lewisham gateway developments limited …...lewisham gateway, phase 1b environmental statement...

ENVIRONMENT

Lewisham Gateway

Developments Limited

Lewisham Gateway – Phase 1B

SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL

STATEMENT

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

www.bwbconsulting.com

B W B C o n s u l t i n g L t d : R e g i s t e r e d i n E n g l a n d 5 2 6 5 8 6 3

ENVIRONMENT

Lewisham Gateway

Developments Limited

Lewisham Gateway – Phase

1B

SUPPLEMENTARY

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT


Birmingham

Livery Place, 35 Livery Street, Colmore Business

District, Birmingham, B3 2PB

T: 0121 233 3322

Leeds

Whitehall Waterfront, 2 Riverside Way, Leeds LS1

4EH

T: 0113 233 8000

London

Providian House, 16-18 Monument Street,

London, EC3R 8AJ

T: 020 74073879

Manchester

4th Floor Carvers Warehouse, 77 Dale Street

Manchester, M1 2HG

T: 0161 233 4260

Nottingham

Waterfront House, Station Street, Nottingham

NG2 3DQ

T: 0115 924 1100

SEPTEMBER 2014

LEWISHAM GATEWAY, PHASE 1B



LNS/2069/ES/NTS

Limitations

All comments and proposals contained in this report, including any conclusions, are based on information available

to BWB Consulting during investigations. The conclusions drawn by BWB Consulting could therefore differ if the

information is found to be inaccurate or misleading. BWB Consulting accepts no liability should this be the case, nor

if additional information exists or becomes available with respect to this scheme.

Except as otherwise requested by the client, BWB Consulting is not obliged to and disclaims any obligation to

update the report for events taking place after:-

(i) The date on which this assessment was undertaken, and

(ii) The date on which the final report is delivered

BWB Consulting makes no representation whatsoever concerning the legal significance of its findings or the legal

matters referred to in the following report.

The information presented and conclusions drawn are based on statistical data and are for guidance purposes only.

i

DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD

Revision Date of

Issue Status Author: Checked: Approved:

1 September

2014 Draft

Jenny Chapman Ben Fleming Iqbal Rassool

2 September

2014 Final

Jenny Chapman Ben Fleming Iqbal Rassool

LEWISHAM GATEWAY, PHASE 1B



LNS/2069/ES/NTS

ii

CONTENTS PAGE

DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD i

CONTENTS PAGE ii

INTRODUCTION 1 1.0

Previous Submissions 1 Structure of the Environmental Statement 2 Purpose of the Supplementary Environmental Statement 2

THE PLANNING PERMISSION SITE 3 2.0

RESERVED MATTERS DEVELOPMENT 5 3.0

Approved Outline Parameters 5 Detailed Proposals for Phase 1B 6 Construction 10 Consideration of Alternatives 10

ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS 12 4.0

Significance Criteria 12 Socio-Economic 13 Air Quality 14 Noise and Vibration 15 Water Resources and Flood Risk 15 Ecology and Nature Conservation 16 Townscape and Visual Impact 16 Wind 17 Daylight and Sunlight Availability 17 Other Issues Considered 18 Summary and Impact Interactions 19

TABLES

Table 4.1 – Significance Criteria

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Site Location Plan

Figure 2 – Proposed Layout – Ground Level Parameter Plan

Figure 3 – Block B Ground Flood Plan

Figure 4 – Illustrative View of Block B (left) viewed from the east

Figure 5 – Rendered Landscape Masterplan

LEWISHAM GATEWAY PHASE 1B

[ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT


LNS/2069/ES/NTS

1

INTRODUCTION 1.0

This Environmental Statement (ES) has been prepared to accompany a reserved 1.1

matters planning application on behalf of 2009 Lewisham Gateway Developments

Limited (LGDL) for the proposed Phase 1B of the Lewisham Gateway development.

Previous Submissions

In May 2009 Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited (LGDL) received planning 1.2

permission for the development, “Lewisham Gateway” (reference DC/06/62375).

Outline planning permission was received for the proposed buildings and public

realm, with full planning permission granted for the highway and infrastructure works

(plus Building F).

