m a s t e r p l a n Ð e n v ir o n m e n t a l s t a t e m e n t n o n -t e c h … · 2008. 2....

Produced on behalf of the LDA by Latz + Partner / Waterman Environmental

C r y s t a l P a l a c e P a r k

MASTERPLAN – ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

C R Y S T A L P A L A C E P A R K – M A S T E R P L A N


E N V I R O N M E N T A L S T A T E M E N T N O N T E C H N I C A L S U M M A R Y

produced on behalf of LDA by:

Latz + PartnerLandscape Architects AKH ByAK BDLA OAI LuxAmpertshausen 6D-85402 Kranzberg, GERMANYTel: +49 (0) 8166 6785-0Fax: +49 (0) 8166 [email protected]

Highgate Business Centre, Studio 1A33, Greenwood PlaceLONDON NW5 1LB

Tel: +44 (0)207 4826320Fax: +44 (0)207 [email protected]

Waterman Environmental

Kirkaldy House

99 Southwark Street

London SE1 0JF

Telephone: 020 7928 7888

Fax: 020 7902 0981

[email protected]

www.waterman-group.co.uk

Brent Design [email protected]



London Development Agency

Palestra

197 Blackfriars Road

LONDON SE1 8AA

Tel: +44 (0)207 593 8000

Fax:+44 (0)207 593 8002

www.lda.gov.uk




Use of images in the Non Technical Summary

Images in this document are intended to convey an idea of the nature of the propos-als within the limits set out in the parameter plans accompanying Masterplan application.Similarly, photographs of examples are intended to provide the reader with an impres-sion of what the proposals could look like. The images depict one of a number of potentialoptions that could be carried out. In no way should any of these images be consideredto definitively represent the final form of the proposals. The final design of the devel-opment will be brought forward following the grant of outline planning permission andwill be contained within the parameters set by the plans, conditions and obligations imposedby the outline planning permission.



1.0 INTRODUCTION 07

2.0 EIA METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATIONS 11

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDS 15

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALS 21

5.0 ALTERNATIVES AND DESIGN EVOLUTION 29

6.0 DEMOLITION ANDCONSTRUCTION 31

7.0 PLANNING AND LAND USE 35

8.0 SOCIO-ECONOMICS 37

9.0 BUILT HERITAGE 39

10.0 HERITAGE LANDSCAPE 43

11.0 VIEWS AND VISUAL AMENITY 45

12.0 ARCHEOLOGY 47

13.0 GROUND CONDITIONS 49

14.0 WATER RESOURCES AND FLOOD RISK 51

15.0 ECOLOGY 55

16.0 TRANSPORTATION, MOVEMENT AND ACCESS 59

17.0 AIR QUALITY 61

18.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION 63

19.0 WASTE MANAGEMENT 65

20.0 LIGHTING IMPACTS 67

21.0 MICROCLIMATE - DAYLIGHT, SUNLIGHT &OVERSHADOWING 69

22.0 MICROCLIMATE - WIND 73

23.0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 75

24.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 77

CONTENTS




06

1.0



The London Development Agency (LDA) isseeking permission to regenerate Crystal PalacePark which is located in the London Borough ofBromley (LBB), south London (referred to as the'Site'). The Site is bounded by Crystal PalaceParade to the west, Thicket Road to the east,Crystal Palace Park Road to the north and northeast and Anerley Hill, Ledrington Road and therailway corridor to the south. The original CrystalPalace Park was designed by Sir Joseph Paxtonand was created between 1852 and 1856. The Siteis designated as a Historic Park and Gardenand a Conservation Area, and also contains number of historic buildings and features.The Site also provides sporting facilities whichcurrently serve the region including the NationalSports Centre and Athletics Stadium. The Site islocated close to the boundaries of the adjacentLondon Boroughs of Lewisham, Croydon, Lambethand Southwark.

