account of factors affecting survival, and a statement of their potential significance. 7.4.2 A site walkover survey was carried out on 18th March 2011. The light and weather conditions were overcast and raining. No interior of buildings located within or outside the site were inspected. Access to the tanks was also restricted on health and safety grounds. A cobbled surface of granite sets was identified at the entrance north of the site, leading from a house dating to 1887, just beyond the site boundary. Fragments of machinery dating to this earliest phase remain, as well as a granite slab recording the construction of the Acton Storm Tanks (undated). The survey noted that the buildings on site are of redbrick construction and date to the end of the 20th century.
Historic environment features

7.4.3 The historic environment features map (Vol 7 Figure 7.4.1) shows the location of known historic environment features within the 800m-radius study area around the site, compiled from the baseline sources set out in the topic specific methodology in Volume 5. Vol 7 Figure 7.4.1 Historic environment features map (see Volume 7 Figures document) 7.4.4 These historic environment features have been allocated a unique historic environment asset reference number (HEA 1, 2, etc), which is listed in the gazetteer in Appendix A. The study area for assessing setting effects on heritage assets may be revised because setting effects are most likely to occur within the visual envelope of the site, which may differ from the study area defined for the purposes of this assessment.
7.4.5
Designated assets
Statutory designations 7.4.6 The site and the immediate vicinity (ie, within a 100m-radius) does not contain any nationally designated (statutorily protected) heritage assets, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or registered parks and gardens. Local authority designations 7.4.7 The site is not located within an archaeological priority area designated by the local authority. The north-eastern boundary of the Bedford Park Conservation area is located c. 125m to the south of the site. There are no locally listed buildings within the site. Known burial grounds 7.4.8 There are no known burial grounds within the Acton Storm Tanks site or adjacent to it.
Page 55
Site location, topography and geology

Site location 7.4.9 The site is bounded to the east by Warple Way, by a car park to the south and southwest, and by Canham Road and industrial/retail units to the north. The site falls within the historic parish of Acton and formerly lay within the county of Middlesex. The site is located approximately 1.5km to the north of the River Thames. The closest natural watercourse to the site is the western branch of the Stamford Brook, which borders the site to its immediate east. It is a tributary of the Thames which is now covered over, and which formed a natural boundary of the ancient parish of Acton. Stamford Brook is the confluence of two smaller streams; an eastern branch arose near the Old Acton Wells approximately 2km north of the site and flowed south down Old Oak Common Road and Old Oak Road. The western branch, known locally as The Warple, ran just west of Horn Lane and south down Warple Way, to the immediate east of the site. By 1900, the brook had been covered over and is now a sewer. Topography 7.4.11 The land slopes from the northwest southwards and is drained by two subterranean streams, Bollo Brook and Stamford Brook's western branch (The Warple). The site is fairly flat, with a general level between 106.7m ATD (above Tunnel Datum; the equivalent to 6.7m Ordnance Datum) in the northwest and 106.4m ATD in the southeast. A number of large storm tanks occupy the majority of the site (western and central part). Access to the storm tanks is via a tarmac road from the northwest. The tanks are surrounded by grassed areas on the northeastern and southern sides. The eastern boundary, abutting Warple Way, is lined with trees. Geology 7.4.13 The site is located on the Kempton Park Gravel Terrace, overlain by Brickearth (Langley Silt Complex), which is a fine-grained silt believed to have accumulated by a mixture of processes (eg, wind, slope and freezethaw) mostly since the Last Glacial Maximum around 17,000BP. The proximity to the interface of the higher Thames river terrace to the north, the Taplow terrace, an interface which currently remains obscured by the blanket of Brickearth, could mean fine grained interglacial sediments survives at this location as they are known to exist at the boundary of river terraces 15. These sediments have potential for holding palaeoenvironmental information on the nature of the climate and vegetation as well as organic material for radiocarbon dating. There are no borehole logs available; consequently there is no sitespecific detailed description of the stratigraphy of the site (the chronological layers of archaeological material or contexts, eg, dump or fill layers, or cuts such as pits or ditches), and the levels of natural deposits are not known. The river terrace upon which the site is located would have largely remained high and dry in relation to the Stamford
7.4.10
7.4.12
7.4.14
Page 56
Brook, immediately to the east of the site, although occasionally major overbank flood events could have distributed channel sediments across the area. In prehistory, from the Mesolithic onward, the proximity of the Brook would have provided freshwater resources as well as a route through the landscape. Similar tributaries have revealed distributions of Upper Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic artefacts sealed by later wetland deposits upon their floodplains. 7.4.15 The higher level brickearth, in contrast to the alluvium of the floodplain, does not provide a good medium for palaeoenvironmental survival although features or artefacts relating to agricultural activity may survive beneath any made ground. In later prehistory and the historic period it is likely that the well drained, easily managed fertile soils typical of this geology would have been exploited for increasingly intensive crop production.
Past archaeological investigations within the study area

7.4.16 There have only been two past archaeological investigations within the study area, approximately 450 and 550m to the northwest and north (HEA 1 and 2). These comprise an evaluation by the Department of Greater London Archaeology (DGLA) in 1991 and an evaluation by the Museum of London Archaeology Service (now named MOLA) in 2000. These investigations revealed post-medieval activity in form of clay pits and evidence of market gardens. There is a general paucity of finds which may simply reflect the lack of past investigation. The area is thus little understood archaeologically, in particular of the prehistoric and Roman periods, for which there is no documentary or cartographic evidence.
Archaeological and historical background of the site

7.4.17 The following section presents a chronological summary of the archaeological and historical background of the site, drawing on the information collated above. Prehistoric period (700,000 BCAD 43) 7.4.18 Lower and Middle Palaeolithic (approximately 700,000 to 40,000 BC) landsurfaces could survive at the base of the brickearth. At Creffield Road in Acton, approximately 1.8km to the northwest of the site, there is evidence of Levalloisian culture stone tool manufacture beneath the brickearth 16. To date, prehistoric remains are poorly represented in the study area. The Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER) records only one chance find from Acton Vale, near Sewage Farm, approximately 300m northwest of the site, in the form of a prehistoric blade (HEA 3). A few isolated prehistoric finds in the form of flint artefacts approximately 800m to the north, west and east of the site (outside the study area), indicate some activity in the general area. The lack of finds is possibly a reflection of the limited past archaeological investigation in the study area, and it difficult to assess prehistoric potential.
7.4.19
Page 57
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Roman period (AD 43410) 7.4.20
The City of London (Londinium) was occupied soon after the invasion of AD 43 and the area that is now Ealing would have been located in the hinterland of the city, approximately 10km to its west. The major Roman road from London to Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum) passes through the southern part of the study area, approximately 530m south of the site, and crossed the River Colne at Staines (Pontes), approximately 17km to the southwest of the site. Whilst it may be presumed that an extensive agricultural landscape existed around London, very little Roman activity has been identified in the area around the site. Settlement and other activity in the general area would have been influenced by administrative and infrastructure factors associated with the establishment of Londinium as the provincial capital by the 2nd century AD. The relationship of the capital to the rural settlements in its hinterland was symbiotic. Small, nucleated settlements, typically located along the major roads leading to the capital, acted both as markets and as producers to the capital. These hinterland settlements appear to have followed the general socio-economic trends that characterise the Roman period; a period of prosperity in the early 2nd century followed by a general decline in the late 2nd to early 3rd century and a brief revival in the 4th century 17. To date there is no evidence of Roman activity in the study area, although as noted above, this may simply reflect the limited amount of past archaeological investigation. Two Roman pits found in the area of Acton shopping centre, approximately 1.0km northwest of the site, indicate some Roman activity in the wider area. Early medieval (Saxon) period (AD 4101066) Following the withdrawal of the Roman army from England in the early 5th century AD the whole country fell into an extended period of socioeconomic decline. In the 9th and 10th centuries, the Saxon Minster system began to be replaced by local parochial organisation, with formal areas of land centred on nucleated settlements served by a parish church. The site fell within the eastern part of manor (estate) of Acton. The Saxon place name means 'oak town', and is first recorded in AD1181. The manor was a division of the bishop of London's manor of Fulham, which he acquired between 704 and 709 18. The site would have been located outside the focus of settlement. It lies approximately 300m to the south of the eastern part of Uxbridge Road, which is thought to have its origin in the Saxon period. The route led from Acton northwest over Ealing common to Haven Green and the site, at the north end of Ealing village, and west-southwest to Hanwell. The route was from London to Oxford, which was a newly founded settlement by AD 911 19 and roadside settlement might have existed along the route 20. There is no known archaeological evidence for this period from the site or the study area and it is likely that the area was open fields or woodland. But as with earlier periods, the general lack of information may be a reflection of the limited past investigations.
7.4.21
7.4.22
7.4.23
7.4.24
7.4.25
7.4.26
Page 58
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Later medieval period (AD 10661485) 7.4.27 7.4.28
There is little material evidence for the survival of medieval remains in the area, and no evidence has been found to date within the study area. The manor of Acton, within which the site lay, is not mentioned in Domesday Book (1086) but was probably accounted for under the larger Fulham or Ealing estate. The main settlement, Church Acton or Acton town, lay approximately 1.3km to the northwest of the site, along the main road from London to Oxford (Uxbridge Road), beside a church dedicated to St. Mary which existed by 1231. By 1380, a number of the tenements along the south side of the road were inns, servicing travellers along the road 21. Another settlement was hamlet of East Acton, mentioned in 1294, located on the north side of Uxbridge Road, approximately 320m to the north of the site. It consisted of farmhouses and cottages north and south of common land, which was later known as East Acton Green. Other than the two main settlements of Church Acton and East Acton, there would have been a few outlying farms 22. Much of the manor to the north, located on the heavy London Clay, would have been heavily wooded. In all likelihood the site, on the edge of the manor, lay within open fields under arable cultivation or used for pasture. Post-medieval period (AD 1485present) The earliest map consulted, Rocques map of 1746 (Appendix A) is a small scale-map that shows buildings indicatively, along with main roads, topographic features and land use. The map shows the site in an area of extensive arable cultivation to the northeast of Acton Common and to the south of Uxbridge Road. The surrounding area is generally sparsely populated, with scattered farms. The map shows a north-south aligned trackway running through the western part of the site and crossing a northwest to southeast aligned creek over a bridge. The creek is most likely to be the western branch of Stamford Brook, which probably due to inaccuracies in the map is shown here further south than on later, more accurate maps. Stamford Brook follows the boundary of the parish which bounds the site to its east. The north to south trackway is not shown on later maps but The Avenue, leading northwards from Chiswick High Road and turning west just south of the site, and Stanley Gardens Road to the north of the site, may be remnants of this old trackway. The early Ordnance Survey (OS) 1: mile map of 18305 (Appendix A) shows the site on open ground; Uxbridge Road is shown to the north, Chiswick High Road to the south. The largest settlement in the area is Acton (or Acton Church) approximately 1.3km to the northwest of the site. There is no settlement in close proximity of the site and activity is focussed along the main thoroughfares to the north and south of the site. This map shows the Stamford Brook to the northeast of the site. The OS 1st edition 25: mile map of 186882 (Appendix A) shows the site in undeveloped open land, on the north side of the North & South Western Junction Railway (NSWJR) line. The map also shows the boundary between the parishes of Acton and Hammersmith which runs along the
7.4.29
7.4.30
7.4.31
7.4.32
Page 59
eastern boundary of the site. The NSWJR was authorised in 1851 to connect the London and North Western Railway (LNWR) at Willesden Junction with the London and South Western Railway (LSWR) Hounslow Loop Line by a west-facing link at Old Kew Junction. The only branch line of the NSWJR ran from Acton station (opened in 1853), to a terminus at Hammersmith. Acton station (renamed Acton Central in 1925) is located approximately 750m to the northwest of the site. In 1865, the North London Railway and the LNWR opened a station at Broad Street, providing Acton with a direct rail link to the City, which could be reached by a few fast trains in 30 minutes. From 1869 a line from South Acton junction to Richmond provided a more direct route, and trains ran alternately to Richmond and Kew Bridge. South Acton station, just north of South Acton junction, was opened in 1880 23. 7.4.33 The OS 2nd edition 25 mile map of 189699 (Appendix A) is the first map to show development on the site. In 188488 the Metropolitan Board of Works constructed the Acton Sewage Disposal Works on the site 24, after the rapid suburban development of the Acton area, brought about by the railways. The map shows filter beds and a building (labelled pump house on later maps) in the northern part of the site. To the south of these is an earthwork embankment and a circular tank, with a small access road leading towards it. The southern part of the site is open and undeveloped. Hachures indicate a small slope down to the railway line to the southwest, which is shown on an embankment. The area surrounding the site is still sparsely occupied. The map shows a house, just north of (outside) the site, near the corner of Canham Road. The site visit noted that the date of 1897 recorded on a date stone on the first floor of the southeast principal elevation (Appendix A2 Photograph A2.1). The first floor elevations have overlapping tiles cladding. A cobbled surface is visible wrapping around the building from the southwest to northwest. This two storey mock Elizabethan structure has seen successive phases of alterations to the rear of the building. The building is associated with the first phase of the Acton Sewage disposal works on the site and was probably built to house the foreman or workers, and their families. The OS 3rd edition 25 map of 19091920 (Appendix A) shows some changes within the site. The filter beds have been enlarged and another large filter bed is now covering the entire southern part of the site. This was constructed on the site in 1902 (shortly after this, in 1905, an Act allowed all the sewage to pass into the London County Council sewers, with only storm water draining into the Thames) 25. The surroundings area has undergone major changes and is now occupied with large residential areas and associated infrastructure. The map shows Canham road bounding the site to the north. There are new footbridges over the railway to the northwest and southeast of (outside) the site. Passenger services for the line were withdrawn during World War I but they were never reinstated and the line carried freight only. The OS revised edition 25 map of 193247 (Appendix A) shows no significant changes within the site, although the building in the northern
7.4.34
7.4.35
7.4.36
Page 60
part of the site appears to have been modified slightly (or demolished and rebuilt) and is labelled pump house. The southern part of the site is now annotated as filter beds. The area surrounding the site has undergone further development and is densely occupied. 7.4.37 The OS 1:2500 scale map of 198091 (Appendix A) shows a complete reconfiguration of the filter beds. These have been replaced with the six existing rectangular storm tanks. A water cooler has been added in the northeastern part of the site. The current site 7.4.38 The site is currently occupied by a series of six large storm tanks to contain overflow from the street drains. Since 198091, the pump house in the northern part of the site has been demolished and brick building constructed beside the access road. Other buildings within the site are late 20th century brick-built sheds to house machinery relating to the current use of the site. The Acton Storm tanks are surrounded by a prefabricated concrete wall and metal railings. The area surrounding the site is characterised by mixed residential and commercial use, with new residential areas under construction to the east.
Statement of significance: above ground heritage assets

Introduction 7.4.39 In accordance with national policy set out in PPS5, the following section provides a statement based on professional and expert judgement on the likely significance (which is a reflection of the value or importance) of heritage assets, derived from their perceived historical, evidential, aesthetic and communal value. These terms are defined in Volume 5. Within the site 7.4.40 Access to the site is via Canham Road, from a vehicular gateway in the northeastern corner at its junction with Warple Way. This is cobbled with granite sets leading into the site, changing to hardstanding as the access road sweeps round to the centre of the site (Appendix A). There is a series of six long tanks running northwest-southeast, with associated machinery and engine housing. An inscribed granite slab has been laid flat beside the northeastern most storm tank (Appendix A) with the inscription relating to the Local Board for the District of Acton W. Main Drainage Works, naming the contractors and councillors involved in the construction. There is no date. Remnants of machinery, possibly dated to the original phase of construction in the late 19th century, are visible across the site, particularly to the east of the tanks (Appendix A). The cobbled road surface and some historic machinery relate to the first phase of the Acton Sewage disposal works on the site, and hold historical value and are of low heritage significance, derived from historical and evidential value. Outside the site 7.4.42 The north-eastern boundary of the Bedford Park Conservation Area lies c. 125m to the south of the site. It extends further to the south and west,
7.4.41
Page 61
divided between the LB of Ealing and the LB of Hounslow. The layout of the area is based on three main roads converging onto the church of St Michael & All Angels. First designated in 1969 and extended to the east in 1994, this conservation area has considerable architectural merit with a large percentage of the structures statutorily designated listed buildings. The area is defined by its connection to the Aesthetic Movement with principal architect Richard Norman Shaw introducing the Queen Anne style for which Bedford Park is so widely recognised. It is primarily a residential area, with a majority of semidetached housing, laid out in a fairly informal manner within an ad-hoc street pattern 26. This area has considerable historical, evidential and communal value and hence is of high heritage significance.
Statement of significance: buried heritage assets on the site

Introduction 7.4.43 The following section discusses past impacts on the site which are likely to have compromised asset survival (generally from late 19th and 20th century developments, eg, building foundations or quarrying), identified primarily from historic maps, the site walkover survey, and information on the likely depth of deposits. In accordance with PPS5, this is followed by a statement on the likely potential and significance of buried heritage assets within the site, derived from current understanding of the baseline conditions, past impacts, and professional judgement. Factors affecting survival 7.4.45 Survival potential is anticipated to be generally low and localised. The depth of any made ground potentially present across the site is currently not known. The biggest impact within the site upon archaeological remains will have been the construction of the storm tanks, approximately 6.0m in depth. These would have removed any archaeological remains within their footprint, down to their maximum depths across the majority of the site. The existing late 20th century brick-built machine sheds in the centre-north of the site are unlikely to have had basement and cellars. Strip or pad foundations will have truncated archaeological remains within their footprints, to a depth of 1.01.5m below ground level, but archaeological remains may survive beneath and between the footings. a. The late 19th century residential building in the northeast of the site: this is not thought to have basement and/or cellars. Foundations may have truncated archaeological remains within their footprints, but archaeological deposits may survive underneath; b. The 19th century filter beds: historic maps indicate that these extended beyond the footprint of the current storm tanks in the southeastern part of the site. Excavations for the filter beds would
7.4.44
7.4.46
7.4.47
Page 62
have removed archaeological remains within their footprint, down to the maximum depth. c. Other works: works associated with the sewage works construction such as tanks, drainage and pipes would have had an impact on potential archaeological remains and are likely to have removed or truncated archaeological deposits within their footprint down to their maximum depth (details not currently known).
Asset potential and significance 7.4.48 The following statement of asset significance takes into account the levels of natural geology at the site and the level and nature of disturbance and truncation. Prehistoric 7.4.49 The site has an uncertain, but possibly low potential to contain archaeological remains dating to the prehistoric period. Finds dating to this period are sparse to date. The general lack of past investigations within the study area and generally in the wider surroundings, may affect this picture. The significance of prehistoric remains, if found, is not known, but is probably low for isolated finds, to medium or high in the unlikely event of extensive remains. This would be based on their likely archaeological and historic value in providing evidence of past environments and human activity. Roman 7.4.50 The site has an uncertain but probably low potential to contain archaeological remains dating to the Roman period. The site is at some distance from known centres of Roman settlement, and to date there have been no finds of this period from the study area. Roman clay pits further to the north, outside the study area, indicate some activity in the wider area and it is possible that the site itself may have been associated with agricultural activity or pasture. The significance of Roman remains, if found, is not known, but is probably low for isolated finds, to medium or high in the unlikely event of extensive remains. This would be based on their likely archaeological and historic value in providing evidence of past environments and human activity. Medieval 7.4.51 The site has an uncertain but probably low potential to contain archaeological remains dated to the early and later medieval periods. The site probably lay within woodland or open fields, outside the known areas of settlement. Any potential archaeological features present on site would probably be associated with agricultural activity, of low significance, based on limited historical value in providing evidence of past environments and human activity. Post-medieval 7.4.52 The site has high potential to contain archaeological remains dating to the post-medieval period. Historic maps indicate that the Acton sewage works were located within the site from the end of the 19th century onwards and
Page 63
remains of old structures may be encountered on the site, including footings of the pump house. The significance of such remains is low, and derived from potential historical and evidential value.
Summary of asset significance

7.4.53 A summary of the known or likely historic environment assets relevant to the proposed scheme is provided below. Vol 7 Table 7.4.1 Historic environment - receptors and their significance Receptor (Asset) Asset type Low Significance (value)
Upstanding remnants of the Above ground/ original sewage works within the site (historic machinery; cobbled access road and granite slab naming the councillors and contractors involved in the construction) Bedford Park Conservation Area (outside the site to the south) Uncertain, possibly low potential for prehistoric isolated artefacts or extensive, in-situ remains Uncertain, possibly low potential for Roman isolated artefacts or extensive, in-situ remains. Uncertain, possibly low potential for medieval agricultural activity Moderate potential for buried remains of the first late 19th century sewage works (pump house, filter beds etc). Above ground/ outside the site Buried/ within the site
High
Low (isolated artefacts), moderate to high (in-situ remains, if present) Low (isolated artefacts), moderate to high (in-situ remains, if present) Low
Buried/ within the site
Buried/ within the site Buried/ within the site
Low
7.5
7.5.1
Construction assessment Above ground heritage assets

During site preparation there may be a localised impact to certain elements of the historic machinery, along with an inscribed granite slab, which may be damaged or removed during the works. It is not certain how extensive this impact could be, but where machinery is damaged or
Page 64
removed, this would reduce its significance to negligible, comprising a medium magnitude of impact. Given the low asset significance of these remains, this would comprise a minor adverse effect. 7.5.2 The assessment of effects upon the historic setting of surrounding designated/protected heritage assets within the study area, including the Bedford Park Conservation Area, for example from the visual presence of construction machinery, requires further consideration and will be completed for the ES. This assessment is distinct from the assessment of effects on townscape character areas presented in Section 11, as it is based on criteria specific to the historic environment. The study area for assessing setting effects on heritage assets may be revised because historic setting effects are most likely to occur within the visual envelope of the site, which may differ from the study area defined for the purposes of this assessment. The effects of other construction phase activities on particularly significant assets (ie, statutorily designated/protected features) adjacent to the site, will also be assessed in the ongoing EIA for presentation in the ES. Construction impacts which may affect the setting of such assets might include vibration from piling, dust and disturbance from the movement of heavy goods vehicles.
7.5.3
Buried heritage assets

Enabling works 7.5.4 The decommissioning of two of the existing storm tanks would have no impact on archaeological remains. Other enabling works would potentially have an impact upon buried heritage assets: a. On the northern part of the site, the hard standing will be broken out. The construction of the works compound is likely to entail site stripping, for the purposes of the assessment assumed to be up to 0.5mbgl. Site fencing will be erected, supported by timber posts in concrete foundations. Office, storage and welfare facilities will be constructed upon pad foundations of up to approximately 0.5mbgl, as assumed for the purposes of this assessment. These works would have a localised impact on any archaeological remains within the made ground. This would locally reduce the significance of any heritage assets to negligible. b. The enabling works would also entail the diversion of existing services and the construction of new service trenches assumed for the purposes of this assessment to be approximately 1.02.0m deep. These works would potentially locally truncate archaeological remains. This would locally reduce the significance of the assets to negligible and would amount to a moderate magnitude of impact. There is a high potential for post-medieval remains of low asset significance. These remains are likely to be at the top of the archaeological sequence and so are most likely to be affected by the impacts of the enabling works. Where such remains are removed the environmental effect would be minor adverse, allowing for the localised nature of the impacts. Buried remains of other periods (ie, medieval remains of low
Page 65
asset significance) may also be present. If present, the impacts would be the same as for the construction works in para. 7.6.7 below. Construction works 7.5.5 The construction within the footprint of two storm tanks would have no archaeological impact. The existing storm tanks are 6m deep and will have penetrated into the Kempton Park gravels. Their excavation will have already removed any archaeological remains from within their footprint. Outside the footprint of the existing storm tanks, the ventilation ducts, foundations for the ventilation building; weir overflow chamber, pipe overflow and connection chamber to Action CSO would all locally remove archaeological remains above their basal formation levels. The significance of any remains removed would be reduced to negligible. Where these archaeological remains are removed at this site, their significance (see bullet points below) would be reduced to negligible. This would comprise a high magnitude of impact, although the precise environmental effect would depend upon the remains removed and their significance. The following archaeological remains could be removed by the temporary or permanent works: a. There is a low potential for isolated prehistoric artefacts of low asset significance, and possibly, for extensive in-situ remains of medium or high asset significance (unlikely). Localised removal of these remains, if present, would potentially comprise a minor or moderate to major adverse effect, depending on the original significance of the remains, if present. b. There is a low potential for isolated Roman artefacts of low asset significance, and possibly, for extensive in-situ remains of medium or high asset significance (unlikely). Localised removal of these remains, if present, would potentially comprise a minor or moderate to major adverse effect, depending on the original significance of the remains, if present. c. There is a low potential for medieval agricultural activity (eg field ditches etc), of low asset significance. Removal of these remains would comprise a minor adverse effect.
7.5.6
7.5.7
d. There is a high potential for post-medieval remains of low significance. Removal of these remains would comprise a minor adverse effect.
Significance of environmental effect

7.5.8 The table below summarises the magnitude of impact upon known and possible historic environment assets at the site (above ground and buried), during the construction phase, and the resulting environmental effect. This is the effect prior to the implementation of an agreed mitigation strategy.
Page 66
Vol 7 Table 7.5.1 Historic environment summary of construction effects Asset (resource) Impact (magnitude, and justification) Above ground heritage assets Upstanding remnants of the first sewage works (historic machinery; cobbled access road and granite slab naming the councillors and contractors involved in the construction). (Low asset significance) Setting of Bedford Park Conservation Area (outside the site to the south) (High asset significance) Uncertain, possibly low potential for prehistoric isolated artefacts or extensive, in-situ remains (Low to moderate or high asset significance, if present, depending on nature and preservation) Uncertain, possibly low potential for Roman isolated artefacts or extensive, in-situ remains. (Low to moderate or high asset significance, if present, depending on nature and preservation) Uncertain, possibly low potential for medieval agricultural activity Medium Minor adverse Risk of damage or demolition of localised parts of historic machinery Effect (prior to mitigation)
To be assessed for the ES
Buried heritage assets High Localised impacts from ground works deep or shallow. Significance of the asset reduced to negligible. Uncertain, possibly minor to major adverse (unlikely)
High Localised impacts from ground works deep or shallow. Significance of the asset reduced to negligible.
Uncertain, possibly minor to major adverse (unlikely)
High Localised impacts from ground works deep or
Minor adverse
Page 67
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Asset (resource)
Section 7: Historic environment Impact (magnitude, and justification) Effect (prior to mitigation)
Above ground heritage assets (Low asset significance) shallow. Significance of the asset reduced to negligible Moderate potential for buried remains of the first late 19th century sewage works (pump house, filter beds etc). (Low asset significance) High Localised impacts from ground works deep or shallow. Significance of the asset reduced to negligible Minor adverse
7.6
7.6.1
Operational assessment Above ground heritage assets

The effect of the project upon the historic setting of Bedford Park Conservation Area, requires further consideration and will be assessed through the ongoing EIA for presentation in the ES. This assessment is distinct from the assessment of effects on townscape character areas presented in Section 11, as it is based on criteria specific to the historic environment. The study area for assessing setting effects on heritage assets may be revised because historic setting effects are most likely to occur within the visual envelope of the site, which may differ from the study area defined for the purposes of this assessment.
Buried heritage assets

7.6.2 Operational activities would not lead to any disturbance to buried heritage assets. Therefore there would be no operational effects on buried heritage assets.
Significance of environmental effect

7.6.3 The historic environment assets for which effects during the operational phase will be assessed through the ongoing EIA for presentation in the ES (see below). Vol 7 Table 7.6.1 Historic environment summary of operational effects Asset (resource) Bedford Park Conservation Area (outside the site to the south). (High asset Impact (magnitude, and justification) Effect (prior to mitigation)
Possible change to the To be assessed for setting of the conservation the ES. area adjacent to the site resulting from the new constructions. To be
Page 68
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Asset (resource) significance)
Section 7: Historic environment Impact (magnitude, and justification) assessed for the ES. Effect (prior to mitigation)
7.7
Approach to mitigation Construction Above ground heritage assets

Within the site
7.7.1
The potential impacts to the historic machinery and granite commemorative slab could be mitigated by ensuring these remains are protected from damage or demolition during the works. Within the study area Any mitigation which may be required for indirect effects on above ground heritage assets will be detailed in the final ES, following consideration of the significance of these assets, their setting and the predicted effects. However, it is acknowledged that the scope for mitigation is likely to be limited, for example where effects on historic setting arise from the visible presence of construction machinery. Buried heritage assets Based on this assessment, no heritage assets of very high significance are anticipated that might merit a mitigation strategy of permanent preservation in situ. It is therefore considered that the adverse environmental effects of the proposed development could be successfully mitigated by a suitable programme of archaeological investigation before and/or during construction, to achieve preservation by record (through advancing understanding of asset significance). The assessment presented here has identified likely significant effects on buried heritage assets resulting from ground works. Mitigation requirements would be informed by selective site based assessment. This could include a variety of techniques, such as geotechnical investigation, geoarchaeological deposit modelling, archaeological test pits and trial trenches. This evaluation would enable a more targeted and precise mitigation strategy to be developed for the site post-consent and in advance of construction. Both evaluation and mitigation would be carried out in accordance with a scope of works (Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI)), agreed with statutory consultees prior to conducting any archaeological fieldwork prior to or during construction. The WSI would ensure that the scope and method of fieldwork are appropriate to satisfy requirements of planning conditions.
7.7.2
7.7.3
7.7.4
7.7.5
Page 69
Operation
Above ground heritage assets 7.7.6 Any mitigation which may be required for indirect effects on above ground heritage assets will be detailed in the final ES, following consideration of the significance of these assets, their setting and the predicted effects. Mitigation might, for example, include changes to the proposed finishing materials of above ground structures, such as cladding and ground treatments. Buried heritage assets 7.7.7 Operational activities would not lead to any disturbance of buried heritage assets. Therefore no mitigation is required.
Page 70
Section 7: Historical environment
7.8
Assessment summary
Construction
Vol 7 Table 7.8.1 Historic environment assessment summary - construction Significance of effect Above ground heritage assets To be assessed for the ES To be identified for the ES To be assessed for the ES Mitigation Residual significance
Asset (receptor)
Setting of Bedford Park Conservation Area (outside the site to the south) (High asset significance) Minor adverse Protection of historic machinery to prevent damage. Where the removal of machinery is proposed (to be confirmed), a photographic record would be sufficient mitigation. Buried heritage assets Archaeological watching brief prior to and during construction achieve preservation by record.
Upstanding remnants of the first sewage works, (historic machinery; cobbled access road and granite slab naming the councillors and contractors involved in the construction). (Low asset significance)
Negligible
Uncertain, possibly low potential Uncertain (minor to major for prehistoric isolated artefacts adverse) or extensive, in-situ remains (Low to moderate or high asset significance, if present, depending on nature and preservation)
Negligible
Page 71
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Significance of effect Negligible Mitigation Residual significance
Asset (receptor)
Uncertain, possibly low potential Uncertain (minor to major for Roman isolated artefacts or adverse) extensive, in-situ remains. (Low to moderate or high asset significance, if present, depending on nature and preservation) Minor adverse Archaeological watching brief prior to and during construction achieve preservation by record Negligible
Low potential for medieval agricultural activity (Low asset significance) Minor adverse
Moderate potential for buried remains of the first late 19th century sewage works (pump house, filter beds etc). (Low asset significance)
Negligible
Page 72
Operation
Significance of effect Mitigation Residual significance
Vol 7 Table 7.8.2 Historic environment assessment summary - operation
Asset (receptor)
Setting of Bedford Park Conservation Area (outside the site to the south) (High asset significance)
To be identified for the ES To be assessed for the ES
Page 73
7.9
7.9.1
In terms of desk based sources, the outstanding information that will contribute to the EIA baseline comprises the results of geoarchaeological monitoring of geotechnical boreholes (clarifying depth and nature of deposits). The assessment of indirect construction and operational effects upon the historic setting of surrounding designated/protected heritage assets within the study area requires further consideration and will be completed for the ES. This assessment is distinct from the assessment of effects on townscape character areas presented in Section 11, as it is based on criteria specific to the historic environment. The study area for assessing setting effects on heritage assets may be revised because historic setting effects are most likely to occur within the visual envelope of the site, which may differ from the study area defined for the purposes of this assessment. Possible effects of ground settlement resulting from deep constructions within the site, other than the tunnel itself (this will be covered in Volume 6: project-wide effects) will be considered in the EIA and reported in the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment, the mitigation approaches for the historic environment within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
7.9.2
7.9.3
7.9.4 7.9.5
Page 74
Section 8: Land quality
8 8.1
8.1.1 8.1.2
Land quality Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant land quality effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The purpose of this report for land quality is as a first step towards the assessment of impacts and mitigation measures required for the site during the construction and operational phase of the proposed scheme. This section should be read in conjunction with Section 13 (Groundwater), Section 14 (Surface Water), Section 5 (Aquatic Ecology) and Section 6 (Terrestrial Ecology).
8.1.3
8.2
8.2.1 8.2.2
Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce land quality impacts are summarised in paras. 8.2.5 and 8.2.6. The proposed development in described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to land quality are as follows. a. The base of the proposed drop shaft at this site would terminate in the London Clay Formation. b. As excavation is mainly through the London Clay, no dewatering or ground treatment is envisaged. Any water entering the excavation from either the superficial deposits or from minor seepages through silt layers would be pumped to the sewer via appropriate settlement tanks.
8.2.3 8.2.4 8.2.5
The plan shown in Vol 7 Figure 2.1.1 provides an indicative extent and layout of the construction site. At the completion of the construction the operational structures would comprise a ventilation column and building. Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP which aim to substantially reduce risks associated with construction activities include: a. the remediation of the site so it is fit for purpose (where required) b. the use of appropriate PPE as well as training and welfare for construction staff c. confined space working measures where applicable d. the employment of UXO specialist advice.
8.2.6
The CoCP includes measures to minimise the migration of dusts during construction activities. These include the use of wheel washing at site entrances, damping down during dry weather and covering and safe storage of potentially contaminating materials (if any).
Page 75
8.3
8.3.1 8.3.2

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site relating to land quality.
Baseline
8.3.3 8.3.4 The baseline data collection follows the methodology detailed in Volume 5. Baseline conditions have been determined for the development confines and for a distance of up to 250m beyond (in order to take into account off site contamination sources and receptors). The baseline data was sourced from the Thames Tunnel Geographical Information Systems (GIS) database, including historic maps and environmental records, together with a walkover survey and stakeholder consultation. A full list of the data sets drawn upon in this assessment is presented in Volume 5 methodology.
8.3.5
Construction and operation

8.3.6 8.3.7 The construction and operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

8.3.8 The assumptions and limitations associated with this study are presented in Volume 5. There are no site specific assumptions and limitations for the Acton Storm Tanks site.
8.4
8.4.1 8.4.2
Baseline conditions Site walkover

A site walkover was undertaken on the 26th November 2010. A site walkover report is presented in Appendix B. Ground level within the site is approximately 1.5m above the surrounding road at its southerly most point. This change in ground level becomes progressively shallower to the north. It is therefore possible that ground levels at the site have been raised at some point and that a cover of made ground is present beneath this area. The site includes a screening facility for the final outflow to the CSO. The storm tanks themselves comprise open concrete lined tanks approximately 4m deep. An approximately 36,400l capacity gas oil tank is adjacent to the northern limit of the work site. At the time of the inspection, the tank was surrounded by a painted brick bund which was dry and showed no evidence of leakage of fuels. The filling point of the tank appeared to be situated within the bunded area.
8.4.3 8.4.4
Page 76
Information received from Thames Water on previous spillage or leakage at the site, stated that no escape to ground of polluting substances has taken place.
Site history and surroundings with potential for contaminants

8.4.6 Vol 7 Table 8.4.1 provides a summary of the site history, including potentially contaminative activities and principal contaminants of concern in and around the site. The table was produced following inspection of the historic mapping dating from the late 19th century to the present day. Items in the table are also shown in Vol 7 Figure 8.4.1. Vol 7 Figure 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land uses (see Volume 7 Figures document) Vol 7 Table 8.4.1 Land quality contaminative land use summary Ref Item Inferred date of operation c1896 present Potentially contaminative substances associated with item Heavy metals, arsenic, free cyanide, nitrates, sulphates, sulphides, asbestos, oil/fuel hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbon, chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons, PCBs, pathogens (eg, faecal coliforms) PAHs, heavy metals, phenols, sulphates, fuel oil, lubricating oil, greases, polychlorinated biphenyls, solvents, asbestos, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, sulphates Heavy metals, paints, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, solvents, degreasers, cutting oils, mineral oil Chlorinated hydrocarbons and chlorine compounds, sulphur, ammonia, dyes Heavy metals, paints, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, solvents, degreasers, cutting oils, mineral oil Heavy metals, paints, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons,
8.4.7
On-site 1 Sewage treatment works/ storm tanks facility
Railway
c1896-c1970
Off-site 3 Motor car repairing works and garage (180m north) 4 Corrugated paper works (adjacent north) Motor car engineering works (adjacent north west) Motor coach works (80m north)
c1915 -c1938
c1915-c1935
c1915-c1920
c1935
Page 77
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ref Item Inferred date of operation
Section 8: Land quality Potentially contaminative substances associated with item solvents, de-greasers, cutting oils, mineral oil. Heavy metals, asbestos, PCBs, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Pathogens Chlorinated hydrocarbons Oils, fats, hydrocarbons Heavy metals, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Heavy metals, asbestos, PCBs, total petroleum hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Heavy metals, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Heavy metals, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Heavy metals, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Heavy metals, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Heavy metals, paints, asbestos, TPH, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, solvents, de-greasers, cutting oils, mineral oil PCBs, oils
8 9 10
Engineering works (adjacent north west) Slaughter house (120m north) Laundry (170m north) a) Soap works (205m north) b) Works (205m north) a) Electrical engineering works (adjacent east) b) Works (adjacent east)
c1935
c1935 c1935 c1935-c1955 c1983-c1986
11
c1935-c1955
c1986-c1987
12
Works (180m north) a) Diesel engineering works (adjacent north) b) Works (adjacent north) Depot (150m east and 185m east) Garages x2 (adjacent south and 40m south)
c1935
13
c1954-c1955
c1983-present
14
c1954-c1989
15
c1954-c1983
16
Electrical substation (5m south)
c1954-c1955
Page 78
In addition to the above, a clay tiles manufacturer 50m west of the site was identified by historical building plans as having existed in 1868 but not identified in the OS mapping. The Acton Storm Tanks site was developed as a sewage treatment works in the mid 1890s; this included filter beds in a similar position to the present storage tanks. The filter beds and other infrastructure such as a pump house were extended to cover the majority of the existing site throughout the 20th century and the filter beds were replaced by the existing storm tanks during the 1980s. The western boundary was formerly occupied by a railway which was dismantled in the 1960s/70s. The area adjacent to the north and east of the site has a manufacturing history dating back to the early part of the 20th Century, although to the east some of the area has now been redeveloped for housing. Land immediately to the south and west was first developed for housing and a garage (presumably a vehicle repair or sale garage) in the 1930s, prior to which the area was open fields. Geology and hydrogeology Data from British Geological Survey indicates the geological succession summarised in Vol 7 Table 8.4.2. At the time of writing no site specific investigations were available for review; however, ground investigations are being undertaken in 2011, and these findings will be reported in the ES. Controlled waters (ie, surface water and groundwater) can potentially represent a pathway for the spread of mobile contaminants as well as being a sensitive environmental receptor. The Environment Agency (EA) Aquifer designation maps have been used to classify the geological units according to their aquifer status which is also presented in the table below. The site is classified by the EA as not being within a source protection zone for groundwater that is extracted for potable supply. Vol 7 Table 8.4.2 Land quality summary of site geology and hydrogeology
8.4.9
8.4.10 8.4.11
8.4.12
8.4.13
8.4.14
8.4.15
Geological unit/ strata
Description
Approximate depth below ground level (m) 0 to 5.0m 0 to 7.0m
Hydrogeological classification
Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits
Clayey and sandy silt Medium dense to dense to dense sand and gravel (predominantly quartz sand and flint gravel). Silty and locally
Unproductive strata Unproductive strata in this area - likely due to their lateral and vertical variability.
London Clay
1 to 50m
Unproductive strata
Page 79
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Formation sandy clay with selenite crystals. Unexploded ordnance 8.4.16
During World Wars I and II, the London area was subject to bombing. In some cases bombs failed to detonate on impact. During construction works, unexploded ordnance or bombs (UXO) are sometimes encountered and require safe disposal. A desk based assessment for UXO threat was undertaken in preparation for ground investigation works at the proposed development site. The UXO assessment report reviews information sources such as the Ministry of Defence (MoD), Public Records Office and the Port of London Authority (PLA). The report establishes that the nearby areas suffered some of the lowest bomb densities in London. Taking into account the findings of this study and the known extent of the proposed works, it is considered that there is an overall low to low/medium threat from UXO at the Acton Storm Water Tanks site. Thames Tunnel ground investigation To date no ground investigation at the Acton Storm Tanks site has been undertaken by the Thames Tunnel project. Ground investigation is scheduled for completion in 2011 and a summary of relevant results to be included within the ES. Locations of proposed boreholes are shown in Vol 7 Figure 8.4.2. Vol 7 Figure 8.4.2 Land quality proposed borehole locations (see Volume 7 Figures document) Other environmental records
8.4.17
8.4.18
8.4.19
8.4.20
8.4.21
Details of environmental records for the vicinity of the site held by the EA and other bodies, partially sourced from Landmark Information Group, have been collected. Significant records are discussed in further detail after the summary table, below. Items in the table are also shown in Vol 7 Figure 8.4.3. Vol 7 Figure 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites (see Volume 7 Figures document)
8.4.22
Vol 7 Table 8.4.3 Land quality environmental records and waste sites Activity Licensed Industrial Activities Hazardous Substance Sites Pollution incidents to controlled water On-site 0 0 0 Within 250m of site boundary 0 0 0
Page 80
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Activity Local Authority Pollution Prevention / Controls Waste Treatment and Disposal Sites Landfill sites Industrial authorisations (IPPC, COMAH, PPC) Past Potential Contaminated Uses Licensed Abstractions 8.4.23 On-site 0 0 0 0 1 0
Section 8: Land quality Within 250m of site boundary 3 0 0 0 6 0
Within a 250m radius of the Acton Storm Tanks site, records have identified three Local Authority Pollution Prevention and Controls. One of these is 200m to the SW of the site on the corner of Hamilton Road and Southfield Road and relates to a dry cleaning shop. The other two are to the NE of the site on Larden Road near Valetta Road approximately 160m and 175m from the site. Of the two nearest entries, one is related to the former factory site and the other entry is unclear. The single past on-site contaminative use relates to the Acton Storm Tanks facility. The remaining entries and associated contamination are detailed in Vol 7 Table 8.4.1. Given the underlying geology none of the entries are judged to have posed a significant risk to the Acton Storm Tanks site. Technical engagement The site is located within the LB of Ealing although the eastern boundary with Warple Way marks the boundary with the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham and the LB of Hounslow is located immediately to the south. Each of the three local authorities was consulted on information they hold in relation to land condition. The London Boroughs of Ealing and Hounslow both stated that they did not hold any pertinent data in respect of the site or search area. The LB of Hammersmith and Fulham holds extensive information relating to the redevelopment of land adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Acton Storm Tanks Facility and this is summarised below. The adjacent site has a long history of manufacture of vehicle components (from the period 1904 to 2004). The site was an Authorised Part B process for plastic and metal coating. Council records indicate that a number of potentially polluting sources existed at the site including: underground and above ground storage tanks (storing fuel oils, cutting oils, cyanide, acids and paint, waste oils, solvents, degreasing solvents); an effluent treatment plant contained sodium hypochlorite and sodium
8.4.24
8.4.25
8.4.26
8.4.27
8.4.28 8.4.29
8.4.30
Page 81
hydroxide; a plating shop with acids, alkalis, hexavalent chromium and cyanide. 8.4.31 The site was decommissioned and demolished by the end of 2007. Ground investigations found a variable depth of made ground from 0m to 3.5m over River Terrace Deposits to 7m over London Clay. A continuous groundwater body was not proved beneath the site. Hydrocarbons were found to have impacted the groundwater beneath the site and, in agreement with the EA, remediation was implemented in the form of a dual phase vapour extraction to improve the condition of groundwater and diminish the free phase hydrocarbons. Off-site migration was assessed in monitoring wells to the south east (in the direction of the known hydraulic gradient). No hydrocarbon migration was noted. The planning condition relating to remediation of the site was not fully discharged as of January 2011.
8.4.32
8.4.33
8.5
8.5.1 8.5.2
Assessment year: construction For land quality, the assessment is based on the likely baseline conditions which would be experienced on commencement of Year 1 of construction. It is not anticipated that land quality baseline conditions would alter significantly from those described in Section 8.4 by the commencement of the construction.
Development of conceptual model