The proposed development which was the subject of the 2006 application comprised 1.3

“comprehensive mixed use redevelopment of the Lewisham Gateway site comprising

up to 100,000 sq m of retail (A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5), offices (B1), hotel (C1), residential

(C3), education (D1), health (D1) and leisure (D2) with new road layout, parking,

servicing, associated infrastructure and improvements to the public transport

interchange, as well as open space, rivers and water features.”

The approved maximum development comprised (by use, in m2 gross external area): 1.4

Retail (A1, A2): 12,000m2

Retail (A3, A4): 4,000m2

Retail (A5): 1,000m2

Offices (B1) / Education (D1): 17,500m2

Hotel (C1): 3,000m2

Residential (C3): 57,000m2

Health (D1): 500m2

Leisure (D2): 5,000m2

TOTAL 100,000m2

An Environmental Statement was produced to accompany the planning application, 1.5

(produced in 2006) and in response to a request for further information, an

Addendum report was produced in 2007.

In February 2013 a Supplementary Environmental Statement (ES) was voluntarily 1.6

produced to accompany a reserved matters application for Phase 1A; “Building A

and Confluence Place” (reference DC/13/82493). This application was approved

during May 2013 and is referred to as the ‘Phase 1A Supplementary ES’. Construction

of Phase 1A and the Infrastructure Phase of the development commenced on site in

Spring 2014.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

2

Since the planning permission for the wider scheme was approved in 2009 and since 1.7

the reserved matters application for Phase 1A was submitted, a number of S96A

applications relating to the development have been submitted. These are for non-

material amendments to the scheme permitted in 2009 and by their nature, they

would not be expected to generate any significant effects.

Structure of the Environmental Statement

This ES comprises two volumes and this separate non-technical summary (NTS) 1.8

document. Volume 1 is the main assessment report whilst Volume 2 comprises the

technical appendices containing the supporting technical information referred to.

Purpose of the Supplementary Environmental Statement

This Supplementary Environmental Statement (Supplementary ES) has been prepared 1.9

to be submitted with the reserved matters application for Phase 1B.

The Original ES documented the likely significant effects of the Lewisham Gateway 1.10

development, including Block B1 and B2. The assessment of the effects of Block B1

and B2, along with the other blocks within the development, was based on

parameter plans, submitted as part of the planning application. This Supplementary

ES has been prepared to update the assessments provided in the Original ES to

identify any likely new or different significant environmental effects of the detailed

proposals for Phase 1B.

The Phase 1B Supplementary ES has been completed in accordance with the EIA 1.11

Regulations, this ES considers the likely environmental impacts of Phase 1B during

construction and during its subsequent operation.

Where likely significant adverse impacts on the environment are identified, the ES sets 1.12

out ways to prevent, reduce and, where possible, offset these impacts. These are

known as ‘mitigation measures’.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

3

THE PLANNING PERMISSION SITE 2.0

The location of the site is shown in Figure 1 below. Blocks B1 and B2 are within the 2.1

Lewisham Gateway development which was granted outline planning approval in

2009.

Figure 1- Site Location Plan

The existing Lewisham Gateway site is dominated by a roundabout, known as 2.2

Lewisham Northern Roundabout and associated approach roads. The northern end

of Lewisham Gateway includes Lewisham Bus Station and Lewisham Docklands Light

Railway (DLR) station.

The northern and western boundaries of Lewisham Gateway are delineated by 2.3

railway lines which are elevated above the surrounding land. The southern boundary

runs along Rennell Street beyond which lie the Riverdale Centre and the Citibank

Tower. The eastern boundary runs along Granville Grove Street – Lewisham High

Street.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

4

The River Ravensbourne flows across Lewisham Gateway and is partially culverted. 2.4

The River Quaggy flows through the development from the east, and flows south of

Blocks B1 and B2, and meets the River Ravensbourne adjacent to the existing bus

station. The River Ravensbourne and River Quaggy have been subject to some

improvement and realignment in the course of the overall development which has

been covered in a separate application.

Phase 1A has also started on site to include the construction of Blocks A1 and A2, as 2.5

well as a new public open space Confluence Park to the south of the River Quaggy.

Building B lies to the east of Block A2 and north of the new Confluence Park. Phase 1B 2.6

also includes landscaping of the area around Blocks B1 and B2 including the area

which is terraced down towards the River Quaggy.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

5

RESERVED MATTERS DEVELOPMENT 3.0

Approved Outline Parameters

The approved parameters for the Lewisham Gateway development are defined in 3.1

the Development Specification submitted with the 2006 planning application. Figure

2 below indicates the layout of the proposed development, as defined by the

approved Proposed Layout: Ground Level parameter plan.