I N T R O D U C T I O N

1.0 INTRODUCTION

07

1.0

Croydon

Lambeth

SouthwarkLewisham

Bromley

Crystal Palace Park

Mayow ParkSydenham Wells Park

Norwood Park

Orchard School Sports Centre

Beaulieu Heights

The Lawns

Stambourne Woods

Westow Park

Upper Norwood Rec Ground

Convent Wood

West Norwood Cemetery

AlexandraRec Ground

Dulwich Wood

Penge East Stn

Sydenham Stn

Crystal Palace Stn

Anerley Hill

Gypsy Hill Stn

RockhillsGate

Norwood Gate

Station GatePenge Gate

SydenhamGate

Crys

tal P

alac

e Pa

rade

Anerley Stn

Crystal Palace Park Road

Thicket Road

Context and location of Crystal Palace Park

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) hasbeen undertaken to assess the environmentaleffects of the Proposals. EIA is a process requiredfor certain development projects which identifiesthe environmental effects (both negative and positive) of proposals in order to inform the decision making process. The EIA process involvesenvironmental studies to identify the effects and proposes mitigation measures to prevent, reduce and offset them. This is reported in anEnvironmental Statement (ES) which is submit-ted in conjunction with the planning application.This document provides a summary of the ES innon-technical language.



The Site comprises approximately 80 hectares (ha)of land, which consists mainly of open grasslandand trees, with pathways, access roads, car parking facilities and buildings related to parkmaintenance, sport and recreation. Crystal PalacePark is a valued open space, highly regarded bylocal people and visitors from across London andbeyond, due to its character and historicappearance, facilities and open space and therecreational opportunities it offers. However, manyareas of the Park today have degraded bothvisually and in terms of the character, quality andrange of facilities and open space.

The LDA sets out it's vision within the Crystal PalacePark Planning Framework Consultation Draft to

“rejuvenate Crystal Palace Park as a metropolitanpark, heritage asset, cultural, leisure, educationaland recreational resource for the 21st century tomeet the needs of local people, sports people andthe public at large while reinterpreting andconserving its national significance”.

The masterplan for the rejuvenation of CrystalPalace Park is subsequently referred to as the‘Proposals’.

In summary, the Proposals include the removal ofa number of buildings and features, re-modellingof ground levels and landscaping, construction ofnew visitor attractions and educational facilities,improvements to the existing entrances and circulation within the Park, and improved sportsfacilities. The Proposals also identify two sites forpermenant residential accomodation and commu-nity facilities adjacent to the boundary of the Sitewhich currently do not form part of the Park.

Designing the Masterplan commenced in 2006 andthe Proposals have been the subject of extensiveconsultation with key stakeholders and the public.Additionally, regular meetings with LBB and EnglshHeritage have assisted in informing the design process.The Masterplan is part of a planning submission whichconsists of the following elements:

a) An outline planning application for theMasterplan (including detailed proposalfor the NSC and the area immediatelsurrounding this Grade II* listed building);

b) A Listed Building Consent application forworks to the Grade II* listed NSC; and

c) A Conservation Area Consent application fordemolition within the Crystal Palace ParkConservation Area.


08

1.0


C R Y S T A L P A L A C E P A R K – M A S T E R P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N

09

1.0

Aerial photograph of the Park




10

2.0



The purpose of the EIA is to ensure that the potential environmental impacts of the Proposals aregiven due consideration in their determination. TheEIA was undertaken by a qualified and experiencedteam of specialists using established methods andcriteria. This involved site surveys and investigations,desk-based reviews of available reports and data,computer modelling and specialist assessments.

The first stage of the EIA process involved undertaking a ‘Scoping Study’. The purpose of thestudy was to identify the potentially significant environmental impacts associated with theProposals and therefore the focus or content ofthe ES. A Scoping Report which presented the findings of the Scoping Study and the intendedapproach to the EIA was submitted to LBB andother consultees for their views in July 2007.

It was agreed with LBB that assessments of thefollowing environmental topic areas would beincluded in the ES: Demolition and Construction;Socio-Economics; Heritage Landscape; BuiltHeritage; Views and Visual Amenity; Archaeology;Ground Conditions; Water Resources and FloodRisk; Ecology; Transportation, Movement andAccess; Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; WasteManagement; Lighting Impacts; Microclimate -Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing; andMicro-climate - Wind; and Cumulative Impacts.