8.5.3 A key element of the Preliminary Risk Assessment for Land Quality is the development of source-pathway-receptor conceptual model which aims to understand the presence and significance of potentially complete pollutant linkages. The methodology for undertaking this analysis is provided in Volume 5. The following section outlines the sources, pathways and receptors which are relevant to the land quality assessment at the site. Sources of contamination 8.5.6 8.5.7 The following sources of contamination have been identified: On site: a. existing Acton Storm Tanks facility (including above ground fuel tank and previous use as sewage treatment facility) b. possible unexploded ordnance c. 8.5.8 naturally occurring sulphate within the London Clay Formation. off site a. adjacent contaminated site (gas/ vapour risk only).
8.5.4 8.5.5
Page 82
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Pathways 8.5.9
The following pathways for contamination have been identified: a. human uptake through: ingestion of exposed contaminated soils during construction; inhalation of soil/dust, volatilised compounds or ground gas via migration through permeable strata and conduits; or dermal contact with exposed soils during construction b. vertical migration of contaminants along preferential pathways created by excavation of shaft c. direct contact of soils with construction materials d. gas/vapour migration through pipes/foundations, along piles and into structures e. accidental detonation of UXO during GI or construction activities. Receptors
8.5.10
The following receptors have been identified: a. construction workers b. end users c. nearby residents d. built environment e. controlled waters.
8.5.11
The sensitivity of receptors is defined in Vol 7 Table 8.5.2.
Construction assessment results

8.5.12 The following section discusses the potential impacts (Vol 7 Table 8.5.1) on receptors as a result of the existing land quality conditions at the site, and the associated significance of effects (Vol 7 Table 8.5.3). Impacts and effects upon construction workers 8.5.13 Desk based information suggests that the site may be contaminated as a result of historical uses. Construction workers may be in contact with soils or other contaminated materials during demolition, groundworks and shaft excavation works and therefore there is the potential for human uptake (via ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact) of contaminants, although any effects are likely to be short term only. Overall the magnitude of the impact is likely to be negligible, giving a slight effect (not significant). Impacts and effects upon off-site receptors 8.5.15 The construction works may result in the creation of new pathways for contaminants to migrate to adjacent sites eg, via wind-borne dust during excavated material handling and storage. Therefore, whilst the sensitivity of adjacent residential sites is moderate to high, the impact from this would be negligible giving a slight effect (not significant).
8.5.14
8.5.16
Page 83
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Impacts and effects upon built environment 8.5.17
High levels of certain contaminants, if contained within subsurface materials, can lead to impacts on the built environment (both existing and proposed), including chemical attack on buried concrete structures and the permeation of water supply pipelines. Additionally detonation of potential unidentified, buried UXO could represent a risk during construction. The built environment is a low to moderate sensitivity receptor and following the proposed procedures, such as site investigation, UXO surveys and remediation, the magnitude of impact is judged to be negligible, giving a negligible effect (not significant). Impacts and effects on controlled waters There is the potential for the disturbance of contaminated infrastructure (eg, historic sewage works sub structures), as well as excavation of made ground and natural materials which may be contaminated from previous and current site uses. This could result in the contamination of shallow perched groundwater that could spread through the lateral and vertical migration of contaminants along newly created preferential pathways (such as service trenches or shaft construction). The sensitivity of the underlying unproductive strata is low and the magnitude of this impact, following the proposed site investigation and remediation (as necessary), is negligible, resulting in a negligible effect (not significant). Vol 7 Table 8.5.1 Land quality impacts and magnitudes construction Impact Health impacts on construction workers Magnitude, and justification Negligible measures such as use of correct PPE, safety briefings and remediation of contaminated soils reduce impacts substantially. Negligible - CoCP measures such as dust suppression, correct storage of potentially contaminated materials, wheel washing at site entrance reduce impacts substantially. Negligible - CoCP measures such as UXO specialists employed to advise staff reduce impacts substantially. Negligible - measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and reduce impacts substantially.
8.5.18
Off-site receptors
Damage to built environment existing structures
Damage to built environment proposed Structures
Page 84
Vol 7 Table 8.5.2 Land quality receptor values/sensitivities construction Receptor Construction workers Off-site receptors Built environment - existing Built environment - proposed Value/sensitivity and justification High intensive below ground construction Moderate to high residential properties very close Low infrastructure Low infrastructure
Vol 7 Table 8.5.3 Land quality significance of effects - construction Effect Slight effect on off-site receptors Negligible effect on built environment - existing Negligible effect on built environment - proposed Significance, and justification Not significant Not significant Not significant Slight effect on construction workers Not significant
8.6
8.6.1
Operational effects are likely to include potential exposure to end users from contaminated soils and for the leakage of sewage from the shaft into the surrounding soils. The following section discusses the potential impacts (Vol 7 Table 8.6.1) on receptors (Vol 7 Table 8.6.2) as a result of the existing land quality conditions at the site, and the associated significance of effects (Vol 7 Table 8.6.3). Impacts and effects upon built environment The principal impact relates to the potential for the degradation of new structures by attack from deleterious substances which may in turn reduce the integrity of the structure (and thus promote leakage of the shaft contents). The built environment is a low sensitivity receptor and with the inclusion of the proposed design measures and soil remediation (as necessary), the impact of the effect is low giving a negligible effect overall (not significant). Impacts and effects on controlled waters As discussed there is the potential for substances within the soil to reduce the integrity of concrete structures which could lead to leakage from the shaft. There is also the potential for loss of sewage from associated operational failures. With the proposed measures (soil remediation, ground investigation to assess concrete mix design), as well as detailed shaft lining design and
8.6.2
8.6.3
8.6.4
8.6.5
8.6.6
Page 85
operational control systems to minimise or prevent leaks from equipment, the magnitude of impact is likely to be negligible to low. The unproductive strata that is present beneath the site is a low sensitivity receptor giving a negligible impact overall (not significant). Impacts and effects on future site users 8.6.7 The future site users include maintenance workers who would be working on the site occasionally and other staff within the Acton Storm Tanks facility. These are low sensitivity receptors. The principal risk would relate to exposure to previously contaminated soils and groundwater (via ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation pathways). Shaft design (including secondary lining) would ensure that any outflow from the shaft is unlikely and that there is a negligible impact to the identified receptors giving a slight effect (not significant) on the build environment and a negligible effect (not significant) on site end users. Vol 7 Table 8.6.1 Land quality impacts and magnitudes - operation Impact Health impacts on site end users Magnitude, and justification Negligible design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and provision of capping layers as appropriate Negligible - design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and concrete mix design reduce risks substantially. Negligible - design measures such as remediation of heavily contaminated soils and concrete mix design reduce risks substantially.
8.6.8
Damage to built environment proposed structures
Damage to built environment existing structures
Vol 7 Table 8.6.2 Land quality receptor values/sensitivities operation Receptor Site end users Built Environment - existing Built Environment - proposed Value/sensitivity and justification Low industrial/infrastructure end use Low industrial/infrastructure Low industrial/infrastructure
Vol 7 Table 8.6.3 Land quality significance of effects - operation Effect Negligible effect on end users Significance, and justification Not significant
Page 86
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Effect Slight effect on built environment Existing Slight effect on built environment Proposed
Section 8: Land quality Significance, and justification Not significant Not significant
8.7
8.7.1 8.7.2
Construction All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to land quality are provided in Volume 2. The assessment has not identified the need for further site specific mitigation measures during the construction phase. Operation The assessment has not identified the need for further site specific mitigation measures during the operational phase.
8.7.3
Page 87
8.8
Vol 7 Table 8.8.1 Land quality significance of effects - construction Significance Not significant Not required Not required Not required Not required Not significant Not significant Not significant Mitigation
Assessment summary
Residual significance No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Receptor Construction workers
Effect Slight effect on construction workers
Off-site receptors residents and workers
Slight effect on off-site receptors
Built environment existing
Negligible effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed
Negligible effect on built environment - proposed
Vol 7 Table 8.8.2 Land quality assessment summary - operation Significance Not significant Not significant Not significant Mitigation Not required Not required Not required Residual significance No residual effects identified No residual effects identified No residual effects identified
Receptor Site end users
Effect Negligible effect on End Users
Built environment existing
Negligible effect on built environment - existing
Built environment proposed
Negligible to slight effect on built environment proposed
Page 88
8.9
8.9.1
New data from the 2011 site investigations (including new boreholes and foreshore samplings) will be reported in the ES and the assessment updated as necessary. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for land quality within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES. Impacts on groundwater, surface water and aquatic ecology will be assessed and reported in the ES.
8.9.2 8.9.3 8.9.4
Page 89
Section 9: Noise and vibration
9 9.1
9.1.1 9.1.2
Noise and vibration Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant noise and vibration effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. This section includes an assessment of the following: a. Noise and vibration from the construction site activities b. Noise from construction traffic on roads outside the site c. Noise and vibration from the operation of the site.
9.1.3
The drive for the main tunnel terminates at this site. Noise and vibration from the tunnelling activities associated with the main tunnel are considered in (Volume 6).
9.2
9.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to noise and vibration are as follows. Construction Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to reduce noise and vibration impacts include: a. careful selection of construction plant (conforming to the relevant SI), construction methods and programming b. equipment to be suitably sited so as to minimise noise impact on sensitive receptors c. use of site enclosures, and temporary stockpiles, where practicable and necessary, to provide acoustic screening
9.2.2
d. choice of routes and programming for the transportation of construction materials, excavated material and personnel to and from the site e. careful programming so that activities which may generate significant noise are planned with regard to local occupants and sensitive receptors. 9.2.3 9.2.4 It has been assumed for the purpose of this assessment that the hoarding height would be 2.8m at this location. Where the need for additional noise control measures (beyond standard best practicable means measures described in the CoCP) have been identified, these have not been assumed for the purposes of the assessment. Where the assessment indicates that these are likely to be required, this information has been added to the section on mitigation. For the purposes of the noise and vibration assessment the construction activities have been grouped into the following stages of work: a. enabling works (including demolition)
9.2.5
Page 90
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks b. shaft construction c. CSO interception
d. completion work (including landscaping, and construction and fit-out of permanent facility). 9.2.6 The site would also be a reception site for the TBM being driven from Carnwath Road Riverside. The noise and vibration associated with this phase of the works are to be addressed in Volume 6. The above ground works (stages a and b) have the potential to create airborne noise and vibration impacts. These are all scheduled to be carried out within the standard working hours. Some noise would be generated for stages c and d, however as stage c would be mostly carried out below ground level, impacts from this stage are considered to be much lower. Stage d is likely to be much smaller in scale than the other activities considered here. Plant schedules for stages c and d (shaft fit-out and completion respectively) are not available at this point in the design so have not been assessed as part of this assessment. However, these stages are likely to be much smaller in scale than the rest of the works and would not involve heavy construction operations. Much of the shaft fit-out works would be underground works in any case. All of the stages would be carried out during standard (core) hours as identified in Vol 7 Table 3.3.1. As such, only daytime working is considered at this location. The potential for any associated activities at surface levels will be examined further after this report when more information is available, and reported in the ES. The strategic transport network would be used to move materials to and from the site. Construction vehicles leaving the site would use the A4020/The Vale (north of the site). Access to and from the A4020 would use the existing one way system via Warple Way and Stanley Gardens. Estimated vehicle numbers are presented in Section 3.3. Operation 9.2.12 The permanent installation would have a ventilation column and separate ventilation building, which would house electrical and control equipment. This equipment would be required to operate under various different scenarios dependent on the operation of the tunnel, with the potential to operate at any time of the day or night. The plant installed and the cascade events (tunnel filling) have the potential to create noise and vibration impacts.
9.2.7
9.2.8
9.2.9
9.2.10
9.2.11
9.3
9.3.1
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below.
Page 91
Vol 7 Table 9.3.1 Noise and vibration stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Ealing Comment Noise and Vibration impacts to residential properties on Canham Road Concerns regarding noise and vibration resulting from drilling through the present storm tanks at Acton Response Considered within this document
LB Ealing
There is the potential for increased noise in breaking through the surface layer relative to other sites. The illustrative construction method is not sufficiently detailed to allow a quantitative assessment for this report this will be assessed in the ES.
Baseline 9.3.2 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Construction 9.3.3 The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. At this location, the construction activities have been assessed over a three and a half year construction period. Operation 9.3.4 The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

9.3.5 Noise-related environmental design measures have been assumed as defined in the CoCP. Those of relevance to noise and vibration are listed in para.9.2.2 above. The assessment has been carried out based on the assumption that the noisiest two activities within any one stage could potentially occur onsite simultaneously for the duration of the stage. This is an extremely conservative approach, as the activities are unlikely to last the duration of any one stage. At the current level of construction planning, this is considered a reasonable assumption for the purposes of the assessment and would be refined as the construction methodology develops. The assessment of construction traffic effects has been based on predicted numbers of construction traffic movements (presented in Section
9.3.6
9.3.7
Page 92
3), using professional judgement at this stage. This assessment will be revisited and presented in the ES upon receipt of baseline traffic data. 9.3.8 While it is considered that there is a possibility for noise and vibration effects arising from water cascading during tunnel filling events at receptors very close to drop shafts, it has not been possible to adequately assess this as part of this assessment. The likely noise and vibration emissions however be estimated as the cascade design develops and will be reported in the ES.
9.4
9.4.1
Baseline conditions
The following section reviews the setting and receptor characteristics of the site for the purposes of this assessment. The site is located within the existing Thames Water operational site, in the LB of Ealing. The site is bounded by commercial properties to the north, and residences to the west, east and south. The nearest residences to the main works are two properties on Canham Road which lie within the LB of Ealing. To the south and southwest of the site are terraced residential properties on Worcester Drive (5-8) and Greenend Road (2-26 and 46-54). The nearest residential properties to the east of the site are the apartment block Tesla Court (1-40) on Warple Way (part of the Factory Quarter development). Further southeast are the apartment blocks 1-66 Edison Court and 250269 Longford Court on Warple Way. The residential properties selected for the noise and vibration assessment are identified in Vol 7 Table 9.4.1 below (and shown in plan view in, Vol 7 Figure 9.4.1). These were selected as they are representative of the noise range of noise climates where sensitive receptors are situated around the site. The approximate numbers of properties affected at each location is indicated. Vol 7 Figure 9.4.1 Noise and vibration residential receptors (see Volume 7 Figures document)
9.4.2 9.4.3 9.4.4
9.4.5 9.4.6
9.4.7
Vol 7 Table 9.4.2 also includes a non-residential noise sensitive receptor in the vicinity of the development. This is Stanley Studios, a recording studio on Canham Road. A baseline noise survey has been carried out around the site according to the baseline measurement method set out in Volume 6, Section 2. The specific details of this survey, such as the measurement times, locations measured results and local conditions, are described in Appendix C. The summarised noise level results are shown below in the table below.
9.4.8
Page 93
Vol 7 Table 9.4.1 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor ambient noise levels Ref Receptor addresses Local authority Measured average daytime ambient noise level, dBLAeq, 60* 53* Noise survey location
AS1 AS2
Stanley Studios 2-12 Greenend Road 14-26 Greenend Road 46-54 Greenend Road 5-8 Worcester Drive 250-269 Longford Court 1-66 Edison Court 1-40 Tesla Court 3,5 Canham Road
LB of Ealing LB of Ealing
PEG1X Noise 1 PEG1X Noise 2
AS3
LB of Ealing
53*
PEG1X Noise 2
AS4
LB of Ealing
53*
PEG1X Noise 2
AS5
LB of Ealing
53*
PEG1X Noise 4
AS6
LB of Hammersmith & Fulham LB of Hammersmith & Fulham LB of Hammersmith & Fulham LB of Ealing
62*
PEG1X Noise 3
AS7
56*
PEG1X Noise 5
AS8
56*
PEG1X Noise 5
AS9
*
54*
PEG1X Noise LT
Facade corrected level
9.4.9 9.4.10
For vibration, significance is not based on existing vibration levels but an absolute level, considered in combination with other value judgements. The site at present does not have appreciable levels of vibration. It is considered that the levels of vibration around the site are low at present, and they are unlikely to rise for any reason between the present time and the base case.
Page 94
Receptor sensitivity
9.4.11 The noise sensitive receptors have been assessed according to the methodology outlined in Volume 5. The sensitivities of all assessed receptors are presented in Vol 7 Table 9.4.2. All residential properties have been regarded as having high sensitivity. The remaining assessed building is a studio, which is also considered to be of high sensitivity. Vol 7 Table 9.4.2 Noise and vibration sensitive receptors Ref Receptor addresses Building Use Sensitivity No. of noise sensitive properties/ areas Studios Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential High High High High High High High 1 6 6 5 4 19 66 40 2
9.4.12
AS1 AS2 AS3 AS4 AS5 AS6 AS7 AS8 AS9 9.4.13
Stanley Studios 2-12 Greenend Road 14-26 Greenend Road 46-54- Greenend Road 5-8 Worcester Drive 250-269 Longford Court 1-66 Edison Court 1-40 Tesla Court 3,5 Canham Road
The criteria at residences for determining the significance of noise effects from construction sources are dependent upon the existing ambient noise levels. From the ambient noise levels measured during the baseline survey, the assessment category and assessment noise threshold levels for the receptors near the site are as shown in
Page 95
Vol 7 Table 9.4.3. As described in the assessment methodology, this follows the ABC categorisation method for determining construction noise significance defined in BS 5228:2009 27.
Page 96
Vol 7 Table 9.4.3 Noise and vibration sensitive receptor data construction Ref Noise sensitive receptor Ambient noise level, rounded to nearest 5dBLAeq* 60 55 55 55 55 60 55 55 55
28
Assessment category*
Significance criterion threshold level**, dBLAeq, 10hour n/a2 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65
AS1 AS2 AS3 AS4 AS5 AS6 AS7 AS8 AS9

* **
Stanley Studios 2-12 Greenend Road 14-26 Greenend Road 46-54 Greenend Road 5-8 Worcester Drive 250-269 Longford Court 1-66 Edison Court 1-40 Tesla Court 3,5 Canham Road
n/a2 A A A A A A A A
From ABC method BS5228:2009
ABC method BS5228:2009 does not apply directly to non-residential receptors
9.5
9.5.1

The construction noise base case for the assessment is expected to be as measured during the baseline noise surveys conducted in 2011. Where there is a variation in the conditions during the first year of construction, it is likely that the noise levels would increase very slightly compared to the measured data from 2011 (due to natural traffic growth), and as such, an assessment based on data from 2011 would be worst case. It is not considered that there are any other circumstances at this location that would cause the baseline noise levels at the receptor locations to change significantly between 2011 and the first year of construction. For vibration, it is considered that the levels of vibration around the site are low at present, and they are unlikely to change between the present time and the future base case. The development case is therefore assumed to be the base case as identified in 2011 plus any additional noise and vibration sources associated with the project.
9.5.2
9.5.3
Page 97
9.5.4 Predictions of construction noise have been carried out based on information available to date on construction, as presented in Section 3 of this volume. Construction noise 9.5.5 The results of the assessment of construction noise are presented in Vol 7 Table 9.5.1 to Vol 7 Table 9.5.9. Stanley Studios 9.5.6 The upper floor of Stanley Studios would overlook the site. It should be noted that the BS5228 ABC method does not apply directly to nonresidential receptors; hence impact has been evaluated based on the absolute noise level and the predicted noise level relative to the ambient noise. The increase above existing ambient noise levels is likely to cause disturbance at ground floor level, and is also considered to potentially cause greater impact on upper floors given the predicted noise level. An adverse impact is expected to occur at this location which could potentially cause some disruption to this facility given the nature of its use. Vol 7 Table 9.5.1 Construction noise at AS1, Stanley Studios Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 1 Ambient baseline dBLAeq Value/ sensitivity High Magnitude/ justification
Stanley Studios Activity Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq)
Ground floor Enabling works Shaft Sinking First Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
*
74
60
+14 dB increase relative to baseline ambient noise level over 4 months + 12 dB increase relative to baseline ambient noise level over 7 months +24 dB increase relative to baseline ambient noise level over 4 months + 22 dB increase relative to baseline ambient noise level over 7 months
72
60
84
60
82
60
Construction noise only
**
Assessment floor level is for a worst case scenario, which is not necessarily the highest floor level.
Page 98
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks 2 -12 Greenend Road 9.5.7
At these residences, the impact criterion threshold is exceeded at both floors for the duration of the works. The exceedence is much higher on the upper floor compared to the lower floor. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening on the upper floor of the building and the proximity of the building to the works. Based on the BS5228 criterion for residential properties this would be rated as a significant impact for both floors for all stages of the work Vol 7 Table 9.5.2 Construction noise at AS2, 2-12 Greenend Road Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 6 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
2-12 Greenend Road Activity Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq)
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq +3 +1 +13 +11 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking 1st Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
* **
68 66 78 76
65 65 65 65
14 -26 Greenend Road 9.5.8 At these residences, the impact criterion threshold is exceeded at both floors for the duration of the works. The exceedence is much higher on the upper floor compared to the lower floor. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening on upper floor of the building and the proximity of the building to the works. Based on the BS5228 criterion this would be rated as a significant impact for both floors for all stages of the work
Page 99
Vol 7 Table 9.5.3 Construction noise at AS3, 14-26 Greenend Road Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 6 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq +1 -2 +11 +8 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking 1st Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
* **
66 63 76 73
65 65 65 65
46-54 Greenend Road 9.5.9 At these residences, the impact criterion threshold is exceeded at both floors for the duration of the works. The exceedences occur only on the upper floor. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening on upper floor of the building and the proximity of the building to the works. Based on the BS5228 criterion this would be rated as a significant impact for all stages of the work. Vol 7 Table 9.5.4 Construction noise at AS4, 46-54 Greenend Road Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 5 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -1 Approx. activity duration, months 4
Ground Floor Enabling Works 64 65
Page 100
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Receptor
Section 9: Noise and vibration No. of noise sensitive properties 5 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -4 +9 +6 Approx. activity duration, months 7 4 7
Shaft Sinking 1st Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking

* *
61 74 71
65 65 65
5-8 Worcester Drive 9.5.10 At these residential receptors, the impact criterion is not exceeded at any floor for the duration of the works. No significant noise impacts are predicted at these properties. Vol 7 Table 9.5.5 Construction noise at AS5, 5-8 Worcester Drive Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 4 Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq) Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
5-8 Worcester Drive Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -12 -15 -2 -5 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking First Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
*
53 50 63 60
65 65 65 65
Construction only
Page 101

**
250-269 Longford Court 9.5.11 9.5.12 At this receptor, the impact criterion is not exceeded. It is therefore considered that there is no significant impact at this receptor. Vol 7 Table 9.5.6 Construction noise at AS6, 250-269 Longford Court Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 19 Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
250-269 Longford Court Activity Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq)
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -11 -13 -1 -5 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking 4th Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
* **
54 52 64 60
65 65 65 65
1-66 Edison Court 9.5.13 At this receptor, the impact criterion is exceeded at the upper floors during the enabling works. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening at the upper floors of the building and the proximity of the building to the works. There is no predicted impact at the ground floor level. It is therefore considered that there is a significant impact at this receptor.
9.5.14
Page 102
Vol 7 Table 9.5.7 Construction noise at AS7, 1-66 Edison Court Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 66 Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq) Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
1-66 Edison Court Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -7 -10 +3 0 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking Fourth Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
* **
58 55 68 65
65 65 65 65
1-40 Tesla Court 9.5.15 At this receptor, the impact criterion is exceeded at the upper floors for the duration of the works. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening at the upper floors of the building and the proximity of the building to the works. It is therefore considered that there is a significant impact at this receptor. Vol 7 Table 9.5.8 Construction noise at AS8, 1-40 Tesla Court Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 40 Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq) Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
9.5.16
1-40 Tesla Court Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq -4 -7 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking 61 58 65 65
Page 103
Section 9: Noise and vibration No. of noise sensitive properties 40 Impact (noise level*, dBLAeq) Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
1-40 Tesla Court Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq +6 +3 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7
Fourth Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking

* **
71 68
65 65
3, 5 Canham Road 9.5.17 At these residences, the impact criterion threshold is exceeded at the upper floors during all works. This is due to the absence of attenuation from screening on the upper floor of the building and the very close proximity of the building to the works. Based on the BS5228 criterion this would be rated as a significant impact for all stages of the work. Vol 7 Table 9.5.9 Construction noise at AS8, 3-5 Canham Road Receptor No. of noise sensitive properties 2 Impact (total noise level*, dBLAeq) Significance criterion threshold level, dBLAeq Value/sensitivity
3,5 Canham Road Activity
High Magnitude/ justification Excess above criterion, dBLAeq +1 -2 +11 +8 Approx. activity duration, months 4 7 4 7
Ground Floor Enabling Works Shaft Sinking First Floor** Enabling Works Shaft Sinking
*
66 63 76 73
65 65 65 65
Construction noise plus measured baseline ambient
Page 104

**
Construction traffic 9.5.18 Baseline traffic data collection is ongoing and is thus not reported in this assessment, and therefore although peak traffic movements are known it is not possible to calculate the change in noise level that would arise at the identified receptor locations. A qualitative assessment has therefore been undertaken to consider the likelihood of a significant impact given current traffic levels and considering the proposed peak daily lorry movements. The proposed peak number of additional traffic movements is shown in Section 3.3. The noise impact associated with the small proportionate increase in HGV traffic relative to existing traffic levels is therefore likely to be slight in magnitude. As discussed above this is a qualitative assessment made in the absence of traffic data and would be assessed in more detail in the ES. Construction vibration 9.5.20 The assessment of construction vibration considers events which have the potential to result in damage to buildings or structures and human response to vibration separately using different parameters. The assessment of potential construction vibration impacts at adjacent buildings / structures has been assessed using the predicted Peak Particle Velocity (PPV), according to the criteria given in Volume 5. The results of the assessment of construction vibration are presented in the table below. Vol 7 Table 9.5.10 Vibration impacts and magnitudes - construction Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted PPV across all activities, mm/s) 1.6 Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification
9.5.19
9.5.21
AS1
Stanley Studios
High
No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic
AS2
2-12 Greenend Road
2.0
High
AS3
14-26 Greenend Road
1.4
High
Page 105
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted PPV across all activities, mm/s) 1.0
Section 9: Noise and vibration Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification
damage AS4 46- 54 Greenend Road High No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage No impact: Below threshold for potential cosmetic damage
AS5
5-8 Worcester Drive
0.4
High
AS6
250-269 Longford 0.4 Court
High
AS7
1-66 Edison Court
0.4
High
AS8
1-40 Tesla Court
0.7
High
AS9
3,5 Canham Road
4.5
High
9.5.22 9.5.23
The vibration levels reported here are well below the levels likely to cause building damage. The assessment of potential construction vibration impacts due to human response at neighbouring receptors has been assessed using the predicted estimated Vibration Dose Value (eVDV). The results from the assessment are presented in the table below.
Page 106
Vol 7 Table 9.5.11 Vibration human response during construction Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted VDV across all activities, m/s1.75) * 0.45 Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification**
AS1
Stanley Studios
High
Impact: Nonresidential hence assessed as Low probability of adverse Comment Possible Impact: Adverse Comment Possible Impact: Low Probability of Adverse Comment Impact: Low Probability of Adverse Comment No impact: Below Low Probability of Adverse Comment No impact: Below Low Probability of Adverse Comment No impact: Below Low Probability of Adverse Comment No impact: Below Low Probability of Adverse
AS2
2-12 Greenend Road
0.58
High
AS3
14-26 Greenend Road
0.37
High
AS4
46- 54 Greenend Road
0.26
High
AS5
5-8 Worcester Drive
0.03
High
AS6
250-269 Longford 0.04 Court
High
AS7
1-66 Edison Court
0.08
High
AS8
1-40 Tesla Court
0.15
High
Page 107
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ref Receptor Impact (highest predicted VDV across all activities, m/s1.75) * 1.78
Section 9: Noise and vibration Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification**
Comment AS9 3,5 Canham Road High Impact: Adverse Comment Probable
Worst affected floor Categorisation of magnitude as defined in Volume 5 Section 2
**
9.5.24
The predicted eVDV levels range from below the Low Probability of Adverse Comment to Adverse Comment Probable as described in Volume 5 Section 8. It should be noted that these predicted levels are based upon the worst case conditions that may arise during vibration intense activities within the site compound. The precise methods used for this procedure would be considered in more detail in the ES to verify the predictions. However, this report assessment indicates that there is a risk of relatively high exposure levels and in order to reduce the levels as far as possible, the methodology for providing compaction at this location will need to be developed carefully as the design progresses. Summary of construction effects The table below outlines the significance of effects from all sources of noise and vibration based on the extent of impacts identified above. As described in the general methodology Volume 5 Section 2, the significance of noise effects is based on the predicted impact and other factors, ie, the construction noise level relative to the significance threshold, the numbers and types of receptors affected and the duration of impact. The significance of vibration effects is assessed on the magnitude of exposure relative to guidance thresholds for disturbance as well as other factors including the number of affected receptors and their uses. Vol 7 Table 9.5.12 Noise and vibration summary of construction effects Receptor Stanley Studios 2-12 Greenend Road 14-26 Greenend Road 46-54 Greenend Road Noise Significant Significant Significant Significant Significance Vibration Significant Significant Significant Significant
9.5.25
9.5.26 9.5.27
Page 108
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Receptor 5-8 Worcester Drive 250-269 Longford Court 1-66 Edison Court 1-40 Tesla Court 3-5 Canham Road 9.5.28 Noise Not significant Not significant Significant Significant Significant
Section 9: Noise and vibration Significance Vibration Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Significant
The assessment identifies significant noise effects at all assessed receptor areas except 5-8 Worcester Drive and 250-269 Longford Court. Significant vibration effects are identified at all assessed receptors except, 5-8 Worcester Drive, 1-66 Edison Court and 1-40 Tesla Court. Based on the impacts assessed there are no significant effects predicted for construction traffic.
9.5.29
9.6
9.6.1
Operational assessment Operational base and development cases

As discussed in para. 9.5.1, there is likely to be only a small variation in baseline noise levels between the baseline survey and the future base case year. The noise levels measured in 2011 are likely to form the basis of a conservative assessment as road traffic noise levels would increase along with traffic increases. For vibration, no change is assumed between the present time and future base case.
9.6.2
Operational effects
9.6.3 Noise control measures will be included on all plant items as part of the design process to limit noise increases to within appropriate noise limits to avoid disturbance. These limits will help inform the ongoing design of the project, will be relative to the existing background noise levels at each receptor using the methodology in BS4142 (1997) 29 and will be established in negotiation with the local authority to ensure the limits proposed are acceptable and achievable. Discussions with the local authority will be ongoing and presented in the ES. It is not possible to quantify the overall change in noise level until this process is complete. However, it is considered that it will be possible to control noise emissions to within appropriate noise limits defined by the local authority to prevent significant effects. Vol 7 Table 9.6.1 contains a summary of the assessment results for the operational noise period (for noise from plant).
9.6.4
Page 109
Vol 7 Table 9.6.1 Noise (airborne) impacts and magnitudes operation Ref Receptor Impact Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact Change in ambient
AS1 Stanley Studios
Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142* Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 High Noise level controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS41421 Noise level High
AS2 2-12 Greenend Road
AS5 5-8 Worcester Drive
AS6 250-269 Longford Court
AS7 1-66 Edison Court
AS8 1-40 Tesla Court
AS9 3,5
Page 110
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ref Receptor Canham Road Impact controlled to prevent adverse impact as per BS4142*
Section 9: Noise and vibration Value/ sensitivity Magnitude and justification noise subject to local authority limits no adverse impact
BS 4142 (1997)29
9.6.5
Through the design process, noise levels would be controlled to meet the limits currently being negotiated with the local authority to prevent adverse impact at sensitive receptors. Therefore, no impacts are identified at this location. As part of the operation of the tunnel, there would need to be routine but infrequent maintenance carried out at the site. A crane would be required for 10 yearly shaft inspections. This would be carried out during normal working hours, using equipment which is likely to increase ambient noise levels. Given the infrequency of this operation, it is considered that a significant noise effect would not occur. Routine inspections, lasting approximately half a day, would occur every six months and would not require heavy plant. As this would be carried out during the daytime with minimal noisy equipment operating over short periods of time, it is considered that further assessment of noise generated by this activity is not required. As no impacts have been identified from the operation of the site, no significant effects have been identified. Vol 7 Table 9.6.2 Noise and vibration significance of effects operation Receptor Significance Noise from surface site ventilation plant Stanley Studios 2-12 Greenend Road 14-26 Greenend Road 46-54 Greenend Road 5-8 Worcester Drive 250-269 Longford Court 1-66 Edison Court 1-40 Tesla Court Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Noise from maintenance operations Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
9.6.6 9.6.7
9.6.8
9.6.9
Page 111
Section 9: Noise and vibration Significance Noise from surface site ventilation plant Noise from maintenance operations Not significant
3,5 Canham Road 9.6.10
Not significant
At this location, no significant effects are predicted at any of the receptors. This is subject to the equipment being specified with appropriate noise control measures to ensure that the targets in BS4142 are met as outlined in Volume 5, Section 2.
9.7
9.7.1 9.7.2

All measures embedded in the draft CoCP of relevance to noise and vibration are found in Section 9.2. Significant effects as a result of construction have been identified at a number of receptors. This is based on a worst case assessment where the two noisiest activities in any stage happen concurrently and over the entire duration of the stage. This is a conservative approach considered appropriate for the level of information provided at this report and will be refined once further information is available at the ES stage. The buildings affected are all either two storeys or more in height, and close to the site, and as such the site hoarding only provides screening to the ground floor of the properties. For all properties with significant noise effects, the hoarding height would need to be extremely high to reduce the noise levels at these properties. It is likely that hoarding at a height to provide effective screening would not be practicable. All stages of works assessed as having the potential to give rise to likely significant effects (enabling works and shaft sinking) would require additional mitigation, if practicable, to supplement the best practicable means (BPM) embedded environmental design measures for all sites. The quantitative assessment has assumed only general BPM measures, as far as it is possible to incorporate these in the noise prediction exercise. These include site boundary screening, careful selection of modern construction plant, and positioning of equipment. To address significant effects, specific solutions will be developed as appropriate to provide additional mitigation targeted on those noise sources generating the highest noise levels at the relevant receptor. For example, within this more detailed mitigation design, the use of localised screens and customised enclosures around the item of plant or the process would be considered. For the purposes of this assessment and at this stage of the design, site specific additional mitigation beyond BPM measures has not been identified in the assessment. However, when the potential mitigation options for the illustrative scheme can be confirmed, this will be presented in the ES.
9.7.3
9.7.4
9.7.5
Page 112
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks 9.7.6 9.7.7
Mitigation of vibration effects is more difficult, owing to the lack of distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, and lack of effective mitigation options. The activity which has been assessed as potentially causing these effects is the compaction of ground around the area. To mitigate this, smaller items of equipment will be selected and the times and duration of these activities controlled to minimise potential disturbance. This would be done in conjunction with community liaison to inform local residents of works, and when their properties are likely to be affected by perceptible vibration levels.
9.7.8
Operational
9.7.9 9.7.10 No significant effects as a result of the operation of the site have been identified; hence no additional mitigation is required at this location. It should be noted that operational plant for the ventilation of the tunnel would be designed to meet noise limits to be agreed with the local authority to avoid significant effects.
Page 113
9.8
Assessment summary
Construction
Mitigation Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. None required None required None required None required Residual significance Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Vol 7 Table 9.8.1 Noise and vibration assessment summary - construction
Receptor
Effect
Significance
Stanley Studios
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Significant
2-12 Greenend Road
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Significant
14-26 Greenend Road
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Significant
46-54 Greenend Road
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Significant
5-8 Worcester Drive
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
Noise
Not significant
250-269 Longford Court
Vibration
Not significant
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 114
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Mitigation Mitigation to be reported in the ES. None required Mitigation to be reported in the ES. None required Mitigation to be reported in the ES. Mitigation to be reported in the ES. n/a Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) n/a Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options) Residual significance Potentially significant (subject to mitigation options)
Effect
Significance
Receptor 1-66 Edison Court
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Not significant
1-40 Tesla Court
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Not significant
3,5 Canham Road
Noise
Significant
Vibration
Significant
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 115
Operation
Mitigation None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required None required n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Residual significance
Vol 7 Table 9.8.2 Noise and vibration assessment summary - operation
Receptor
Effect
Significance
Stanley Studios
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
2-12 Greenend Road
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
14-26 Greenend Road
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
46-54 Greenend Road
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
5-8 Worcester Drive
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
250-269 Longford Court
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
1-66 Edison Court
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
1-40 Tesla Court
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
3,5 Canham Road
Noise
Not significant
Vibration
Not significant
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 116
9.9
9.9.1
The completion of the assessment to an appropriate level of detail is subject to further information on baseline and construction road traffic. When the transport analysis is complete this will be assessed and any effects identified in the ES. The level of detail of this report site assessment reflects the available information on methods and programme. The next stage of the assessment work will be more detailed in profiling the variation in construction noise levels across the programmes of work and the range of receptors at each surface site. It has not been possible to adequately assess the potential for noise and vibration from water cascading down drop shafts during tunnel filling events. The likely noise and vibration emission will be estimated as the design develops and will be included in the ES. As the illustrative construction methodology develops more indepth assessment work for the ES will allow more detailed mitigation design. Following the development of more refined mitigation design as described above, it will be possible to carry out a more detailed assessment of residual effects. The effectiveness of more specific mitigation measures will be fully assessed and reported in the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for noise and vibration within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
9.9.2
9.9.3
9.9.4 9.9.5
9.9.6 9.9.7
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 117
Section 10: Socio-economics
10 10.1
10.1.1 10.1.2
Socio-economics Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant socio-economic effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The section does not include consideration of operational phase effects in socio-economic terms, as no significant effects were scoped in for Acton Storm Tanks during the scoping stage. This is for the following reason: a. Potential air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts during the operational phase are likely to be relatively modest and able to be readily mitigated. As a result, they are unlikely to cause deterioration in the amenity experienced by users of nearby open spaces or nearby residents.
10.2
10.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to socio-economics are as follows. Construction Measures incorporated into the draft CoCP to limit, and in some cases eliminate, significant adverse air quality, noise, vibration, and visual impacts could also reduce socio-economic impacts, particularly amenity impacts. Please see Section 4 (Air quality and odour), Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this volume for detail on the type of measures that may be employed. Both the construction related activities and traffic (including lorry movements) could result in amenity effects being experienced by a range of sensitive receptors in proximity to the proposed activities. Operation As described in Section 10.1, no significant operational effects were scoped in for consideration during the scoping stage.
10.2.2
10.2.3
10.2.4
10.2.5
10.3
10.3.1
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below. Vol 7 Table 10.3.1 Socio-economics stakeholder engagement Organisation LB Ealing Comment Impact of construction working hours in view of proximity Response An outline assessment of potential amenity effects on nearby residential properties and their occupants has been undertaken as
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 118
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks to residential properties Baseline 10.3.2
Section 10: Socio-economics part of this assessment, including consideration of working hours.
The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Construction The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below: a. The assessment years used to consider the potential for socioeconomic effects have covered the period from the establishment of the site and ending approximately three and a half years later. Operation
10.3.3
10.3.4
As explained in Section 10.1, no significant operational effects were scoped in for consideration during the scoping stage.