Figure 2 – Proposed Layout – Ground Level Parameter Plan




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

6

The full set of parameter plans (copies of the approved versions of which are 3.2

included in Appendix A.2) are approved and set the parameters for subsequent

reserved matters applications:

1 – Existing Layout;

2 – Proposed Layout: Ground Level;

3 – Proposed Layout: Basement;

4 – Building Blocks Plan;

5 – Public Realm Plan: Ground Level;

6 – Open Space Plan: Roof Levels;

7 – Vehicular Circulation/Public Transport Plan; and

8 – Building Heights Plan.

Where appropriate, the parameter plans include limits of deviation. The relevant 3.3

plans for Building B have been summarised:

Parameter plan 4 indicates the position of Block B1 and B2, with the limit of

deviation for the block’s location being 5m in any direction (except where

limited by fixed road alignments and minimum pavement requirements).

Parameter plan 8 indicates that the western part (B1) is in the ‘mid zone’ and

the eastern part (B2) is in within the ‘high zone’. As a result the western part

(B1)should be 34m-47m high and the eastern part (B2) be 54m-77m high. The

difference in height between the two parts of the block should be at least

20m. All heights indicate the main roof level, excluding plant rooms and vent

shafts (assumed to extend above roofs heights by an average of 4m). The

maximum height of Block B2 is limited to 70m.

Parameter plan 6 identifies that the roof of Building B can accommodate

“communal roof gardens, private roof terraces, ecological roof zones and

mechanical plant”.

Parameter plan 3 identifies that Building B can accommodate a basement.

All other details regarding the design, appearance, etc. of Building B were reserved 3.4

to be approved through a subsequent reserved matters application of which this

report forms part.

Detailed Proposals for Phase 1B

The following description of the detailed Block B proposals should be read in 3.5

conjunction with the ground floor plan and illustrative view provided as Figure 3 and

Figure 4 respectively.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

7

Figure 3 – Block B Ground Floor Plan




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

8

Figure 4 – Illustrative View of Block B (right) viewed from the east

Building B comprises two buildings connected by a single storey section. The western 3.6

block (referred to as Block B1) will comprise 15 storeys and the eastern block (referred

to as Block B2) is taller at 22 storeys.

In total Block B will provide 169 flats. 68 flats are to be provided in Block B1 (40 one 3.7

bedroom units and 28 two bedroom units). Block B2’s 101 flats comprise of 43 one

bedroom units, 54 two bedroom units and 4 three bedroom units. Block B1 will

typically provide 5 flats per floor (4 of which will be dual aspect and the other facing

south west). Block B2 will typically provide 5 flats per floor (4 of which will be dual

aspects, with the other facing south west).

As an exemplar new-build housing scheme, the proposals are compliant with 3.8

regulatory and design standards including, London Housing Design Guide, Lifetime

Homes 2010, Code for Sustainable Homes 2010, and Secure by Design.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

9

In addition to residential accommodation, the buildings propose ground floor retail 3.9

(A1 and/or A3) uses, which will help to redefine the proposed public realm

immediately adjacent to the site.

Phase 1B will address Confluence Place, completed as part of Phase 1. The park will 3.10

be an attractive and unique amenity space at the heart of the scheme. It will be

centred around the confluence of the Quaggy and Ravensbourne Rivers and will

provide a focus for community activities.

All flats have full height windows to take advantage of views and sunlight. Some of 3.11

these windows will include Juliet balconies.

Shared garden spaces have been proposed at roof level of Blocks B1 and B2 to 3.12

supplement private amenity space. The rendered landscape masterplan is provided

as Figure 5.

Figure 5 – Rendered Landscape Masterplan

Large ventilated refuse stores are located at ground floor, with direct access off the 3.13

main shared foyer space from both cores.

In accordance with the Section 106 agreement all dwellings within Block B, without 3.14

dedicated basement storage, will be provided with a folding bicycle, which can be

stored within the dwelling. Due to the excellent public transport connections at the

site, no private car parking is to be provided.