During the EIA, a number of discussions were heldwith consultees and interested parties, includingLBB, neighbouring local planning authorities, theEnvironment Agency, English Heritage, Transportfor London (TfL), the Greater London Authority(GLA), Natural England, Thames Water, NationalGrid Wireless/BBC, the Caravan Club of GreatBritain, Sport England, wildlife organisations andamenity societies. A series of workshops were heldin August 2007 with consultees to discuss andagree the detailed approaches to certain studies.

Consultation on the Masterplan consisted of regular discussions with LBB, local communityorganisations and Park users (called the ‘DialogueProcess’) as well as a programme of wider community consultation. This extensive consulta-tion process commenced with the preparation ofa draft Planning Framework document for CrystalPalace Park which was published by the LDA inOctober 2005 and set out their vision for rejuve-nation of the Park. This draft document wassubsequently amended to take into account comments received from stakeholders and anAddendum to the Planning Framework was pub-lished in January 2007.

Each environmental assessment topic is reportedin the ES as a technical chapter. Each technicalchapter describes how the assessment wasundertaken, the current conditions in and aroundthe Site and the potential impacts of theProposals. Each technical chapter also describesthe measures that would be incorporated to avoid,reduce, or offset adverse impacts where these havebeen identified (referred to as ‘mitigation measures’). The resulting impacts (known as ‘residual impacts’) after mitigation has been implemented are also described.

E I A M E T H O D O L O G Y A N D C O N S U L T A T I O N S

2.0 EIA METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATIONS

11

2.0



TfL are planning to extend the Croydon Tramlink lightrail service from Harrington Road to Anerley and Crystal Palace and one of the routes currentlybeing considered runs through the south-western partof the Site. A ‘safeguarded route’ has therefore beenaccommodated within the Proposals adjacent toAnerley Hill to allow the possible future delivery ofthe Tramlink through this area if it gets approval. TheTramlink Extension could be open in 2013, subjectto funding and approval. The Tramlink was also considered in the Transport Assessment.

The demolition and construction works for the Proposalswould be undertaken in a series of phases across theSite over a period of between 15 to 20 years. For thepurposes of the EIA the completed year has beenassumed as 2028, although it is not possible to ‘fix’the sequence of construction activities due to uncer-tainty in when funding would be secured. The EIAhas therefore been based on reasonable assumptionsabout how the Proposals could be built.

Crystal Palace Park already attracts many visitors andhosts a number of small to large scale events through-out the year. Assumptions were therefore made aboutthe number of existing visitors and the type and fre-quency of events, as well as the number of visitorsthat would be attracted to the completed Proposalsand the events that would be held. These assump-tions formed the basis of some assessments, includingSocio-Economics and Transport.


12

2.0

Key features of the Site



13

2.0




14

3.0



The Crystal Palace and Park were built by Sir JosephPaxton’s Crystal Palace Company between 1852and 1855 in an area of south London that had oncebeen part of the ancient Great North Wood. ThePark was the setting for the relocated and enlargedCrystal Palace which Paxton designed and built forthe 1851 Great Exhibition in Hyde Park. The Parksubsequently became an international attraction.

Paxton’s design for the Park included elements fromthe original landscape, such as woodland andmature parkland trees. Paxton imposed a strongsymmetrical design for the landscape, orientatingit around a Central Walk (the Paxton Axis) with aMaze, Rosary Gardens, cascades, fountains andbasins on either side. The Crystal Palace wasdestroyed by fire in 1936, leading to a period ofdereliction. The NSC and Athletics Stadium in thecentre of the Site were completed in 1964 as partof a larger masterplan commissioned by LondonCounty Council. The ‘sports park’ concept was thefirst of its kind in the UK. LBB took ownership ofthe Site in 1986.