10.3.5 The following limitations apply to the findings presented within this assessment: a. Preliminary technical assessments of likely significant air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects, and associated design and mitigation measures, have been undertaken by each of those topic areas (see sections 4, 9 and 11 respectively). The socio-economic assessment has been informed by the preliminary findings of these topic assessments. b. Impacts on businesses have not been assessed at this stage due to ongoing discussions between Thames Tunnel and local business owners, and ongoing consideration of whether any significant effects are likely. Pending the results of these discussions and any further information that may be received, assessment of the effects on businesses could be made at a later stage. See Section 10.4 and 10.9.
10.4
Baseline conditions Current conditions

Residential
10.4.1
The Emlyn Gardens Estate and a recently constructed residential-led development, known as The Factory Quarter, are located to the east of the site boundary across Warple Way. Emlyn Gardens Estate consists of five storey local-authority built residential flats. Some units within the western section of the estate overlook Warple Way and the site, however, the majority of units are
10.4.2
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 119
oriented away from the site. The precise number of dwellings in the estate and each building is not known but there are likely to be 10 to 15 dwellings in the north-western wing of the building located closest to the site. 10.4.3 The Factory Quarter contains 450 residential units across seven blocks, as well as multi-use community focused meeting space, retail and commercial space 30. The Factory Quarter development was recently completed and is in the process of being of occupied by residents. Both the local authority flats and the new build flats are approximately five storeys high with windows, and in some cases balconies, overlooking Warple Way and the site. The open nature of the site affords open views across the site for residents. Terraced suburban-style two-storey housing is located to the west of the site boundary on Greenend Road and beyond. The housing is separated from the site by a strip of land running the full length of the site (approximately 15m wide) and is currently used for car parking. The housing faces in the opposite direction, away from the site, and the rear gardens of the terraces are therefore the closest part of the residential properties in relation to the site. There are also approximately five two storey dwellings adjacent to the northern perimeter of the Storm Tanks site on Canham Road. There is some screening provided by fencing and roadways/parking areas between the site and the residential developments to the east and west of the site. There are existing odour issues in the locality associated with the site because of the uncovered storm tanks31. In terms of the potential sensitivity of the occupants of the dwellings in the area, it is considered that overall, residents are likely to be vulnerable to amenity impacts arising from the construction process. This is due to the fact that residents cannot easily take steps to avoid amenity effects that may arise. Residents are likely to be less sensitive to any noise disturbance during the day and more sensitive during the evening and at night-time, particularly during sleeping hours. The sensitivity of residents to amenity impacts may be mediated by character and mix of uses currently existing in the area. Taking these factors into account, and given that the construction processes would be limited to daytime working hours at this site, it is assessed that the residents are likely to have a medium level of sensitivity overall to amenity impacts that may arise as a result of construction activity. Vol 7 Figure 10.4.1 presents a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Vol 7 Figure 10.4.1 Socio-economic context (see Volume 7 Figures document)
10.4.4
10.4.5
10.4.6 10.4.7
10.4.8 10.4.9
10.4.10
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 120
Semi-private amenity space Emlyn Gardens and Factory Quarter 10.4.11 There are two pocket park sized semi-private amenity spaces on the east side of Warple Way. These amenity spaces do not have any status as formal public open spaces. One is within the Emlyn Gardens estate and one is within the newly constructed flats at The Factory Quarter. They are both separated from the site by the concrete panel fence located on the site boundary (approximately 1.8m high). The open space within the Factory Quarter is a small courtyard that is connected to a larger space within the development (this larger space is physically separated and shielded from the Acton Storm Tanks by a substantial medium-rise L-shaped block of flats). In the case of Emlyn Gardens, the amenity space is further separated from the site by a brick fence (approximately 1.5m high) on the estates boundary. Emlyn Garden is grassed; while the amenity space within the Factory Quarter is mostly paved. The design of the amenity spaces and access to them is such that public access is effectively discouraged. On this basis, it is assumed that the spaces are not particularly busy. Accordingly, the number of users that spend time in the open space in order to experience relative tranquillity and solitude and which would be sensitive to potential noise and air quality impacts of the construction process is likely to be relative few. There are also additional alternative areas of semi-private open space and a public pocket park within close proximity (within approximately 100m) to Emlyn Gardens and Factory Quarter. In addition, Wendell Park is within approximately 250m of the site. As discussed above, there have been odour complaints associated with Acton Storm Tanks. Taking the above factors into account including the availability of other amenity and open spaces which could cater to residents recreational needs, and given that the construction processes would be limited to daytime working hours, it is considered that the users of the open spaces are likely to have a low level of sensitivity to changes in amenity impacts that may arise as a result of the construction process. See Vol 7 Figure 10.4.1 for a baseline plan which indicates the features identified above. Commercial activities offsite businesses 10.4.18 10.4.19 The Factory Quarter, to the east of the site boundary, contains space for retail and commercial activities. 32 The Acton Park Industrial Estate is located northwest of the site boundary. The estate comprises approximately 30 units as well as a self storage facility and petrol station. 33 There are further businesses to the north of the site in an area bounded by Canham Road to the south, Warple Way to east, Stanley Gardens to the west and Bradford Road to the north.
10.4.12
10.4.13
10.4.14
10.4.15 10.4.16
10.4.17
10.4.20
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 121
During the scoping process based on the project information available at the time, it was considered that there was little, if any, potential for the businesses in the area to experience any significant socio-economic effects as a result of the proposed development. Accordingly, an assessment of the sensitivity of the businesses has not been made. See Section 10.9.
Receptor sensitivity
10.4.22 A summary of receptors as described in the baseline conditions and their sensitivity is provided in the table below. Vol 7 Table 10.4.1 Socio-economic receptor values/sensitivities Receptor Residents of nearby properties Value/sensitivity and justification Medium residents less able to avoid effects but less sensitive during the day when the effects would be experienced. Low the amenity spaces are not particularly busy although this enhances tranquillity. Users have access to alternative areas of semiprivate open space and public open space (parks) nearby.
Users of nearby semi-private amenity space
10.5

Base case
10.5.1
For this site, the base case year is Year 1 of the construction works. This is the year when site establishment is proposed to commence and marks the start of the assessment period for socio-economic effects. It is assumed that the base case would be largely the same as the baseline, ie, the socio economic conditions at the site would remain the same as existing conditions. Development case Under the development case, it is expected that the following changes to the baseline would occur: a. The proposed scheme would result in the open areas within the storm tanks site being temporarily lost to construction activity, structures and hard standing. b. Nearby residents and nearby semi-private amenity spaces may be subject to construction and construction-traffic related impacts such as air pollution, dust, noise, vibration and/or visual disturbance. These impacts may occur individually or in combination.
10.5.2
10.5.3
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 122
Other than the above, it is assumed that the development case for other socio-economic conditions at the site would remain the same as set out in the baseline.
Effects on residential amenity 10.5.5 Air quality, noise and vibration, and visual impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction works and construction related traffic could potentially act individually or in combination with one another to reduce the environmental amenity experienced by residents living at the Emlyn Gardens Estate, the Factory Quarter and residential properties to the north and west of the site. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the likely significant air quality, noise and vibration, and visual effects on surrounding local residential receptors. With respect to the proposed works at Acton Storm Tanks, the following preliminary findings of likely effect significance from these assessments are summarised below: a. Air quality and construction dust effects on residential properties are likely to be minor adverse. b. Noise effects on residents have been measured as likely to be significant at six of a total of eight residential receptors identified. Vibration (human response) effects are likely to be significant at four of the eight residential receptors. c. Visual effects are likely to be moderate adverse from five of the eight viewpoints identified (viewpoints 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.7) and minor adverse at a further three viewpoints for the duration of the construction period (viewpoints 1.5, 1.6 and 1.8).
10.5.6
10.5.7
For further information, refer to Section 9 Noise and vibration, Section 4 Air quality and odour and Section 11 Townscape and visual within this volume. In terms of duration, the potential for impacts which may reduce amenity experienced by nearby residents would only last during the construction period a temporary, medium term period of up to approximately three and a half years. They would also be temporary as they would only occur during the construction period. During this time, these impacts would be restricted to day-time working hours. They are also unlikely to be continual over the working day, but are likely to rise and fall in intensity as different activities of the construction process take place throughout the day. Similarly, the nature of the construction activity/process being undertaken would determine whether the different types of impacts arise simultaneously or whether only one or two impacts arise at any one time. There is some screening and roadways between the site and the surrounding residential development. Given this, and the proximity and positioning of residential development relative to the site, amenity impacts would be likely to only affect a relatively small number of dwellings.
10.5.8
10.5.9
10.5.10
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 123
Given the above factors, it is considered that the impacts are likely to be of medium magnitude. Taking account of the potential for a medium magnitude of the impact and the medium sensitivity of residents to amenity impacts experienced during daytime working hours (see para. 10.4.9), it is considered that the overall effect on residential amenity could be moderate adverse and therefore significant. This is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Preliminary access route plans for vehicular (lorry) access and egress routes during construction show that vehicles are likely to pass through local residential streets between the site and the strategic road network. Construction traffic may also contribute to a reduction in residential amenity. However due to the qualitative nature of the assessment of transport effects at this stage this has not been taken into account in the above assessment. This will be examined in more detail as further information becomes available. Amenity effects on semi-private amenity space users As for the case of residential receptors considered above, air quality, noise and visual impacts arising as a result of the proposed construction works and construction related traffic could potentially act individually or in combination with one another to reduce the environmental amenity experienced by users of the semi-private amenity spaces within Emlyn Gardens and the Factory Quarter. Preliminary assessments have been undertaken to examine the likely significant noise and vibration, air quality and visual effects on residents at receptors surrounding local residential dwellings. With respect to the proposed works at Acton Storm Tanks, the following preliminary findings of likely effect significance from these assessments are noted: a. No air quality or construction dust receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to users of the semi-private open spaces. However, the results for residential receptors presented in the above section, to some extent, provide an indication of the likely impacts on the general area. b. No noise and vibration (human response) receptors were identified as requiring assessment at the project site in relation to users of the semi-private open spaces. However, the results for residential receptors presented in the above section, to some extent, provide an indication of the likely impacts on the general area. c. Visual effects are likely to have moderate adverse significance for park users from viewpoint 1.4 looking north from outside Emlyn Gardens, for the duration of the construction period.
10.5.13
10.5.14
10.5.15
10.5.16
For further information, refer to Section 11 Townscape and visual, Section 9 Noise and vibration and Section 4 Air quality and odour within this volume. Most of the other factors affecting the impact magnitude of the potential amenity impacts are the same as per those explained above with regard to impacts on residential dwellings (see previous sub-section).
10.5.17
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 124
The exceptions generally relate to the relationship of the amenity spaces in relation to the proposed construction site area. The spaces, unlike the neighbouring residential buildings, are at ground level and are mostly physically and visually separated from the site by solid masonry / concrete walls of approximately 1.5m to 1.8m high. As such, it is considered the semi-private amenity spaces would to some degree be screened and any adverse impacts would be minimised. As for residential development, the environmental design measures proposed as part of the project will also limit and in some cases eliminate the potential for amenity-reducing impacts. Taking account of the above factors, it is considered that the magnitude of the impact is likely to be low. Taking account of the low magnitude of the potential impact and the low sensitivity of potential users to amenity effects experienced during daytime working hours, it is considered that the overall effect on semi-private open space users amenity is considered to be negligible and therefore not significant. It is stressed that this is a preliminary and outline finding only at this stage. Summary The findings of the above preliminary assessments on potential construction phase socio-economic impacts and effects are summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 10.5.1 Socio-economics summary of construction effects Impact Amenity effects on residential amenity (outline findings) Sensitivity Medium Magnitude Significance Medium site exposed to Moderate residential development adverse on four sides but relatively limited number of directly affected receptors. Impacts would be limited to normal working hours and some screening and roadways between site and receptors. Environmental design measures likely to minimise impacts. Low impacts would be limited to normal working hours and screening is provided by existing fencing. Ground level amenity spaces also separated from construction site by fencing and roads/ parking areas. Environmental design Negligible
10.5.19
10.5.20
10.5.21
Amenity effects on semi-private open space users (outline findings)
Low
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 125
Section 10: Socio-economics measures likely to minimise, and even eliminate, impacts.
10.6
10.6.1
As explained in Section 10.1, no significant operational effects were scoped in for consideration during the scoping stage.
10.7
10.7.1
The above assessment has arrived at a preliminary finding that there is a potential for a moderate adverse effect to arise in relation to amenity effects on residential amenity. As defined in the generic significance criteria, moderate adverse effects constitute significant effects. There is a continuing opportunity for further consideration of the potential for employing any viable additional measures to minimise the potential for significant adverse air quality and dust, noise and vibration and visual impacts (if any) to act individually or in combination in a manner that reduces environmental amenity. For further information, please refer to Section 4 Air quality and odour, Section 9 Noise and vibration, and Section 11 Townscape and visual, within this volume.
10.7.2
10.7.3
Operational
10.7.4 As explained in Section 10.1, no significant operational effects were scoped in for consideration during the scoping stage.
10.8
10.8.1
Assessment summary
Vol 7 Table 10.8.1 provides a summary of the preliminary findings arrived at above in relation to the potential for socio-economic effects at the site as a result of the project.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 126
Vol 7 Table 10.8.1 Socio-economic assessment summary - construction Effect Amenity effects on residential amenity (outline findings) Moderate adverse significant Mitigation measures including design alternatives or construction process and management changes that are typical of the sort usually identified to mitigate air quality, noise or visual impacts. Significance Mitigation Residual significance If mitigation measures suggested in the air quality, noise and vibration and visual assessments to minimise adverse impacts are able to be implemented and achieve a reduction in the assessment of effect significance to an acceptable level, a reduced residual adverse significance may result. None required Negligible - not significant
Receptor
Residents of nearby properties
Users of semi-private open space
Amenity effects on semi-private open space users (outline findings)
Negligible not significant
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 127
10.9
10.9.1
Pending further refinement of results of assessments by other EIA topics, it is likely that updates to the baseline data and results of the assessments will be made for the following assessments: a. Amenity effects on residents b. Amenity effects on semi-private open space users.
10.9.2
Impacts on businesses have not been assessed at this stage due to ongoing discussions between Thames Tunnel and local business owners, and ongoing consideration of whether any significant effects are likely. Pending the results of these discussions and any further information that may be received, assessment of the effects on businesses could be made at a later stage. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for socio economics within the project, if applicable, will be finalised and reported in the ES.
10.9.3 10.9.4
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 128
Section 11: Townscape and visual
11 11.1
11.1.1
Townscape and visual Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant townscape and visual amenity effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The assessment describes the current conditions found within the area the nature and pattern of buildings, streets, open space and vegetation, their interrelationships within the built environment, the nature and extent of views of and around the site, and the changes that would be introduced as a result of the proposed development. The assessment also identifies mitigation measures where appropriate. Townscape and visual assessments are made up of two separate, although linked, procedures; the townscape baseline and its analysis contribute to the baseline for visual amenity. Each section of the assessment is structured so that townscape aspects are described first, followed by visual.
11.1.2
11.2
11.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to the townscape and visual assessment are as follows. Construction The method of construction for the proposed development is described in Volume 3. The peak construction phase for this topic relates to the time when the shaft is being constructed, involving the presence of cranes at the site and the export of material by road. For this site, this equates to Year 1 of construction, within a total construction period of approximately three and a half years. Similar effects would arise during secondary tunnel lining, which would occur in Year 2 of construction. The site would be under construction during standard working hours only, defined in Section 3. The specific construction activities which may give rise to effects on townscape character, tranquillity and visual receptors are: a. Vehicular construction access to the site off Canham Road b. Establishment of hoardings around the boundary of the construction site c. Temporary works in the disused railway corridor (now a car park) adjacent to the site
11.2.2
11.2.3
d. Selective removal of existing vegetation e. Use of cranes during shaft sinking and secondary lining of the tunnel f. Provision of welfare facilities g. Lighting of the site when required.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 129
Measures to control townscape and visual effects incorporated into the CoCP include appropriate protection of tree and vegetation in line with BS5837, Trees in relation to construction Recommendations. Specific measures which have been adopted by the project, and which form part of the project, that are considered to minimise the construction effects on the townscape and visual resource are outlined below: a. Locating the proposed development towards the northern end of the Acton Storm Tanks site, maximising the distance from residential receptors b. Retention of trees within the site boundary as far as practicable. Operation
11.2.5
11.2.6
The proposed operation of the infrastructure at Acton Storm Tanks is described in Volume 3. The particular components that are of importance to this assessment include the design and siting of the ventilation building and associated ventilation column. The proposed development pattern and site extent from a townscape and visual perspective is included in Vol 7 Figure 11.4.1
11.2.7
11.3
11.3.1 11.3.2
Scoping and engagement Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. In addition to the formal scoping process, the LB of Ealing, LB of Hammersmith and Fulham, LB of Hounslow and English Heritage have been consulted on the detailed scope of this topic, including the number and location of viewpoints. Comments received from the LB of Ealing have been incorporated into the viewpoints used for the visual assessment, including adding a new location at a pedestrian route to the south of the site and two verifiable photomontage locations to the north of the site, in response to the shaft location moving towards the northern end of the Acton Storm Tanks site. The LB of Hounslow requested views from Bedford Park Conservation Area to the south of the site, which are addressed by viewpoints 2.2 and 2.3. English Heritage have confirmed acceptance of the proposed viewpoints. Baseline The assessment area, defined using the standard methodology provided in Volume 5, is indicated by the extents of the drawing frame in Vol 7 Figures 11.4.1 to 11.4.6. The scale of the assessment area has been set by the maximum extent of the ZTV, excepting those locations along specific corridors to the east, south and west of the site where the visibility is in reality obscured by intervening built form and mature tree cover. The methodology for establishing the townscape and visual baseline follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. With specific reference to the Acton Storm Tanks site, baseline information has been gathered through a review of:
11.3.3
11.3.4 11.3.5
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 130
a. The Unitary Development Plans (UDP) for the LB of Ealing, LB of Hammersmith and Fulham and LB of Hounslow b. The Bedford Park Conservation Area appraisal and Bedford Park Conservation Area management plan (LB of Ealing, 2007) c. The Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area character profile (LB of Hammersmith and Fulham, 1999).
Construction 11.3.6 The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. With reference to the Acton Storm Tanks site, the peak construction phase for this topic would be in year one of construction, when the shaft would be under construction, cranes would be present at the site and materials would be transported to and from the site by road. This has therefore been used as the assessment year for townscape and visual effects. The intensity of construction activities would be similar in year two of construction, during the secondary lining of the tunnel, involving import of materials by road. For the purposes of the construction phase assessment, it is assumed that there would be no substantial change in the townscape and visual baseline between 2011 and Year 1 of construction. Operation 11.3.9 The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. Any site specific variations are described below. The operational phase visual assessment for this site will be supported through the preparation of three verifiable photomontages, from locations agreed in advance with the LB of Ealing. These will be produced and presented in the ES. The operational phase assessment has been undertaken for Year 1 of operation and year fifteen of operation. For the purposes of the assessment, it is assumed that there would be no substantial change in the townscape and visual baseline between 2011 and Year 1 of operation. Further work will be undertaken for the ES to identify any potential changes in the base case for Year 15 of operation. Assumptions and limitations 11.3.12 11.3.13 For this site, there are no site specific townscape and visual assessment assumptions and limitations beyond the generic ones listed in Volume 5. Assumptions made on the base case for the construction and operational phase assessments are described in para. 11.3.7. These assumptions are based on known planning applications and planning policy within the assessment area, interpreted using professional judgement to understand what the base case may be in Year 1 of construction and Year 1 of operation without the project (ie, the do nothing scenario).
11.3.7
11.3.8
11.3.10
11.3.11
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 131
Assumptions will be made in the ES regarding what the base case may be in Year 15 of operation without the project. The preliminary assessment of operational effects is based on the engineering design of the proposed development. The assessment recognises that the project is committed to high quality design, and this forms the basis of the preliminary assessment of likely significant effects presented here. The details of the project design and landscaping, to be provided for the planning submission, will inform the assessment of operational effects in Year 1 and Year 15 which will be presented in the ES.
11.4
11.4.1
Baseline conditions Townscape baseline