Dwellings within Block B will achieve a minimum of Level 3 under the Code for 3.15

Sustainable Homes (CfSH) and a ‘Very Good’ rating under BREEAM.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

10

Construction

The Original ES provided a summary of construction activities and phasing. 3.16

It is anticipated that Lewisham Gateway will be delivered over a number of phases 3.17

and over a number of years.

The first phase (Phase 1A and the Infrastructure Phase) entails the implementation of 3.18

the reserved matters development (i.e. Block A and Confluence Place) and the

approved highway and infrastructure works. Construction of Phase 1A and the

Infrastructure Phase of the development commenced on site in Spring 2014..

Phase 1B including Building B is anticipated to be implemented over a subsequent 2 3.19

year period.

The Original ES identified that a Construction Management Plan would be prepared 3.20

to ensure that the construction phase mitigation measures identified in the Original ES

are implemented and the environmental effects of the construction works are

minimised. As part of the Original ES a draft Code of Construction Practice was

prepared.

Condition 32 of the planning permission requires a Code of Construction Practice and 3.21

Construction Method Statement to be approved by LBL prior to the commencement

of construction. Condition 32 therefore secures the delivery of the required

construction management measures to minimise the environmental effects of

construction. Further controls are secured through other planning conditions and

through legal obligations included in the Section 106 agreement.

A Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method Statement for Phase 1B 3.22

will be submitted to the London Borough of Lewisham (LBL) for approval prior to the

commencement of Phase 1B.

Consideration of Alternatives

The EIA Regulations require an ES to include an outline of the main alternatives 3.23

considered by the applicant, indicating the main reasons for the choice made,

taking into account the environmental effects. This requirement is expressed in very

general and high-level terms, requiring only the inclusion of an "outline" of "main"

alternatives and an "indication" of "main" reasons.

Alternatives were considered in detail in the Original ES during the earlier stage of the 3.24

design and planning process. Alternatives at the reserved matters stage are limited,

as the development needs to be in accordance with the approved development

parameters and controls imposed by the planning permission granted.

Building B comprises two blocks (B1 and B2) connected by a single storey section. The 3.25

western block (referred to as Block B1) will comprise 15 storeys and the eastern block

(referred to as Block B2) is taller at 22 storeys.

The strategy for the massing of buildings in Phase 1B attempts to improve the 3.26

proportions of massing proposed in the Illustrative Masterplan.

Proposals have been developed around the idea of two separate buildings which 3.27

decreases the apparent width of the block and provides a more elegant massing.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

11

The two buildings, while maintaining the idea of enclosure around the principal public

space in Confluence Place, also allow for permeability through the space as well as

glimpses of sky, views and improved sunlight.

The internal layout of Block B has been based around typologies and floorplates that 3.28

can be replicated from one building to the next, while still providing the necessary

variety and flexibility required in terms of flat types and mix within each building. In

total there are 17 unit types - including 6 ‘wheelchair adapted’ layouts. Floorplates

and flat types can be substituted to allow different mix while plans and standardised

core arrangements can be easily mirrored across the floorplate to respond to

orientation, aspect and views. Flats are arranged in clusters of 3-5 units per floor.

Corridor distances are kept to a minimum and fire strategy is simplified with natural

light and ventilation to lift lobbies at each level.

The reserved matters application seeks approval for the maximum build out of the 3.29

approved Block B parameters. This, rather than smaller development within the

approved parameters, is proposed to maximise the use of accessible previously used

land within Lewisham Town Centre; to create landmark buildings at this gateway

location; and in response to commercial requirements in order to provide a viable

development. The maximum build out of the approved Block B parameters also

ensures that the socio-economic benefits of the proposed development (housing

provision, jobs, etc.) are maximised.

While the potential for alternatives is limited by the reserved matters nature of the 3.30

application, design decisions on the above main alternatives have sought to

minimise the adverse environmental effects of the proposed development.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

12

ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS 4.0

The reserved matters application relates only to Phase 1B, for which details are 4.1

provided for approval in accordance with the approved parameters. This

Supplementary ES therefore assesses any likely new or different significant

environmental effects as a result of the detailed proposals for Phase 1B only. This

Supplementary ES therefore updates the baseline conditions as appropriate and

assesses whether any likely new or different significant environmental effects will result

from the proposed development, based on updated baseline conditions at the site.