D E S C R I P T I O N O F T H E S I T E A N D S U R R O U N D S

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDS

15

3.0

Plan of the Palace in 1864 (Grade II* Registered Park boundaryshown in red) Courtsey Bodleian Library University of Oxford



Today, Crystal Palace Park is one of the largest parksin South London, covering approximately 80hectares (198 acres). The Site is located along thehighest section of a clay covered chalk ridge whichmarks the southern edge of the London Basin, aseries of hills in South London. The Site falls steeplyfrom the west to east. The former site of the CrystalPalace, adjacent to Crystal Palace Parade, is atapproximately 109 metres Above Ordnance

Datum (mAOD) falling to the lowest level of approx-imately 52m AOD at Penge Gate in the south east.

The Park comprises open parkland (grassland andtrees) with pathways, access roads and car park-ing facilities and with buildings and structuresrelated to park maintenance and the sport andrecreation facilities that are mostly located in thecentre of the Park. The main built elements include

the NSC and Athletics Stadium in the centre of theSite. The 50m swimming pool in the NSC is oneof only two currently in London and the AthleticsStadium is one of the traditional homes of Britishathletics hosting major events. Other key featuresof the Park include the Italian Terraces (also referredto as the ‘Upper and Lower Terraces’), the PaxtonAxis (that runs centrally from the Terracesthrough the Park to the eastern boundary of theSite), the Crystal Palace BBC Television Transmitter,the Crystal Palace Caravan Club Site and Tidal Lakesin the north and the south-east.

The Park is subject to a number of designationswhich recognise its importance. These designationsinclude:

• Historic Park and Garden (Grade II*) –this designation recognises the historic value of the Park as a whole which wasdesigned by Paxton;

• Crystal Palace Park Conservation Area – this designation extends to the majority of the Site, with the exception of the formersite of Crystal Palace, and recognises thePark as being 'of special architectural or historic interest’;


16

3.0

View from Crystal Palace Station to Crystal Palace, 1911,Sale Particulars (private collection)



• Metropolitan Open Land – the large majorityof the Site is subject to this planning desig-nation which means that the Site isregarded as a strategically important area ofopen space. Metropolitan Open Land hasthe same status as Green Belt there istherefore a presumption against inappropri-ate development, although this does notmean that development cannot take place;

• Area of Archaeological Significance; and

• Site of Importance for Nature Conservation(SINC).

Although not statutory designations, the Park isan important destination on two London walks. Itforms the beginning of the Green Chain, a 16.5mile network of open spaces stretching across southeast London, and is also on the London Loop walk.

A number of the buildings and features within theSite are ‘listed’, and are therefore on statutorylists of buildings of 'special architectural or historic interest' compiled by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The Site alsoincludes a number of ‘locally listed’ features whichare not on the statutory list but which are recognised by LBB as being of local significance.These features are described below.

Pedestrians and cyclists access the Park through anumber of entrances around the boundary and sec-tions of the London Cycle Network run through thePark. There are five main entrances to the Park whichare referred to as ‘Gates’. These are Anerley Hill/CrystalPalace Station, Norwood Triangle, Rockhills, Sydenham,and Penge. In terms of public transport, the Parkis served by mainline rail services at Crystal PalaceStation and Penge West Station and a number ofbus routes. It is bounded by three busy ‘A’ roads.Within the Park, there are several permanent andoverspill car parking facilities providing a totalcapacity for approximately 2,500 cars.

Different parts of the Park are used for a widerange of informal and formal events, running bothshort term and longer term. The current numberof visitors to the Park and the sports facilities isestimated to be 1.67 million per year, excludingvisits for special events.

The Site is defined by eight character Zones asshown on the Aerial Photograph of the Site. Themain features of each zone are described below:

• Zone A: Anerley Hill Edge –This zone runs parallel with Anerley Hill upto the junction with Crystal Palace Paradeand includes the existing Crystal Palace ParkMuseum, the base of a former water towerdesigned by Brunel (locally listed) and anAuxiliary Ranger’s Building. The Grade IIlisted Crystal Palace Station is locatedimmediately south of the Site boundary.