The proposed development is located within the confines of the existing Thames Water owned Acton Storm Tanks site. The surrounding townscape is a mix of 20th and 21st century residential apartments and houses with a large industrial estate to the north. Physical elements The physical elements of the townscape in the assessment area are described below. Topography The site and its surrounding area are relatively flat with no notable topographic features within or around the site area. Land use The area to the north of the site comprises a mix of large scale commercial and industrial buildings. To the east, south and west, land use is predominantly residential with larger scale apartment buildings more evident in the east and two storey detached, semi-detached and terraced properties to the south and west. Development patterns and scale Vol 7 Figure 11.4.1 illustrates the pattern and scale of development within the assessment area and also indicates building heights. Vol 7 Figure 11.4.1 Townscape and visual pattern and scale of development (see Volume 7 Figures document)
11.4.2
11.4.3
11.4.4
11.4.5
11.4.6
The residential terraces surrounding the site have small front and rear gardens with on-street parking and some off street parking within the disused railway corridor to the west of the site. Five storey apartment buildings (The Factory Quarter) are located to the east of the site on Warple Way, characterised by a large built footprint set among communal open spaces. The Emlyn Gardens Estate consists of five storey local-authority built residential flats. The majority of the remaining residential areas are characterised by two to three storey
11.4.7
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 132
terraced and semi-detached properties lining residential streets set out on a uniform grid. 11.4.8 Industrial units to the north of the site are medium to large scale set out on wide roads with numerous open hardstanding areas used for car parking or storage. The operational Acton Storm Tanks site is characterised by mainly low lying features, which contrasts with much of the surrounding area. Vegetation patterns and extents 11.4.10 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.2 illustrates the pattern and extent of vegetation within the assessment area, including tree cover. Vol 7 Figure 11.4.2 Townscape and visual pattern and extent of vegetation (see Volume 7 Figures document) 11.4.11 Semi-mature street trees and garden hedges are a common feature within the residential areas surrounding the site. They are less frequent in the industrial area to the north. Vegetation is an important element of the overall character and provides a green appearance to the streetscape, particularly during summer. There are no known Tree Preservation Orders within or in the vicinity of the site, based on local authority GIS information provided to the project to date. However, trees within Bedford Park, and Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Areas are protected through their location within the designated areas. Open space distribution and type 11.4.14 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.3 illustrates the distribution of different open space types within the assessment area, indicating all relevant statutory, non-statutory and local plan designations. Vol 7 Figure 11.4.3 Townscape and visual distribution of open space (see Volume 7 Figures document) 11.4.15 Public open spaces are limited to Wendell Park to the east, Southfields Recreation Ground to the west and allotments to the south within the disused rail corridor. There are also private and semi-private open spaces associated with residential developments. These spaces are described in the table below: Vol 7 Table 11.4.1 Open space type and distribution Open space Factory Quarter Emlyn Gardens Distance from site 150m E Character summary Semi-private open space within the Factory Quarter development, comprising small trees, lawns, seating areas and play equipment. Small private courtyard spaces with lawns and mature trees.
11.4.9
11.4.12 11.4.13
200m SE
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 133
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Open space Wendell Park Distance from site 250m E
Section 11: Townscape and visual Character summary The park is located within the Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area. It is described in the Conservation Area Character Profile as an important open space within this relatively dense built up area and contains many good mature trees. It is a medium sized park comprising mature trees set among areas of amenity grassland. St Saviours with St Mary Church is located within the north west corner. The park also contains a childrens play area. The recreation ground is a large open space containing playing pitches and a childrens play area. It is predominantly characterised by open grassland with some trees along paths and the park boundaries. It is designated as a Public Open Space in the LB of Ealing Unitary Development Plan. A small area of relatively well maintained allotments located between rows of housing within the disused railway line corridor.
Southfields 400m W Recreation Ground
Allotments
500m S
Transport routes 11.4.16 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.4 illustrates the transport network within the assessment area, including cycleways. Vol 7 Figure 11.4.4 Townscape and visual - transport network See Volume 7 Figures document 11.4.17 The road network immediately around the site is generally residential in nature. Roadside parking and traffic calming is evident throughout the surrounding area. The residential roads surrounding the site are generally not used by heavy good vehicles (HGV), although HGVs do use roads within the industrial area to the north. Two Hammersmith and Fulham Strategic and Local Cycle Routes are located around the site. These are along Cobbold Road and Larden Road / Emlyn Road, east of the site. There is one Public Right of Way adjacent to the site, connecting Canham Road and Rugby Road, north of the site. Site character assessment 11.4.19 The site is currently occupied by an operational Thames Water pumping station and storm tank facility. Vegetation within the site is limited to grassland with some boundary vegetation. There are no statutory, nonstatutory or local plan designations within or directly adjacent to the site boundary. The site is bounded by security fencing around the perimeter and contains ground level storm tanks and a two storey detached property. Within the
11.4.18
11.4.20
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 134
eastern edge of the site a compact line of mature trees provides a visual barrier between Warple Way and the pumping station. 11.4.21 The site is dominated by the presence of the open storm tanks, which lend an open aspect to the site. The components of the site are described in the table below: Vol 7 Table 11.4.2 Townscape and visual site components ID 01 Component Boundary trees Description 17 semi-mature trees located along the boundary with Warple Way, next to Edison Court. The trees form a dense crown providing a green boundary in summer. Two semi-mature trees located on the Canham Road boundary. 11 trees of varying sizes spread across the grassed area of the site Condition Good condition (to be confirmed following tree survey) Good condition (to be confirmed following tree survey) Good condition Poor condition
02
Standalone trees
03 04
Storm tanks Boundary fencing and vegetation
Six concrete storm tanks set into the ground, used for storm overflows Palisade and closed concrete panel fencing with intermittent scrub vegetation
11.4.22
The condition of the townscape within the site is generally good for the type of usage, with the operational area well maintained. However, the boundary conditions of the site are generally in a poor condition comprising poorly maintained fencing and vegetation. The potential for enhancement of the boundary conditions is therefore high. In addition, the industrial nature of the site is not contiguous with the surrounding residential areas. Therefore, the potential for enhancement of open spaces within the site, to improve the outlook from overlooking residences, is also high. Although the site is largely open in character, with strong enclosures to the boundaries, the overlooking residential properties, existing industrial usage and presence of further industry to the north means the site has limited tranquillity. Due to its usage, the site has limited townscape value, although the open character of the site is relatively uncommon within the densely built up immediate area. Due to its robust industrial usage and the limited townscape value, the site has a low sensitivity to change.
11.4.23
11.4.24
11.4.25
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 135
At night, the site is largely unlit, except for some low level lighting. However, the density of the surrounding built environment means the site is heavily influenced by light spill from street lights and residential properties, particularly along Warple Way. The sensitivity of this site to additional lighting is therefore low. Townscape character assessment The Townscape Character Areas surrounding the site are identified on Vol 7 Figure 11.4.5. Townscape character areas are ordered beginning to the north of the site and continuing around the site in a clockwise direction. Each area is described below. Vol 7 Figure 11.4.5 Townscape and visual character assessment (see Volume 7 Figures document) Acton Park Industrial Estate
11.4.27
11.4.28
This area is defined as a Major Employment Area in the LB of Ealings UDP, and is characterised by warehouses and office blocks with large building footprints. The heights of buildings within this area are generally three to four storeys. Semi-mature street trees are intermittently present throughout the area, although they are less frequent than in surrounding residential areas. The area is predominantly inward looking and not substantially influenced by the character of surrounding areas. The buildings, surface treatment and vegetation within the area are relatively well maintained. The overall townscape condition is good. Tranquility within the area is limited by the industrial use, the high levels of on and off street parking and the relative lack of public open spaces and vegetation. The townscape has limited amenity value to the community due to the type of land use, the lack of public realm and the lack of characteristic features and typically valued components. The character of the area and type of land use is locally widespread. Due to the widespread nature of this character type, the lack of characteristic features and the introspective pattern of the development, this character area has a low sensitivity to change. At night the area is lit directly by street lighting and indirectly from some buildings and compound areas. Although this lighting provides a fairly dimly lit character, the sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is low due to the land use. Valetta Road Residential This area comprises residential terraced housing aligned in a grid pattern. The character is further defined by an abundance of semi-mature street tree planting and vegetation in private gardens. Roads within the area are generally relatively wide and used for on-street parking. The area has moderate levels of tranquility due to the residential land use, presence of vegetation and limited volumes of traffic.
11.4.29 11.4.30
11.4.31
11.4.32
11.4.33
11.4.34
11.4.35
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 136
The area is likely to be valued by local residents, by virtue of the abundance of street trees and the moderate levels of tranquility, which provides a pleasant setting to the residential properties. Due to the moderate level of tranquility and residential character, strengthened by mature planting, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. At night the area is dimly lit by residential street lighting and limited light spill from residential properties, providing a generally low lit setting. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is high. Warple Way Residential This character area is defined by large scale, five to six storey high, residential apartments. Private and communal open spaces are located within and around the buildings. The area comprises a mix of new build developments and some well maintained 19th century developments of strong architectural character. Spaces within the area are defined by the character of the surrounding residential properties. The periphery of the character area is heavily influenced by the surrounding land uses, particularly the industrial nature of the existing Acton Storm Tanks site. However, the storm tanks also serve to provide an open setting to the east of the character area. Tranquillity within and around the apartment complexes is high due to the low level of noise and vehicular movement, and the enclosure provided by the surrounding residential buildings. The townscape is likely to be locally valued, although the character type is locally widespread. Due to the character of this area being heavily influenced by surrounding character areas, particularly the Acton Storm Tanks site, this character area has limited tolerance to change in the townscape of the assessment area. Therefore, this character area has a high sensitivity to change At night the area is relatively well lit by residential street lighting and relatively high levels of light spill from the high-rise residential properties. The night time character is also influenced by lighting within the wider area, including from industrial uses. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is low due to the existing relatively high light levels. Mayfield Road Residential This residential area is a designated homezone. The area comprises a gated residential development characterised by three storey dark brick apartment buildings, low vegetation among communal open spaces and access roads with traffic calming measures. The character area is entirely introspective and has little relation to the surrounding character areas. The area is in a good condition, with well maintained buildings, open spaces and vegetation. The tranquillity of the area is high due to the introspective nature of the development and residential land use, which leads to little pedestrian or vehicular traffic.
11.4.37
11.4.38
11.4.39
11.4.40
11.4.41
11.4.42 11.4.43
11.4.44
11.4.45
11.4.46 11.4.47
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 137
The townscape is likely to be locally valued by the residents who live in the development, but has limited value in the wider area. However, this residential character type is relatively uncommon within the surrounding area. Although the tranquillity of the area is high and the area valued locally, the introspective and enclosed nature of the development means it has a low sensitivity to change. At night, street lighting within the development and light spill from residential properties provides a low lit setting. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is therefore high. Wendell Park This character area, which consists of Wendell Park open space, forms part of the Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area designated by the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham. The area comprises a relatively large open space, characterised by mature trees and amenity grassland. St. Saviours with St. Mary Church and Wendell Park Primary School are located to the north of the park and provide part of the immediate setting. The area is in a good condition, with the various components of the park being well maintained. The church and school buildings to the north of the character area are also in good condition. The tranquility of this area is high due to the nature and use of the open space, the enclosure and amenity provided by the mature trees and the limited amount of vehicular traffic passing through or close to the area. This area is likely to be locally highly valued due to the amenity value to surrounding residents. As a relatively large public open space, the character of Wendell Park is rare within the local area. The value of the park is heightened by its good condition. In addition, by virtue of the conservation area and open space designation, the area is valued at the Borough level. Due to the condition, tranquility and rarity of this open space, and the importance of the surrounding setting, this character area has a high sensitivity to change. At night the park is unlit and receives some dim illumination from street lighting and light spill from surrounding buildings. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is therefore high. Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area This character area comprises a small part of the eastern edge of Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area in the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham. The area is characterised by rows of terraced and semi-detached white rendered residential properties. Residences typically have small front gardens, demarcated with low walls, and larger rear gardens. The residential streets are wide enough to incorporate on-street parking along both sides. The streets are also characterised by semi-mature street
11.4.49
11.4.50
11.4.51
11.4.52
11.4.53
11.4.54
11.4.55
11.4.56
11.4.57
11.4.58
11.4.59
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 138
trees. The western edge of the character area is defined by a disused railway corridor, characterised by dense bands of vegetation and, in this location, occupied by allotments at the rear of residential properties along Emlyn Road. 11.4.60 11.4.61 The area is in good condition, with the streets, gardens and properties typically well maintained. The tranquility of the area is high due to the quiet residential nature of the area, the use of traffic calming measures on the streets, the presence of private gardens and semi-mature street trees and the relatively light levels of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area. In addition, by virtue of the conservation area designation, the area is valued at the Borough level. The character of the residential area is relatively rare within the assessment area, although the same conservation area extends further to the south and east outside of the assessment area. Allotments also represent a component of the character area that is locally scarce. Due to the high levels of tranquility and heightened value of the character area, this character area has a high sensitivity to change. At night the street lighting and light spill from residential properties provides a low lit setting. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is therefore high. Bedford Park Conservation Area 11.4.65 This area comprises two separate, although physically and characteristically linked, conservation areas designated by the LB of Ealing and the LB of Hounslow. Both areas are entitled Bedford Park Conservation Area and are broadly similar in character. The area is largely characterised by two storey residential properties, either semi-detached or in short terraces. The properties are typically relatively compact, with bay windows and gable ends orientated towards the street. They are also set back from the roads behind white painted balustrades. Streets are characterised by rows of mature and semimature trees. The character area is largely introspective and is not substantially influenced by the wider townscape. The condition of the area is good, with streets, gardens and properties well maintained. The tranquility throughout the area is high due to the residential nature of the area, the presence of street trees and the limited volumes of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area, as evidenced by the good condition of the area. In addition, by virtue of the conservation area designation, the area is valued at Borough level.
11.4.62
11.4.63 11.4.64
11.4.66
11.4.67 11.4.68
11.4.69
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 139
Although the character area is largely introspective, the high levels of tranquility and heightened value of Bedford Park Conservation Area means it has a high sensitivity to change. At night the street lighting and light spill from residential properties provides a low lit setting. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is high. Bedford Park Residential This area is characterised by a gridded network of residential streets comprising semi-detached and terraced properties with some low rise apartment buildings. At the junction of Southfield Road and Speldhurst Road there are a number of small retail premises. Further to the east is Southfield First and Middle School, a five storey brick building surrounded by an asphalt playground. Properties typically have front and rear gardens. The character of the area is strengthened by semi-mature trees along the streets and within private gardens. The residential streets are generally fairly narrow, although used for on-street parking on both sides of the road. With the exception of linear views along streets, the character area is generally introspective in character. The area has a high level of tranquillity due to the residential nature of the area, the widespread presence of trees and vegetation, and the limited levels of traffic and pedestrian movement passing through the area. The area is likely to be locally valued by residents within the character area, although the character of the residential environment is locally widespread. Due to the largely introspective nature of the development, this character area has a medium sensitivity to change. At night the street lighting and light spill from residential properties provides a low lit setting. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is high. Southfields Playing Fields This character area comprises a large recreation ground defined by mature trees around the park boundaries. The open space comprises open grassed areas used as sports pitches, some areas of species rich grassland and a play area. The mature planting around the boundary means the open space is largely introspective, although it is influenced by buildings around the periphery of the area, which provide part of the immediate context. The open space is in a good condition, with planting and boundary conditions fairly well maintained. By virtue of the open and green nature of the area, Southfields Playing Fields has high levels of tranquillity (albeit reduced to some extent at times when the playing fields are in use for active sports). Nevertheless overall the site, which is used by a range of users including walkers, is considered to have high levels of tranquillity. This is heightened by the mature tree
11.4.71
11.4.72
11.4.73 11.4.74
11.4.75
11.4.76 11.4.77
11.4.78
11.4.79 11.4.80
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 140
planting around the boundaries, which provides further seclusion from surrounding residential and commercial areas. 11.4.81 The open space is likely to be locally valued by virtue of the physical and visual amenity it provides to surrounding areas. The size, character and condition of the open space are also relatively scarce within the Borough, meaning it is valued at the Borough level. This is recognised by virtue of its designation as a public open space in the LB of Ealings UDP. Due to the high levels of tranquillity, heightened local value and good condition, this character area has a high sensitivity to change, despite it being largely introspective. At night the open space is unlit and receives some dim illumination from street lighting and light spill from surrounding buildings. The sensitivity of this area to additional lighting is high. The sensitivity to change of the townscape character areas is summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 11.4.3 Townscape sensitivities to change Townscape character area The site Acton Park Industrial Estate Valetta Road Residential Warple Way Residential Mayfield Road Residential Wendell Park Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area Bedford Park Conservation Area Bedford Park Residential Southfields Playing Fields Sensitivity Low Low Medium High Low High High High Medium High
11.4.82
11.4.83
11.4.84
Visual baseline
11.4.85 Vol 7 Figure 11.4.6 indicates the location of viewpoints referenced below. All residential and recreational receptors have a high sensitivity to change. Transport receptors have a medium sensitivity to change. Employment receptors have a low sensitivity to change. Appendix D1 contains illustrative winter photographs from selected viewpoints (the ES will include winter and summer photos for each character area and viewpoint). Vol 7 Figure 11.4.6 Townscape and visual viewpoint locations (see Volume 7 Figures document) Residential 11.4.86 Residential receptors have a high sensitivity to change, as attention is often focused on the townscape surrounding the property rather than on
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 141
another focused activity (as would be the case in predominantly employment or industrial areas). The visual baseline in respect of residential receptors (represented by a series of viewpoints, agreed with consultees) is described below. Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road 11.4.87 The viewpoint is representative of the view from residential apartments to the north-east of the site. The view is contained along Canham Road, limited by tree cover within the disused railway corridor to the west. The view is characterised by two storey properties to the south of Canham Road and commercial buildings to the north. Views towards the site are limited by buildings and vegetation at ground level, although more direct views are apparent from upper floors of the properties. Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.4.88 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential apartments adjacent to the eastern edge of the site. The view is characterised at the lower level by on-street parking on Warple Way and security fencing along the boundary to the Acton Storm Tanks site. Beyond the fencing, a mast and two storey industrial buildings are apparent. The background is characterised by residential houses beyond the disused railway line to the west. There is a clear panoramic view of the eastern part of the site from upper stories of the apartments. Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.4.89 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential apartments close to the junction of Warple Way and Cobbold Road. Views towards the site are limited by the presence of semi-mature trees along the boundary of Acton Storm Tanks. Filtered views across the site are apparent from ground level. There is a clear panoramic view across the site from upper stories of the apartments. Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens 11.4.90 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residencies within Emlyn Gardens, close to the south-east boundary if the site. The view from ground level is characterised by concrete walling and intermittent vegetation along the boundary of Acton Storm Tanks. The views from upper storeys of the apartments are characterised by the open aspect of the existing pumping station, dominated by the storm tanks. Viewpoint 1.5: View north along Greenend Road from Southfield Road 11.4.91 This viewpoint is representative of the view from residential properties on the south side of Southfield Road. The view is contained to the east by other properties and to the west by Southfield First and Middle School. The view is further enclosed during summer by mature street trees along Greenend Road. The site forms the background of the view, further filtered by vegetation along the disused railway line.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 142
Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road 11.4.92 This viewpoint is representative of the view from three storey residences on Southfield Road opposite the junction with Rugby Road. The view is contained by residential properties along both sides of Rugby Road, and characterised by dense street tree cover. The site forms the background of the view, further filtered by vegetation along the disused railway line. Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road 11.4.93 This viewpoint is representative of the view from properties along Hatfield Road and Greenend Road. The view is characterised by residential properties in all directions, set among intermittent street trees. Views towards the site are limited by mature trees along Rugby Road and within the disused railway corridor. Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road 11.4.94 This viewpoint is representative of the view from properties along Hatfield Road to the west of the site. The view is contained to the north and south by residential properties along Hatfield Road and intermittent street trees. Industrial premises within Acton Park Industrial Estate are intermittently visible beyond the residential properties. The site forms the background of the view, further filtered by vegetation along the disused railway line. Recreational 11.4.95 Recreational receptors (excepting those engaged in active sports) generally have a high sensitivity to change, as attention is focused on enjoyment of the townscape. The visual baseline in respect of recreational receptors is discussed below. Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath between Warple Way and Woodstock Road 11.4.96 This viewpoint is representative of the view pedestrians experience when walking towards the site from Woodstock Road. The view is dominated by concrete walling and guard railing at the southern boundary of the site. Residential apartments form part of the immediate context. Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road 11.4.97 This viewpoint is representative of the view from pedestrians walking along Woodstock Road, within Bedford Park Conservation Area. The view is contained by mature street trees, on-road parking and residential properties. The view towards the site is partially blocked by a residential property at the end of the street. Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road 11.4.98 This viewpoint is representative of the view from pedestrians walking along Abinger Road within Bedford Park Conservation Area. The view is contained by mature street trees, on-road parking and residential properties. The view north towards the site is partially obscured by mature street trees.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 143
Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground 11.4.99 This viewpoint is representative of an oblique view from users of Southfields recreation ground. The view is framed by residential properties and tree lined streets within Bedford Park Residential. Views towards the site are largely obscured by built form and vegetation. Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens 11.4.100 View south towards the site from the pedestrian route to the north of the site. The view is characterised by palisade fencing and intermittent vegetation at the northern boundary of Acton Storm Tanks. The open aspect of the site is clearly visible beyond the palisade fencing. Transport 11.4.101 People travelling through an area generally have a medium sensitivity to change, although it is often the means by which the greatest numbers of people view the townscape. Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road 11.4.102 This viewpoint is representative of the view from people travelling towards the site along Stanley Gardens. The view is contained to the east by industrial units and to the west by street trees and industrial units. The site forms the background of the view. Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road 11.4.103 This viewpoint is representative the view from people travelling south or west along Valetta Road and Larden Road. The view is characterised by two storey residential properties with some mature street trees along Valetta Road, which largely obscure views towards the site. Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road 11.4.104 This viewpoint is representative of the view from people travelling west along Jeddo Road. The view is framed by four storey offices to the north and two storey residential properties to the south, along with intermittent street trees. The site forms the background of the view, beyond the wider residential areas. Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road 11.4.105 This viewpoint is representative of the view from people travelling along Saltcoats Road. The view is framed by two storey terraced properties to both sides with some semi mature trees. Views towards the site are largely obscured by a two storey residential property with vegetation visible beyond, along the disused railway corridor. Employment and other institutions 11.4.106 People at work are the least sensitive receptors, as their attention is likely to be focused on their work activity. These receptors have a low sensitivity to change.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 144
Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road 11.4.107 This view is characterised by retail units set among the wider residential area around Southfield Road. Views are open to the north west along Southfield Road. Views towards the site are largely obscured by the surrounding built form. 11.4.108 The sensitivity to change of the viewpoints is summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 11.4.4 Visual viewpoint sensitivities to change Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road Medium Medium High High High High High High High High High High High High High Sensitivity
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 145
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Viewpoint
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Medium Medium Low
Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road Employment and other institutions Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road
11.5
11.5.1
Effects during the construction phase would be temporary, although medium term due to the scale and necessary phasing of the proposed development. The proposed phasing of the development would result in intense periods of activity within relatively quieter phases. Construction phase site assessment Direct effects on the townscape of the site would arise from clearance of the site, creation of a new access from Canham Road, erection of site hoardings, breaking out of parts of two existing storm tanks and construction activity associated with the construction of the shaft and building, and secondary lining of the tunnel. The effects on specific components of the site are described below: Vol 7 Table 11.5.1 Townscape and visual site component effects construction ID 01 Component Boundary trees Effects Loss of two trees on the Canham Road boundary. Protection of all other trees (to be confirmed following the completion of a tree survey). All trees retained (to be confirmed following the completion of a tree survey). Two storm tanks broken out to facilitate shaft construction. Boundary conditions largely unchanged, with the exception of the northern boundary along Canham Road, on which new access would be created during construction.
11.5.2
02 03 04
Standalone trees Storm tanks Boundary fencing and vegetation
11.5.3
The magnitude of change to the site during the construction period is considered to be high due to the clearance required to form the construction site, including vegetation and the northern two storm tanks, and the level of activity during construction. Although the existing site has limited tranquility, the magnitude of change to the tranquility of the site is considered to be high due to introduction of construction vehicles, plant equipment and high levels of activity in a space not currently intensively used.
11.5.4
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 146
Overall, the high magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of the site to change, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on the townscape resource of the site would be of moderate adverse significance. Construction phase townscape assessment Acton Park Industrial Estate
11.5.6
Although the proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, it may be indirectly affected by construction traffic. Roads through the area are typically wide enough to accommodate HGVs, therefore effects would only arise from increased levels of HGV traffic. During the construction of the shaft and the secondary lining of the tunnel, the presence of cranes would slightly alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has limited tranquility at present and the magnitude of change due to construction traffic passing through the area is considered to be low as it is of a similar nature to the current road usage. Given the low magnitude of change and the low sensitivity of this character area, the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Acton Park Industrial Estate. Valetta Road Residential Although the proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, it may be indirectly affected by construction traffic (medium term effects) and the presence of cranes (short term effects during construction of the shaft and secondary lining of the tunnel). Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has moderate levels tranquility at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to the careful routing of construction traffic (see the transport section of this chapter). Any effects would be transient, intermittent and short term (ie, less than one year in duration for two distinct phases). Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquility is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on Valetta Road Residential is likely to be of minor adverse significance. Warple Way Residential The proposed site forms part of the setting for the western edge of this character area. The setting along Warple Way and Cobbold Road would be affected by the presence of construction activity, traffic and cranes, although the main activity would be focused to the northern end of the existing storm tanks site, furthest from this character area. The area immediately adjacent to Warple Way would remain largely open in character and predominantly used for stockpiling of materials and welfare facilities. These uses would be largely contiguous with the existing
11.5.7
11.5.8
11.5.9
11.5.10
11.5.11
11.5.12
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 147
industrial nature of this part of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium. 11.5.13 The area has a high level of tranquility at present and the magnitude of change to tranquility due to the levels of proposed construction activity is considered to be high. However, as noted above, the main construction site would be located in the part of the site furthest from this character area, with the area immediately adjacent to Warple Way only used by smaller vehicles and less intense activities. Given the medium magnitude of change and the high sensitivity of this character area to a change in setting, the effect of the proposed construction activity on Warple Way Residential would be of moderate adverse significance. Mayfield Road Residential 11.5.15 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area, which is largely introspective, and it is unlikely to be indirectly affected by construction traffic. The presence of cranes is not likely to significantly alter the setting of the area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has high levels of tranquility at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquility is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change and low sensitivity of this character area means the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Mayfield Road Residential. Wendell Park 11.5.18 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area and it is unlikely to be indirectly affected by construction traffic. The presence of cranes is not likely to significantly alter the setting of the area, particularly as they would be located towards the northern end of the site, furthest from this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has high levels of tranquility at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquility is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Wendell Park. Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area 11.5.21 The proposed site does not form part of the setting for this character area and it is unlikely to be indirectly affected by construction traffic. The presence of cranes is not likely to significantly alter the setting of the area, particularly as they would be located towards the northern end of the site,
11.5.14
11.5.16
11.5.17
11.5.19
11.5.20
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 148
furthest from this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. 11.5.22 The area has high levels of tranquility at present, which is likely to be largely unchanged due to the careful routing of construction traffic. Therefore, the magnitude of change to tranquility is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change and high sensitivity of this character area means the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area. Bedford Park Conservation Area 11.5.24 Although the proposed site is not a major component of the setting for this character area, it does form a backdrop in places, particularly towards the northern end of Abinger Road. The setting of this part of the character area may be temporarily altered by the presence of cranes during the construction of the shaft and secondary tunnel lining (both short term activities within the overall construction programme). However, much of the setting would be largely unaffected by the works, including construction traffic which would be focused towards the north of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has high levels of tranquility at present and the magnitude of change due to the presence of cranes is considered to be low, as most of the setting would be largely unchanged. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on Bedford Park Conservation Area would be of minor adverse significance. Bedford Park Residential 11.5.27 Although the proposed site does not form a major component of the setting for this character area, it does provide a backdrop in places. The setting of Southfield Road, Hamilton Road, Greenfield Road, Hawkshead Road, Hatfield Road and Rugby Road may be affected by the presence of cranes beyond the rooflines. These activities would give rise to relatively short term effects when the shaft is being constructed and when the secondary lining of the tunnel is being undertaken. However, much of the setting would be largely unaffected by the works, including construction traffic which would be focused towards the north of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. The area has moderate levels of tranquility at present and the magnitude of change due to the presence of cranes is considered to be low, as the majority of the setting would be largely unchanged. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the effect of the proposed construction activity on Bedford Park Residential would be of minor adverse significance.
11.5.23
11.5.25
11.5.26
11.5.28
11.5.29
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 149
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Southfields Playing Fields 11.5.30
Although the proposed site does not form a major component of the setting for this character area, it does provide a backdrop in places. The setting of the open space may be intermittently affected by the presence of cranes in the distant skyline. However, much of the setting would be largely unaffected by the works, including construction traffic which would be focused towards the north of the site. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The area has high levels of tranquility at present and the magnitude of change to tranquility due to the presence of cranes is considered to be negligible, as the majority of the setting would be largely unchanged and the relative seclusion of the character area would remain. The negligible magnitude of change and high sensitivity of this character area means the proposed construction activity would give rise to a negligible effect on Southfields Playing Fields. The assessment of townscape effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 11.5.2 Townscape magnitude of change - construction Townscape character area The site Acton Park Industrial Estate Valetta Road Residential Warple Way Residential Mayfield Road Residential Wendell Park Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area Bedford Park Conservation Area Bedford Park Residential Southfields Playing Fields Sensitivity Magnitude Low Low Medium High Low High High High Medium High High Low Low Medium Negligible Negligible Negligible Low Low Negligible Effect Moderate adverse Negligible Minor adverse Moderate adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible
11.5.31
11.5.32
11.5.33
Construction phase townscape assessment night time effects 11.5.34 There are likely to be limited effects on night time character due to the proposed limit of 12 hour working at the site. However, this would mean that there would be some lighting of the site in the early morning and evening during winter. Effects on night time character will be considered in the ES.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 150
Construction phase visual assessment Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road 11.5.35 The views towards the proposed development would remain characterised by the buildings either side of Canham Road. Further along the road, the site entrance would be visible within a line of construction hoardings. The cranes would be visible during the construction of the shaft and the secondary tunnel lining. Construction traffic would also be visible along Canham Road. The magnitude of change to this view would be medium due to the visibility of construction activity and hoardings alongside the retention of existing components of the view. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.5.37 Views from the residences towards the site would be affected during construction. At ground level, views would be characterised by construction hoardings set along the existing pumping station boundary, reducing the existing open aspect. From higher levels, there would be direct views of construction activity within the site. Some enclosure is likely to be provided by welfare and office facilities stacked within the site. The open aspect of the existing site would still be largely apparent from this viewpoint. The main construction working area, around the proposed shaft location, would be partially screened behind the existing two storey properties west of Warple Way. However, the cranes would be visible beyond these buildings. The magnitude of change on this view would be medium due to the high visibility of construction activity and hoardings, partially reduced by the location of the main construction works beyond existing buildings, therefore retaining some of the open aspect of the site during construction. The medium magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.5.39 Views from residences towards the site would be affected during construction. At ground level, views would be characterised by construction hoardings set along the existing pumping station boundary, reducing the existing open aspect. Existing mature vegetation is likely to still be present, partially screening the site boundary. From higher levels, there would be a clear panoramic view of construction activity across the site. The main construction working area, around the proposed shaft location, would form the background of the view, with the cranes fully visible. The magnitude of change on this view would be high due to the
11.5.36
11.5.38
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 151
visibility of construction activity across the whole site. The effects would be partially reduced by the retention of existing mature vegetation and the location of the shaft furthest from the residential receptors. 11.5.40 The high magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens 11.5.41 Views from residences towards the site would be affected during construction. At ground level, views would be remain largely unchanged due to the existing concrete walling, although the cranes are likely to be visible towards the northern end of the site. However, from higher levels, there would be a clear panoramic view of construction activity across the site. The main construction working area, around the proposed shaft location, would form the background of the view, with the cranes fully visible. Although effects from ground level would be limited, the magnitude of change on this view would be high due to the visibility of construction activity across the whole site from residential receptors living from the first floor upwards. The high magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road 11.5.43 The foreground of the view towards the site from this location would remain unchanged. The cranes are likely to be visible beyond the residential properties and intervening vegetation, forming a backdrop to the view. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low due to the retention of existing components of the view with the cranes partially visible beyond. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road 11.5.45 The foreground of the view towards the site from this location would remain unchanged. The cranes are likely to be visible beyond the residential properties and intervening vegetation, forming a backdrop to the view. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low due to the retention of existing components of the view with the cranes partially visible beyond. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance.
11.5.42
11.5.44
11.5.46
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 152
Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road 11.5.47 The immediate foreground of the view towards the site from this location would remain unchanged, although the cranes would be likely to form a highly visible backdrop to the view, beyond the vegetation along the disused railway line. Construction traffic along Canham Road is also likely to be intermittently visible. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be medium due to the high visibility of some elements of the construction activity, partially filtered by residential buildings and mature vegetation. The medium magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of moderate adverse significance. Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road 11.5.49 The foreground of the view towards the site from this location would remain unchanged. The cranes are likely to be visible beyond the residential properties and intervening vegetation, forming a backdrop to the view. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low due to the retention of existing components of the view with the cranes partially visible beyond. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road 11.5.51 The foreground of the view is likely to remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. The cranes are likely to be visible across the open aspect of the storm tanks site, set against the industrial premises beyond. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low due to the retention of existing components of the view but with the visibility of construction activity and cranes beyond. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road 11.5.53 It is likely that no construction activity or hoardings would be visible from this location. The magnitude of change on this view is therefore considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint.
11.5.48
11.5.50
11.5.52
11.5.54
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 153
Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road 11.5.55 The foreground of the view would remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. The cranes may be intermittently visible beyond extensive mature tree cover, but would not form a major component of the view. The magnitude of change is therefore considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground 11.5.57 The foreground of the view would remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. However, the cranes would be visible above the roofs of residential properties, intermittently filtered by mature vegetation along the disused railway corridor. The magnitude of change from this location is considered to be negligible due to the retention of existing components of the view, with the cranes only intermittently visible beyond. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens 11.5.59 The foreground of this view would be altered through the introduction of hoardings during the construction phase, following the existing site boundary, prohibiting views across the open aspect of the storm tanks. The cranes would also be highly visible within the foreground of the view, largely unfiltered by intervening vegetation. Construction traffic and the site access points would also be highly visible along Canham Road, alongside construction activity associated with stockpiling of excavated material in the disused railway line. Tree removal along this boundary would further heighten the visibility of construction from this viewpoint. The magnitude of change from this location is considered to be high due to visibility of numerous components of construction activity. The high magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be likely to be of major adverse significance. Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road 11.5.61 The foreground of this view would remain largely unchanged, except for the introduction of greater levels of HGV traffic. The cranes would be visible as a backdrop to the view, above the intervening industrial buildings and street trees. This would add a further industrial element to the view, although the nature of the view would be retained. The magnitude of
11.5.56
11.5.58
11.5.60
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 154
change from this location is considered to be low due to the introduction of new elements to the view without altering the overall character of the visual resource. 11.5.62 The low magnitude of change and medium sensitivity to change means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road 11.5.63 The foreground of the view would remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. However, the cranes would be visible above the roofs of residential properties, intermittently filtered by intervening mature vegetation. The magnitude of change from this location is considered to be negligible due to the retention of existing components of the view, with the cranes only intermittently visible beyond. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road 11.5.65 The foreground of the view would remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. However, the cranes are likely to be visible above the roofs of residential properties, intermittently filtered by intervening mature vegetation. The magnitude of change from this location is considered to be negligible due to the retention of existing components of the view, with the cranes only intermittently visible beyond. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road 11.5.67 The foreground of the view towards the site from this location would remain unchanged. The cranes are likely to be visible beyond the residential properties and intervening vegetation, forming a backdrop to the view. The magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low due to the retention of existing components of the view with the cranes partially visible beyond. The low magnitude of change and medium sensitivity of the receptor means the visual effect of the proposed construction phase would be of minor adverse significance. Employment and other institutions Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road 11.5.69 The foreground of the view would remain unchanged due to the distance from the construction working area. However, the cranes may be visible above the roofs of residential properties, intermittently filtered by intervening mature vegetation along the disused railway corridor. The magnitude of change from this location is considered to be negligible due
11.5.64
11.5.66
11.5.68
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 155
to the retention of existing components of the view, with the cranes only intermittently visible beyond. 11.5.70 The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the low sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed construction phase would give rise to a negligible effect on this viewpoint. The assessment of visual effects during construction is summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 11.5.3 Visual significance of effects - construction Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road High Low Minor adverse High Medium Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Minor adverse Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
11.5.71
High
Medium
High
High
High High
High Low
High
Low
Minor adverse
High
Medium
Moderate adverse
High
Low
Minor adverse
High High
Negligible Negligible
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 156
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Viewpoint Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road Employment and other institutions Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road Low
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect High Negligible Negligible
High
High
Major adverse
Medium
Low
Minor adverse
Medium
Negligible
Negligible
Medium Medium
Negligible Low
Negligible Minor adverse
Negligible
Negligible
11.6
11.6.1 11.6.2
Operational assessment Operational assessment results Year 1 of operation

The operational assessment below describes effects during daylight hours. The operational scheme would have little activity associated with it, aside from infrequent maintenance visits. Therefore, for all townscape character areas it is considered that the proposed development would have a negligible effect on tranquility. Operational effects on the site and surrounding character areas are discussed further below. Operational phase site assessment Year 1 of operation The proposed development would have a direct and permanent effect on the townscape resource of the site. The shaft would encompass an area of land previously occupied by the two northern storm tanks, with access covers and hardstanding for maintenance finished to ground level. The ventilation building and column would introduce built elements into a previously open part of the site, although they would appear adjacent to existing buildings of a similar height. The rest of the site used during construction would be returned to its original condition. It is likely that there would be some improvement to boundaries affected by the works,
11.6.3
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 157
particularly along Canham Road, with any vegetation lost replaced at the end of construction. The effects on specific components of the site are described below: Vol 7 Table 11.6.1 Townscape and visual site effect, Year 1 of operation ID 01 Component Boundary trees Standalone trees Storm tanks Effects Replacement of two trees on Canham Road boundary, compensating for the loss during construction (to be confirmed following tree surveys). No effects during operation. Two storm tanks decommissioned and filled to ground level, substantially altering the character of the northern portion of the site. Boundary conditions largely unchanged, with the exception of the northern boundary along Canham Road, which would comprise new fencing, vegetation and would be partly formed by the faade of the ventilation building. This would improve the boundary condition of the site in this location.
02 03
04
Boundary fencing and vegetation
11.6.4
The magnitude of change and significance of effect on the site would be dependent on the design and finish of the ventilation building and surrounding landscape. The magnitude of change is likely to range from low to medium. Assuming the high quality design of the ventilation building and surrounding landscape, effects are likely to be of benefit to the townscape resource of the area. Assessing this alongside the low sensitivity of the character area means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Operational phase townscape assessment Year 1 of operation Acton Park Industrial Estate
11.6.5
11.6.6
The proposed development would permanently result in the addition of a new building and ventilation column close to the boundary of this character area, forming part of its setting. The new built elements would be similar in scale to existing buildings along the northern boundary of the site, and would reflect the industrial character of the area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be low. Given the low magnitude of change and the low sensitivity of the character area, the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Acton Park Industrial Estate.
11.6.7
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 158
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Valetta Road Residential 11.6.8 11.6.9
The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Valetta Road Residential. Warple Way Residential The proposed development would slightly alter the setting of this character area through the filling in of the northern two storm tanks and the new built elements. The shaft would be finished to ground level, retaining the open aspect of the site, having minimal effect on the setting of Warple Way Residential. The built elements would extend the existing row of buildings that forms part of the setting. Due to the continuity with the existing land use, the magnitude of change would be low. The low magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the character area means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Mayfield Road Residential The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change and low sensitivity to change of this character area means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Mayfield Road Residential. Wendell Park The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Wendell Park. Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area. Bedford Park Conservation Area The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Bedford Park Conservation Area.
11.6.10
11.6.11
11.6.12 11.6.13
11.6.14 11.6.15
11.6.16 11.6.17
11.6.18 11.6.19
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 159
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Bedford Park Residential 11.6.20
The proposed development would slightly alter the setting of this character area due to the presence of the ventilation building and column close to the boundary of the character area, located on previously open space within the storm tanks site. The built elements would extend the existing row of buildings that forms part of the setting, therefore introducing minimal change to the setting of the area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Bedford Park Residential. Southfields Playing Fields The proposed development is not likely to alter the setting of this character area. Therefore, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of this character area, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect on Southfields Playing Fields. The assessment of townscape effects during Year 1 of operation is summarised in below. Vol 7 Table 11.6.2 Townscape significance of effects - Year 1 of operation Townscape character area The site Acton Park Industrial Estate Valetta Road Residential Warple Way Residential Mayfield Road Residential Wendell Park Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area Bedford Park Conservation Area Bedford Park Residential Southfields Playing Fields Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Low Low Medium High Low High High High Medium High Low to medium Low Negligible Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor beneficial Negligible Negligible Minor beneficial Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.6.21
11.6.22 11.6.23
11.6.24
Operational phase townscape assessment Year 1 of operation night time effects 11.6.25 It is likely that the operational scheme would have no substantial lighting requirements. Therefore, for all townscape character areas it is
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 160
considered that the proposed development would have a negligible effect on night time character. Operational phase visual assessment Year 1 of operation Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road 11.6.26 The views towards the proposed development would encompass the ventilation building and column located at the northern extent of the site. In addition, it is likely that the boundary treatment along this part of the site would be improved following construction at the site, which would also be visible from this viewpoint. The new structures would appear alongside existing buildings in the view, and would be similar in scale. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view would be low as the new visible elements would appear in continuity with the surrounding townscape. Through good architectural and landscape design, it is likely that there would be beneficial effects on this residential receptor. In addition, it is likely that the removal of the northern two storm tanks would also result in beneficial effects on this receptor. The low magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.6.29 The view towards the proposed development would be largely focused on the construction working area, which would be reinstated as part of the Thames Water owned site. Views towards the shaft, ventilation building and ventilation column would be partially blocked by existing buildings along Warple Way. The new structures would appear as part of the grouping of buildings towards the northern end of the site, and would be similar in scale. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view would be low as the new visible elements would appear in continuity with the surrounding townscape. Through good architectural and landscape design, it is likely that there would be beneficial effects on this residential receptor. The low magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site 11.6.32 The view across the site would encompass the remaining storm tanks in the foreground, which would remain unchanged, and the new shaft location, ventilation building and ventilation column as a backdrop. The new built elements would limit wider views into Acton Park Industrial Estate from this viewpoint. The building would also appear contiguous with the existing cluster of buildings towards the northern end of the site,
11.6.27
11.6.28
11.6.30 11.6.31
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 161
and would be similar in scale. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view would be low as the new visible elements would appear in continuity with the surrounding townscape. 11.6.33 11.6.34 Through good architectural and landscape design, it is likely that there would be beneficial effects on this residential receptor. The low magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the effect of the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens 11.6.35 The view across the site would encompass the remaining storm tanks in the foreground, which would remain unchanged, and the new shaft location, ventilation building and ventilation column as a backdrop. The new built elements would limit wider views into Acton Park Industrial Estate from this viewpoint. The building would also appear contiguous with the existing cluster of buildings towards the northern end of the site, and would be similar in scale. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view would be low as the new visible elements would appear in continuity with the surrounding townscape. Through good architectural and landscape design, it is likely that there would be beneficial effects on this residential receptor. The low magnitude of change assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would be of minor beneficial significance. Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road 11.6.38 From this location, the tops of the ventilation building and ventilation column are likely to be intermittently visible, set beyond intervening buildings and mature vegetation. The proposed development is unlikely to become a distinct characteristic in the background of the view. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed development would be of minor adverse significance. This is largely due to the introduction of built form which would be intermittently visible, in a location that is currently open space. Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road 11.6.40 From this location, the tops of the ventilation building and ventilation column are likely to be intermittently visible, set beyond intervening buildings and mature vegetation. The proposed development is unlikely to become a distinct characteristic in the background of the view. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed development would be of minor adverse significance. This is largely due
11.6.36 11.6.37
11.6.39
11.6.41
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 162
to the introduction of built form which would be intermittently visible, in a location that is currently open space. Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road 11.6.42 From this location, the tops of the ventilation building and ventilation column are likely to be intermittently visible, set beyond intervening buildings and mature vegetation. The proposed development is unlikely to become a distinct characteristic in the background of the view. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be low. The low magnitude of change, when assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the visual effect of the proposed development would be of minor adverse significance. This is largely due to the introduction of built form which would be intermittently visible, in a location that is currently open space. Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road 11.6.44 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to negligible effects. Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road 11.6.46 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening vegetation and boundary treatments. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road 11.6.48 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road 11.6.50 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature
11.6.43
11.6.45
11.6.47
11.6.49
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 163
vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. 11.6.51 The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground 11.6.52 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens 11.6.54 The view from this location would encompass the proposed ventilation building and ventilation column, orientated along Canham Road. The new built elements would strengthen the frontage along Canham Road, continuing on from the existing properties towards the junction with Warple Way. The proposed development would also largely screen views into the Acton Storm Tanks site from this location. After construction, there is likely to be some improvement in the Canham Road site boundary to reinstate any changes required during the construction phase. Due to the high visibility of the proposed development in this location, partially reduced by the existing presence of buildings of a similar scale in the vicinity, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be medium. Through good architectural and landscape design, it is likely that there would be beneficial effects on this recreational receptor. The medium magnitude of change, assessed alongside the high sensitivity of the receptor means the proposed development would be of moderate beneficial significance. Transport Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road 11.6.57 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect.
11.6.53
11.6.55 11.6.56
11.6.58
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 164
Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road 11.6.59 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road 11.6.61 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road 11.6.63 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the medium sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. Employment and other institutions Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road 11.6.65 It is likely that the proposed development would not be visible from this location due to screening provided by intervening built form and mature vegetation. Therefore, the magnitude of change on this view is considered to be negligible. The negligible magnitude of change, assessed alongside the low sensitivity of the receptor, means the proposed development would give rise to a negligible effect. The assessment of visual effects during Year 1 of operation is summarised below. Vol 7 Table 11.6.3 Visual significance of effects - Year 1 of operation Viewpoint Residential Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and High Low Minor beneficial Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
11.6.60
11.6.62
11.6.64
11.6.66
11.6.67
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 165
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Viewpoint Canham Road Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road Recreational Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens Transport High High
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Low Minor beneficial
High
Low
Minor beneficial
High
Low
Minor beneficial
High
Low
Minor adverse
High
Low
Minor adverse
High
Low
Minor adverse
High
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
High High High
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible Negligible Negligible
High
Medium
Moderate beneficial
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 166
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Viewpoint
Section 11: Townscape and visual Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Negligible Negligible
Viewpoint 3.1: View south Medium from the junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road Employment and other institutions Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road Low Medium
Negligible
Negligible
Medium Medium
Negligible
Negligible
Operational assessment results Year 15 of operation

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

Mitigation measures during the construction phase have been incorporated as far as possible into the CoCP. In addition, a process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to reduce adverse effects arising during construction. Significant adverse effects arising during construction cannot be further mitigated because the scale of construction activities, primarily the height of cranes, and also construction deliveries, would obstruct views and adversely alter the townscape character. Therefore no further mitigation measures are proposed.
Operation
11.7.2 A process of iterative design and assessment has been employed to reduce adverse effects during operation. Operational effects depend heavily on the architectural and landscape design of built elements and boundary conditions, which form part of the project design. During operation, effects are considered to have either a minor adverse, negligible or positive effect on the character of the site, surrounding
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 167
townscape and views from receptors. Therefore no additional mitigation is proposed. However, it is likely that the projects ongoing commitment to high quality design, would lead to the beneficial effects on the townscape resource of the site being maximised.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 168
11.8
Vol 7 Table 11.8.1 Townscape assessment summary - construction Description of effect Change to character due to site clearance an intensity of construction activity. Slight increase in HGV traffic, and presence of cranes. Change to setting due to the presence of cranes. Change to setting due to site hoardings, construction activity and cranes. No significant change in setting. No significant change in setting. No significant change in setting. Change to setting due to the presence of cranes. Change to setting due to the presence of cranes and stockpiles. No significant change in setting. Moderate adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Minor adverse Negligible No mitigation possible Mitigation
Assessment summary
Receptor
The site
Significance of effect Moderate adverse
Significance of residual effect Moderate adverse
Acton Park Industrial Estate
Not required Negligible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Minor adverse
Valetta Road Residential
Warple Way Residential
Moderate adverse Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible Minor adverse
Mayfield Road Residential
Wendell Park
Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area
Bedford Park Conservation Area
Bedford Park Residential
Minor adverse
Southfields Playing Fields
Not required Negligible
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 169
Vol 7 Table 11.8.2 Visual assessment summary - construction Description of effect Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Residential Visibility of site entrance, hoardings, cranes and construction traffic. Visibility of site hoardings, construction activity, welfare facilities and cranes. Visibility of site hoardings, construction activity, welfare facilities and cranes. Visibility of construction activity, welfare facilities and cranes. Visibility of cranes. Moderate adverse Minor adverse Minor adverse Moderate adverse Minor Moderate adverse Moderate adverse No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No mitigation possible No Moderate adverse No mitigation possible Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Moderate adverse Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road
Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site
Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site
Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens
Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road Visibility of cranes.
Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road
Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road
Visibility of cranes, construction activity and construction traffic. Visibility of cranes.
Moderate adverse Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 170
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description of effect adverse mitigation possible No mitigation possible Minor adverse Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Road
Recreational Visibility of cranes. Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible
Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road No significant effects. Intermittent visibility of cranes beyond tree cover. Intermittent visibility of cranes filtered by tree cover. Foreground visibility of site hoardings, Major site access points, cranes, adverse construction activity and construction traffic. Minor adverse Negligible
Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road
Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road
Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground
Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens
No mitigation possible
Major adverse
Transport No mitigation possible Minor adverse
Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the Visibility of cranes and construction junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford traffic. Road Intermittent visibility of cranes filtered by tree cover. Intermittent visibility of cranes filtered
Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road
Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo
Negligible
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 171
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description of effect by tree cover. Visibility of cranes. Minor adverse No mitigation possible Minor adverse Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Road
Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road
Employment and other institutions Intermittent visibility of cranes filtered by tree cover. Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road
Vol 7 Table 11.8.3 Townscape assessment summary Year 1 of operation Description of effect Removal of two storm tanks, introduction of new well designed structures and improved boundary conditions. Mitigation
Receptor
The site
Significance of effect Minor beneficial
Significance of residual effect Not required Minor beneficial
Acton Park Industrial Estate No significant effects.
Slight change to setting through Negligible introduction of the ventilation building. Negligible Minor beneficial Change to setting through removal of two storm tanks, introduction of new well designed structures and improved boundary conditions. No significant effects. No significant effects.
Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Minor beneficial
Valetta Road Residential
Warple Way Residential
Mayfield Road Residential
Not required Negligible Not required Negligible
Wendell Park
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 172
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description of effect No significant effects. No significant effects. Minimal change to setting through introduction of new buildings and structures. No significant effects. Negligible Negligible Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Significance of effect Negligible Mitigation Significance of residual effect Not required Negligible
Receptor
Ravenscourt and Starch Green Conservation Area
Bedford Park Conservation Area
Bedford Park Residential
Southfields Playing Fields
Vol 7 Table 11.8.4 Visual assessment summary Year 1 of operation Description of effect Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Residential Visibility of new well designed structures and buildings, improved boundary condition and two storm tanks filled in. Partial visibility of new well designed structures and buildings, and improved boundary condition. Visibility of new well designed structures and buildings, and improved boundary condition. Visibility of new well designed structures and buildings, and improved boundary condition. Minor beneficial Not required Minor beneficial
Viewpoint 1.1: View west from residences on the junction of Warple Way and Canham Road
Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site
Minor beneficial Minor beneficial Minor beneficial
Not required Minor beneficial
Viewpoint 1.3: View north east from residences along Warple Way adjacent to the site
Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 173
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description of effect Background visibility of the ventilation building and column in a location that is currently open space. Background visibility of the ventilation building and column in a location that is currently open space. Background visibility of the ventilation building and column in a location that is currently open space. No visibility. Negligible Minor adverse Minor adverse Minor adverse Not required Minor adverse Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Viewpoint 1.5: View north east along Greenend Road from Southfield Road
Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road from the northern bend of Southfield Road
Not required Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.7: View east from the junction of Rugby Road, Hatfield Road and Greenend Road
Not required Minor adverse
Viewpoint 1.8: View east from Hatfield Road No visibility. No visibility. No visibility. No visibility. Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Recreational Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath linking Warple Way to Woodstock Road
Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road
Viewpoint 2.3: View north from Abinger Road
Viewpoint 2.4: View from outside the entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground
Viewpoint 2.5: View towards the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens
Foreground visibility of the improved boundary condition and new well designed ventilation building and column.
Moderate beneficial
Not required
Moderate beneficial
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 174
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description of effect Significance of effect Mitigation Significance of residual effect
Receptor
Transport Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 3.1: View south from the No visibility. junction of Stanley Gardens and Bradford Road No visibility. Negligible
Viewpoint 3.2: View south west from the junction of Valetta Road and Larden Road No visibility. No visibility. Negligible Negligible
Viewpoint 3.3: View west along Jeddo Road
Not required Negligible Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road No visibility. Negligible
Employment and other institutions Not required Negligible
Viewpoint 4.1: View towards the site from retail units on Southfield Road
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 175
11.9
11.9.1
The baseline data collection is complete for this site, aside from establishing a baseline for the night time character of the assessment area. The ES will include the summer baseline for each of the character areas and viewpoints. It will also include winter and summer photos for each character area and viewpoint. The study area for the assessment will be reviewed for the ES, based on the findings of the assessment. It may be appropriate to reduce the study area to focus the assessment on likely significant effects. Further work will be undertaken to establish a base case for the Year 15 operational assessment, using professional judgement aligned with future developments. The construction and operational assessments will be completed, including an assessment against the night time baseline. Three verifiable photomontages will be produced for the ES, in the locations indicated on Vol 7 Figure 11.4.6. Ongoing work will be undertaken throughout the assessment process to identify design measures to minimise any adverse effects, and maximise beneficial effects, arising from the proposed scheme in operation. Where possible, these will be embedded in the proposed development. Details of the project design and landscaping will be provided for the planning submission. Further work will be undertaken for the ES to establish the effects of the proposed development after the architectural and landscape design has been fully worked up. This will inform the assessment of operational effects in Year 1 and Year 15. Residual effects remaining after mitigation measures that are identified will be identified and recorded. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES.
11.9.2
11.9.3
11.9.4 11.9.5 11.9.6
11.9.7
11.9.8 11.9.9
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 176
Section 12: Transport
12 12.1
12.1.1 12.1.2
Transport Introduction
This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant transport effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The site has the potential to affect transport in the following ways: a. effects on pedestrian routes b. effects on cycle routes c. effects on bus routes and patronage d. effects on London Underground and National Rail services e. effects on river services and patronage f. effects on car and coach parking g. effects on highway layout, operation and capacity.
12.1.3 12.1.4
Each of these effects is considered within this assessment for both construction and operational phases of the project. This section details the site-specific findings for Acton Storm Tanks site. As detailed in Volume 5, the transport assessment also comprises assessment at Borough (sub area) and project-wide levels these assessments are contained in Volume 6. More detailed analysis of all three levels of assessment (site-specific, Borough level and project-wide) will be presented in the ES. This assessment provides a commentary on the anticipated transport effects of the project. When baseline data collection and analysis is complete a full quantitative transport assessment will be carried out. The assessment and mitigation text contained within this section is therefore based on professional judgement using available information at the time of writing.
12.1.5
12.2
12.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to transport are as follows.
Construction
12.2.2 Construction details for the site relevant to the construction transport assessment are summarised below. Vol 7 Table 12.2.1 Transport - site construction traffic Description Assumed peak period of construction lorry movements* Assumed average peak daily Assumption Year 2 of construction 40 movements per day
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 177
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Description construction lorry vehicle movements Types of lorry requiring access
Section 12: Transport Assumption (20 two-way lorry trips)
Excavation lorries Concrete lorries Rebar lorries Office lorries Pipe/track/oils lorries Grout/materials lorries
* a movement represents a one way trip
12.2.3
Vehicle movements would take place during the typical day shift of ten hours on weekdays (08:00 to 18:00) and five hours on Saturdays (08:00 to 13:00) with up to one hour before and after these hours for mobilisation of staff. Mobilisation may include: loading; unloading; and arrival and departure of workforce and staff at site and movement to and from the place of work. During construction it is assumed that all materials would be transported to and from the site by road. Lorry routing during construction phasing A new temporary construction access would be created off Canham Road, along the northern perimeter for the site. Construction vehicles would access the site utilising the existing one way system which exists along Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens. A width restriction of 7.5m applies to these roads. Construction vehicles would transfer between The Vale (A4020) carriageway and the Acton Storm Tanks site by travelling southbound along Warple Way and subsequently northbound along Stanley Gardens. The exact origin and destination of construction vehicles have not currently been determined. Consequently, vehicles could either access from, or travel to, either a general westerly or easterly direction. If vehicles were to travel to a westerly direction, then the primary route would be via the M4 motorway and the A406 Gunnersbury Avenue, prior The Uxbridge Road / The Vale (A4020). A secondary route, utilising the A40 Western Avenue and the A4000 Horn Lane / The Steyne, prior The Uxbridge Road / The Vale is also being considered. If vehicles were to travel to an easterly direction, then the primary route would be to use the A40 Western Avenue and the Old Oak Road, prior The Vale. A secondary route, utilising the A40 Westway, the A3220 West Cross Route and the entire eastern section of The Vale is also being considered.
12.2.4
12.2.5 12.2.6
12.2.7
12.2.8
12.2.9
12.2.10
12.2.11
12.2.12
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 178
Vol 7 Figure 12.2.1 indicates the construction traffic routes for access to/from the Acton Storm Tanks site. These are being discussed with both TfL and the Local Highway Authority (LHA). Vol 7 Figure 12.2.1 Transport - construction traffic routes (see Volume 7 Figures document)
12.2.14
The histogram in Vol 7 Figure 12.2.2 below shows that peak activity at the Acton Storm Tanks site would occur in Year 2 of construction. This peak is later than the overall project-wide construction peak activity year of 2019. Most of the excavated material would be used to infill two of the existing storm tanks, which would minimise the number of lorries visiting the site.
12.2.15
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 179
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Vol 7 Figure 12.2.2 Transport - construction traffic profile
Note: Figure shows indicative volumes and movements based upon assumed timings for the works. It is not a schedule and remains subject to change.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 180
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Construction workers 12.2.16
The construction site is expected to require a maximum workforce of approximately 40 people at any one time. The number and type of workers is shown in the table below. Vol 7 Table 12.2.2 Transport - construction worker numbers Contractor Staff 08:00-18:00 15 Labour 08:00-18:00 20 Client Staff 08:00-18:00 5
12.2.17
It is difficult to predict with certainty the direction that workers would arrive/depart to and from the site. Staff could potentially be based in the local area or in the wider Greater London area and are unlikely to have the same trip attraction to primary routes as construction lorries. The method of distribution of worker trips on the transport networks, including the public transport services, will be agreed with the Local Highway Authority (LHA) and Transport for London (TfL). Code of construction practice Measures incorporated into the CoCP to reduce transport impacts include measures in relation to HGV management and control such as specific vehicle routes to sites and holding areas for construction vehicles. They also include provision for management plans in relation to construction worker journeys to and from the site. The implementation of these measures has been assumed for the assessment of construction effects.
12.2.18
12.2.19
12.2.20
Operation
12.2.21 12.2.22 The operational structure would be located within the existing Thames Water pumping station and storm water tanks site. Access would be required for a light commercial vehicle on a three to six monthly maintenance schedule. Access would be via the existing site access at the junction of Canham Road and Warple Way. Additionally there would be more significant maintenance visits every ten years which would require access to enable two cranes to be brought to the site, which may require temporary suspension of on-street parking in the vicinity of the site. Access would utilise two new accesses onto Canham Road in the area of the access created for construction purposes
12.2.23
12.3
12.3.1

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. All consultee comments relevant to this site are presented in the table below.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 181
It is noted that it was reported in the Scoping Report that operational traffic effects were scoped out of the EIA. However, while the environmental effects associated with transport for the operational phase are not expected to be significant or adverse, the Transport Assessment which will accompany the ES as part of the application, will examine the operational phase in order to satisfy the relevant stakeholders that technical issues have been addressed (for example, those associated with access for maintenance activities). As this also allows conclusions in relation to environmental effects to be drawn, these have been included in the assessment for completeness. Vol 7 Table 12.3.1 Transport stakeholder engagement Organisation LB of Ealing Comment The assessment should cover road safety, network impact, construction strategy, method statement, trip generation, freight management, travel plan and parking. Response These issues will be covered in the Transport Assessment for the Acton Storm Tanks site.
LB of Ealing
Road surfaces to be returned to This would be standard if damage caused. managed through the CoCP. Ability of Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens to accommodate large vehicles was questioned. Programme of utility works on Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens. Swept path analyses will be undertaken and to determine accessibility. This will be reported in the ES. LB Ealing agreed to try and programme works to take place outside of Thames Tunnel construction period. Alternative route was identified. The route through Shepherds Bush gyratory is now a secondary route. This would be a standard requirement across all Thames Tunnel construction sites as outlined in the CoCP.
LB of Ealing
LB of Ealing
LB of Ealing
Investigate construction route that avoids Shepherds Bush Gyratory.
LB of Ealing
Require vehicles to go through wheel wash before leaving site.
LB of Ealing
Warple Way, Canham Road Possible ice on the and Stanley Gardens cannot be carriageway, specific gritted during winter. care to be taken during winter months.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 182
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Organisation Transport for London Comment Construction lorry routes should avoid Holland Park roundabout, Shepherds Bush gyratory and Earls Court One Way System if possible.
Section 12: Transport Response Alternative routes to avoid these locations are being explored.
Baseline
12.3.3 The baseline methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Construction
12.3.4 The construction phase methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Operation
12.3.5 The operational phase methodology follows the standard methodology described in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.