Changes to planning policy have occurred since the Original ES (including the 4.2

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), London Plan and Lewisham Core

Strategy), which have been considered to determine whether likely new or different

significant environmental effects could occur as a result of the proposed

development. Each topic chapter also identifies as appropriate updates to

guidance, standards, etc., which are used as the basis for the assessment. Any

significant implications as a result of such changes are identified as appropriate.

On the basis of the above each topic chapter of the Supplementary ES provides an 4.3

updated assessment of any likely new or different significant effects as a result of the

proposed development. The approach adopted has been tailored to the

requirements of each chapter. As with the Original ES, effects have been considered

during both construction and operation of the proposed development.

Significance Criteria

The Significance Criteria utilised in the Original ES have also been utilised in this 4.4

Supplementary ES to ensure a consistent and continuous approach to the

assessment.

Table 4.1 – Significance Criteria

Significance

Level Criteria

Severe

Only adverse effects are assigned this level of importance as they represent

key factors in the decision-making process.

These effects are generally, but not exclusively associated with sites and

features of national or regional importance. A change at a regional or

district scale site or feature may also enter this category.

Typically, mitigation measures are unlikely to remove such effects.

Major

These effects are likely to be important considerations at a local or district

scale but, if adverse, are potential concerns to the project and may

become key factors in the decision-making process.

Mitigation measures and detailed design work are unlikely to remove all of

the effects upon the affected communities or interests.

Moderate

These effects, if adverse, while important at a local scale, are not likely to be

key decision-making issues. Nevertheless, the cumulative effect of such issues

may lead to an increase in the overall effects on a particular area or on a

particular resource.

They represent issues where effects will be experienced but mitigation

measures and detailed design work may ameliorate or enhance some of the

consequences upon affected communities or interests.

Some residual effects will still arise.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

13

Significance

Level Criteria

Minor

These effects may be raised as local issues but are unlikely to be of

importance in the decision-making process.

Nevertheless they are of relevance in enhancing the subsequent design of

the project and consideration of mitigation or compensation measures.

Not significant

No effect or effect which is beneath the level of perception, within normal

bounds of variation or within the margin of forecasting error.

Such effects should not be considered by the decision maker.

Socio-Economic

The proposed development, Phase 1B, is expected to deliver 169 residential units 4.5

along with ground floor retail. The residential units and the employment generating

retail floor space are both expected to generate socio-economic effects.

The quantum of the development proposed as part of Phase 1B does not exceed 4.6

that assessed as part of the 2006 ES. Therefore, the overall range and significance of

effects are in line with those assessed previously.

Phase 1B does not result in the overall quantum of development being exceeded, 4.7

the construction cost assessed previously remains valid and, consequently, so too do

the effects assessed. These effects include: direct employment opportunities,

leakage, deadweight, displacement, and indirect and multiplier effects.

As with the construction phase effects, the Phase 1B development results in no 4.8

change to the overall quantum of employment generating floorspace expected to

be delivered as a result of the overall scheme. The impact of the development in

employment terms remains unchanged from the assessment undertaken in 2006 and

again in 2013 as a beneficial effect.

Phase 1B is expected to bring forward 169 residential units. This is a proportion of the 4.9

625-800 units expected to be delivered by the Lewisham Gateway scheme as a

whole. The overall contribution of the development to housing targets in Lewisham

remains unchanged from the previous assessment. Similarly, the new population

expected to be accommodated by those units remains unchanged. The significance

of both of these effects is, therefore, in line with the 2006 assessment.

The population expected to be accommodated by the proposed residential units 4.10

remains unchanged at between c.900 and 1,260 residents (minimum and maximum

scenarios, respectively).

In terms of the impact on other types of social infrastructure including cultural, leisure, 4.11

recreation and open space, the 2006 assessment highlighted that the local area

provides a range of these facilities and the proposals for the Lewisham Gateway

development as a whole provides potential for the delivery of additional cultural and

recreational facilities should the market demand it.

The development as a whole makes provision for public open spaces to contribute to 4.12

place-making and meet the needs of the new resident population and employees

and visitors brought to the site as a result of the scheme.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

14

The residual effects of the proposed development in the context of the overall 4.13

scheme remain unchanged from those set out in the Original ES and reiterated in the

Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No additional or different (in terms of significance)

effects have been identified.