• Zone B: The Palace Terrace – This zone is located along the western siteboundary and was the site of the formerCrystal Palace. It contains a Grade II listedPaxton’s Subway structure located partlybeneath Crystal Palace Parade.


17

3.0

Park Character Zones



• Zone C: The Italian Terraces –Located to the east of the Palace Terrace,these Grade II listed terraces were designedby Paxton in the 19th century, with a retainingwall, steps and balustrades. The Upper andLower Terraces remain largely intact, althoughrequire repair.

• Zone D: The Transitional Landscape – This zone, located to the east of the ItalianTerraces, contains the locally listed LodgeTower which provides accommodation forathletes, seven two-storey houses (also locally listed), car parking, tennis courts,grassland and roads. A Grade II listed bust ofPaxton is currently located within this zone.

• Zone E: The Central Area – This area contains the Grade II* listed NSCand locally listed Athletics Stadium which isa sports field encircled by an athletics trackand stadium seating, with capacity for16,500 and associated car parking. The NSCand the Athletics Stadium are located on thesite of former Fountain Basins.


18

3.0

View of the Italian Terraces (Grade II listed structure) View of the National Sports Centre (Grade II* listed building)



• Zone F: The Tidal Lakes -Located in the southeast of the Park this zoneincludes a large lake system, Grade I listeddinosaur statues and geological features (a‘lead mine’ and ‘limestone cliff’), landscapedareas, a car park, Penge Café, toilets, and aCity Farm.

• Zone G: The Cricket Ground -This zone is located in the north-easternpart of the Park and consists of open grassland, trees, a cricket pitch andpark/community related buildings.

• Zone H: The English Landscape -This zone extends around the northern part ofthe Site and includes the Rockhills Gate, whichis close to the historic entrance to Paxton’shouse (the house is no longer present), andthe associated gate piers which are Grade IIlisted. This zone contains the largest expanseof woodland in the Park. This area alsocontains the Intermediate (or Fishing) Lake, a Maze and the Concert Bowl which is used tohost concerts in the Park.

The Park is sensitive in terms of its historiclandscape, cultural context and archaeologicalresources. Other receptors within and around theSite which may potentially be sensitive have alsobeen identified. These include users and visitorsto the Park and its facilities, local residents, schools,habitats and species, and road users.


19

3.0

View of Dinosaurs (Grade 1 listed)




20

4.0



The Masterplan for the regeneration of the Park,which has been led by Latz and Partner, is definedby the following:

• Parameter Plans –these define the features to be removed,the location and size of buildings, groundlevels and areas proposed for planting;

• Design Guidelines – the Design Guidelines is a written documentwhich is part of the Masterplan Design andAccess Statement which supports theParameter Plans and describes design princi-ples which must be followed at the detaileddesign stage; and

• Detailed drawings and a Design and AccessStatement for the proposed alterations to theNSC and landscaping works –this document forms the basis of the application for Listed Building Consent whichis required as the NSC is Grade II* listed.

D E S C R I P T I O N O F T H E P R O P O S A L S

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALS

21

4.0

Illustrative Crystal Palace Park Masterplan



In summary, the Proposals comprise the follow-ing elements:

• Zone A: Anerley Hill Edge – Two new buildings would be introduced intothis area: the South Greenhouse and theCollege and Lodge buildings. The SouthGreenhouse would be a predominantlyglazed structure which would house sub-tropical plants and would be a new visitorattraction. The South Greenhouse would beone of two Greenhouses located on theGrade II listed terraces (the North

Greenhouse would be in the EnglishLandscape Zone). A new College and Lodgebuilding providing rooms for education andaccommodation for athletes and students(replacing part of that lost elsewhere withinthe Park) would be constructed close to theCrystal Palace Station. The existing CrystalPalace Park Museum would be renovated forre-use by Park Rangers and the locally listedbase of Brunel's water tower would beretained. A safeguarded route for the Tramhas also been identified in this zone.