12.3.6 The assumptions and limitations made for the transport assessment are as listed in Volume 5. Site specific assumptions and limitations for the site will be provided in the ES when the detailed assessment is presented. The preliminary assessment findings reported in this report are qualitative and based on professional judgement.
12.3.7
12.4
12.4.1
Baseline conditions
The Thames Tunnel Acton Storm Tanks site is located on land within the existing Thames Water pumping station and storm water tanks fronting Warple Way and Canham Road, Acton, within LB of Ealing. The site is currently open space, forming part of the landscaped area of the pumping station, situated at the northern part of the site, adjacent to Canham Road. The site is in close proximity to the boundaries of LB Hammersmith and Fulham and LB Hounslow. It is bounded to the north by Canham Road and industrial units. The east and south-east of the site are bounded by Warple Way and multi storey residential properties. To the south-west and west there are further dwellings along Greenend Road. The surrounding area is predominantly light industrial and residential in character with the nearest residents to the interception site situated on the southern side of Canham Road adjacent to the existing storm tanks land boundary. There is road access to the site via Warple Way and Canham Road, approximately 400m from the A4020 (Uxbridge Road / The Vale). The following sub-sections describe the baseline conditions of the site in relation to pedestrians, public transport and highways. Sensitive receptors
12.4.2
12.4.3
12.4.4 12.4.5
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 183
in the vicinity of the site are also identified. Vol 7 Figure 12.4.1 shows the Transport Site Plan. Vol 7 Figure 12.4.1 Transport site plan (see Volume 7 Figures document)
Pedestrian routes
12.4.6 There is good pedestrian access along The Vale with adequate footway widths provided. Dropped kerbs and signalised crossing points are present at the junction of The Vale, East Acton Lane and Warple Way. There are footways of an average width along both sides of the Warple Way. Canham Road has footways on both sides of the carriageway; however, these are very narrow across the length of the road. There is a pedestrian cut through to Rugby Road from the westerly edge of Canham Road. Stanley Gardens has reasonable width footways along both sides of this northbound road. There is no signalised crossing at the junction of Stanley Gardens and The Vale.
12.4.7 12.4.8
12.4.9 12.4.10
Cycle routes
12.4.11 There are a number of cycle routes in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site. Signed routes on busier roads exist along sections of: a. St Albans Avenue, Speldhurst Road and Rusthall Avenue to the south-west of the site. b. The Vale to the north. c. In the east along Larden Road, Cobbold Road, Warple Way (south of the junction with Canham Road), and Valetta Road (the section between Warple Way and Larden Road). A contraflow cycle lane exists along Warple Way, south of the Canham Road junction.
12.4.12 12.4.13
Advanced stop lines are provided in both directions along The Vale at the junction with Warple Way. A short section of advisory cycle lane is provided in the westbound direction on The Vale, across the junction with Stanley Gardens. This advisory route leads into a bus lane just to the west of the Stanley Gardens junction. Lightly trafficked roads, and therefore quieter routes for cyclists, exist along Rugby Road, Southfield Road, Somerset Road and St Albans Avenue to the west; along the one-way route of Warple Way, Canham Road, and Stanley Gardens directly north of the site; and Valetta Road, Agnes Road, and Bromyard Avenue to the east. Further quiet routes exist further north along East Acton Lane and across the adjacent park.
12.4.14
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 184
Bus routes
12.4.15 The site is classified as having a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of between 1 and 2 which indicates that public transport provision in the vicinity is poor. The closest bus stop to the site is located on Southfields Road/Rubgy Road, approximately 120m west of the site access. This stop is served by the E3 bus which operates between Clifton Road and Edensor Road/Chiswick Pool. It has an hourly frequency of nine buses during the AM peak, PM peak, inter-peak, and on Saturdays. The frequency of the E3 is six per hour on a Sunday. Bus route 70 stops at Acton Park, located less than 500m to the northwest of the site. It provides a service which operates between Acton Market Place and Queensberry Place. Route 70 has a frequency of six buses per hour during the AM peak, PM peak, inter-peak and on Saturdays. Sundays have a frequency of four buses per hour. Routes 272 and 607 both stop along Bromyard Avenue, 650m to the north of the Acton Storm Tanks site. Route 272 travels between Cavendish Road and Shepherds Bush Station and has an AM peak frequency of five buses per hour. The PM peak, inter-peak, Saturdays and Sundays all have a frequency of four buses per hour along the 272 bus route. Route 607 offers a more frequent service of eight buses per hour during the AM peak, six buses per hour during the PM peak, inter-peak and on Saturdays, and five buses per hour on Sundays. The 607 operates between Uxbridge Station and White City Bus Station. Bus routes 266 and 207 both call at East Acton Lane, also about 650m to the north of the Acton site as well as stops along The Vale. Route 266 operates between Hammersmith Bus Station and Brent Cross Shopping Centre and has a frequency of eight buses per hour during the AM peak, PM peak, inter-peak and on Saturdays. It offers a Sunday frequency of six buses per hour. The 207 travels between Hayes Bypass and White City Bus Station and has a frequency of some 12 buses per hour during the AM peak, PM peak and inter-peak, and a frequency of eight buses per hour on weekends. Vol 7 Figure 12.4.1 shows the location of the bus stops in the vicinity of the site. The destinations and frequency of the routes are detailed in the table below. Vol 7 Table 12.4.1 Transport - bus service frequency Distance from site (meters) and Location of Bus Stop 485m (Acton Park/ Greenview Close) AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour 6
12.4.16
12.4.17
12.4.18
12.4.19
12.4.20
Route Number 70
Origin - Destination
Acton Market Place to Queensberry Place
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 185
Route Number 70
207 207 266 266 272
272
607
607
E3 E3
Distance from site (meters) and Origin - Destination Location of Bus Stop 470m (Acton Queensberry Place to Acton Park/ Market Greenview Close) 485m (East Hayes Bypass to White City Acton Lane) Bus Station 495m (East White City Bus Station to Acton Lane) Hayes Bypass 495m (East Hammersmith Bus Station to Acton Lane) Brent Cross Shopping Centre 485m (East Brent Cross Shopping Centre Acton Lane) to Hammersmith Bus Station 645m Cavendish Road to (Bromyard Shepherds Bush Station Avenue) 640m Shepherds Bush Station to (Bromyard Cavendish Road Avenue) 640m Uxbridge Station to White (Bromyard City Bus Station Avenue) 645m White City Bus Station to (Bromyard Uxbridge Station Avenue) 245m (Rugby Clifton Road to Edensor Road) Road/Chiswick Pool 305m (Rugby Edensor Road/Chiswick Pool Road) to Clifton Road
AM Peak (07:00-10:00) buses per hour 6
12 12 8 8 5
9 9
London Underground and National Rail stations

12.4.21 Acton Central National Rail station is approximately 750m north-west of the site and serves stations along the London Overground line from Stratford to Richmond. In the AM and PM peaks, four trains serve Acton Central rail station from the eastbound/Richmond direction. There are four arrivals at Acton Central rail station during the AM peak from westbound/Stratford trains, and three during the PM peak. Turnham Green underground station is located approximately 1km south from the site egress point offering services for the District and Piccadilly Lines.
12.4.22
River services
12.4.23 There are no existing wharfage / jetty facilities at the Acton Storm Tanks site as it is more than 1.5km from the river.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 186
Parking
Existing on-street car parking 12.4.24 No parking is permitted along The Vale in the vicinity of the Warple Way and Stanley Gardens access roads between Monday and Saturday 18:0018:30. From observations, parking appears to be well used along the Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens loop, however, some capacity seems to remain. There are short sections of double yellow lines along Warple Way, with the remaining length parked on along both sides of the one-way road. Canham Road has parking along the northern side of this one-way road. A single yellow line covers the full southern extent. Single yellow lines prevent parking along a lengthy corner section between Canham Road and Stanley Gardens. Stanley Gardens has permitted parking along the vast majority of the eastern side of this northbound one-way road, and shorter sections of parking on the western side. The western side of Stanley Gardens has sections of single yellow lines that prevent parking along certain sections of the carriageway. There is no coach parking in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site. Existing off-street / private car parking 12.4.31 12.4.32 There is some limited off-street private parking within the businesses along Warple Way. A larger number of off-street private parking bays are located along Allied Way, off Warple Way, and within Acton Park Industrial Estate which can be accessed of Stanley Gardens. There is also a private off-street car park located on a section of disused railway line adjacent to the south-western boundary of the site. The car park can be accessed via the southern end of Warple Way
12.4.25
12.4.26 12.4.27 12.4.28 12.4.29
12.4.30
12.4.33
Highway network
12.4.34 The Vale is a wide single carriageway two-way road which in places becomes dual carriageway. There are also sections where dedicated bus lanes are in place. Traffic signals control the majority of junctions and advanced stop lines are provided for cyclists at some of these junctions. Sections of advisory cycle lanes are in place along The Vale with these often leading into dedicated bus lanes. Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens form a single carriageway clockwise one-way loop which has a width restriction of 7.5m. The southbound Warple Way becomes a no-through route at the junction with Canham Road. The northbound Warple Way joins the one-way system at the same location.
12.4.35 12.4.36
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 187
Survey data
Description of surveys 12.4.37 Baseline survey data for the Acton Storm Tanks site were collected in June and July 2011 to establish the existing transport movements in the area. Manual and automated traffic surveys were undertaken to establish specific traffic, pedestrian and cycle movements including turning volumes, queue lengths, saturation flows, degree of saturation and traffic signal timings. The following junction surveys were undertaken in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site to understand highway operation in the area. a. The Vale / Larden Road b. East Acton Lane / The Vale / Warple Way c. The Vale / Stanley Gardens d. The Vale / Uxbridge Road (A4020) / Old Oak / Askew Road (B408) e. Uxbridge Road (A4020) / High Street / Steyne Road (A4000) / Gunnersbury Lane (A4000) f. Uxbridge Road (A4020) / Hanger Lane (A406) / Gunnersbury Avenue g. Gunnersbury Ave / Gunnersbury Lane (A4000) / Popes Lane (B4491) h. The Vale (A4020) / Eastman Road i. j. 12.4.39 Eastman Road / Acton Park Industrial Estate Stanley Gardens / Bradford Road / Acton Park Industrial Estate.
12.4.38
Automated Traffic Counters (ATC) were placed in the following locations to obtain data on traffic flows: a. The Vale by Bromyard Avenue b. The Vale by Mansell Road.
12.4.40
Pedestrian and cycle surveys were undertaken in the following locations: a. The Vale signalised crossing, west of Larden Road b. The Vale, west of Eastman Road c. Walk-through between Rugby Road / Stanley Gardens / Canham Road
d. Walk-through between Southfield Road / Warple Way / Emlyn Road. 12.4.41 A parking survey was undertaken in the roads surrounding the site to establish occupancy of on-street parking spaces on the following roads: a. Stanley Gardens b. Warple Way c. Canham Road d. Valetta Road e. Larden Road
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 188
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks f. Dordrecht Road
g. Land to south of Canham Road. Results of surveys 12.4.42 Data obtained from the surveys was being processed at the time of writing and will be reported fully in the ES.
Data from third party sources

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

12.4.44 The receptors and their sensitivities in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site are summarised in the table below. The transport receptor sensitivity is defined as high, medium or low using the criteria detailed in Volume 5. As the assessment undertaken for this report is judgement based (rather than being based on quantitative analysis), it has not been possible to identify the effects at individual receptors. A commentary is however provided on the effects upon individual receptor groups; namely pedestrians and cyclists in the local area and users/operators of the local bus services, rail network, river services, parking and local highway network. A full assessment will be provided in the ES.
12.4.45
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 189
Vol 7 Table 12.4.2 Transport receptor values/sensitivities Value/sensitivity and justification High Receptor Residents on Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens. Pedestrians and cyclists using Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens for access and as a through route. Emergency vehicles accessing the commercial and residential units within the local area. Business owners, small commercial units and workplace occupiers along Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens. Private vehicle users in the area using the local highways or parking. No receptors with low sensitivity
Medium
Low
12.5
12.5.1
At this stage in the assessment process a qualitative assessment has been undertaken based on discussions with TfL and the LHAs, knowledge of the transport networks and their operational characteristics in the vicinity of each site and knowledge of the construction programme, duration and levels of construction activity. These elements have been considered in the context of the range of receptors present in each location and the significance criteria identified. Professional judgement has been applied to determine qualitatively the likely effects and their significance in each location being assessed. The Transport Assessment will include full quantitative and qualitative analysis and the transport effects reported in the ES will be based on that detailed analysis.
12.5.2
Construction base and development cases

Assessment year 12.5.3 As described in Volume 5, 2019 has been used as the construction assessment year for all sites, as agreed with TfL, to enable a networkwide assessment. The peak period for vehicle trips to the site is predicted to be in Year 2 of construction which will be the assessment year for local network assessments and will be contained in the ES. For this report the assessment is undertaken for the network-wide 2019 assessment year.
12.5.4
12.5.5
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 190
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Assessment area 12.5.6 12.5.7
The area being assessed for the Acton Storm Tanks site is based on discussions with LB Ealing and Transport for London. Local roads and junctions included in the assessment are as follows: a. The Vale / Larden Road b. East Acton Lane / The Vale / Warple Way c. The Vale / Stanley Gardens d. The Vale / Uxbridge Road (A4020) / Old Oak / Askew Road (B408) e. Uxbridge Road (A4020) / High Street / Steyne Road (A4000) / Gunnersbury Lane (A4000) f. Uxbridge Road (A4020) / Hanger Lane (A406) / Gunnersbury Avenue g. Gunnersbury Ave / Gunnersbury Lane (A4000) / Popes Lane (B4491) h. The Vale (A4020) / Eastman Road i. j. Eastman Road / Acton Park Industrial Estate Stanley Gardens / Bradford Road / Acton Park Industrial Estate.
12.5.8
These roads and junctions would be assessed for highway, cycle and pedestrian impacts. Local bus and rail services, as identified on Vol 7 Figure 12.4.1, would also be assessed. Construction base case The construction base case takes into account traffic growth and new developments within the local area by 2019. Research has identified that there are no major identified new developments in the immediate vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site that are likely to influence transport conditions for the construction base case. The following sub-sections detail what is assumed to change between the baseline and base case scenario with respect to the different transport aspects considered. Pedestrian routes Pedestrian routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. The base case therefore assumes the same pedestrian routes as set out in Section 12.4. Cycle routes Cycle routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumes the same cycle routes as set out in Section 12.4. Bus routes and patronage Bus routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore are assumed to be the same in the base case. Bus patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment.
12.5.9 12.5.10
12.5.11
12.5.12
12.5.13
12.5.14
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 191
London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.15 London Underground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. London Underground patronage is anticipated to increase, the effects of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment. National Rail routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. National Rail patronage is anticipated to increase, the effect of which will be detailed in the Transport Assessment (which will be appended to the ES). River services and patronage 12.5.17 River services and patronage are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Parking 12.5.18 Coach and car parking provision is assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Highway layout 12.5.19 The physical layout of the highway network is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumed the same highway layout. Highway operation 12.5.20 Population growth and development in the wider area will result in an increase in traffic on the surrounding highway network. As a result of this increase, it is anticipated that traffic flows may be heavier and queues longer. Highway capacity analysis 12.5.21 Baseline traffic flows (from the junction surveys) will be used and forecasting carried out to understand the capacity on the highway network in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Tanks site in 2019 without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Ealing and Transport for London. The full assessment of the highway operation and capacity analysis will be undertaken in the ES. Construction development case 12.5.23 12.5.24 The construction development case comprises the base case plus construction activities associated with the Acton Storm Tanks site. This section addresses the changes that would arise as a result of the Thames Tunnel construction activities at the Acton Storm Tanks site. Construction vehicle movements 12.5.25 It has been assumed for the purposes of the assessment that construction lorry movements are limited to the day shift only (08:00 to 18:00). The table below shows the construction lorry movement assumptions for the local peak traffic periods. These are based on the peak months of
12.5.16
12.5.22
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 192
construction activity at this site. The table also shows the construction worker movements expected to be generated by the site. 12.5.26 These movements are based on the assumption that all material is transported to and from the site by road. Vol 7 Table 12.5.1 Transport forecast construction vehicle movements Vehicle movements per time period* Vehicle type Total Daily 0700 to 0800 0800 to 0900 1700 to 1800 1800 to 1900 0 14 14
Construction vehicle movements 10%* Worker vehicle movements Total
40 28 60
0 14 14
3 0 3
3 0 3
* As explained in Volume 5 it has been assumed that a maximum of 10% of daily construction vehicle movements associated with materials would take place in each of the peak hours.
12.5.27
Assuming all excavated material and other material is taken by road, an average peak flow of 68 vehicle movements a day is expected during the months of greatest activity at this site. At other times in the construction period, vehicle flows would be lower than this average peak figure. Modal split The Acton Storm Tanks site has a PTAL of between 1 and 2. A limited amount of parking might be provided on site for workers. It is assumed that some travel to site or between sites is required (for maintenance, client supervision etc) therefore it has been assumed that 60% of staff and 10% of labour staff could drive to the site. Workers who are unable to drive to the site would use other modes. Information regarding the travel arrangements of these workers will be included in the Construction Management Plan and Work Place Travel Plan documents for the site (to be submitted as part of the application). Pedestrian routes A new crossover would be required at the site entrance on Canham Road and would require a large section of footpath to be removed. Cycle routes No cycle routes run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on directly by the construction site development. Bus routes and patronage No bus services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development.
12.5.28
12.5.29
12.5.30
12.5.31
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 193
London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.32 No underground or rail services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development. River services and patronage 12.5.33 No river services run through the site and therefore none would be impacted on by the construction site development. Parking 12.5.34 The construction site boundary encompasses the access to the private car park which is located on the disused railway line adjacent to the southwestern boundary of the Acton Storm Tanks site. Access to the car park would be maintained during the construction phase but may be subject to temporary realignment. It may also be necessary to rearrange an area of parking adjacent to the car park entrance during the construction phase. Highway layout 12.5.35 12.5.36 Two new accesses from Canham Road would be provided into the site. Highway operation Highway operation would not be impacted on by the worksite area.
12.5.37 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the assessment undertaken for the assessment year based on professional judgement. A more detailed assessment will be presented in the ES. Pedestrian routes 12.5.38 The footways adjacent to the site on Canham Road would be affected upon by the works. Should closures be required there are alternative routes on the opposite side of the carriageway. It is not possible for an articulated or rigid lorry to undertake the left-turn movement from Stanley Gardens to The Vale without entering the opposing lane of traffic. It is therefore proposed, and will be discussed and agreed with LB Ealing and TfL, to remove a section of footpath on the western side of the Stanley Gardens where it meets The Vale to provide additional carriageway width allowing vehicles to undertake the left-turn movement. On the basis of the above diversions increasing crossing distances and journey times for pedestrians, it is considered that the effect on pedestrian routes would be minor adverse. Cycle routes 12.5.41 The existing cycle routes in the area are not segregated and although quiet cycle routes exist along Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens, the level of construction traffic at the Acton Storm Tanks site would not require any diversions to be established. Cyclists routing along Warple Way, Canham Road and Stanley Gardens may occasionally encounter large vehicles at times along this route as a
12.5.39
12.5.40
12.5.42
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 194
result of the construction site at Acton Storm Tanks. This would reduce the road width available to cyclists when passing or being passed by large vehicles and would represent a slight increase in safety hazard. Therefore, it is expected that the effect on cycle routes would be minor adverse. Bus routes and patronage 12.5.43 12.5.44 The routing of bus services in the area would not be affected by the construction works at the Acton Storm Tanks site. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using buses to access the site during construction, however, it is considered that the effect on bus routes and patronage would be negligible. London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.5.45 The underground service at Turnham Green is not likely be affected by the construction works at the Acton Storm Tanks site, nor National Rail services at Acton Central Station. It is anticipated that there would be a proportion of labourers and staff using rail and underground to access the site during construction, however, it is expected that the effect on London Underground, Overground and National Rail services would be negligible. River services and patronage 12.5.47 Construction materials to/from the Acton Storm Tanks site would not be transported by river and therefore would not alter or affect any river services. On this basis the effect on river services would be negligible. Parking 12.5.48 It is proposed that the site would be accessed from Canham Road. It would be necessary to construct a new site access directly from Canham Road into the northern edge of the Acton Storm Tanks site. The on-street parking on Canham Road located opposite the site access would need to be removed to enable manoeuvrability. There is inadequate width available on Warple Way to accommodate the one-way travel of an articulated or rigid lorry. The removal of a significant amount of on-street parking on the eastern side of Warple Way could be required. Similarly, there is inadequate width available on Stanley Gardens to accommodate one-way travel of an articulated or rigid lorry. The removal of a significant amount of on-street parking on the western side of Stanley Gardens could be required. The suspension of some of the parking on Stanley Gardens, Warple Way and Canham Road would reduce the amount of on-street parking available although parking would be reprovided in the local area if demand requires. Additionally, the access to the private car park adjacent to the southwestern boundary of the construction site would remain open during the construction phase but may be subject to temporary realignment. It may
12.5.46
12.5.49
12.5.50
12.5.51
12.5.52
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 195
also be necessary to rearrange an area of parking adjacent to the car park entrance during the construction phase. 12.5.53 On the basis of the above, it is considered that the effect of the construction works on car parking would be moderate adverse. Highway layout 12.5.54 Vehicles undertaking the right turn movement from Stanley Gardens onto The Vale may not be able to complete the turning movement if there is a large vehicle waiting to undertake the right turn movement from The Vale to Warple Way. As only a small volume of vehicles are expected to service the Acton Storm Tanks site this is not expected to be a significant issue, however, there may be a need to slightly alter the junction of Stanley Gardens and The Vale to better accommodate left turn lorry movements. During these junction alterations temporary pedestrian and traffic management measures would be implemented if required. There may also be a slight delay to vehicles attempting to egress Stanley Gardens if they are behind a construction vehicle turning left onto The Vale. Likewise, general traffic on The Vale could be delayed by construction vehicles turning right from The Vale into Warple Way. Overall it is considered that the effect on local highway layout would be minor adverse. Highway operation 12.5.57 The majority of construction vehicles would be routing from the site, west along The Vale and Uxbridge Road and then in a southerly direction along the North Circular before joining the M4 near Chiswick. On exiting Stanley Gardens, the only route out of the site on Canham Road, there is a dedicated left turn lane which would allow construction vehicles to merge into the vehicle flows along The Vale. A set of traffic signals on The Vale just to the east of Stanley Gardens would regulate the flow of traffic and allow sufficient gaps to safely join the westbound flows thus reducing the impact of the additional vehicles on current traffic flows. There may be a delay to vehicles routing along The Vale due to construction vehicles undertaking the turning movements into Warple Way and out of Stanley Gardens. Therefore, it is expected that the effect on highway operation (specifically the ease of vehicle movements) would be minor adverse. Highway capacity analysis 12.5.59 The levels of construction vehicle movement expected at this site are comparatively low in the context of the amount of traffic already using the road network in the surrounding area. Due to the overall increase in vehicles using the local road network, it is expected that the effect on highway capacity would be minor adverse. Significance of effects 12.5.61 The significance of the transport effects described above has been determined as part of the ongoing assessment and analysis. With regard
12.5.55
12.5.56
12.5.58
12.5.60
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 196
to the application of the IEMA criteria detailed in Volume 5, this is based on professional judgement for the purposes of the assessment. 12.5.62 During construction, the number of heavy goods vehicle movements would be moderate. The nature of the construction site layout at this location is considered likely to result in a minor to moderate adverse effect on road network operation and delay. Effects on pedestrian and cyclist amenity and safety are expected to be minor adverse.
12.6
12.6.1
This section summarises the preliminary findings of the assessment based on professional judgement. The results summarised below will be presented in more detail in the ES. A qualitative approach to the assessment is appropriate due to the transport activity during the operational phase being very low. The transport elements have been considered in the context of the range of receptors present in each location and the significance criteria identified. Professional judgement has been applied to determine qualitatively the likely effects and their significance in each location being assessed. The transport effects reported in the ES will be based on more detailed information and qualitative analysis where this is appropriate.
12.6.2
Operational base and development cases

Assessment year 12.6.3 As outlined in Volume 5 the operational assessment year has been taken as year 1 of operation. As transport activity associated with the operational phase is very low, there is no requirement to assess any other year beyond that date. Assessment area 12.6.4 The assessment area for the operational assessment remains the same as for the construction assessment as set out in paras. 12.5.6-12.5.7. This includes those roads and junctions which lead to/from the Acton Storm Tanks site to the SRN and TRLN. Operational base case 12.6.5 The operational base case takes into account traffic growth within the local area by year 1 of operation (no new developments are anticipated that would affect local traffic flows see para. 12.5.10). The following sub-sections detail what is assumed to change between the baseline and base case scenario with respect to the different transport aspects considered. Pedestrian routes 12.6.7 Pedestrian routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. The base case therefore assumes the same pedestrian routes as set out in Section 12.4.
12.6.6
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 197
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Cycle routes 12.6.8
Cycle routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore the base case assumes the same cycle routes as set out in Section 12.4. Bus routes and patronage Bus routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions and therefore are assumed to be the same in the base case. Bus patronage is anticipated to increase between 2011 (baseline) and year 1 of operation and the assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. London Underground and National Rail and patronage London Underground routes are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. It is anticipated that London Underground patronage will increase between 2011 and year 1 of operation and the assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. National Rail routes are not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. It is anticipated that National Rail patronage will increase between the baseline and year 1 of operation and the assessment will be detailed further in the Transport Assessment. River services and patronage River services and patronage are assumed to be the same as baseline conditions as no changes are anticipated. Parking Parking provision is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. Highway layout The physical layout of the highway network is not anticipated to change from baseline conditions. Highway operation Population growth and development in the surrounding area will result in an increase in traffic on the surrounding highway network. As a result of this increase, it is anticipated that traffic flows may be heavier and queues longer. Highway capacity analysis Baseline traffic flows (from the junction surveys) are being used and forecasting carried out to understand the capacity on the highway network in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks site in year 1 of operation without the Thames Tunnel project. The scope of this analysis is being agreed with LB Ealing and Transport for London and will be reported in the ES.
12.6.9 12.6.10
12.6.11 12.6.12
12.6.13 12.6.14
12.6.15
12.6.16 12.6.17
12.6.18
12.6.19
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 198
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Operational development case 12.6.20
The operational development case for the site includes any permanent changes in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks site as a result of the Thames Tunnel project and takes into consideration the occasional maintenance activities required at the site. Trip generation For routine three or six monthly inspections and equipment exercising, vehicular access would be required for light commercial vehicles. In most cases this would be typically a transit van. On occasion there may be a consequent need for small flatbed vehicles with lifting cranes, for example to remove plant from the site. During 10 yearly inspections, sites for placing two large cranes would be required. The cranes would facilitate lowering and recovery of tunnel inspection vehicles and to provide duty/standby access for personnel. Modal split It is anticipated that all trips during the operational phase would be using transit van or large construction vehicles. No trips would be made by public transport, walking or cycling due to the nature of maintenance requiring equipment that can only be transported by vehicles. Pedestrian routes The footways and kerb alignments adjacent to the Acton Storm Tanks site would be reinstated following the construction phase. There would be an additional dropped kerb at the new access on Canham Road to provide site access for construction and subsequent maintenance vehicles. Cycle routes The designated cycle routes within the area would be maintained and would not be affected during the operational phase. Bus routes and patronage No change is expected to any bus services in the operational phase and it is not anticipated that operational staff journeys would be made by bus. London Underground and National Rail and patronage No change is expected to any London Underground or National Rail service in the operational phase and it is not anticipated that operational staff journeys would be made by rail. River services and patronage No change is expected to any river services as a result of the operational phase. Parking No change is expected to car parking in the vicinity of the site, compared to the base case, as a result of the operational phase arrangements at Acton Storm Tanks.
12.6.21
12.6.22
12.6.23
12.6.24
12.6.25
12.6.26
12.6.27
12.6.28
12.6.29
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 199
When large vehicles are required to service the site, some parking may have to be suspended to ensure the vehicles have sufficient space to manoeuvre into the site. Highway layout The site would be accessed via Warple Way and Canham Road during the operational phase. This reflects the current access arrangements for the site. Highway operation Occasional maintenance vehicles would service Acton Storm Tanks every three to six months. When larger vehicles are required to service the site, there may be some temporary, short-term delay to other road users.
12.6.31
12.6.32 12.6.33
Operational effects
12.6.34 This section summarises the preliminary findings of the operational assessment undertaken for the year 1 of operation assessment year. The results summarised below will be presented in more detail in the ES. Pedestrian routes 12.6.35 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on pedestrian routes in the area and footways adjacent to the site. Cycle routes 12.6.36 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on cycle routes in the area and on the roads surrounding the site. Bus routes and patronage 12.6.37 As a result of the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on bus routes and patronage. London Underground and National Rail and patronage 12.6.38 London Underground and National Rail services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase. River services and patronage 12.6.39 River services would not be affected by the occasional maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase. Parking 12.6.40 As a result of the highly infrequent maintenance trips anticipated at Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase, there would be a negligible effect on on-street parking in the local area. During maintenance where larger vehicles are required, some parking may be temporarily suspended to enable vehicles to access the site which would be reprovided in the local area if demand requires.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 200
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Highway layout 12.6.41
In the operational phase the current highway layout would be restored, with the construction access retained, resulting in a negligible effect on the local highway layout. Highway operation During the operational phase there may be some delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles are required at Acton Storm Tanks, however this is likely to be highly infrequent, and the effect is therefore deemed to be negligible. Highway capacity analysis It is expected that the effect on highway capacity would be negligible. Significance of effects The significance of the transport effects described above has been determined as part of the ongoing assessment and analysis. With regard to the application of the IEMA criteria detailed in Volume 5, this is based on professional judgement for the purposes of the assessment. During the operational phase there would be very occasional vehicle trips to and from the site for maintenance activities but these would have a negligible effect on the surrounding transport networks (in terms of delay and safety) and pedestrian/cyclists.
12.6.42
12.6.43 12.6.44
12.6.45
12.7
12.7.1 12.7.2

Measures contained in the draft CoCP of relevance to transport are summarised in Section 12.2. The project has been designed to limit the effects on the transport networks as far as possible and many measures have been included directly in the design of the project. Any mitigation which is required is detailed below. Pedestrian routes At this location, mitigation measures during the construction phase are likely to be required to provide safe crossing points for pedestrians. Cycle routes No mitigation measures are likely to be required for cyclists. Bus routes No mitigation measures are likely to be required for bus services. London Underground and National Rail No mitigation measures are likely to be required for underground or rail services. River services No mitigation measures are likely to be required for river services.
12.7.3
12.7.4 12.7.5 12.7.6
12.7.7
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 201
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Parking 12.7.8
On the basis that any on- and off-street parking that has to be removed is relocated in the local area if required, no mitigation would be required. Highway layout Assuming that appropriate pedestrian and traffic management measures are put in place during junction realignment works, no mitigation would be required. Highway operation Mitigation in the form of signal optimisation at The Vale / Warple Way / East Acton Lane junction and Uxbridge Road / Hanger Lane / Gunnersbury Avenue junction may be required to reduce the effect on highway operation. Highway capacity Mitigation in the form of signal optimisation at The Vale / Warple Way / East Acton Lane junction and Uxbridge Road / Hanger Lane / Gunnersbury Avenue junction may be required to improve capacity on the highway network.
12.7.9
12.7.10
12.7.11
Operation
Pedestrian routes 12.7.12 Footways would be returned to their original routes for operation. As a result, no mitigation is required for the operational phase. Cycle routes 12.7.13 Cycle routes would not be significantly affected by the operation of Acton Storm Tanks, and no mitigation would be required. Bus routes 12.7.14 Bus services and patronage would not be affected by the operation of Acton Storm Tanks therefore no mitigation is required. London Underground and National Rail 12.7.15 London Underground and London Overground services would not be affected by the operation of the Acton Storm Tanks site therefore no mitigation is required. River services 12.7.16 River services and patronage would not be affected by the operation of Acton Storm Tanks therefore no mitigation is required. Parking 12.7.17 Assuming that any temporarily suspended parking is relocated if needed, no mitigation would be required. Highway layout 12.7.18 The highway layout would be restored to the existing layout and therefore would not be affected by the operation of Acton Storm Tanks. As a result no mitigation is required for the operational phase.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 202
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Highway operation 12.7.19
The number of trips associated with Acton Storm Tanks during the operational phase would be very low and infrequent and for maintenance purposes only. No mitigation is therefore deemed to be required. Highway capacity As the local highway network would not experience a significant detrimental effect from the operational proposals, there is no requirement for highway improvement mitigation to increase capacity of local junctions.
12.7.20
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 203
12.8
Vol 7 Table 12.8.1 Transport assessment summary - construction Effect Loss of footway Local diversions Severance due to increased vehicle flow. Increased vehicle flows affecting cyclist safety. Some additional patronage from construction workers. Some additional patronage from construction workers. No additional river patronage or changes to services are anticipated. Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse None required None required None required None required Minor adverse Safe crossing points Significance Mitigation Residual significance Minor adverse
Assessment summary
Receptor
Pedestrians in the local area
Cyclists in the local area
Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible
Bus users and operators
Rail users and operators
River users and operators
Parking users Removal and relocation of on-street parking. Changes to off-street parking layout.
Moderate adverse
None identified
Moderate adverse
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 204
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Effect Minor adverse Minor adverse Significance Mitigation Residual significance
Receptor
All road users
Movement of large construction vehicles Junction modifications possibly requiring temporary pedestrian and traffic management. Additional vehicle movements on the network resulting in delays to journey times
Where appropriate, signal optimisation may be undertaken to improve pedestrian crossing time and junction capacity.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 205
Vol 7 Table 12.8.2 Transport assessment summary - operation Effect Occasional maintenance trips. Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible None required None required None required None required None required None required Occasional maintenance trips. Occasional maintenance trips. No effect. No effect. Significance Mitigation Residual significance Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Receptor
Pedestrians in the local area
Cyclists in the local area
Bus users and operators
Rail users and operators
River users and operators
Parking users
All road users
Occasional suspension of onstreet parking in the immediate vicinity of the site during maintenance (to be reprovided if required). Occasional delay to road users when large maintenance vehicles accessing site. Negligible
None required
Negligible
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 206
12.9
12.9.1
In addition to the baseline survey data collected and data obtained from Transport for London (strategic model data and additional ATC and junction count data), there is a need for additional data to supplement the data set. The baseline data collection was in the process of being collated at the time of writing. When baseline data collection (including data from third party sources) and analysis is complete a full transport assessment will be carried out. This will include a detailed analysis of all three levels of assessment (sitespecific, Borough level and project-wide) and will include an assessment of cumulative and in combination effects. The scope of analysis will be agreed with TfL and the LHA and will include the identification of effects at individual receptors. This full assessment will be reported in the ES (and Transport Assessment). Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for transport within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES and Transport Assessment.
12.9.2
12.9.3
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 207
Section 13: Water resources - groundwater
13 13.1
13.1.1 13.1.2
Water resources groundwater Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant groundwater effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The Scoping Report identified that in the absence of appropriate measures within the design, there is potential for effects on groundwater resources from both construction and operational phases at the site. This preliminary assessment identifies these measures in order to assess the effects (if any) on groundwater resources that might then require mitigation.
13.2
13.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3. The elements of the proposed development relevant to groundwater are as follows. Construction The main infrastructure at the site, relevant to the consideration of groundwater, would include: a. A drop shaft (approximate diameter 15m (internal) and to a depth of approximately 30m) b. Interception and valve chambers would be constructed from cast in situ steel reinforced concrete, connected by approximately 700m of precast concrete culverts.
13.2.2
13.2.3
The proposed methods of construction for the various elements of the site, of relevance to the groundwater assessment, are summarised in the table below. Also contained in this table are approximate time-scales and depths. Vol 7 Table 13.2.1 Groundwater methods of construction
Design elements
Method of construction Dry caisson excavations digging out and placing sections Sheet piles Sheet piles
Construction periods 1 year
Construction depth* Deep
CSO Drop shaft Interception Chamber Two Interception Chambers (IC) 13.2.4 13.2.5
<1 year 1-2 years
Shallow Shallow
* In terms of construction depth - Shallow (means <10m) and Deep (<10m)
No dewatering is anticipated would be required as the tunnel would be constructed mainly within London Clay. No ground treatment is anticipated at the site.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 208
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Operation 13.2.6
During operation the presence of below ground structures could interfere with any shallow groundwater movements and potentially act as a barrier to flow locally around the site. If this occurs, the build up of groundwater can cause problems of groundwater flooding.
13.3
13.3.1 13.3.2