The proposals for Phase 1B do not change the type or magnitude of socio-economic 4.14

effects arising from the overall scheme. As such, the mitigation measures identified in

the Original ES and reiterated in the Phase 1A Supplementary ES remain valid and

appropriate for the purposes of this assessment.

Air Quality

The potential effects of Building B have been described and assessed by comparing 4.15

estimated pollutant concentrations with the Air Quality Strategy (AQS) objectives and

established criteria used to determine significance.

Road traffic can be considered a primary source of emissions to air. The combustion 4.16

of fuel in vehicles leads to a number of harmful by-products which can affect air

quality in the vicinity of roads. Areas with high traffic volumes or near to major roads

can often experience elevated pollutant levels, particularly in the form of nitrogen

dioxide (NO2) and particulates (PM10).

The ADMS-Roads detailed dispersion model was used to assess direct effects from the 4.17

additional traffic on the local road network when the proposed development is

complete and operational. Two operational scenarios have been modelled: one

without the development in 2011 and one with the development in 2011. The ADMS-

Roads Gaussian dispersion model has been used to assess direct effects from the

combined heat and power (CHP) and the boiler plants. This is a worst case

approach, since it does not take into account reductions in vehicle emissions that are

likely to have come about by the time the proposed development is in place,

particularly the introduction of Euro VI/6 vehicle emissions standards for new vehicles

from 2013 onwards.

Dust emissions during demolition and construction activities have the potential to give 4.18

rise to effects on sensitive locations such as residential properties. Under best practice

guidance, the proposed site in Lewisham would constitute a medium-risk site and has

potential for emissions and dust to have occasional and minor impacts on nearby

receptors. The primary impacts associated with the proposed development are likely

to be in the form of dust generated during earthworks, construction and track-out

from the site.

The primary impacts associated with the proposed development are likely to be in 4.19

the form of dust generated during earthworks, construction and track-out from the

site. Use of appropriate mitigation measures throughout the construction period will

ensure that impacts to sensitive receptors are minimised or avoided.

No additional cumulative effects on air quality are anticipated as a result of 4.20

additional committed development combined with the proposed development.

The proposals for Phase 1B do not change the type or magnitude of air quality effects 4.21

arising from the overall scheme. As such, the mitigation measures identified in the

Original ES and reiterated in the Phase 1A Supplementary ES remain valid and

appropriate for the purposes of this assessment. No likely new or different significant

environmental effects have been identified.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

15

Noise and Vibration

The noise and vibration impacts of the Phase 1B development have been updated 4.22

through baseline noise surveys in 2014 and a review of the implication of changes to

planning policy, guidance and standards since the 2006 ES and 2007 Addendum

were prepared.

It is considered that the effect of construction noise and vibration on existing off-site 4.23

sensitive receptors remains unchanged to the 2007 ES Addendum, with appropriate

mitigation being secured through condition 32 of the Lewisham Gateway planning

permission which requires a Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method

Statement to be agreed with LBL prior to the commencement of construction.

An updated baseline noise survey has been carried out between May and June 4.24

2014. The 2014 noise survey results have confirmed that there is no significant change

in noise levels compared to the baseline noise survey results in the 2012, 2006 and

2007 Addendum.

It can be concluded that the mitigation measures proposed in the 2007 Addendum 4.25

remain appropriate, and it is anticipated that the detailed acoustic specification will

reduce noise for future occupiers in proposed Block B1 and B2 to acceptable levels.

Overall, the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed development, and the 4.26

requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the 2006 ES and

2007 Addendum. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have

been identified.

Water Resources and Flood Risk

The flood modelling completed as part of the 2006 ES and the 2007 Addendum report 4.27

showed that the site was not within the indicative floodplain and that the flows

predicted for the 1 in 100 year flood event would not overtop the river banks. The

modelling also demonstrated that the proposed permanent channel works would not

affect flood levels. Flood risk to the site has not increased based on the most up to

date Environment Agency flood maps. As such the impact on fluvial flood risk has not

changed.

The reserved matters development is consistent with the approved parameter plans 4.28

which were assessed through the 2006 ES and 2007 Addendum. The current drainage

strategy is in line with that previously proposed and assessed.

The Proposed Phase 1B Development has taken into account potential effects on 4.29

flood risk drainage and appropriate measures, including, surface water runoff

interception, storage and treatment have been built into the Proposed Development

design submitted and therefore effects from construction will be Not Significant.