• Zone B: The Palace Terrace – This Zone would be a space sheltered by trees,which would be suitable for different activitiessuch as events and relaxation. The planting oftrees would reflect the former Crystal Palacelayout providing an ‘outline’ of the Palace. Anew Crystal Palace Museum would beconstructed in this Zone, adjacent to CrystalPalace Parade. The new museum would linkwith the Grade II listed underground PaxtonSubway which would be restored. Small kioskswould also be provided and the Grade II listedbust of Paxton would be relocated to this Zone.


22

4.0Illustrative view of the proposals for the Palace Terrace Existing view of the Palace Terrace



• Zone C: The Italian Terraces – The Grade II listed terraces would berepaired and restored and would be flankedby two new Greenhouses (the South andNorth Greenhouses). Two sunken gardensare proposed in this Zone, located largelybetween former fountain basins which werepart of Paxton’s Park. Stairs and rampswould be incorporated in the slopes of boththe Upper and Lower Terraces to make themmore accessible.

• Zone D: Transitional Landscape – The ground levels in this Zone would bere-modelled to provide a more undulatinglandscape. The locally listed Lodge Towerand houses would be demolished and thebases of the Lodge Tower and Paxton Suitewould be re-used as a play area. A Rosarywhich formed part of the original Park wouldbe re-instated and the underground part ofa new Regional Sports Centre would extendinto this Zone. A new Central Pavilion wouldbe introduced as an information and meeting point. New water features wouldalso be introduced.

• Zone E: Central Area – There would be internaland external alterations to the NSC to form a'Low-Key' use. This means that the swimmingpool would be infilled and the building would beused for 'dry' uses such as five-aside footballand hockey. Walkways, structures and buildingswhich surround the NSC would be removed.This would then enable the ground levels to beraised around the base of the NSC, allowingusers to enter and leave the building at a newground level through a new entrance on thesouthern side of the building. These alterationswould allow the building to appear as a 'free-standing pavilion' in the Park. Changes to theNSC are the subject of a Listed Building Consentapplication. The existing athletics track would beretained and a new grassed amphitheatre wouldbe created with informal seating for spectators.This would require the of the stands includingthe locally listed Jubilee Stand. A new RegionalSports Centre (of up to 14,900m2) would beconstructed mainly underground and would pro-vide a new 50 metre swimming pool and othersports facilities. The building would have aneast-facing glazed frontage overlooking the ath-letics track and a green, landscaped roof. Thealterations to the NSC would take place afterthe 2012 Olympics so that the existing swim-ming pool can be used for training by athletes inthe run up to the Olympics.


23

4.0Illustrative drawing of the Italian Terraces showing the proposedoption for the Sunken Garden and the North Greenhouse




24

4.0

View of the existing National Sports Centre and elevated walkway

View of the existing National Sports Centre following proposed alterations



• Zone F: The Tidal Lakes – No major works are proposed to this areawhich contains the Grade I listed dinosaursand geological illustrations, although landscap-ing improvements would be made. Theseimprovements include changes to the edge ofthe lake, planting and the removal of fencesand other barriers. The City Farm would beretained. A new Café and DinosaurInterpretation Centre would also be providedto replace the Penge Café.

• Zone G: The Cricket Ground –The main landscape proposal in this zone is torenovate the cricket pitch and provide a newcricket pavilion. The Proposals also include fournew residential blocks, or ‘villas’, along CrystalPalace Park Road on the site of the existingmaintenance and St John’s Ambulance build-ing. Two residential villas are proposed on thesite of the existing One O’Clock Club (nursery)which would be relocated. The existing maintenance building would be relocated adjacent to Sydenham Gate. The six permanent residential villas would be up to four storeys in height.

• Zone H: The English Landscape – This Zone is one of the remaining featuresof the original Paxton Park. A NorthGreenhouse would be constructed as a newvisitor attraction and the Maze, IntermediateLake and Concert Bowl features would beimproved. The Crystal Palace Caravan ClubSite would be relocated outside of the Parkand part of this area would be returned toparkland. Three new residential blockswould be constructed close to the RockhillsGate with a maximum of five storeys. Spacewould also be provided for a café and com-munity facilities. A Treetop Walkway wouldbe erected which would start adjacent to theNorth Greenhouse and end close toSydenham Gate. This Walkway would befully accessible allowing people to walk atthe level of the trees. The remains of aformer aquarium and base of Brunel’s northwater tower would be retained.