Volume 4 documents the scoping and technical engagement process which has been undertaken. There were no site specific comments from consultees for this particular site relating to groundwater. Construction The construction phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Operation The operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site. Assumptions and limitations The assessment has been based on a qualitative approach. There is presently no ground investigation information available for the Acton Storm Tanks site. The list of receptors is based on the best available information from the Environment Agency on abstractions (both licensed and GSHP schemes).
13.3.3 13.3.4 13.3.5 13.3.6 13.3.7 13.3.8 13.3.9
13.4
13.4.1

The CSO drop shaft to the main tunnel is likely to pass through made ground, Langley Silt, River Terrace Deposits and London Clay as summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 13.4.1 Groundwater - Thames Tunnel hydrogeological units Group Formation (Made Ground) Alluvium Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits Hydrogeology Perched Water Aquiclude Upper Aquifer Designation Non aquifer Non aquifer Secondary aquifer
Superficial Deposits
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 209
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Group Thames 13.4.2 Formation London Clay
Section 13: Water resources - groundwater Hydrogeology Aquiclude Designation Non aquifer
The shaft would be founded in London Clay and would be constructed using a sheet pile cut-off (to seal out the upper aquifer) and sprayed concrete lining (SCL) with placed segments to form a secondary lining. The River Terrace Deposits or upper aquifer is classified as a secondary aquifer. The thickness has yet to be confirmed by ground investigation at the site but, on the basis of logs from nearby boreholes, could be between 4 to 5m thick. The Thanet Sands and the Upnor Beds (the lower unit of the Lambeth Group) are known as the Basal Sands and are in hydraulic continuity with the Chalk aquifer beneath London. The Chalk is a principal aquifer ii and, together with the Basal Sands (Thanet Sands and Upnor Beds), is referred to as the lower aquifer. The anticipated hydrogeology is summarised in Vol 7 Table 13.4.1. The shaft would not extend down into the lower aquifer. There would be a separation distance of around 30m between the base of the shaft and the top of the Thanet Sands (an undetermined thickness of the Upnor Beds above the Thanet Sands is assumed to be the effective top of the lower aquifer. The Upnor Beds are not expected to be greater than 5m thick). Water level monitoring by the Environment Agency indicates that the piezometric surface within the Chalk has been above the base of the shaft within the past 10 years. Water level monitoring of respective geological units would strengthen the understanding of this risk. The site does not lie within any Source Protection Zone (SPZ) as defined by the EA. The nearest SPZ is over 6km away to the east but this is in direction of groundwater flow expected beneath the site. There are no unlicensed abstractions near to the site based on information provided by the local council. There is one Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) scheme neighbouring the site but which abstracts from the Chalk. There is another proposed scheme approximately 3km west of the site. There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site. Detailed assessment of groundwater quality and ground quality is subject to the findings of a ground investigation (GI), which is scheduled for 2011. The flood risk assessment states that the site is situated with a medium groundwater flood risk zone, based on information from the LB of Ealing SFRA. No information is available on incidents of flooding local to the site. Further details on the baseline conditions at the Acton Storm Tanks site are provided in Appendix E. Appendix E also contains a summary of the water quality information from the land quality assessment. Monitoring is
13.4.3
13.4.4
13.4.5
13.4.6
13.4.7
13.4.8
13.4.9 13.4.10
13.4.11
ii A Principal Aquifer is a geological strata that exhibits high intergranular and/or fracture permeability. This strata has the ability to support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. Principal Aquifers equate in most cases to aquifers previously referred to as Major Aquifers.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 210
continuing and would extend the baseline which would inform the assessment in the ES.
Receptor summary
13.4.12 Groundwater receptors which could be affected during construction or operation are summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 13.4.2 Groundwater sensitive receptors Receptor Groundwater Resources Upper Aquifer Lower Aquifer Construction

Operation

Comment Penetrated by shaft Base of shaft 30m above the Lower Aquifer Nearest Chalk abstractions 1.4km to the northeast and no construction taking place within the Chalk None identified None identified at the site (one adjacent to the site)
Abstractions Licensed Abstractions Unlicensed GSHP* Schemes

*Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP)
13.5
13.5.1
The drop shaft passes for most of its depth through London Clay so no groundwater issues are expected in connection with construction of the shaft and no dewatering or depressurisation is proposed. The main potential effects could arise as a result of the valve and connection culverts creating a physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer for a period of up to two years. This could cause a rise in groundwater level up gradient and fall down gradient and consequent change in groundwater storage and flood risk. Impact magnitude The magnitude of the impact would be confirmed once the local groundwater conditions are established by local ground investigation, and the direction of groundwater flow relative to the interception chambers is known (this will be confirmed in the ES). The magnitude of the impact on groundwater levels is currently expected to be minor or negligible, ie, a slight rise in groundwater levels may take place on the upstream/ southwest side of the structure. The impacts would be mitigated by removal of the sheet pile walls around the excavations (or at least cut off at a level above the base of the upper aquifer) following construction.
13.5.2
13.5.3
13.5.4
13.5.5
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 211
There is no contamination (known about at present) in the upper aquifer (see Appendix E) so the magnitude of any impact associated with groundwater quality is negligible. A summary of the impacts and likely magnitude is provided in the table below. Vol 7 Table 13.5.1 Groundwater impacts and magnitudes construction Impact Physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer and resultant rise in groundwater level Creation of pathway for pollution Receptor sensitivity Magnitude Minor or negligible; to be confirmed following ground investigation, and reported in the ES. Negligible; no pollution near surface.
13.5.7
13.5.8
In terms of receptors, the upper aquifer is a secondary A aquifer iii and is categorised in the Volume 5 as being of medium importance, as summarised in the table below. Vol 7 Table 13.5.2 Groundwater receptor values/sensitivities construction
Receptor Upper aquifer Significance of effects 13.5.9
Value/sensitivity Medium importance; secondary A aquifer
A summary of significance of the effects is shown in the table below. There are negligible effects on groundwater as a result of activities at the site. Vol 7 Table 13.5.3 Groundwater significance of effects during construction
Effect Change in groundwater storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper aquifer
Significance* Negligible effect
* Negligible impacts in Vol 7 Table 13.5.1 excluded
Secondary A aquifers are permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local scale (rather than strategic scale) and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers.
iii
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 212
13.6
13.6.1
The base case and operational development case are derived from current baseline conditions as described in Section 13.4 and Appendix E. The possible future change from current baseline conditions is taken into account by considering a range of groundwater levels in the assessments. The Water Framework Directive commits EU member states to achieve good qualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies (including marine waters up to kilometre from shore) by 2015. The Directive defines 'surface water status' as the general expression of the status of a body of surface water, determined by the poorer of its ecological status and its chemical status. Thus, to achieve 'good surface water status' both the ecological status and the chemical status of a surface water body need to be at least 'good'. In order to ensure that no build up of groundwater takes place around the underground structures, the sheet pile walls to be put in around the interception chambers would be removed or at least cut off at a level above the base of the upper aquifer. The impact is considered to be of negligible magnitude resulting in a negligible effect. Seepage out of the shaft into the upper aquifer is expected to be negligible given that the shaft will be full on relatively few occasions (which increases the risk of seepage). The shafts would also have a secondary lining to minimise the risk to the upper aquifer. Seepage into the shaft would be prevented by the double lining, this should ensure that this risk is fully minimised over the asset life. No other operational effects are envisaged. A summary of the impacts and likely magnitude is provided below. Vol 7 Table 13.6.1 Groundwater impacts and magnitudes - operation Impact Physical obstruction to flow in the upper aquifer and resultant rise in groundwater level Seepage out of the shaft affecting groundwater quality (upper aquifers) Seepage into the shaft affecting groundwater resource Receptor sensitivity Magnitude Negligible; piles removed or shortened.
13.6.2
13.6.3
13.6.4
13.6.5 13.6.6 13.6.7
Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary lining Negligible, design of shaft would include a secondary lining
13.6.8
The upper aquifer is a secondary aquifer so is categorised in the Scoping Report as being of medium importance, as summarised below.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 213
Vol 7 Table 13.6.2 Groundwater receptor values/sensitivities operation Receptor Upper aquifer Significance of effects 13.6.9 A summary of significance of the effects is shown below. Vol 7 Table 13.6.3 Groundwater significance of effects - operation Effect Change in groundwater storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper aquifer Deterioration in groundwater quality caused by seepage out of the shaft Seepage into shaft affecting groundwater resources Significance Negligible effect Value/sensitivity Medium importance; secondary aquifer
Negligible effect Negligible effect
13.7
13.7.1
The project includes a number of environmental design elements. This section contains the mitigation measures to be taken to address the impacts identified within the assessment. Construction The possible build up of groundwater in the upper aquifer would be addressed by existing design measures. No additional mitigation measures beyond those identified in the CoCP are required. Provided appropriate mitigation is adopted there should be no residual effects on the upper aquifer. Operational No effects are identified in the operational assessment and therefore no mitigation is required.
13.7.2
13.7.3
13.7.4
13.8
13.8.1
Assessment summary
The tables below provide a summary of the significance and residual effects for groundwater receptors at the site.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 214
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Vol 7 Table 13.8.1 Groundwater summary of construction assessment Effect None required Negligible effect Significance Mitigation Residual Significance
Receptor
Upper aquifer
Change in groundwater Negligible effect storage and flood risk as a result of physical obstruction in upper aquifer Negligible None required
Upper aquifer
Creation of pathway for pollution Vol 7 Table 13.8.2 Groundwater summary of operation assessment Effect Negligible effect Negligible effect design of shaft would include a secondary lining Negligible effect, design of shaft includes double lining None required No mitigation proposed at this point Significance Mitigation
Negligible effect
Receptor
Residual Significance Negligible effect Negligible effect
Upper aquifer
Change in groundwater levels
Upper aquifer
Deterioration in groundwater quality caused by seepage out of the shaft
Upper aquifer
Seepage into shaft affecting groundwater resources
No mitigation proposed at this point
Negligible effect
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 215
13.9
13.9.1 13.9.2
A ground investigation is being undertaken during 2011, the findings of which will be reported in the ES. The geology of the site and currently available data suggests that a qualitative assessment will be sufficient at this site to accurately assess the likely significant effects of the project on groundwater resources. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for groundwater within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
13.9.3 13.9.4
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 216
Section 14: Water resources surface water
14 14.1
14.1.1
Water resources surface water Introduction

This section presents the preliminary findings of the assessment of the likely significant surface water effects at the Acton Storm Tanks site. This assessment identifies: a. the existing water resources baseline conditions b. the future base case conditions against which the project should be assessed c. both the beneficial and adverse effects of the project during construction and operation and assess the significance of the effects
d. any residual effects with respect to surface water resources potentially affected by the project, both during construction and operation. 14.1.2 Groundwater resources are assessed separately in Section 13. Similarly land quality is addressed in Section 8. A Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been carried out separately and is included in Section 15. In addition, it should be noted that this assessment only covers the effects of the work at the Acton Storm Tanks site. The catchment-wide effects on the Thames Tideway, particularly the water quality improvements anticipated from the project are assessed separately in Volume 6.
14.1.3
14.2
14.2.1
The proposed development is described in Section 3 of this volume. The elements of the proposed development relevant to surface water resources are described in the following sections. The Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) includes a number of measures that are important in protecting water quality and these are referred to as appropriate. Construction The site is located within Thames Waters operation site at Warple Way and currently contains a foul pumping station and six storm tanks, which are used to store excess flows during rainfall, and other equipment related to the operation and maintenance of the storm tank system. The Acton combined sewer overflow originates at the site. The proposed construction works would remove two of the six storage tanks, but the remaining four tanks would remain in normal use throughout the construction of the proposed scheme. Upon completion of the Thames Tunnel remaining storm tanks would be hydraulically isolated. The site lies approximately 1.5km north of the River Thames. The majority of the shaft would be excavated through the London Clay and therefore no dewatering or ground treatment is envisaged. Any water entering the excavation would be pumped to the local combined sewer via appropriate settlement facilities.
14.2.2
14.2.3
14.2.4
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 217
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Construction controls 14.2.5
To prevent pollution from leaks or spillages, contaminating substances would be stored in leakproof containers, with secondary containment equal to 110% of the volume of the container, in a safe and secure building or compound. Areas for transfer of contaminating substances, including refuelling, oiling and greasing, would be similarly protected and activities would take place above drip trays or on an impermeable surface with sealed drainage or oil interceptor. All wash down of vehicles (including wheel washing) and equipment would take place in designated areas and washwater would be prevented from passing untreated into drains or holding areas prior to pumping. These measures will be detailed in the CoCP. The CoCP would be adhered to at all times and good construction techniques followed to ensure protection against pollution incidents. In addition, relevant Environment Agency guidance would be followed, including: a. General Guide to the Prevention of Pollution: PPG 1 b. Works and maintenance in or near water: PPG 5 c. PPG 6 Pollution prevention guidance for working at construction and demolition sites
14.2.6
d. Vehicle washing and cleaning: PPG 13 e. Dewatering of Underground Ducts and Chambers: PPG 20 f. Incident Response Planning: PPG 21 g. Storage and handling of drums and intermediate bulk containers (IBCs): PPG 26. 14.2.7 14.2.8 Appropriate maintenance of vehicles and plant would also minimise pollution during construction. Suitable spill kits would be provided and positioned in vulnerable areas and staff would be trained in their use and a record kept of all pollution incidents or near-misses, to ensure appropriate action is taken and lessons are learned from incidents. Regular toolbox talks would be held to raise staff awareness of pollution prevention and share lessons learned from any recorded incidents. There would be written procedures in place for dealing with spillages and pollution (The Pollution Incident Control Plan or PICP). The PICP would contain the following as a minimum: a. guidance on the storage and use of hazardous materials with the aim of preventing and containing spills and releases b. guidelines on the degrees of containment which take account of the nature of the materials and the sensitivity of the environment c. procedures to be adopted in the event of a pollution incident, to contain and limit any adverse effects
d. procedures and appropriate information required in the event of any incident such as a spillage or release of a potentially hazardous material
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 218
e. systems for notifying appropriate emergency services, the Environment Agency and other relevant authorities, Thames Water and the Contractor's personnel f. arrangements for notifying appropriate statutory bodies and local authorities of pollution incidents where required to by legislation.
Operation 14.2.9 The operation of the tunnel would allow interception and control of flows which would otherwise discharge to the Thames Tideway via the Acton CSO after one of the storm tanks is full. There would therefore be a reduction in the frequency, duration and volume of spills from the Acton Storm Relief CSO.
14.3
14.3.1
The construction and operational phase assessment methodology follows the standard methodology provided in Volume 5. There are no site specific variations for this site.
Scoping and engagement

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

14.3.3 Project ground investigations are being undertaken in September 2011. The assessment of contamination risk from intrusive ground works at the site has therefore relied on existing records of contamination (see Land quality assessment Section 8). Definition of Tideway conditions and CSO operation during future base cases and development cases are reliant on model simulations. All model simulations are only a representation of the future conditions and have degrees of error that must be considered. The model simulations are therefore performed to show the relative change in CSO discharges with a consistent set of catchment and sewer system assumptions. Future climate change simulations have not been completed at the time of compiling this assessment. The impact of climate change on the beneficial impacts of the project will be reported in the ES. The assessment of the beneficial effect of a reduction in sewage derived litter and pathogens discharged to the Tideway has been inferred from catchment modelling simulations of the reduction in discharge volume, frequency and duration and have not been directly modelled. Effects of discharges on dissolved oxygen levels in the river have been simulated using the catchment model and the Tidal Thames QUESTS model.
14.3.4
14.3.5
14.3.6
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 219
14.4

Surface water receptors
14.4.1
A list of surface water receptors and their status under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is included in Vol 7 Table 14.4.1, which are either within the vicinity of the site, or downstream of the site and therefore have the potential to be affected by the proposed scheme. Due to the dilution effect of the Tideway, the effects of construction activities would be localised to the waterbodies listed and this section assesses only the impacts local to the proposed site. Therefore, only the Thames Upper and Thames Middle waterbodies are considered in this assessment. Vol 7 Table 14.4.1: Surface water receptors
Hydromor Current phological ecological Status quality Heavily modified Heavily modified Moderate potential Moderate potential Current chemical quality Good Fail 2015 2015 Predicted Predicted ecological chemical quality quality Moderate potential Moderate potential Good Fail
14.4.2
Water Body Thames Upper GB530603911403 Thames Middle GB530603911402
14.4.3
The Thames Upper (which stretches from Teddington to Battersea Bridge) and Middle (which stretches from Battersea Bridge to Mucking Flats) can be considered to be high value waterbodies as although their current and predicted status in 2015 (target date from River Basin Management Plan) is moderate potential, there is a status objective of good by 2027 iv. In addition, the Thames is a valuable resource and plays an important role as a water resource, habitat provision, amenity, recreation, and transport throughout London. Current CSO operation Using the June 2011 catchment model (to be updated for the ES), the current operation of the Acton CSO has been characterised and the typical year duration, frequency and volume of spill have been defined as follows: a. the CSO spills on average of 29 times per year b. the CSO spills for an average duration of 152 hours per year c. the spill volume from the CSO is approximately 312,000m3 per year.
14.4.4
14.4.5
The polluting load data that is discharged from the CSO (Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD, Ammoniacal-N and Total Oxidised Nitrogen TON) will be provided to inform the ES.
Thames River Basin Management Plan Annex B: Water Body Status Objectives, Environment Agency, 2011
iv
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 220
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Dissolved oxygen 14.4.6
The discharge from the Acton Storm Relief CSO contributes to the depletion of dissolved oxygen in the Thames as a result of the biological breakdown of organic matter in the discharges. This causes both a localised (near the Chiswick Eyot) and more widespread cumulative effect of lowering dissolved oxygen levels. The half tide plots showing the oxygen depleting effects of the CSO and other discharges to the Tideway will be provided to inform the ES Exposure to pathogens Each discharge also increases the risk of exposure to pathogens for river users who come into contact with water. An assessment of health impacts upon recreational users of the River Thames was conducted and reported by the Health Protection Agency in 2007 34. This concluded that risk of infection can remain for two to four days following a spill as the water containing the spill moves back and forward with the tide. The same study also noted that analysis of the illness events reported against discharges on the Tideway shows that 77% of cases had been rowing in three days of CSO discharge. Assuming the average 29 spills per annum occur on separate days, this could lead to a maximum of 116 days per year where recreational users are at risk of exposure to pathogens in the Acton CSO outfall locality. Sewage derived litter The operation of Acton Storm Relief CSO results in the discharge of sewage litter along with the discharge of effluent. It was estimated by the Thames Tideway Strategic Study that overflows from the combined sewers introduce approximately 10,000 tonnes of sewage derived solid material to the Thames Tideway annually. June 2011 catchment modelling of the current CSO operation defined the average volume of discharge from Acton Storm Relief CSO was 312,000 m3, representing 0.79% of the total volume discharged to the Thames Tideway annually. As an approximation, this would result in 78 tonnes of sewage derived litter being discharged from the Acton Storm Relief CSO annually. Receptors designated sites The River Thames and Tidal Tributaries are designated as a Site of Metropolitan Importance. There are no hydraulically linked internationally designated conservation sites within 2 km of the proposed construction site that could be affected by the construction. Chiswick Eyot LNR lies within 2 km of the site. The effects of the overall scheme on the internationally designated sites in the Upper and Middle Thames are covered separately in Volume 6. Receptors discharges and abstractions In addition to the Acton Storm Relief CSO, which discharges to the Tideway, there three other CSO discharges in the vicinity: the Stamford
14.4.7
14.4.8
14.4.9
14.4.10 14.4.11
14.4.12
14.4.13
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 221
Brook CSO, LL1 Brook Green, NW Storm Relief and Hammersmith PS; there are no licensed surface water abstractions within 1 km of the site. Contamination 14.4.14 Several sources of potential land contamination have been identified on site, including the presence of a sewage pumping station since approximately 1896, an adjacent railway, and motor works, and various other industrial uses. The presence of contaminants could exacerbate the effects of site run-off containing suspended solids and silt from earthworks or exposed bare soils, due to the effects of toxic pollution in addition to the possible smothering effect of silt. Any groundwater present on site could also be contaminated and should dewatering be required there is the potential for effects from the discharge of contaminated dewatering effluent. See the Land Quality assessment in Section 8 for full details of on-site contamination.
Base case
Construction base case 5.1.1 The Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tideway Quality Improvement (TTQI) projects (improvement works at Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Long Reach and Riverside STWs) would be operational by the time construction commences. Significant improvements in the water quality in the Tideway are anticipated as a result of these projects. The construction base case would therefore be the future water quality in the Thames Tideway with the TTQI projects and the Lee Tunnel in place. Results from modelled simulations of conditions in 2021 (as simulated model runs are only available for 2006 and 2021) with the TTQI and Lee Tunnel in place have therefore been used for the base case. Operation base case 5.1.3 For the assessment of operational impacts, the effects have been assessed against a base case of Year 1 of operation. As described in the methodology section in Volume 5, this base case year takes account of the effects that other major schemes would have on the quality of the Thames Tideway as explained in the construction base case above. Results from modelled simulations of conditions in 2021 with the TTQI and Lee Tunnel in place have therefore been used for the base case.
5.1.2
5.1.4
14.5
14.5.1
As described in Volume 5, the construction effects have been assessed for significance against the relevant WFD objectives as well as their significance against targets set by other legislation. Surface water receptors are identified in Vol 7 Table 14.4.1. The WFD objectives as taken from Article 4 of the WFD are as follows: a. WFD1 Prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water b. WFD2 Protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water, with the aim of achieving good surface water status by 2015
14.5.2
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 222
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks c.
WFD3 Protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status by 2015
d. WFD4 Reduce pollution from priority substances and cease or phase out emissions, discharges and losses of priority hazardous substances.
Identification of construction impacts and effects

14.5.3 The proposed development site lies approximately 1.5km from the Tideway; hence it is considered that there is no direct pollution pathway. The pathway for pollutants to reach the river would be indirect via the combined drainage system, which overflows through the storm tanks. Site drainage 14.5.4 Site runoff has the potential to become polluted with a number of substances during construction activities, which may include the following: a. silt and suspended solids from earthworks and exposed soils b. oil and fuels from machinery and equipment maintenance and refuelling c. concrete or cement from spillages during spraying and pouring d. hazardous substances from ground contamination exposed during earthworks and construction. 14.5.5 These pollutants could be indirectly discharged to the Tideway via surface water or combined drains as part of the surface water discharge from the construction site. Any effects on the Thames Tideway from leakage or discharges would be adverse, although of short duration before remedial action was taken. All site drainage would be drained and discharged to the existing pumping station on site and be lifted into the combined Stamford Brook sewer. It is understood that foul drainage from the site welfare facilities would be connected to the mains foul or combined sewer. There should therefore be no impact pathway from the routine discharge of foul drainage from the site and there is considered to be no effect on the Thames Upper or Middle waterbody. It is considered that via the proposed drainage management, the pollution pathway can be managed sufficiently to reduce the pollution risk to negligible. It is considered that via the adherence to the measures detailed in Section 14.2 during construction works, the pollution pathway can be managed sufficiently to reduce the pollution risk to negligible. Contamination and dewatering 14.5.10 Several sources of potential land contamination have been identified on site and due to the historic uses of the site it is likely that contaminants could be present. Further ground investigation work is to be undertaken in 2011 in preparation of the EIA to confirm or otherwise the presence of
14.5.6 14.5.7
14.5.8
14.5.9
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 223
contaminants. Until results from this work are available, there remains a possibility that the release of hazardous substances into the drainage system from the exposure of contamination could occur during general earthworks at the Acton Storm Tanks site. This information is not available to inform this report and will be re-assessed as part of the ES. 14.5.11 As excavation is mainly through the London Clay, no dewatering is envisaged. Any water entering the excavation from either the superficial deposits or from minor seepages through silt layers would be pumped to the combined sewer via appropriate settlement tanks. Although the combined sewer has an overflow through the storm tanks which may operate during rainfall, it is thought that due to the small volumes of groundwater anticipated and the control measures proposed that there is only a minimal pathway for this effect, which will not be considered further as part of this assessment. Loss of combined foul and storm water storage 14.5.12 The proposed shaft location is currently occupied by two storm water storage tanks (known as tanks 5 and 6), which would be removed during the construction. The tanks would not be re-instated post-development and there is therefore the potential for the loss of storm water storage for the period between the start of construction works and the commissioning of the Thames Tunnel. Storm tanks 5 and 6 are held in reserve and function as additional storage when elevated tidal levels restrict or prevent CSO discharges. There is therefore the possibility of the loss of storage for storm events which occur at high river levels. The simulation of the Acton CSO was based on the normal use of 4 storm tanks with reduced capacity (800m3) to account for emptying and cleaning practices prevailing at the time of the TTSS. It is therefore assumed that the current situation has a total usable storage capacity within the storm tanks of 3,200m3, although this is a conservative assumption of the storage capacity and it is likely that the tanks can store more than this. The estimated full capacity of the tanks is about 12,000m3. However simulations indicate that even with use of this larger storage volume the CSO discharges remain unacceptable and would continue to be needing control. It is therefore proposed that in the period between the start of construction and the commissioning of the Thames Tunnel, site operations are enhanced such that the four remaining tanks are used to capacity. It is considered at this stage that this enhanced operation would ensure no increases to CSO spill frequency and or adverse surface flooding on site at Acton and this effect will not be considered further in this assessment.
14.5.13
14.5.14
14.5.15
Assessment of impacts
14.5.16 The previous stage of the assessment has not highlighted any significant adverse effects that would require additional mitigation beyond the environmental design measures.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 224
14.6
14.6.1
As with the construction effects, the assessment has defined the WFD objectives and the waterbodies affected.
Operational impacts and effects

Reduction in CSO spills 14.6.2 The control of the Acton Storm Relief CSO would have a beneficial effect on water quality, bacteriological quality and aesthetic value in the Acton locality and beyond by substantially reducing the frequency, duration and volume of discharges from the Acton Storm Relief CSO. June 2011 catchment modelling of the operational base case has simulated that by Year 1 of operation (assessed to be 2021) the frequency, duration and volume of the Acton Storm Relief CSO would have increased (as a result of increased population) beyond the current baseline to the following: a. the CSO would spill on average of 30 times in the typical year (one spill more than the current base case) b. the CSO would spill for an average duration of 163 hours in the typical year (11 hours greater than the current baseline) c. 14.6.4 14.6.5 the spill volume from the CSO would be approximately 325,800 m3 in the typical year (13,800 m3 greater than the current baseline).
14.6.3
The number of risk days for river users being exposed to pathogens during the base case year would be a maximum of 120 days in the typical year. June 2011 catchment modelling of the operational development case has simulated that by Year 1 of operation (assessed to be 2021 to use modelled assumptions) with the project in place the Acton Storm Relief CSO would not spill into the Thames Tideway in the typical year. The frequency, duration and volume of spill at Acton Storm Relief CSO would therefore be reduced by 100% as a result of the project. Following on from the interpretation of the base case the number of risk days for river users being exposed to pathogens during the development case year would be reduced to near zero during the typical year rainfall conditions. In addition, the tonnage of sewage derived litter can be expected to be reduced to zero in the typical year. The data for the reduction in polluting load that is discharged from the CSO (Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD, Ammoniacal-N and Total Oxidised Nitrogen TON) will be provided in the ES.
14.6.6 14.6.7
14.6.8 14.6.9
Assessment of impacts
14.6.10 Vol 7 Table 14.6.1 below gives a summary of the assessment of effects during operation of the Acton Storm Tank site against: a. WFD environmental objectives b. local impacts
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 225
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks c. 14.6.11
whether other legislative targets are likely to be affected.
As discussed, overall Tideway-wide benefits are assessed in Volume 6 and this section only assesses the beneficial impacts local to the proposed site at the Acton Storm Tank site. Therefore, with respect to the Thames Tideway waterbody, only the Thames Upper and Middle waterbodies are considered in the assessment for Acton Storm Tanks.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 226
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Vol 7 Table 14.6.1 Surface water impact assessment - operation Duration and reversibility WFD1 WFD2 WFD3 Local effects or other legislative effects WFD objectives met?
Impact
Water body
Assessment and likely effect
WFD4
N/A Permanent. Reversibility dependent on operation of system.
Capture of the Acton Storm Relief CSO would reduce pollution from priority substances at Acton
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from the Acton Storm Relief CSO.
Thames Upper and Middle
Improved water quality in the vicinity of the Acton Storm Relief CSO by reduced pollutant loading and increased dissolved oxygen levels.
Contribution to the overall Tideway-wide water quality improvements
The water quality local to Acton would be improved and would ensure that the operation of the Acton Storm Relief CSO complies with the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive
The Thames Upper and Middle is a heavily modified waterbody and only needs to achieve good potential
Along with the project as a whole, the Acton Storm Relief CSO connection would enhance the water quality of the tideway helping to move the Thames Upper and Middle towards good ecological status N/A The
Reduced
Thames
Risk of exposure
Permanent.
The effect is not relevant to WFD objectives
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 227
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Duration and reversibility WFD1 WFD2 WFD3 Local effects or other legislative effects WFD objectives met?
Impact
Water body
Assessment and likely effect
WFD4
bacterial Upper loadings of and the river Middle giving health improvements to river users
days to pathogens would be reduced to a zero days in the typical year (a reduction of up to 108 days of risk of exposure)
Reversibility dependent on operation of system.
bacteriological improvement effect is considered to have an effect locally in the context of local river users.
Permanent
Reduced sewage litter discharge Reversibility dependent on operation of system.
N/A The effect is not relevant to WFD objectives
Sewage derived litter discharge at Acton would be reduced by 100% in the typical year improving the aesthetic quality of the river locally.
The sewage derived litter reduction effect is considered to have an effect locally in the context of local river users.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 228
Significance of operational effect

14.6.12 Vol 7 Table 14.6.2 identifies the significance of the effects identified in accordance with the criteria set out in Volume 5. Vol 7 Table 14.6.2 Surface water significance of effects - operation Effect Significance and justification Major beneficial The improvements would contribute to the future attainment of Good status under objective 3 in combination with the improvements elsewhere in the Tideway and would also ensure that operation of the Acton Storm Relief CSO complies with the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive Moderate beneficial Reduced bacterial loadings of the river giving health improvements to river users The improvements would not adversely affect WFD or other legislative drivers, but would significantly improve conditions for river users at Acton and in the Thames Upper and Middle as a whole. Moderate beneficial The improvements would not affect WFD or other legislative drivers, but would significantly improve aesthetic conditions for river users and recreational use at Acton and in the Thames Upper and Middle as a whole.
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from Acton Storm Relief CSO.
Reduced sewage litter discharge
14.7
14.7.1
The assessment of significant effects for both construction and operation has not highlighted any significant adverse effects that would require mitigation.
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 229
14.8
Vol 7 Table 14.8.1 Surface water assessment summary - operation Effect None required None required None required Significance Mitigation Residual significance Major beneficial Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial
Assessment summary
Receptor
Thames Upper and Middle Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial
Reduced spill frequency, duration and volume from Major beneficial the Acton Storm Relief CSO.
Reduced bacterial loadings of the river giving health improvements to river users
Reduced sewage litter discharge
100-RG-ENV-00000-000037
Page 230
Section14: Water resources surface water
14.9
14.9.1
At the time of writing, further water quality modelling was underway to determine the relative beneficial improvements that would accrue for other water quality improvements such as Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Ammoniacal Nitrogen. These results for baseline and assessment will be reported the ES. Assessment of cumulative and in combination effects will be undertaken and reported in the ES. Following completion of the assessment the mitigation approaches for surface water resources within the project will be finalised and reported in the ES.
14.9.2
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 231
Section15: Water resources flood risk
15 15.1
15.1.1
Water resources flood risk Introduction

This section presents a Level 1 FRA which assesses the flood risk from all flood sources both to and from the proposed Acton Storm Tanks site as a result of development. This Level 1 Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25) 35 and covers the construction and operation phases. This assessment makes use of the PPS25 Practice Guide 36 and is consistent with the outputs and findings of the Thames Estuary 2100 Plan (TE2100)37 and the policy requirements of the London Plan 38. Borough specific documents have been reviewed in addition to other relevant flood risk planning, policy and legislative documents. This Level 1 FRA is supported by 2D hydrodynamic modelling, undertaken to assess flood risk effects for the project as a whole (as described in Volume 5) and for specific sites (Volumes 7 to 28). The FRA comprises four parts, which can be found in the following volumes of this assessment: a. Volume 5 contains Part A of the FRA: Common sections relevant to all sites, including assessment methodology. b. Volume 6 contains Part B of the FRA: Project-wide risk assessment section. c. Volumes 7-28 contain Part C and Part D of the FRA: Individual risk assessment sections for every site (Part C) where flood risk is considered as an issue, organised according to London Borough (this Part) which precede the conclusions for each site (Part D).
15.1.2
15.1.3
15.1.4
15.1.5
15.1.6
As explained in Volume 5, a Level 1 FRA is an assessment of flood risk based on information available at the time of undertaking the assessment. Where further detailed assessment (including modelling and calculations) is required to define flood risk or required mitigation, this is undertaken to support a Level 2 or more detailed Level 3 FRA. The aim of this part of the Level 1 FRA is to assess the effects of flood risk from all sources at the site, both to the site and from the site to surrounding areas. The purpose of this section is to highlight the key issues for the design team and provide a preliminary assessment of flood risk issues. A more detailed assessment will be completed in the ES. Considering the nature of the project, the length of construction period at the site and the location of the site within the Thames Tideway, it is important that flood risk is assessed both during the construction phase and the operational phase taking into consideration climate change over the lifetime of the project. The project involves the construction at many sites throughout London. Many of these sites are situated within close proximity to, or within, the
15.1.7
15.1.8
15.1.9
15.1.10
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 232
River Thames or other watercourses. According to PPS2535, any development located within Flood Zones 2 v or 3 vi or greater than 1ha. and situated within Flood Zone 1 vii should be accompanied by a FRA. The FRA will be required to demonstrate how flood risk from all sources of flooding to the development and from the development will be managed now and in the future as a consequence of climate change for the lifetime of the development. 15.1.11 The objectives of this section are to satisfy the requirements of PPS2535 in relation to this site.
15.2
15.2.1
Policy considerations
The proposed development of a shaft and associated structures is classified as water and sewage transmission infrastructure including docks, marinas and wharfs which is classified as water-compatible development and compatible within all flood zones within PPS2535.
15.3
15.3.1
Regulatory position Overview

General policy documents (eg PPS2535) have been reviewed within Volume 5. The following should be read in conjunction with that Volume.
Local policy
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 15.3.2 The Acton Storm Tank site lies within the LB of Ealing. LB of Ealing Council has produced a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 39. This reviews existing information, outlines the current level and identifies the significant sources of flood risk. Despite the River Thames not flowing through the Borough of Ealing, the SFRA confirms that the Thames Tidal Defence network defends the southeastern corner of the Borough against a 0.1% AEP for tidal events up to 2030. However there remains a residual risk of flooding from tidal inundation. The SFRA advocates the use of flood resilience and resistant measures. These should be adopted during the construction and operation phases of the project. According to the SFRA: a. the site is just within the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone 3 b. Acton is shown to sit on a thin layer of Lyndon Hill Gravel and Langley Silt. A thick layer of London Clay underlies the whole Borough
defined as medium probability, assessed as having between a 1% and 0.1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) of river flooding or between a 0.5% and 0.1% AEP of sea flooding in any year vi defined as high probability, assessed as having a 1% or greater AEP of river flooding or a 0.5% or greater AEP of sea flooding in any year vii defined as low probability, assessed as having less than a 0.1% AEP of river or sea flooding in any year
v
15.3.3
15.3.4
15.3.5
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 233
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks c.
the natural flood plain of the River Thames extends into the southeastern corner of the Borough of Ealing, including Acton Green and Bedford Park and the site lies just within this floodplain
d. the site is within an area benefiting from the Thames Tideway Defences e. areas most at risk from foul water sewer flooding in Ealing include Acton. The majority of surface water flooding also occurs in Acton. There have been a total of 2 properties flooded from overloaded foul sewers between 1997 and 2007 within close proximity to the site f. 15.3.6 the site is located in an area with a medium groundwater risk. The SFRA promotes the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) suitable to specific site locations within the Borough, depending on underlying geology. These must however be adopted and adequately maintained post-construction to ensure design operation into the future. Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) 15.3.7 The Council is working in partnership with the Greater London Authority (GLA), Thames Water and the EA to produce a SWMP as part of the Drain London Project. This is scheduled for completion in Autumn 2011.
Environment Agency policy

Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100) 15.3.8 The Acton Storm Tanks site lies within the Hammersmith Policy Unit which has been assigned the P5 flood risk management policy within the TE2100 Plan 40, meaning that further action will be taken to reduce flood risk beyond that required to keep pace with climate change. The TE2100 Plan40 identifies the local sources of flood risk at this location as including: a. tidal and fluvial flooding from the River Thames b. surface water (heavy rainfall) and urban drainage sources c. 15.3.10 a risk of groundwater flooding. Defences from these sources include: a. the Thames Barrier and secondary tidal defences along the Thames frontage (both making up the Thames Tidal Defences) b. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) for mitigation of urban drainage c. 15.3.11 flood forecasting and warning. The TE2100 Plan seeks to promote, where possible, defence improvements that are sensitive to ensure views are maintained and impacts to river access/views are minimised. Where defence raising in the future as a consequence of climate change is not possible, secondary defences and floodplain management should be introduced. There is also a vision to increase flood risk awareness within the area. Further investigation is required into flood risk from surface water and groundwater sources, these form part of the TE2100 Action Plan.
15.3.9
15.3.12
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 234
Regional policy
London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (RFRA) 15.3.13 For the reach between Teddington Lock and Hammersmith Bridge (West London Reach) the London RFRA 41 encourages enhanced channel capacity to cope with fluvial flows and small scale set back of development from the river walls where possible. The aim of this is to enable modification, raising and maintenance in a sustainable, environmentally acceptable and cost effective way. Development should be designed in such a way as to take opportunities to reduce flood risk and include resilience. There is particular concern surrounding confluences and the interactions between tidal and fluvial flows in the future due to climate change. This should be taken into consideration during the re-development process. The RFRA41 indicates that SUDS should be included within developments to reduce surface water discharge.
15.3.14
15.3.15
15.4
15.4.1
Assessment of flood risk Overview