Construction will follow the Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method

Statement.

Overall, the water resources and flood risk impacts of the proposed development, 4.30

and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original

ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different significant

environmental effects have been identified.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

16

Ecology and Nature Conservation

The assessment of the site is based on the phase one and protected species survey 4.31

undertaken on 27th August 2014, as well as desk study data. The main purpose of this

chapter is to support the current reserved matters planning application for Phase 1B.

The site consists of bare ground which was absent of any vegetation, this is because 4.32

construction operations have commenced and habitats previously described during

surveys in January 2013 have been removed as per the proposals for the overall

development. The ground levels have been excavated level with the Ravensbourne

and Quaggy Rivers, which pass along the western and southern boundary

respectively. Due to all natural habitats being removed during the construction

phase, the site lacks any biodiversity value.

The London Plan and Lewisham Core Strategy both state the importance of 4.33

maintaining, enhancing and creating corridors of movement for the purpose of

increasing biodiversity. The river corridors will not be directly affected by the

proposed development of Phase 1B, and indirect effects will be avoided via

appropriate mitigation measures. The proposed development will be mainly

residential dwellings and hard landscaping; however opportunities will be created to

increase biodiversity. This will include the incorporation of bat boxes within Phase 1A,

and if appropriate; the planting of native trees species and plants which provide

nectars sources which would complement those natural habitats which are proposed

along both Ravensbourne and Quaggy River.

Phase 1B only forms a small part of the more extensive Lewisham Gateway project. 4.34

The possible ecology and natural conservation enhancements are limited by the

plots small size and development proposals, whereby there will be limited

opportunities to increase biodiversity within this phase. There are only likely to be

minor beneficial effects at a local level. The wider Lewisham Gateway scheme will

have a more substantial beneficial effect, due to the removal of manmade river

systems and creating a more natural river corridors and surroundings.

Overall, the ecological and nature conservation impacts of the proposed 4.35

development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those

identified in the Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different

significant environmental effects have been identified.

Townscape and Visual Impact

Visual analysis has been undertaken using the viewpoints referenced within both the 4.36

Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES in order to identify changes in views and

any consequential changes in effect on the receptors identified. It is considered that

there are no new or different effects.

The parameters for the Phase 1B development remain the same as those assessed in 4.37

the Original ES, as no changes have been made to the proposals of relevance to

townscape and visual matters.

This assessment finds that, although changes to the townscape baseline have 4.38

occurred since 2006 and 2013, these changes do not result in significant effects. New

development has taken place on previously developed land and in an already

urban environment with notable influence from tall buildings.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

17

The Phase 1B development has been considered cumulatively alongside five 4.39

committed or consented developments in the surrounding area. No significant

cumulative effects are considered to arise as a result of any of these developments

coming forward simultaneously with the Phase 1B proposals.

Overall, the townscape and visual impacts of the proposed development, and the 4.40

requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES and

Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different significant environmental

effects have been identified.

Wind

An updated assessment has been undertaken of the potential impact of the 4.41

proposed Phase 1B development on the wind environment within the proposed

development and in the surrounding area, with respect to comfort and distress within

the pedestrian environment, amenity areas, rooftop gardens and balconies.

Wind conditions were assessed using wind tunnel modelling. The predicted wind 4.42

speeds have been compared with the Lawson Criteria, which provides a method for

assessing the suitability of an area for different uses.

There is considered to be no risk that unacceptable winds will occur across the site in 4.43

the baseline conditions scenario.

With the Phase 1B development, the wind tunnel assessment of a model of the 4.44

completed development has shown that there is considered to be no risk of

unacceptable winds occurring across the site at pedestrian level, within the site or

surrounding areas.

Overall, the wind impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for 4.45

mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES. No likely new or

different significant environmental effects have been identified.

Daylight and Sunlight Availability

A previous assessment of daylight and sunlight availability was undertaken as part of 4.46

the Original ES, issued as part of the outline planning proposal for the whole Lewisham

Gateway development.

The outline planning consent allows for Block B1 to have a maximum height of 47m 4.47

and Block B2 to have a maximum height of 70m to the roof line, with an additional

4m allowance for plant space and vent shafts. The application drawings presented

in Appendix A.3 shows Block B1 as having a height of 47m and Block B2 of 69m.