The flood risk from all potential flood sources (as listed in Annex C of PPS2535) to the site, and from the site as a result of the development, is assessed in the following section. For a discussion on project-wide effects see Volume 5. In summary, initial hydraulic computation modelling indicates that the influence of the project as a whole on the River Thames (tidal and fluvial) flood levels is minimal and is unlikely to exacerbate flood risk. Acton Storm Tanks and pumping station are owned and operated by Thames Water. Until the 1970s the pumping station was a small sewerage works. The current facility receives combined water (surface water and foul water) from the local area as well as Hammersmith and Chiswick and contains six storm water storage tanks to store water during heavy rainfall events when the local system is at capacity. At present, only four of the six tanks operate under normal conditions. Tanks five and six are used to store water only when rainfall causes the combined system to require discharge at the CSO, but the CSO outfall is tidelocked (high tide water level is above the outfall level) and unable to discharge. If the capacity of the tanks is exceeded, and the CSO is still tidelocked, there is potential for sewer flooding locally in the system. Modelling work indicates that this flooding would occur on the Acton Storm Tanks site rather than in public areas outside the Thames Water boundary.
15.4.2
15.4.3
Flood sources
Flooding from sea (and tidal sources) Flood risk to the site 15.4.4 The site is located approximately 1.5km to the north of the River Thames on the periphery of the EA floodplain. The site is located within Flood
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 235
Zones 3a viii, 2 ix and 1 x associated with the tidal River Thames as shown in Vol 7 Figure 15.4.1. Vol 7 Figure 15.4.1 Flood risk EA flood zones (see Volume 7 Figures document) 15.4.5 Flood Zone 3a is predominantly associated with the storm tanks (as they are situated at a lower topographic level), with Flood Zone 2 present along the periphery of the tanks. Flood Zone 1 is present in the north, south east and northwest of the tanks. The site does however benefit from the protection afforded by the Thames Tidal Defences, reducing the flood risk at the site to residual, ie the remaining risk after risk reduction measures have been taken into account and this is associated with a breach of the existing defences. The design standard of the existing defences is stated by the EA to be at the 0.1% AEP level. There would be an additional freeboard on top of the crest level. In reality, the defence levels along the River Thames vary and are generally in excess of the 0.1% AEP standard of protection with a freeboard. Flood defences along the River Thames are all raised, manmade and privately owned structures. Upstream of the Chiswick Eyot the defence crest levels are 5.94mAOD and downstream of this feature defence crest levels are 5.54mAOD39. All defences are regularly inspected. The local defence levels will be confirmed with defence survey information, requested from the EA for the Level 2 FRA to be prepared for the ES. Given the distance between the site and the formal Thames Tidal Defences, the proposed development of the Acton Storm Tanks site would not have any impact on the structural integrity of the defences. The most extreme tidal flood risk to the site in this location would be as a result of a high tide combined with a storm surge (with the Thames Barrier operational); this is considered to be the EA flood design event. Ground levels at the site where the proposed shaft is to be situated are approximately 6.1mAOD (it is proposed to situate the shaft within tanks five and six, which are situated in the northern most section of the site and to fill the tanks to the surrounding ground level). Ground levels are generally consistent throughout the site. The tidal flood levels for the EA flood design event within the vicinity of the site are: a. b. 5.16mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005 5.10mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107 (ie, with climate change).
15.4.6
15.4.7
15.4.8
15.4.9
15.4.10
15.4.11
15.4.12
viii ix
Flood Zone 3a indicates high probability of flooding with a 0.5% AEP of flooding from tidal sources Flood Zones 2 indicates a medium probability of tidal flooding with between a 0.5% and 0.1% AEP x Flood Zone 1 indicates a low probability of flooding, with less than a 0.1% AEP of river or sea flooding in any year
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 236
This data is taken from the EA Tidal Thames Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study 42. Current indication is that the shaft lid would be constructed at a level of approximately 6.1m AOD, and therefore would not flood under the above return periods in the event of a breach in the local Thames Tidal Defences. It should be noted that water levels decrease in the future due to the Thames Barrier closure rule (see Volume 5) such that the 2005 scenario produces the highest water levels. The TE2100 Plan40 indicates that a higher level of protection would be required to protect areas along the river in light of the necessity for a greater number of Barrier closures as water levels increase and due to the possibility that higher tides could propagate upstream of the Barrier should the Barrier fail. Thames Tidal Defences to the south of Acton Storm Tanks would be required to be raised to 5.95mAOD and 6.40mAOD for 2065 and 2100 respectively in line with requirements of the TE2100 Plan40. The defence raising would contribute to the continual protection of the site from tidal flooding into the future. The EA has also used the Tidal Thames Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study to investigate water levels within the Thames in the absence of the Thames Barrier, ie when the Barrier is not closed (it is assumed that a partial closure would influence flood levels upstream of the barrier). This shows tidal flood levels within the River Thames are 6.03mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2005 and 6.86mAOD for the 0.5% AEP 2107. Under this modelled scenario the site would be flooded during the 0.5% AEP 2107 event as the water level is above both the local flood defence level and ground levels during the construction and operation of the site. However, because the Thames Barrier is a key component of the Thames Tidal defences, these levels are not used for the EA flood design event when considering the required flood prevention measures for new development. The SFRA39 did not undertake any breach assessments to determine the residual flood risk from tidal sources. The SFRA for the adjacent Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham 43 has modelled a series of breaches along the frontage of Hammersmith and overtopping of the defences to assess the residual flood risk. One of these breaches, HF12 is located to the south west of the site and hence can be used as a proxy to assess the residual flood risk associated with a breach in the River Thames defences. The breach modelled assessment takes into account the 0.5% AEP event from EA modelled water levels and the overtopping assessment takes into account the 0.5% AEP event for the no barrier closure levels from the 2005 EA Joint Probability Analysis. These modelled scenarios show the site does not become inundated during any scenario due to the distance of the site from the River Thames and the complexity of flood flow paths due to the urban nature of the area. EA mapping and comparison between tidal flood levels and ground levels within the construction and operation phases of the site development show the storm tanks as situated with Flood Zone 3 (due to their low
15.4.14
15.4.15
15.4.16
15.4.17
15.4.18 15.4.19
15.4.20
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 237
topography) but the peripheral areas of the site (situated at the local ground level and including and majority of the site) as Flood Zone 1. It is proposed to situate the shaft at a level analogous with local ground levels and fill in storm tanks one and two. The shaft (and associated infrastructure) would consequently be situated above the local flood level and outside the tidal floodplain of the River Thames. 15.4.21 The SFRA shows that there are no records of tidal flooding of the site area during any historic flood events (note, this does not mean the site was not flooded, only that no data is held) and the breach and overtopping assessment does not show the site as inundated by a residual flood event. In summary: a. The majority of the site including the proposed shaft location is not at tidal flood risk from the River Thames. Ground levels are/would be higher than the local tidal design flood level from the River Thames so flooding would not occur on the site. b. Flood risk to the remaining storm tanks (three to six which are situated at a lower ground level than the majority of the site) within the site from tidal sources is residual in the event that there is a breach (or failure) of the existing defences and tidal water could enter the site. The residual tidal design flood event is the 0.5% AEP 2005 event. The standard of protection of the current local Thames Tidal Defences (and hence new defences) and the operation of the Thames Barrier are such that tidal flooding up to the EA flood design event (0.5% AEP 2005) does not pose a direct flood risk to the portion of the site affected by tidal flood risk. 15.4.23 15.4.24 The distance of the site from the defences reduces the risk further. The Thames Tidal Defences would not be modified in any way due to the construction of the Acton Storm Tanks site as they are located more than 1.5km to the south of the site. Flooding from rivers 15.4.25 Aside from the impact of fluvial flows on flood levels of the River Thames at Acton, the Acton Storm Tanks site is not situated within the floodplain of any fluvial watercourses. The EA Tidal Thames Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels Study uses a combination of different factors including astronomical tides, tide surge and fluvial river flows to produce an estimation of the peak high water levels within the Tidal Thames during a combined event. This methodology assumes that no combination of fluvial events with tidal conditions produces a higher flood level than the worst case combined tidal storm surge conditions. Water levels influenced by high fluvial flow alone would therefore be lower than the combined event assessed and hence the assessment of fluvial risk from the Thames is considered to be included within the assessment of flood risk from tidal sources in the previous section.
15.4.22
15.4.26
15.4.27
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 238
Flood risk to the site from fluvial sources alone is therefore considered to be negligible. Flooding from land and surface water runoff Flood risk to the site
15.4.29
The LB of Ealing SFRA identified surface water flooding as a significant issue within the Borough. The SFRA does not however show any flooded sites within the vicinity of the storm tanks. This assessment will be updated for the Level 2 FRA when Critical Drainage Area (CDA) mapping is made available for LB of Ealings SWMP through the Drain London Project in Autumn 2011. Surface water flooding could originate from any surrounding hardstanding land where infiltration (into the ground or the local sewer network) is exceeded or the local sewer is at capacity and surcharging occurs. The storm tanks are situated at a lower ground level compared with the surrounding land but include a peripheral barrier which would block the entrance of surface water/overland flow into the tanks. Ground levels along Canham Road and Warple Way are generally lower than 6.0mAOD so it is considered unlikely that water would flow from the surrounding roads onto the site. Flood risk to the site from this source is considered to be low. Flood risk from the site The creation of the permanent site would increase the area of hardstanding at Acton and increase the runoff rates and volumes generated as a result. PPS2535 states that runoff post development should not be greater than runoff pre development in order to not increase the risk of flooding either downstream or on surrounding land. The London Plan aims towards greenfield runoff rates and the Mayors Draft Water Strategy 44 also aims for greenfield runoff and has an essential standard of 50% attenuation to the undeveloped sites surface water runoff at peak times (see Volume 5). The site is currently 80% developed and 20% undeveloped greenfield site. Surface water runoff generated at the site discharges into the site Thames Water infrastructure (pumping station). It is proposed to discharge runoff post development in the same manner. It is anticipated that the pumping station would have sufficient flexibility to cater for any increases associated with climate change. Surface water runoff generated on the greenfield area of the site is thought to infiltrate directly into the ground or to an adjacent surface water drainage network. Based on a development footprint of 2012m2 (80% developed, 20% greenfield) the existing surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP event plus 30% climate change has been calculated. The ICP SUDS rural runoff method in Micro Drainage WinDes Version 12.5 software has been used to calculate runoff from the greenfield area of the site. A soil factor of 0.45, which represents poorly drained soils, has
15.4.30
15.4.31 15.4.32
15.4.33
15.4.34
15.4.35
15.4.36
15.4.37
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 239
been used within this method. The Modified Rational Method has been used for the developed impermeable area of the site. 15.4.38 15.4.39 The runoff rates calculated for each site area have been added together to provide an existing runoff rate for the development footprint. Post development the area of the site used for construction and operation would be impermeable (peripheral greenfield areas would be retained). The post development surface water runoff rate for the 1% AEP event has been calculated using the Modified Rational Method. In accordance with PPS25 Table B.235 the post development surface water runoff rate includes a 30% increase in peak rainfall intensity to account for the anticipated impact of climate change over the developments lifetime. Both existing and post development runoff rates for the 1% AEP event are provided in the table below. Vol 7 Table 15.4.1 Flood risk - runoff rates onsite Site Status Existing Post Development Greenfield Rainfall Runoff Event 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change 1% AEP + 30% Climate Change Runoff Rate (l/s) 31.1
15.4.40
15.4.41
38.0 3.1
15.4.42
By subtracting the existing undeveloped runoff rate from the post development runoff rate for the 1% AEP event, an additional runoff rate of 6.9l/s is predicted post development. No mitigation measures are proposed relating to surface water drainage as noted in Section 14.7. Flooding from groundwater The LB of Ealing SFRA states that rising groundwater levels in major aquifers following prolonged rainfall presents the most extensive level of groundwater food risk. The SFRA has also investigated the risk associated with groundwater flooding based on the following drivers: geology, aquifer, elevation and depth to groundwater. This analysis shows the site to be situated within a medium groundwater flood risk zone. Potential mechanisms for groundwater flooding would be explored further including local water levels from ongoing monitoring and data collection as part of the EIA. This would inform the assessment of groundwater flood risk to this site and would be reported in the Level 2 FRA for the Acton Storm Tanks site. Until further information is available, flood risk to the site from this source is considered to be low, as although SFRA suggests the site is located
15.4.43
15.4.44
15.4.45
15.4.46
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 240
within a medium groundwater flood risk zone there is no evidence to suggest that groundwater flooding has occurred in the past. Flooding from sewers 15.4.47 15.4.48 The LB of Ealing SFRA indicates that sewer flooding results from either a lack of capacity or a failure of the infrastructure. The SFRA has indicated a total of two properties flooded from overloaded surface water, foul and combined sewers between 1997 and 2007 within 200m of Acton Storm Tanks (between Greenend Road, Canham Road and Warple Way). The local sewer network has been investigated to determine whether there are any capacity issues that may lead to an increase in the potential for sewer flooding to the site. This assessment shows the site is surrounded by large combined sewers (of unknown size). If the capacity of this system was exceeded, the combined sewer would surcharge throughout outlets such as man holes and gullies located along the length of the sewer. The site may become inundated under this mechanism due to the location of the sewers surrounding the site. It is also possible that the site would become inundated should sewers upstream of the site flood, most likely during storm events in excess of the 3.3% AEP event (this would however be clarified by Thames Water modelling and included within the Level 2 and/or 3 FRA for the Acton Storm Tanks site). Should sewers flood downstream of the site (ie to the south), runoff would not inundate the site. As described, storm tanks one, two, three and four reach capacity every few weeks and discharge to the river between 14 and 27 times in a typical year. Storm tanks five and six are currently only used approximately once a year. Once the capacity of all six storm tanks is reached and if the CSO outfall remains tidelocked, then localised backing up and surcharging of the combined sewer system could occur. As ground levels rise to the north of the site it is likely that any flooding due to surcharging sewers would occur on the site itself. Initial analysis using the Thames Water sewer model indicates that the removal of tanks five and six as part of the construction process could lead to storm water surcharging at the construction site during extreme rainfall events. A number of measures including intensification of tank usage on-site would be employed to mitigate this effect. Following the completion of the Thames Tunnel project, this overflow would be directed into the tunnel. Flood risk from this source is considered to be medium (during construction), as a flood pathway exists, and the construction of the site has the potential to exacerbate sewer flooding on the site. During operation, the flood risk is considered to be low. Flooding from artificial sources 15.4.53 There are no artificial flood sources within proximity to the site and therefore no flood risk from this type of source.
15.4.49
15.4.50
15.4.51
15.4.52
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 241
15.5
15.5.1
Flood risk - design and mitigation Overview

This assessment has identified the following sources of flood risk related to the site: a. residual risk of flooding to the current and remaining storm tanks within the site from tidal sources as a result of a breach in the existing defences b. low risk of surface water flooding to the site as a result of runoff from surrounding land c. low risk of groundwater flooding to the site associated with underlying geology
d. medium risk of sewer flooding to the site during construction when the CSO operates during a high tide event e. a minor increase in runoff rate and flood risk on or adjacent to the site if not mitigated. 15.5.2 This section describes flood mitigation methods that have been highlighted as being required specifically to address flood risk effects occurring elsewhere as a result of development at Acton Storm Tanks. Flood mitigation methods in this context are defined as being required to alleviate the effect of the development of a site on any consequential (increase in) flood risk.
Flood prevention
Flood resilience/resistance during operation 15.5.3 The London RFRA states that flood risk should be reduced where possible and flood resistance and resilience measure should be built into the development. Given that the project is a water compatible development type (see para. 15.2.1), there is no project-wide intention to provide flood resistance and resilience measures for residual flood risk. The top of the shaft would be set at a similar level to the surrounding ground level and so this would provide some protection from flood risk (tidal, surface water, sewer and groundwater). This will be informed by findings from the Drain London Project which is undertaking an assessment on surface water flood risk. Following this work, prevention measures in the form of: raising any additional sensitive equipment above the local surface water flood level; using flood resistant techniques where it is beneficial to exclude surface flood water; using flood resilient building materials where possible; raising thresholds of site offices/kiosks 300mm above the ground will be investigated as part of the Level 2 FRA assessment. Construction and emergency planning 15.5.5 The subsequent Level 2 FRA will include the production of a site Emergency Plan in relation to Flood Risk outlining appropriate working practices and appropriate access/egress routes in the event of a flood
15.5.4
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 242
warning. The LB of Ealing will be required to comment on the Emergency Plan.
Design and mitigation

Surface water discharge 15.5.6 15.5.7 An appropriate surface water management strategy is required to ensure surface water is positively drained from this site post development. The preliminary calculations shown in Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 are based on SUDS attenuation, assuming zero infiltration (the feasibility of SUDS infiltration techniques onsite is currently unknown). PPS2535 states that runoff post development should not be greater than runoff pre development in order to not increase the risk of flooding either downstream or on surrounding land. The attenuation volume is based on this Policy. In addition and in accordance with The Mayors Draft Water Strategy44. Mayor of London. Greater London Authority (Aug 2009)) the preferred standard and essential standard have also been considered. To take into account the effects of climate change over the developments lifetime a 30% increase in peak rainfall intensity has been included when considering post development runoff and the associated attenuation volumes. It is important to note that the attenuation volumes provided in the table below are based on preliminary calculations and would be subject to refinement at outline and detailed design stage." Both the need and the potential to deliver this level of attenuation at the site will be determined during the Level 2 FRA and reported in the ES, which will ensure that the requirements of PPS25 are met at all times and the aspirations of the London Plan are met where practicable. Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 Flood risk - runoff rates and preliminary attenuation volumes 1% AEP rainfall event Preferred standard (attenuation to greenfield runoff rate) Essential standard (attenuation to 50% of undeveloped runoff rate) PPS25 standard (no increase in runoff post development) 15.5.11 Runoff rate (l/s) Attenuation volume (m3) 113 153
15.5.8
15.5.9
15.5.10
3.1
15.5
71 101
31.1
52 83
Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 indicates that to meet the PPS2535 standard a storage volume between 52 - 83m3 would be required to provide sufficient storage to attenuate the 1% AEP event inclusive of climate change (drainage up to
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 243
the 3.3% AEP storm event would discharge to the current pumping station). 15.5.12 It is important to note that the attenuation volumes provided in Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 are based on preliminary calculations and would be subject to refinement at outline and detailed design stage. SUDS could be incorporated into the design of the site to accommodate the required attenuation. Appropriate SUDS (eg storage tank or oversized piping) will be explored and developed alongside the development of the final site design, details of which will be included in the Level 2 FRA for Acton Storm Tanks. The current design proposals include a brown roof which would provide rainwater attenuation and reduce both the total volume and peak rate of surface water runoff from the site. The impact on potential runoff rates and volumes Vol 7 Table 15.5.1 will be assessed within the Level 2 FRA. The following surface water mitigation measures would also be considered for incorporation into the development design: a. In the event of return periods in excess of the 3.3% AEP storm, the layout and the landscaping of the site would aim to route water away from vulnerable property, and avoid creating hazards to access egress routes, whilst not increasing flood risk to third parties. b. Depending on operational activities at the site surface water runoff may be required to pass through an oil interceptor, or similar, prior to discharge to the chosen surface water receptor. c. During the construction phase appropriate mitigation would be provided to ensure surface water is managed in a controlled manner.
15.5.13
15.5.14
15.5.15
Sewer flooding 15.5.16 During site construction, specific mitigation is required to protect the site and surrounding land from the potential increase in sewer flood risk associated with removal of tanks five and six. Whilst the event of CSO tidelocking with high rainfall and tank capacity exceedence is considered to be infrequent, when it does occur, it could result in storm water surcharging on to the site. Temporary storage would be provided to contain surcharged water during these infrequent events, for return to the Stamford Brook sewer system once water levels in the surrounding sewer network fall after the rainfall event. During the construction period, the storage volume lost from within tanks five and six would be replaced by pumping additional water into the remaining tanks. The tanks are currently fed by gravity therefore the use of pumps would permit use of the additional freeboard within the tanks. Further details will be included to support this specific mitigation in the Level 2 FRA.
15.5.17
15.5.18
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 244
15.6
15.6.1 15.6.2
A Level 2 FRA will be prepared for the site which will outline further specific design approaches and measures. It is considered that a Level 2 FRA will be sufficient to assess the impact of flood risk for the final site design (ie, no Level 3 specific site modelling is required). This will be prepared for the site and incorporated into the ES. The Level 2 FRA will use the data collected as part of the Level 1 FRA and build upon the preliminary findings of this assessment once further information is available from the EA and other assessments being undertaken to support the FRA and the EIA. In summary, the following additional assessment elements will be undertaken: a. Confirmation of existing defence level following receipt of the EA survey information of flood defences. This will be used to reassess the standard of protection at the site and effect on tidal flood risk (direct and residual). b. The assessment of surface water flood risk to the site will be completed when the final surface water flood maps are available from the Drain London Project, due in Autumn 2011. c. The surface water drainage scheme will be assessed for suitability and conformity with the suggested surface water attenuation within this Level 1 FRA.
15.6.3
d. Sewer flooding will be investigated further through the assessment of the capacity of the storm tanks and the local sewer network, informed by Thames Water modelling. e. Groundwater flood risk and any required flood risk prevention measures will be reassessed when the groundwater resources impact assessment is complete. This will be included in the Level 2 FRA. f. An emergency plan will be developed to support the Level 2 FRA and the CoCP.
g. Further detail of any site specific mitigation that may be required, particularly surface water attenuation, and flood prevention measures, required to manage both residual risk and direct flood risk based on the final site design. 15.6.4 It is not anticipated that further primary data collection (except for that already anticipated) or any modelling will be required at this site as part of future work and hence a Level 2 FRA will be sufficient to support the ES specific to the Acton Storm Tanks site.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 245
Appendices
Appendices
List of figures
Page number
Figure A.1 Rocques map of 1746 .......................................................................... 248 Figure A.2 Early OS 1: mile map of 18305 .......................................................... 248 Figure A.3 OS 1st edition 25 scale map of 1868 82 ............................................. 249 Figure A.4 OS 2nd edition 25 scale map of 189699 ............................................ 249 Figure A.5 OS 3rd edition 25 scale map of 19091920 ......................................... 250 Figure A.6 OS revised edition 25 scale map of 19321947................................... 250 Figure A.7 OS 1:2500 scale map of 19801991 (not to scale) ............................... 251 Figure A.8 View of a house to the north.................................................................. 252 Figure A.9 View of cobbled road surface ................................................................ 252 Figure A.10 View of a piece of redundant machinery on the site ............................ 253 Figure A.11 View of the inscribed granite tablet ..................................................... 253 Figure C.1 Noise measurement locations at Acton Storm Tanks .......................... 260 Figure C.2 Noise monitoring at Canham Road northwest of PEG1X ...................... 262 Figure C.3 Noise monitoring at Car Park south of PEG1X ..................................... 262 Figure C.4 Noise monitoring at Warple Way east of PEG1X .................................. 262 Figure C.5 Noise monitoring at Car park southeast of PEG1X ............................... 263 Figure C.6 Noise monitoring at Warple Way north of PEG1X................................. 263 Figure C.7 Noise monitoring at Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site ................. 263 Figure D.1 Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way .............. 264 Figure D.2 Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens ....................... 264 Figure D.3 Viewpoint 1.5: View north along Greenend Road ................................. 265 Figure D.4 Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road ............................... 265 Figure D.5 Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath ................................................... 266 Figure D.6 Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road ................................. 266 Figure D.7 Viewpoint 2.4: View from entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground .. 267 Figure D.8 Viewpoint 2.5: View to the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens 267 Figure D.9 Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road .......................... 268 Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology ........................................................ 269 Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology................................................................. 269 Figure E.3 Groundwater EA monitoring locations ................................................ 273 Figure E.4 Groundwater level hydrograph High Street Acton OBH ........................ 275 Figure E.5 Groundwater GSHP ........................................................................... 277
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 246
Appendices
List of tables
Page number
Table A.1 Gazetteer of known heritage assets ....................................................... 254 Table B.1 Site walkover report ................................................................................ 257 Table C.1 Details of measurement locations at Acton Storm Tanks ....................... 260 Table C.2 Summary of noise survey results at Acton Storm Tanks ........................ 260 Table E.1 Summary of anticipated Thames Tunnel geological succession ............ 269 Table E.2 Acton Storm Tanks anticipated ground conditions .............................. 270 Table E.3 Summary of anticipated Thames Tunnel main hydrogeological units..... 272 Table E.4 Licensed Abstractions in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks.................... 277 Table E.5 GSHP schemes in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks ............................. 277
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 247
Appendix A: Historic environment
Appendix A: Historic environment A.1 Figures
Figure A.1 Rocques map of 1746

Note: the map shows Stamford Brook too far to the south
Figure A.2 Early OS 1: mile map of 18305
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 248
Figure A.3 OS 1st edition 25 scale map of 186882

Note: not to scale
Figure A.4 OS 2nd edition 25 scale map of 189699

Note: not to scale
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 249
Figure A.5 OS 3rd edition 25 scale map of 19091920

Note: not to scale
Figure A.6 OS revised edition 25 scale map of 19321947

Note: not to scale
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 250
Figure A.7 OS 1:2500 scale map of 19801991 (not to scale)
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 251
Photographs
Figure A.8 View of a house to the north
Figure A.9 View of cobbled road surface Taken from the entrance of the site; standard lens; looking northeast.
Situated (outside) of the site, at the corner of Canham Road and Warple Way. The stone dates the house to 1887; standard lens; looking south.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 252
Figure A.10 View of a piece of redundant machinery on the site Located near the centre of the site; standard lens; looking north-west.
Figure A.11 View of the inscribed granite tablet Located near the centre of the site; standard lens; looking south-west.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 253
Gazetteer of known heritage assets

A.1.2 The location of known heritage assets is shown on the historic environment features map (Vol 7 Figure 7.4.1). Table A.1 Gazetteer of known heritage assets HEA Ref no. 1 Description Site code/ HER ref/ LBUID no VLO00
278-282 The Vale. 2000 Museum of London Archaeology Service evaluation Archaeological periods: 19th century Natural brickearth was truncated in places by modern features, probably flower beds, and overlaid by a layer of redeposited brickearth, apparently of 19th-c date, or building rubble and garden soils. Beech Avenue, Bromyard Avenue. 1991 Department of Greater London Archaeology evaluation Archaeological periods: 19th century/20th century. Shallow features cut into the brickearth subsoil, and dating to the 19th or early 20th century. They were probably clay pits associated with East Acton Brickworks. Acton Vale, near Sewage Farm. The GLHER notes the chance find of a prehistoric blade. Bath Road Car Park. A Post-medieval culvert and market garden are noted on the GLHER. Rylett Road. Post-medieval brickfield noted on the GLHER. Benbow Road. Post-medieval clay pit noted on the GLHER. Emlyn Road. Post-medieval clay pit noted on the GLHER. 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 Addison Grove, Grade II listed buildings.
BEA91
3 4 5 6 7 8
050396 052362 052361 054572 054824 054827 202386 202387 202388 202390 202391 202392 202381 202382 202383 202384 202385
16, 18, 20 and 22 Addison Grove, Grade II listed buildings
10
1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 Addison Grove, Grade II listed buildings
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 254
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks HEA Ref no. 11 12 Description
Appendix A: Historic environment Site code/ HER ref/ LBUID no 202389 202414 202415 202416 202656 202418 202411 202412 202419 202404 202405 202399 202400 202401 200906 200897 200898 200899 200900 202545 202546 202547 202656 202657 202652 202653 202665 202666 202667 202658 202659 202663 202664 202668 202669
12 and 14 Addison Grove, Grade II listed buildings 38, 40,42, 44 and 46 Bath Road , Grade II listed buildings
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
29 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 50-58 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 28, 30, 32 and 34 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 60 and 62 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 33, 35 and 37 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 9 and 11 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 13, 15, 17-27 Bath Road, Grade II listed buildings 12 Blenheim Road, Grade II listed buildings 13, 15, 17, 19-25 Blenheim Road, Grade II listed buildings.
22
1, 3, 5 and 7 Fairfax Road, Grade II listed buildings
23 24 25
37, 39 and 41 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings 23, 25, 27 and 29 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings 28, 30, 32, 34 and 36 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings 43, 45 and 47 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings 20, 22, 24 and 26 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings. 38, 40, 42, 44, 46 and 48 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings
26 27 28
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 255
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks HEA Ref no. Description
Appendix A: Historic environment Site code/ HER ref/ LBUID no 202670 438388 202654 202655 201009 438402 201082 201083 201084 438788 438789 201079 201080 201081 438787 438790 438791 438792
29 30 31 32
31, 33 and 35 Priory Avenue, Grade II listed buildings. 14 and 16 Queen Annes Gardens, Grade II listed buildings. 2 Rupert Road, Grade II listed buildings 35, 37, 39-45 Woodstock Road, Grade II listed buildings.
33 34
46, 48, 50 and 52 Woodstock Road, Grade II listed buildings 23, 25, 27, 29, 31 and 33 Woodstock Road, Grade II listed buildings 40 and 42 Woodstock Road, Grade II listed buildings 54, 56, 58 and 60 Woodstock Road, Grade II listed buildings.
35 36
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 256
Appendix B: Land quality
Appendix B: Land quality B.1

Item Site Ref Site Name Date of walkover 26th November 2010 Record elevation in relation to surroundings, any hummocks, breaks of slope etc.
Site walkover report

Table B.1 Site walkover report
Details PEG2X Acton Storm Tanks Site location (Address & Access) Ground level within the site is approximately 1.5m above the surrounding road at its southerly most point. This change in ground level becomes progressively shallower to the north. Ground levels at the site may have been raised at some point and that a cover of made ground is present beneath this area. Commercial and residential properties located along Canham Road. Wider Acton Sewage Pumping Station site.
Size and topography of site and surroundings
Neighbouring site use (in particular note any potentially contaminative activities or sensitive receptors)
North South
East West Site buildings Record extent, size, type and usage. Any boiler rooms, electrical switchgear?
Wider Acton Sewage Pumping Station and residential properties located on Warple Way. Terraced residential properties situated on Greenend Road. None within the worksite itself, within the wider site area are the storm tanks which comprise open concrete lined tanks approximately 4m deep and 36368 litre gas oil tank located south east. At the time of the inspection, the tank was surrounded by a painted brick bund which was dry and showed no evidence of leakage of fuels. The work site is located on undeveloped ground covered with grassland toward the north west of the wider Acton Storm Tanks site. There is an area of hardstanding toward the south of the worksite which could be used as a turning circle. None observed at time of survey. The work site within the wider Acton Storm Tanks site is on an area of grass with a small number of mature trees bordering the north of the site and younger trees situated to the west. N/A
Surfacing
Record type and condition
Vegetation
Any evidence of distress, unusual growth or invasive species such as Japanese Knotweed? Evidence of buried services? Types/ quantities? Tanks (above ground or below ground) Containment systems (eg, bund, drainage interceptors). Record condition and standing liquids Refill points located inside bunds or on impermeable surfaces etc?
Services Fuels or chemicals on site
None One above ground gas oil tank located within the wider site area. Brick bunding for the gas oil tank, no evidence of leakage. N/A None None observed.
Vehicle servicing or refuelling onsite Waste generated/stored onsite
Record locations, tanks and inspection pits etc. Adequate storage and security? Fly tipping ?
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 257

Surface water Site drainage Evidence of previous site investigations Evidence of land contamination Summary of potential contamination sources Any other comments Eg access restrictions/ limitations Record on-site or nearby standing water Is the site drained, if so to where? Evidence of flooding? Eg trial pits, borehole covers. Evidence of discoloured ground, seepage of liquids, strong odours? None N/A None
Appendix B: Land quality
No obvious potential contaminative sources were identified during the survey. Presence of gas oil tank.
N/A
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 258
Appendix C: Noise and vibration
Appendix C: Noise and vibration C.1

C.1.1
Introduction
A baseline noise survey was completed on 3rd to 5th April 2011. As described in Volume 5, the main purpose of the noise survey was to determine representative ambient and background noise levels at a number of different types of noise sensitive receptor. These include (but are not restricted to): a. dwellings b. community buildings c. hospitals/health care buildings d. hotels/Hostels e. offices f. open/Public Amenity Space g. premises with noise/vibration sensitive equipment h. places of worship i. j. recording studios; and schools/educational institutions.
C.1.2
The nearest identified receptors to Acton Storm Tanks are the dwellings and commercial buildings close to the site (see Section 9.5).
C.2
C.2.1
Survey methodology
Short term attended noise monitoring was completed at all measurement positions. Measurements were undertaken during the interpeak periods of 10am-12pm and 2pm-4pm so that the baseline data is representative of the quieter periods where any disturbance from construction would be most noticeable. It is understood that Acton Storm Tanks would be used for standard hours working and therefore no evening or night time measurements were undertaken. Three Brel and Kjr sound level meters, Type 2250 (serial numbers 2626233, 2626231 and 2446918), fitted with Brel and Kjr Type 4189 inch free field microphone (serial numbers 2656211, 2656208 and 2440900) were used for all measurements. At locations 1 and 3 a Brel and Kjr sound level meter, Type 2250 (serial number 2626232), fitted with Brel and Kjr Type 4189 -inch free field microphone (serial number 2621212) was used for all measurements. The microphones were fitted with a windshield during the measurements. Prior to and on completion of the survey, the sound level meter and microphone calibration was checked using a Brel and Kjr sound level meter calibrator Type 4231 (serial number 2619375). On-site calibration checks were performed before and after all measurements with no
C.2.2
C.2.3
C.2.4
C.2.5 C.2.6
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 259
significant deviation being observed. The sound level meters and calibrators have valid laboratory calibration certificates. C.2.7 The sound level meter was tripod-mounted with the microphone approximately 1.3m above ground level. A windshield was fitted over the microphone at all times during the survey period to minimise the effects of any wind induced noise. Weather conditions were dry during the survey. The weather was warm and cloudy with sunny intervals. The maximum windspeed measured during the survey was 4.8 ms-1 (at location 1 at 10:41) with an average windspeed of 0.3 -1.2 ms-1. The temperature range recorded was 4-16C.
C.2.8
C.3
C.3.1
Measurement locations
Table C.1 details the measurement locations for the baseline noise surveys Figure C.1 Noise measurement locations at Acton Storm Tanks (see Volume 7 Figures document) Table C.1 Details of measurement locations at Acton Storm Tanks
Measurement Location Number PEG1X Noise 1 PEG1X Noise 2 PEG1X Noise 3 PEG1X Noise 4 PEG1X Noise 5 PEG1X Noise LT Results C.3.2
Co-ordinates Description Canham Road northwest of Acton Storm Tanks Car Park south of Acton Storm Tanks Warple Way east of Acton Storm Tanks Car park southeast of Acton Storm Tanks Warple Way north of Acton Storm Tanks Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site X 521111 521179 521339 521312 521305 521170 Y 179764 179647 179601 179530 179679 179736
The summary of the noise survey measurements is presented in the table below. Table C.2 Summary of noise survey results at Acton Storm Tanks
Measurement Location Number Description
dBLAeq,15 Measured average daytime ambient noise level, dBLAeq,15

min min
(rounded to nearest 5dB) 60
Free field PEG1X Noise Canham Road northwest of 57
Facade 60
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 260
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks 1 PEG1X Noise 2 PEG1X Noise 3 PEG1X Noise 4 PEG1X Noise 5 PEG1X Noise LT Acton Storm Tanks Car Park south of Acton Storm Tanks Warple Way east of Acton Storm Tanks Car park southeast of Acton Storm Tanks Warple Way north of Acton Storm Tanks Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site
50 59 50 53 51
53 62 53 56 54
55 60 55 55 55
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 261
C.4
Baseline condition photographs specific to topics

Figure C.2 Noise monitoring at Canham Road northwest of PEG1X
Figure C.3 Noise monitoring at Car Park south of PEG1X
Figure C.4 Noise monitoring at Warple Way east of PEG1X
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 262
Figure C.5 Noise monitoring at Car park southeast of PEG1X
Figure C.6 Noise monitoring at Warple Way north of PEG1X
Figure C.7 Noise monitoring at Acton Storm Tanks Thames Water site
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 263
Appendix D: Townscape and visual
Appendix D: Townscape and visual D.1 Winter photographs for selected viewpoints
Figure D.1 Viewpoint 1.2: View west from residences along Warple Way
Note: adjacent to the site
Figure D.2 Viewpoint 1.4: View north from outside Emlyn Gardens
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 264
Figure D.3 Viewpoint 1.5: View north along Greenend Road

Note: from Southfield Road
Figure D.4 Viewpoint 1.6: View north east along Rugby Road
Note: from the northern bend of Southfield Road
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 265
Figure D.5 Viewpoint 2.1: View from the footpath

Note: between Warple Way / Woodstock Road
Figure D.6 Viewpoint 2.2: View north from Woodstock Road
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 266
Figure D.7 Viewpoint 2.4: View from entrance to Southfields Recreation Ground
Figure D.8 Viewpoint 2.5: View to the site from Canham Road / Stanley Gardens
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 267
Figure D.9 Viewpoint 3.4: View north east along Saltcoats Road
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 268
Appendix E: Water resources groundwater
Appendix E: Water resources - groundwater E.1