Therefore both Block B1 and B2 are within the heights previously assessed and

approved at outline planning.

As a result of no material policy or guidance change within any of the listed 4.48

documents in the section above, the results of the assessment remain valid and

therefore there are no likely new or different significant effects when compared

against the Original ES assessment of effects.

Any residual effects on the planned development on the Premier Inn development 4.49

on Lewisham High Street are considered to have been taken into account within the




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

18

planning submission for the Premier Inn, therefore it is considered they do not need to

be reviewed.

Overall, the daylight and sunlight impacts of the proposed development, and the 4.50

requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES. No

likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified.

Other Issues Considered

Introduction

The Original ES dealt with public utilities and waste management in an ‘Other Issues 4.51

Considered’ chapter as it was identified that such disciplines will not lead to

significant environmental effects. The original ES also provided an assessment on the

Archaeological Resources and Cultural Heritage (ARCH) and there have been no

changes since this assessment.

The Phase 1A Supplementary ES provided an update on Public Utilities and Waste 4.52

Management, Transport and Access and Land Quality. An update on these

disciplines is provided below.

Public Utilities and Waste Management

Utilities and Waste Management were assessed as part of a chapter within the 4.53

Original ES called, ‘Other Issues Considered’. These two topics were also assessed as

part of the 2013 supplementary ES. No additional or new environmental effects were

identified. No further assessment of waste management has been completed as this

issue has been addressed as part of the site wide waste strategy produced in

accordance with condition 45 of the outline planning consent.

Transport and Access

The Phase 1A Supplementary ES produced to accompany the reserved matters 4.54

application for Building A and Confluence Place included revised traffic survey data

that identified traffic levels had reduced since the Original ES. The mitigation

proposed for the wider development was based on the more conservative traffic

figures and as such provided a robust basis for assessment. As a result the

development will not lead to any different significant effects to those previously

identified. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been

identified. A travel plan for Phase 1B will be submitted with the Phase 1B application.

Archaeological Resources and Cultural Heritage

The Original ES included an assessment of Archaeological Resources and Cultural 4.55

Heritage (ARCH) and the assessment concluded that the site contains a number of

archaeological and palaeoenvironmental receptors of low-importance. The previous

assessment concluded that, due to the moderate importance of the receptors within

the site, preservation by record of the remains would be adequate to prevent

residual impacts from occurring.

The Phase 1a Supplementary ES confirmed that there were no significant changes to 4.56

baseline conditions and that no significant new or different environmental effects will

occur in relation to those described in the Original ES.




LNS/2069/ES/NTS

19

Mitigation of environmental effects has been secured through the inclusion of 4.57

condition 28 of the planning permission, which requires preservation by record of any

archaeological resources that may be encountered at the site.

Overall, the archaeological resources and cultural heritage impacts of the proposed 4.58

development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified

in the Original ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have

been identified.

Land Quality

A site wide phase 2 intrusive site investigation was undertaken to support the Phase 4.59

1A Supplementary ES which was used to discharge outline planning condition 42.

The assessment completed as part of the Phase 1A Supplementary ES concluded that 4.60

there was no evidence of any significant changes in the layout or use of the site since

the previous assessment as port of the Original ES.

Summary and Impact Interactions

The Original ES included an assessment of the impact interactions of the proposed 4.61

development, (Type 1) i.e. receptors being affected by more than one environmental

effect and therefore potentially being subject to a more significant combined effect

than the individual effects reported in each of the topic chapters because of

potential synergies between different effects.

This was updated through a revised assessment included in the 2007 Addendum 4.62

based on the further assessment that was documented in the 2007 Addendum. The

revised assessment identified that the impact interactions remained as reported in the

Original ES.

This Phase 1B Supplementary ES has identified that there have been changes to 4.63

policy and guidance, baseline conditions and committed developments since the

Original ES was prepared. The potential for likely new or different significant

environmental effects as a result of such changes, and the reserved matters

development, have then been identified.

This assessment has identified very limited changes to the likely significant 4.64

environmental effects identified in the Original ES.

As a result, there are no likely new or different significant impact interactions in 4.65

relation to those identified in the Original ES.

21

www.bwbconsulting.com

lewisham gateway developments limited …...lewisham gateway, phase 1b environmental statement...

Documents