E.1.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: geology
A summary of the anticipated geology succession to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown below.
Table E.1 Summary of anticipated Thames Tunnel geological succession Period Series Holocene Quaternary Pleistocene Eocene Thames Group Formation Made ground Superficial Deposits Alluvium Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits London Clay Harwich Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottled Beds Laminated Beds Palaeogene Palaeocene Lambeth Lower Shelly Beds Mid-Lambeth Hiatus* Lower Mottled Beds Upnor No group Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk** Lewes Nodular Chalk Cretaceous Upper Cretaceous White Chalk Subgroup New Pit Chalk Holywell Nodular Chalk
* Not a Formation but an important depositional feature ** Subdivided into the Haven Brow, Cuckmere and Belle Tout members.
E.1.2
Figure E.1 shows the superficial geology and Figure E.2 the solid geology beneath the site. Figure E.1 Groundwater superficial geology Figure E.2 Groundwater solid geology (see Volume 7 Figures document)
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 269
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks E.1.3
There is presently no ground investigation (GI) information available for the Acton Storm Tanks. As a result, the specific depths to each geological horizon are not yet established. In the absence of site specific data, borehole logs held by the British Geological Survey (BGS) have been reviewed. Notably, boreholes with reference TQ27NW80 and TQ27NW409. Further investigation planned for 2011 will confirm the depths and thicknesses of geological layers encountered at the site (location shown in Figures E.1 and E.2). The shaft is likely to extend down into the London Clay Formation (B/A3iii-I horizons). At the site, the depth of the shaft will be 74. 85mATD (with base slab down to 70.85mATD). The base of the shaft is likely to be within the London Clay Formation, as will be the main tunnel at this site. The strata depth presented in the ground water section are based on project assumptions. The table below presents the data from the nearest borehole logs. Table E.2 Acton Storm Tanks anticipated ground conditions using nearby borehole logs; (awaiting outcome of GI) Formation Superficial Deposits [Alluvium]/Made Ground River Terrace Deposits London Clay B A3ii A3i A2 Harwich Formation Lambeth Group Thanet Sands Chalk Elevation* mATD 106.0 Depth below ground level (m) 0 No GI data 7.5 No GI data Thickness (m) 2.9 No GI data 4.6 No GI data
E.1.4
98.5
54.3
51.7 No GI data
44.2 No GI data
Unknown 51.0 27.7 -31.5
No GI data 55.0 No GI data 78.3 No GI data 137.5 No GI data
No GI data 22.4 No GI data 8.5 No GI data Not proven
Note: Based on an assumed ground level of 106mATD; using nearby borehole logs; (awaiting outcome of GI)
E.1.5
Beneath the made ground and alluvium, the Langley Silt is present. The Langley Silt is a firm to stiff brown sandy clay with gravel post-Anglian
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 270
deposit. The Langley Silt outcrops extensively westwards from Kensington, as far east as the Lea Valley. Many areas of the Langley Silts have been worked out around Hammersmith and Hayes for bricks; the quarries were generally not backfilled and houses were built on many of them E.1.6 River Terrace Deposits are extensive alluvial sand and gravel deposits laid down in a braided river system of approximately 5km width, in river terraces since the Anglian glaciation. Phases of down-cutting and intervening deposition during colder periods and subsequent melt waters increased river flows and sediment load. Seven terraces are distinguishable in London in terms of their altitude, rather than distinguishing lithological features, ranging in thickness from around 2.5m to 28m. The River Terrace Deposits thickness at the site has yet to be confirmed. Although the River Terrace Deposits commonly has very fine-grained sand, silt and clayey silt 'Brickearth' deposits above. The planned further GI will confirm whether the Brickearth deposits are present or significant at this site. The London Clay comprises clayey silt beds grading to an increasing number of silty fine-grained sand westward; and increase in homogeneity upwards through the deposit. The upper sandier formation is informally referred to as the Claygate Member to distinguish its coarser-grained nature. Beneath substantial thicknesses of London Clay, the Harwich Formation comprises of fine-grained glauconitic sand and rounded black flinty pebble beds, commonly deposited in a series of superimposed channels. The Upper Shelly Beds comprise grey, shelly clays with scattered glauconite grains increasing to mainly sand in south-east London. The Upper Mottled Beds (UMB) of the Reading Beds comprise silty clay and clay, generally un-bedded, fissured and blocky, with up to 50 per cent silt and sand. Laminated Beds (LtB) comprise thinly interbedded fine to medium grained sand, silt and clay with shells, with sand lenses found locally in south-east London. The Lower Shelly Beds (LSB) comprise dark grey to black clay with abundant shells, with increasing sand content towards east London. A thin - less than 0.3m thick - seam of Lignite is commonly found at its base, although this has not been established in the borehole logs at the site. Lower Mottled Beds (LMB) of the Reading Beds comprise of silty clay and clay, generally un-bedded, fissured and blocky, with up to 50 per cent silt and sand. The Upnor Formation (UPN) is a variably bioturbated fine- to mediumgrained sand with glauconite, rounded flint pebbles and minor clay, with distinctive pebble beds and base and top (Upn (Gv)).
E.1.7
E.1.8
E.1.9
E.1.10 E.1.11
E.1.12
E.1.13
E.1.14
E.1.15
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 271
The Thanet Sand Formation defines the first marine transgression following erosion of the Chalk, and is round unconformably on the approximately planar eroded Chalk surface. The Thanet Sand Formation comprises well sorted, uniform sand, with evidence of intense bioturbation removing bedding structures. With approximately 10 per cent fine-grained sand at the base, the lower part is typically clayey and silty, coarsening and greater sorting upward to the upper beds containing as much as 60 per cent fine-grained sand. The base of the Thanet Sands is a unit known as the 'Bullhead Bed' - a pale to medium-grey to brownish-grey, fine to fine-grained sand; and a conglomerate up to 0.5m thick comprising rounded to angular flint cobble and gravel sized clasts set in a clayey, fine to coarse-grained sand matrix with glauconite pellets forming the basal bed of the Thanet Sand Formation. The Bullhead Bed marks the Palaeocene/Cretaceous unconformity. The Seaford Chalk is the upper unit of the White Chalk, comprising firm to soft non-nodular Chalk with flint beds. Thin marl seams are found in the lower 8m and absent higher up. A hard ground marks the top of the Seaford Chalk.
E.1.17
E.2
E.2.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: hydrogeology
A summary of the anticipated hydrogeological properties of the different geologies to be encountered by the Thames Tunnel is shown below.
Table E.3 Summary of anticipated Thames Tunnel main hydrogeological units Group Formation (Made Ground) Alluvium Langley Silt River Terrace Deposits Thames London Clay Harwich Upper Shelly Beds Upper Mottle Beds Laminated Beds Lower Shelly Beds -----Mid Lambeth Hiatus---Lower Mottled Beds Upnor Thanet Sand Seaford Chalk Lewes Nodular Chalk Hydrogeology Perched Water Aquiclude Upper Aquifer Aquiclude Aquitard/Aquifer
Superficial Deposits
Lambeth
Aquitards/ Aquifers
No group White Chalk Subgroup
Lower Aquifer
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 272
Volume 7 Acton Storm Tanks Group Formation New Pit Chalk Holywell Nodular Chalk E.2.2
Appendix E: Water resources groundwater Hydrogeology
The lower aquifer comprises the Upnor Beds, the Thanet Sands and the Chalk (principal aquifer) xi. The upper aquifer (River Terrace Deposits) is defined as a secondary A aquifer. The thickness of the River Terrace Deposits (upper aquifer) and the Langley Silt deposits at the site have yet to be determined, and will be confirmed subject to the results of further GI planned for 2011. The depth of shaft will not extend down into the lower aquifer, as it will be constructed entirely within the upper aquifer and London Clay. The majority of the shaft will be excavated through the London Clay Formation (B/A3iii-I sub divisions). This is generally acknowledged as an aquiclude between the upper and lower aquifers. It is expected that below the River Terrace Deposits, the shaft will encounter little groundwater in the London Clay Formation with the exception of minor localised seepages and/or minor flows at silt layers or claystone horizons. Within the London Clay Formation, any groundwater present is likely to consist of localised seepages and/or minor flows. It is therefore possible that localised high pressure groundwater might be encountered within parts of the London Clay. The most porous section of London Clay the A3ii division - is present within the GI borehole logs. Groundwater movement through the London Clay Formation also occurs along horizontal bedding planes, resulting in localised seepages. The base of the London Clay has less sand fraction, and is therefore regarded as the less permeable and more compacted part of the London Clay, thereby forming an effective retardation to groundwater flow from the lower aquifer.
E.2.3
E.2.4
E.2.5
E.3
E.3.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: groundwater levels
The EA has a network of observation monitoring boreholes across London for which records are available dating back to1963. In the future, the Thames Tunnel team are monitoring groundwater levels in some boreholes drilled for the GI. The nearest EA monitoring borehole is located at High Street Acton (TQ 2037 8002) reference TQ28-45, approximately 1km to the northwest (see Figure E.3). Figure E.3 Groundwater EA monitoring locations (see Volume 7 Figures document)
E.3.2
The terms Principal and Secondary Aquifers were previously known as Major and Minor Aquifers (EA, 2010)
xi
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 273
This borehole records levels in the lower aquifer (mainly Chalk). A groundwater level hydrograph from this observation borehole is shown below.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 274
Appendix D: Water resources - groundwater
Figure E.4 Groundwater level hydrograph High Street Acton OBH
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 275
Appendix D: Water resources groundwater technical information
The levels in the Chalk represent the piezometric level, this is the level to which water will rise in borehole drilled down into the Chalk would reach. At the site, the top of Chalk will be around 32mATD, the piezomtric levels are always above the top of the Chalk, indicating the presence of confined conditions within the Chalk aquifer at this site. Over the period of record, from 1970, the trend shows a marked steady rise in groundwater piezometric head until 2000, where piezometric head fluctuated before a notable decline in piezometric levels since 2004. This rise probably reflects the changes in abstractions i.e reductions in groundwater abstractions in central London due to the closure of heavy industries. The recent lowering of levels reflects increase use of central London groundwater in recent years. The latest levels from this borehole in January 2010 were around 63 mATD (-37 mAOD) (EA, 2010)45. Noting that the water level peaked at 72mATD in January 2002, this level is above the base of the shaft at this site. Furthermore, as the lower units of the London Clay tend to be more permeable, this poses some potential for the lower aquifer piezometric level impacting on the construction, and this should be considered as part of the design and construction at this site. The EA have produced a groundwater contour map of the Chalk piezometric levels at a snap-shot in time in January 2010. According to this map (EA, 2010), the regional direction of groundwater flow within the confined Chalk (lower aquifer) around the site is to the west towards a low point within central London.
E.3.5
E.3.6
E.3.7
E.4
E.4.1 E.4.2
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: groundwater abstractions and protected rights
Groundwater abstractions within a radius of influence of up to 2km around the site have been identified. There are three Licensed Abstraction boreholes which abstract from the Chalk to northeast of the site, at a distance of 1.4km. The Licence Number for this source is 28/39/39/0230 and the annual licensed quantities from each are 63,500, 63,500 and 29,280 m3/annum. The use of this water in each case is for industrial, commercial and public services. These licences are all issued to the London & Quadrant Housing Trust. Another licensed abstraction is found 1.6km southeast of the site, held by Chiswick Park Estate Management Limited, licence volume unknown. Further details of these licensed abstractions are given below.
E.4.3
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 276
Table E.4 Licensed Abstractions in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks Licence Number Licence Holder London & Quadrant Housing Trust Chiswick Park Estate Management Limited E.4.4 E.4.5 E.4.6 Purpose Aquifer Licensed Volume [m3/annum] 63,500, 63,500 and 29,280
28/39/39/0230
Industrial, commercial and public services
Chalk
Chalk
Unknown
The nearest gravel abstraction is at a distance of approximately 2km to the south of the site, close by the River Thames. There are no unlicensed groundwater abstraction within a 1km radius of the site. Review of Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) schemes within 1km of the site identified one in the Chalk immediately adjacent and to the north of the site. This is shown in Figure E.5. Figure E.5 Groundwater GSHP (see Volume 7 Figures document)
E.4.7 E.4.8
There is one proposed GSHP open loop scheme in the Chalk at Chiswick Park, Acton, approximately 3km west of the site. Further details of these GSHP are given below. Table E.5 GSHP schemes in the vicinity of Acton Storm Tanks
Licence Number Planning Application
Licence Holder Genesis Housing Group
Purpose Unknown
Aquifer Chalk
Licensed Volume [m3/annum] Unknown
E.5
E.5.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: Groundwater Source Protection Zones
The EA defines Source Protection Zones (SPZ) around all major public water supply abstractions sources and also those currently licensed for quantities of greater than 1Ml/d (to check). The nearest SPZ to the site is over 6km away to the east
E.5.2
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 277
E.6
E.6.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: other designations
There are no other environmental designations relevant to groundwater in the vicinity of the site.
E.7
E.7.1
Baseline data review for the Acton Storm Tanks site: groundwater quality and land quality assessment
The EA monitors groundwater quality at number of points across London. The nearest EA monitoring is at Hammersmith Hospital (PGWU1887, see Figure E.3). The distance of this location from the site is approximately 1.5km to the north. The groundwater quality conditions at this location show slightly higher Sodium (Na+) concentrations than the Drinking Water Standard of 200mg/l. The origin of this Na+ is believed to be natural feature of the marine conditions under which these sediments were laid down. Groundwater quality sampling will be undertaken by the Thames Tunnel project as part of the GI. Project data on land quality at the site shows the site to be clean of any contamination. However, further monitoring of groundwater quality is being undertaken as part of the Thames Tunnel project monitoring programme. Further information will be presented in the ES.
E.7.2 E.7.3
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 278
Glossary
Glossary
Term A-weighted sound Description A-weighted decibels, abbreviated dBA, or dBa, or dB(a), are an expression of the relative loudness of sounds in air as perceived by the human ear. Ground elevation is measured relative to the mean sea level at Newlyn in Cornwall, referred to as Ordnance Datum (OD), such that heights are reported in metres above or below OD. Removal of water from a source of supply (surface or groundwater). Areas where the local authority determines the national air quality objectives are not likely to be achieved by the relevant deadlines. People, property or designated sites for nature conservation that may be at risk from exposure to air pollutants that could potentially arise as a result of the proposed development/project. Sediment laid down by a river. Can range from sands and gravels deposited by fast flowing water and clays that settle out of suspension during overbank flooding. Other deposits found on a valley floor are usually included in the term alluvium (eg, peat). The average (mean) of the hourly pollutant concentrations measured or predicted for a one year period. Originating as a result of human activities. A hydrogeological unit which, that allows groundwater movement at negligible rates, even though porous and capable of storing water. Groundwater movement insufficient to allow appreciable supply to a borehole or spring. Aquicludes tend to act as an impermeable barrier. A permeable geological stratum or formation that is capable of both storing and transmitting water in significant amounts.
Above Ordinance Datum abstraction Air Quality Management Area air quality sensitive receptors
alluvium
Annual Mean Concentration anthropogenic aquiclude
aquifer
Archaeological Priority Areas of archaeological priority, significance, potential or Area/Zone other title, often designated by the local authority. background concentration Basal Sands base case The contribution to the total measured or predicted concentration of a pollutant that does not originate directly from local sources of emissions. The Upnor Beds (the lower unit of the Lambeth Group) and the Thanet Sands. The base case for the assessment is a future case, without the project, in a particular assessment year.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 279
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term baseflow baseline benthic invertebrates Bentonite Description
Glossary
The component of river flow derived from groundwater sources rather than surface run-off. The existing conditions against which the likely significant effects due to a proposed development are assessed. Invertebrates which are found within or on the river bed. An absorbent aluminium phyllosilicate, in general, impure clay consisting mostly of montmorillonite. Mixed with water, it forms a slurry commonly used as drilling fluid and ground support in tunnelling. A hole drilled into the ground for geological investigation or for the exploitation of geological deposits or groundwater. An abstraction borehole is a well sunk into an aquifer from which water will be pumped. Wind-blown dust deposited under extremely cold, dry post glacial conditions suitable for making bricks. Produced by the BSI Group in order to set up standards of quality for goods and services. 2,000600 BC. Recording of historic buildings (by a competent archaeological organisation) is undertaken to document buildings, or parts of buildings, which may be lost as a result of demolition, alteration or neglect, amongst other reasons. Four levels of recording are defined by Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (RCHME) and English Heritage. Level 1 (basic visual record); Level 2 (descriptive record), Level 3 (analytical record), and Level 4 (comprehensive analytical record). Also called a bund wall, bunding is a separated area within a structure designed to prevent inundation or breaches of various types. An area of stone, concrete or timber laid on the river / sea bed, that is exposed at low tide, allowing vessels to rest safely and securely in place. The area from which surface water and/or groundwater will collect and contribute to the flow of a specific river, abstraction or other specific discharge boundary. Can be prefixed by surface water or groundwater to indicate the specific nature of the catchment.
borehole
brickearth British Standard Bronze Age Building recording
bunding
campshed
catchment
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 280
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS) Description
Glossary
The Environment Agencys strategy for water resources management in England and Wales through licensing water abstraction. CAMS is used to inform the public on water resources and licensing practice; provide a consistent approach to local water resources management; and help to balance the needs of water-users and the environment. A curve formed by a perfectly flexible, uniformly dense, and inextensible cable suspended from its endpoints. Whales, dolphins and porpoises. A soft white limestone (calcium carbonate) formed from the skeletal remains of sea creatures. Method for evaluating invertebrate communities based on species rarity, diversity and abundance. A temporary or permanent enclosure built across a body of water to allow the enclosed area to be pumped out creating a dry work environment. A sewer conveying waste water of domestic or industrial origin and rain water. A structure, or series of structures, designed to allow spillage of excess waste water from a combined sewer under high rainfall conditions. Flows may discharge by gravity or by pumping. A simplified representation or qualified description of the behaviour of the hydrogeological system. A quantitative conceptual model includes preliminary calculations and flow and mass balances. Conservation areas defined by Local Planning Authorities according to the provisions of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The area of site that would be used during the construction phase. The statutory plan which sets out a boroughs planning policies in relation to the management of development and land use. Supersedes the Unitary Development Plan in Boroughs where it has been adopted. A mobile crane, usually with caterpillar tracks. The flow from the existing CSO is diverted to the location of the drop shaft. The drop shaft location requires suitable access for construction and maintenance.
catenary Cetaceans Chalk Community Conservation Index. (CCI) cofferdam
combined sewer combined sewer overflow (CSO)
conceptual model
Conservation area
construction site Core Strategy
crawler crane CSO connection culvert
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 281
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term CSO connection tunnel Description
Glossary
The flow from the drop shaft is transferred to the Thames Tunnel through a connection tunnel. These vary in diameter from 2.2m to 5.0m Long connection tunnels can be up to 4,615m in length. The shaft connects the flow down to the Thames Tunnel. The shaft sizes depend on the amount of flow to be intercepted and the de-aeration requirements and the depth depends on the location of the Thames Tunnel. The size ranges from 6m to 25m and depth from 25 to 75m. Site where the flows from an existing CSO would be redirected to the main Thames Tunnel. An area of land or structures around a dwelling or other structure. Excavated material to be re-used within the development as fill or removed off-site. the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified time period T. An area within the shaft and/or associated pipe work, where air is removed from liquids. Logarithmic ratio used to relate sound pressure level to a standard reference level. Influencing or determining elements or factors. In London these refer to the borough Unitary Development Plans. A system used to locally lower groundwater levels around the worksite to provide stable working conditions when excavating. A diaphragm wall is a reinforced concrete retaining wall that is constructed in-situ. A deep trench is excavated and supported with bentonite slurry, and then reinforcing steel is inserted into the trench. Concrete is poured into the trench and only after this does excavation in front of the retained earth commence. The release of substances (eg, water, sewage, etc.) into surface waters, ground or sewer. A lowering of the water level in a borehole or aquifer, usually in response to abstraction. Legal standards set in Europe in the Drinking Water Directive 1998 together with UK national standards to maintain wholesomeness of potable water.
CSO drop shaft
CSO interception site curtilage cut dB LAeq,T
de-aeration chamber decibel (dB) determinands Development Plan dewatering wells
diaphragm wall
discharge drawdown Drinking Water Standards
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 282
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term early medieval effect effluent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Description
Glossary
AD 410 1066. Also referred to as the Saxon period. The result of an impact on a particular resource or receptor. The treated wastewater discharged from the Sewage Treatment Works. An assessment of the likely significant effects that a proposed project may have on the environment, considering natural, social and economic aspects, prepared in accordance with the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The concentration of chemical pollutants assessed to have detrimental effects on water quality in terms of the health of aquatic plants and animals. EQS are established in the WFD (Annex V) through the testing of the toxicity of the substance on aquatic biology. A document to be prepared following an EIA which provides a systematic and objective account of the EIAs findings, prepared in accordance with the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. A limited programme of nonintrusive and/or intrusive fieldwork which determines the presence or absence of archaeological features, structures, deposits, artefacts or ecofacts within a specified area. A programme of controlled, intrusive fieldwork with defined research objectives which examines, records and interprets archaeological remains, retrieves artefacts, ecofacts and other remains within a specified area. The records made and objects gathered are studied and the results published in detail appropriate to the project design. A structural planar fracture or discontinuity within lithological strata due to strain or compression, in which significant displacement is observable. Factors that will determine the severity of an odour as defined by the Environment Agency; Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness, Receptor. Material required to raise existing ground levels. This can utilise cut material generated within the site, or necessitate the importation of material. The location at which an item was found. A sewer conveying waste water of domestic and/or industrial origin, but little or no rain water. A breakage in a rock mass. Present at any scale, but is generally used for large scale discontinuities.
Environmental Quality Standards (EQS)
Environmental Statement (ES)
Evaluation (archaeological)
Excavation (archaeological)
fault
FIDOR
fill
findspot foul sewer fracture
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 283
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term GARDIT Description
Glossary
General Aquifer Research Development and Investigation Team (Thames Water, the Environment Agency and London Underground with the support of organisations such as the Corporation of London, Envirologic, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) and BT). The gradual increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere, believed to be due to the greenhouse effect, caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants. Benchmark national quality standard for parks and green spaces in the United Kingdom. Water contained in underground strata, predominantly in aquifers. Inundation of land or basements as groundwater levels rise and the groundwater discharges to the surface or underground structures. The rise in groundwater level that occurs after cessation of abstraction. Groundwater Body: distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer or aquifers. A dark brown slightly glauconitic clay with localised fine sand. Temporary roads provided within the contractors site area to allow the transportation of material around the site. A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. Heritage assets are the valued components of the Historic environment. They include designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing). Archaeological and built heritage database held and maintained by the County authority. Previously known as the Sites and Monuments Record. Designated residential area with streets designed to operate primarily as a space for social use. Generally hard nodular chalks with thin flaser marls. In parts, there are significant proportions of shell debris. Inter-bedded coloured marl and chalk succession characteristic of the Plenus Marls Member are found at its base. Above this, the Melbourn Rock Member is distinguishable by its lack of shell material.
global warming
Green Flag groundwater groundwater flooding
groundwater rebound GWB Harwich Formation haul roads heritage asset
Historic environment Record (HER) Homezone Holywell Nodular Chalk
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 284
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term hydraulic conductivity Description
Glossary
A constant of proportionality in Darcys law that allows the calculation of the rate of groundwater flow from the hydraulic gradient. For a unit hydraulic gradient, the higher the hydraulic conductivity the higher the rate of groundwater flow. In an aquifer this is the rate of change of groundwater level per unit distance in a given direction. Groundwater flows in the direction of the decline in hydraulic gradient. A graph showing a plot of water flow or level with time, applicable to both surface water and groundwater. A physical or measurable change to the environment attributable to the project. This structure is required to be built around the existing overflow either on land or at the discharge point in the foreshore. The chamber has a weir and valves to divert the flow in to the Thames Tunnel system. It is likely to be a reinforced concrete cut and cover box structure. In some other cases the structure is required to be built adjacent to an inlet or sump of a pump station from which the flow is diverted 600 BC AD 43. A caisson is a retaining, water-tight structure open to the air. A jack is used to push the caisson into the ground, with the internal area then excavated. Equivalent continuous sound level is a notional steady sound level which would cause the same A-weighted sound energy to be received as that due to the actual and possibly fluctuating sound over a period of time (T). It can also be used to relate periods of exposure and noise level. Thus, for example, a halving or doubling of the period of exposure is equivalent in sound energy to a decrease or increase of 3dB(A) in the sound level for the original period. The maximum sound level measured on the A- weighted scale occurring during an event. Complex sequence of highly variable inter-bedded sediments which include clay, sands, pebble beds and Shelly beds. Fine to coarse sand or clay with occasional black organic matter. AD 1066 1500. The Lee Tunnel comprises a 7.2m diameter storage and transfer tunnel from Abbey Mills Pumping Station to Beckton STW and the interception of the Abbey Mills CSO.
hydraulic gradient
hydrograph impact interception chamber
Iron Age jacked caission
LAeq(T)
LAmax Lambeth Group Laminated Beds later medieval Lee Tunnel
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 285
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term Lewes Nodular Chalk Description
Glossary
Hard to very hard nodular chalks and hardgrounds with interbedded soft to medium hard chalks and marls. More abundant softer chalks towards the top. Formal permit allowing the holder to engage in an activity (in the context of this report, usually abstraction), subject to conditions specified in the licence itself and the legislation under which it was issued. A structure of architectural and/or historical interest. These are included on the Secretary of State's list, which affords statutory protection. These are subdivided in to Grades I, II* and II (in descending importance). The general characteristics of a rock or sedimentary formation. Local areas where the local authority determines the national air quality objectives are not likely to be achieved by the relevant deadlines. Collection of planning documents prepared by the Local Planning Authority outlining the management of development and land use in a Borough. A structure of local architectural and/or historical interest. These are structures that are not included in the Secretary of States Listing but are considered by the local authority to have architectural and/or historical merit. An area specific plan to interpret and apply the strategy set out in the Structure Plan, to provide a detailed basis for the control of development, to provide a basis for co-ordinating new development and to bring planning issues before the public. Fine sandy silty clay to silty clay. The LTI comprise five separate improvement projects at Thames Waters five Tideway sewage treatment works (STWs): Mogden, Beckton, Crossness, Riverside and Long Reach. The LTT comprises two separate projects: the Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tunnel. Consisting of the Upnor Beds (the lowest unit of the Lambeth Group), the Thanet Sands and the Chalk. Artificial deposit. An archaeologist would differentiate between modern made ground, containing identifiably modern inclusion such as concrete (but not brick or tile), and undated made ground, which may potentially contain deposits of archaeological interest.
licence
listed building
lithology Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) Local Development Framework (LDF) locally listed building
Local Plan
London Clay London Tideway Improvements (LTI)
London Tideway Tunnels (LTT) Lower aquifer made ground
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 286
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term main tunnel drive shaft site main tunnel reception shaft site Mesolithic mitigation measures Description
Glossary
Site that would be used to insert and then drive the TBM. Site that would be used to remove the TBM from the Thames Tunnel at the end of the drive. 12,000 4,000 BC. Actions proposed to prevent or reduce adverse effects arising from the whole or specific elements of the development. 4,000 2,000 BC. Non-nodular chalk, massively bedded, with fairly regularly developed marl seams and sporadic flints. A product of combustion processes. Nitrogen dioxide is associated with adverse effects on human health. A report which briefly describes the main points discussed in the Environmental Statement in a clear manner without the use of technical jargon and phraseology. This report is a requirement of the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The Water Services Regulations Authority, a government body set up in 1989 to regulate the activities of the water companies in England and Wales. Odour panel sampling carried out in laboratory conditions. Related to past environments, ie, during the prehistoric and later periods. Such remains can be of archaeological interest, and often consist of organic remains such as pollen and plant macro fossils which can be used to reconstruct the past environment. 700,00012,000 BC. A Middle Bronze Age axe. Solid particles or liquid droplets suspended or carried in the air and includes the same matter after it has deposited onto a surface. For the purposes of this assessment the term includes all size fractions of suspended matter, such as dust, PM10 and PM2.5. A structure containing carbon which absorbs odour from air flowing out of the Tunnel, without the assistance of mechanical pumping. Preliminary Environmental Information Report is a document setting out initial environmental information. In accordance with the Planning Act 2008, it is a requirement that this is the subject of pre-application consultation.
Neolithic New Pit Chalk nitrogen dioxide (and oxides NO2 and NO) Non-Technical Summary (NTS)
Ofwat
olfactometry Palaeo-environmental
Palaeolithic palstave particulate matter (PM)
passive filter chamber
PEIR
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 287
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term pelagic invertebrates perched water Description Invertebrates which are found in the water column.
Glossary
Is groundwater in an aquifer present above the regional water table, as a result of a (semi-)impermeable layer of rock or sediment above the main water table/aquifer, below the ground surface. The capacity of soil or porous rock to transmit water. A measure of the acidity or basicity of an aqueous solution. A borehole designed specifically to allow the measurement of groundwater level. The level or head to which groundwater would rise in a piezometer if it is free to seek equilibrium with the atmosphere. Written procedures put in place for dealing with spillages and pollution. Containing void spaces. Most sedimentary rocks are porous to some extent, and the term is commonly applied in a relative sense, generally restricted to rocks which have significant effective porosity. Refers to Option 3 Abbey Mills route, which runs from Action Storm Tanks in west London to Limehouse then turns northeast to Abbey Mills Pumping Station, where it connects with the Lee Tunnel. Refers to the preferred route and construction sites. Sites assessed as most suitable following review of suitability of each shortlisted site by taking in to account engineering,planning, environment, property and community considerations. Preservation by recording and advancement of understanding of asset significance. This is a standard archaeological mitigation strategy where heritage assets remains are fully excavated and recorded archaeologically and the results published. For remains of lesser significance, preservation by record might comprise an archaeological watching brief. Archaeological mitigation strategy where nationally important (whether designated or not) heritage assets are conserved in situ for future generations, typically through modifications to design proposals to avoid damage or destruction of such remains.
permeability pH piezometer piezometric surface
Pollution Incident Control Plan porous
preferred route
preferred scheme preferred site
preservation by record
preservation in situ
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 288
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term Principal Aquifer Description
Glossary
A geological stratum that exhibits high inter-granular and/or fracture permeability. This strata has the ability to support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale. Principal Aquifers equate in most cases to aquifers previously referred to as Major Aquifers. Term used to describe the supply of water provided by a water company. Putty chalk (clay characteristics) near the surface of the unit above firm to soft non-nodular chalk with flint (Upper Chalk undivided) above hard nodular chalk with flints (Lewes Chalk). An international treaty for the conservation and sustainable utilisation of wetlands. River Basin Management Plans these are the relevant plans that outline the state of water resources within a River Basin District relevant to the objectives of the WFD. The rarest and most threatened species are often listed in the Red Data Book of Insectsxii, within which there are three categories. Taxa in danger of extinction are referred to as RDB 1 species; those considered to be vulnerable and likely to move into the endangered category are listed under RDB 2, whilst rare species occur on RDB 3. Section of river between two points. Extensive alluvial sand and gravel deposits laid down in a braided river system in river terraces since the Anglian glaciations. Where live data is used to manipulate control equipment in order to best manage the flow of storm water and sewage within the capacity of the system. People (both individually and communally) and the socioeconomic systems they support. Water that percolates downwards from the surface to replenish the water table. The red route is a network of roads designated by Transport for London that carry heavy volumes of traffic and are essential for the movement of traffic and public transport. These comprise mainly of major routes into and around London. Transport for London are responsible for enforcing the red routes which include clearways, parking and loading bays, bus lanes, yellow box junctions and banned turns.
Public Water Supply Putty Chalk
RAMSAR RBMP
RDB3
reach River Terrace Deposits real time control (RTC) receptors recharge Red route
xii
Bratton, (1991) Red Data Book for Insects
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 289
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term risk assessment Description
Glossary
Assessment of the risks associated with an activity or object and possible accidents involving a source or practice. This includes assessment of consequence. AD 43 410. Scheduled Ancient Monument. More commonly referred to as Scheduled Monument. Entry of brackish or salt water into an aquifer, from the sea or estuary. This may be natural or induced by excessive or uncontrolled groundwater abstraction. The zone in which the voids in a rock or soil are filled with water at a pressure greater than atmospheric pressure. An ancient monument or archaeological deposits designated by the Secretary of State as a Scheduled Ancient Monument and protected under the Ancient Monuments Act. The formal view of the determining authority on the range of topics and issues to be considered by the Environmental Impact Assessment, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The document prepared by the applicant setting out the proposed approach to the Environmental Impact Assessment, including the range of topics and issues to be addressed, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The formal view of the determining authority on the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment to be undertaken, as referred to in the 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulations. The upper unit of the White Chalk, comprising of as firm to soft non-nodular Chalk with flint beds. Thin marl seams are found towards its base and and absent higher up. A hard ground marks the top of the Seaford Chalk. Alternate piles in-filled with concrete to form a water-tight retaining wall. Either permeable strata capable of supporting local supplies or low permeability strata with localised features such as fissures. The term Secondary Aquifer replaces the previously used name of Minor Aquifer. There are two classes of Secondary Aquifer. Secondary A are capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale and Secondary B are lower permeability layers which may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering.
Roman SAM saline intrusion
saturated zone Scheduled Monument
Scoping Opinion
Scoping Report
Screening Opinion
Seaford Chalk
secant piles Secondary Aquifers
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 290
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term short listed sites SINC (Grade B) SINC (Grade L) SINC (Grade M) Site Description
Glossary
Sites idenitfied following an assessment of long list sites in accordance with the Site Selection Methodology. Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade II of Borough importance). Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade I of Local importance). Site of Nature Conservation Importance (Grade III of Metropolitan importance). For the purposes of the PEIR assessment, the site is deemed as the entire area located within the Limit of Land to be Acquired or Used. It should not be inferred that this entire site area will be physically separated (ie, hoarded or fenced) for the construction duration. An area given a statutory designation by English Nature or the Countryside Council for Wales because of its nature conservation value. Materials such as hard standing and vegetation including incidental topsoil (including potential contaminated soil). A record of sites of archaeological interest. An efficient method for constructing the tunnel lining with a layer of sprayed concrete. This is instead of using pre-cast concrete segments. Layers of rock, including unconsolidated materials such as sands and gravels. The study of stratified rocks, their nature, their occurrence, their relationship to each other and their classification. A colourless gas with a choking smell, the main product of the combustion of sulphur contained in fuels. Overarching term for recent generally unconsolidated or loosely consolidated deposits of sand, gravel, silt, clay, etc on top of bedrock. Synonymous with drift generally supersedes the term. This is a general term used to describe all water features such as rivers, streams, springs, ponds and lakes. Water that travels across the ground rather than seeping in to the soil.
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) site strip Sites and Monuments Record sprayed concrete lining strata stratigraphy sulphur dioxide (SO2) superficial deposits
surface water surface water runoff
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 291
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term Thames Tunnel Description
Glossary
The Thames Tunnel comprises a full-length storage and transfer tunnel from Acton Storm Tanks to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works in East London and the interception of specific CSOs along the Thames Tideway with a diameter between 6.5m and 7.2m. Coarsening upward sequence of well sortedfine grained sand which has a higher clay / silt content towards the lower part of the sequence, and evidence of intense bioturbation removing bedding structures. The Thames Tunnel project. Length of river channel swept by water from a discharge point in one tidal cycle. In the case of the River Thames this is considered to 13km up and downstream of the discharge point. Tool developed on behalf of Thames Water to assess the effects of lapses in water quality caused by CSO discharges on Tideway fish populations. The formal assessment of traffic and transportation issues relating to the proposed development. The findings are usually presented in a report which accompanies the planning application. Partially or wholly remove. In archaeological terms remains may have been truncated by previous construction activity. A typical year relates to an actual year, eg, the corresponding meteorological dataset for that year used in the modelling which was 1979-80. The corresponding meteorological dataset is used as it would give a better indication of conditions rather than using a recent year of data where the meteorological data may not be consistent with a rainfall event leading to the tunnel emissions. An enclosed space below the ground surface where air is released to atmosphere, should the pressure within the Tunnel exceed a set value. The statutory plan which sets out a unitary authoritys planning policies. These are rocks which are generally unable to provide usable water supplies and are unlikely to have surface water and wetland ecosystems dependent upon them. Variably bioturbated fine- to medium-grained sand with glauconite, rounded flint pebbles and minor clay, with distinctive pebble beds and base and top.
Thanet Sands
The project tidal excursion
Tideway Fish Risk Model Transport Assessment (TA)
truncate typical year
underground pressure release chamber Unitary Development Plan (UDP) unproductive strata
Upnor Formation
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 292
Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Term Upper aquifer Upper Mottled Beds Upper Shelly Beds Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive valve chamber Description
Glossary
Comprising the water bearing strata above the London Clay, namely the River Terrace Deposits and the Alluvium. A bluish grey mottled with greenish brown clay. Contains shell fragments within a flinty gravel or a sandy clay The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (1991) has the overall aim of protecting the environment from the adverse effects of urban waste water discharges. An underground structure on the sewer system containing valves which are used to isolate the flow between different parts of the sewer system. For example, flap valves prevent the flow from the river travelling back up the sewer or into the tunnel. A stack through which air is released. An EC Directive seeking to improve water quality in rivers and groundwater in an integrated way (2000). An archaeological watching brief is a formal programme of observation and investigation conducted during any operation carried out for nonarchaeological reasons. Level below which the ground is saturated with water. The water table elevation may vary with recharge and groundwater abstraction. The WEEE Directive aims to reduce the amount of electrical and electronic equipment going to landfill and to encourage everyone to reuse, recycle and recover it. Chalk with flints, with discrete marl seams, nodular chalk, sponge-rich and flint seams throughout. Flint typology and marl seam incidence is important for correlation. Comprises of Seaford Chalk, Lewes Nodular Chalk, New Pit Chalk and Holywell Nodular Chalk.
ventilation column Water Framework Directive (WFD) watching brief (archaeological) water table
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE) White Chalk subgroup
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 293
References
References
1
Greater London Authority and London Councils (2006) Best Practice Guidance: The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition, November 2006
2
Defra, http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/backgroundmaps.html, Accessed May 2011)

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

5 6
Defra (2009) Local Air Quality Management- Technical Guidance, LAQM.TG(09).
Greater London Authority and London Councils (2006) Best Practice Guidance: The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition, November 2006
7 8
Defra (2010) Draft National Policy Statement for Waste Water, November 2010.
Thames Estuary Partnership Biodiversity Action Group (undated) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan. Thames Estuary Partnership.
9
Thames Estuary Partnership Biodiversity Action Group (undated) Tidal Thames Habitat Action Plan. Thames Estuary Partnership. Colclough, S.R, Gray, G, Bark, A & Knights, B (2002) Journal of Fish Biology 61 (Supplement A), 64-73. Fish and fisheries of the tidal Thames: management of the modern resource, research aims and future pressures.
11 10
Thames Water Utilities Ltd. Lee Tunnel and Beckton Environmental Statement (2008) The Mayors Biodiversity Strategy Connecting with Nature (Great London Authority, July 2002)
13 12
IEEM. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006).
14
Department of Communities and Local Government. Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010), 1, 13
15
Bridgeland D, Quaternary of the Thames. Geological Conservation Review Series 7 London. Chapman, and Hall (1994)
16
Wymer J, 1999a The Lower Palaeolithic Occupation of Britain: Volume 1. Wessex Archaeology and English Heritage
17
Museum of London Archaeology Service, The archaeology of Greater London. An assessment of archaeological evidence for human presence in the area now covered by Greater London (2000)
18
Victoria County History A History of the County of Middlesex. Volume 7: Acton, Chiswick, Ealing and Brentford, West Twyford, Willesden. T F T Baker, C R Elrington (Editors) (1982), 714
19
Victoria County History A History of the County of Oxford. Volume 4: The City of Oxford. Alan Crossley, C R Elrington (Editors) (1979), 39
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 294
References
20
21
22
23
24
Victoria County History A History of the County of Middlesex: Volume 7: Acton, Chiswick, Ealing and Brentford, West Twyford, Willesden. T F T Baker, C R Elrington (Editors)(1982), 3235
25
Victoria County History A History of the County of Middlesex. Volume 7: Acton, Chiswick, Ealing and Brentford, West Twyford, Willesden. T F T Baker, C R Elrington (Editors) 1982, 3235
26 27
LB of Ealing, Bedford Park Conservation Area Appraisal (September 2007)
BS 5228:2009 (Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites) BS5228:2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites
29 28
BS 4142 (1997): Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas
30
Web reference - Durkan Estates (http://www.durkan.co.uk/news-durkancompletes-londons-newest-urban-village.asp); Last accessed May 2011.

31
Thames Tunnel, Phase 1 Report on Consultation: Section 3 Site specific issues: Site 1 Acton Storm Tanks
32
Durkan website, http://www.durkan.co.uk/news-durkan-completes-londons-newesturban-village.asp, site accessed May 2011

33
Segro Acton Park Estate (no date) http://london.segro.com/pdfs/london/PR_Acton_Site.pdf, site accessed May 2011
34
the Thames Recreational Users Study Final Report (2007), a collaborative partnership project between the City of London Port Health Authority and the Health Protection Agency
35
Communities and Local Government (March 2010). Planning Policy Statement 25 Development and Flood Risk.
36
Communities and Local Government (December 2009). Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Practice Guide.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 295
References
37
Environment Agency. Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. (Accessed Feb 2011 http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/research/library/consultations/106100.aspx)
38
Greater London Authority (July 2011). The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London.
39
Capita Symonds Ltd (March 2008). LB of Ealing Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report.
40 41 42
Environment Agency. Thames Estuary 2100 Flood Risk Management Plan. Greater London Authority, (October 2009), London Regional Flood Risk Appraisal
Environment Agency (April 2008). Thames Tidal Defences Joint Probability Extreme Water Levels 2008 Final Modelling Report (Thames Barrier operational, Model Node 2.19)).
43
JBA and Entec UK Ltd (Jun 2010). LB of Hammersmith and Fulham and Kensington and Chelsea Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report.
44 45
Greater London Authority (Aug 2009). The Mayors Draft Water Strategy. EA (2010) Management of London Basin Chalk Aquifer. Status Report 2010.
100-RG-ENV-00000-00000X
Page 296
Thames Tunn
110-RG-ENV-PEG2X-000015
Phase two consultation (Autumn 2011)
For further information see our website: www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk or call us on 0800 0721 086
Thames Tunn

PEIR Main Report Vol7 Acton Storm Tanks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PEIR Main Report Vol7 Acton Storm Tanks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks site assessment

Phase two consultation documentation

Project information papers

Site information papers

Thames Tunnel Preliminary environmental information report

Part B: Preliminary site information

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Thames Tunnel Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks site assessment

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

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Socio-economics ......................................................................................... 118

Townscape and visual ................................................................................. 129

Transport ...................................................................................................... 177

Water resources groundwater ................................................................. 208

Preliminary environmental information report

Water resources surface water ................................................................ 217

Water resources flood risk ....................................................................... 232

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

Preliminary environmental information report

WSI WWT ZTV ZVI

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 2: Site context

Site context Site location

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 2: Site context

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 3: Proposed development

Proposed development Overview

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 3: Proposed development

Interception chambers and culverts

Access and maintenance works

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks 3.2.17

Section 3: Proposed development

Code of Construction Practice

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks

Section 3: Proposed development

3.3.14 3.3.15 3.3.16

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Tunnelling 3.3.17

Section 3: Proposed development

Preliminary environmental information report

Volume 7: Acton Storm Tanks Ventilation building 3.3.25

Section 3: Proposed development

Access and movement

Preliminary environmental information report