It is envisaged that the Proposals would provideup to 180 permanent residential dwellings in total.

Currently, the Park has a poor relationship with itssurroundings. There are a number of entrances intothe Park but they are inconspicuous andsuffer from poor quality public spaces serving them.One of the key objectives of the Proposals is to pro-vide better accessibility to and within the Park fromall directions, linking the Park to surrounding neigh-bourhoods, and the Green Chain Walk. The Proposalsalso aim to reduce reliance on the private car andencourage the use of public transport. There wouldbe an increase of well-indicated pedestrianentrances around the Park boundary. A total of 383permanent car parking spaces would be providedwithin the proposals, in addition to provision for overflow parking during events. Approximately 190cycle spaces would also be provided.

Changes to the ground levels would take place inZones A, B and C of the Site. The proposals in ZoneD involve major re-profiling of ground levels to cre-ate a more uniform landscape. Significant groundraising would also take place around the NSC in orderto achieve the proposed ground levels. This areawould require approximately 30,000 cubic metresof material which would be obtained from areas ofexcavation within the Site and from demolishingbuildings.


25

4.0




26

4.0

Illustrative figure showing the location

of proposed buildings



Existing water features would be reused within the Park. A water strategy has beendesigned which would ensure that water wouldbe collected and retained within the Park. Thisstrategy includes the creation of new water fea-tures. A waste strategy would be implemented toencourage waste minimisation, recycling and reuse.An energy strategy has been developed to ensureenergy demand is reduced within the Site as faras practicable. The strategy included the use ofCombined Heat and Power (CHP) and biomass boiler systems, as well as solar thermal panels.

The LDA is also committed to the following targets:

• New residential buildings would achieveLevel 4 of Code for Sustainable Homes (thistarget is the equivalent of an overall 44%reduction in carbon emissions compared tothat required by current BuildingRegulations); and

• BREEAM ‘Very Good’ rating for the non-residential buildings (striving to achieve‘Excellent’).


27

4.0




28

5.0



In developing the Proposals the LDA and its partners have undertaken extensive consultation withthe public and a large number of stakeholders.Following an initial consultation exercise, the LDApublished the Crystal Palace Park draft PlanningFramework in October 2005, which set out theaspirations and vision for the future of the Park.This document, together with an Addendum (published in 2007) have formed the basis of theProposals. The core principles set out theFramework are for:

• A revived metropolitan park;

• A sports and events park;

• A sustainable park;

• An accessible and integrated park; and

• An educational park.

In line with the EIA Regulations, the ES providesa description of the main alternatives consideredby the Applicant. These alternatives are summarisedbelow.

If the Park were left in its current state withoutsignificant investment, this would result in the continued deterioration of the existing Park build-ings, historic features and the quality of the Parkenvironment, resulting in a decline of its usage.The LDAs vision of a revived metropolitan park wouldalso not be realised if the Proposals do not go ahead.

The LDA wish to ensure that a 50m (i.e. Olympicsized) swimming pool and diving facilities are available as suitable training facilities in the runup to the 2012 Olympics. As an alternative toreplacing the plant and equipment in the NSC,which is very expensive, a temporary swimmingpool was considered, which would have been located between the NSC and Crystal PalaceStadium. However, this was rejected as following further cost analysis it was decided thatrefurbishing the existing pool in the NSC would make more financial sense.

There are a number of problems with the existingsports facilities at the NSC which are partly relat-ed to its age and outdated design which mean thatit does not meet current requirements for sportsespecially at competition level. The draft PlanningFramework published in 2005 included proposalsfor the removal of the NSC and its replacement withparkland and a new sports centre provided closerto Crystal Palace Station. However, this proposal wasreconsidered due to the architectural value of theNSC and further options for its retention and reusewere explored.

The Planning Framework set out two main alterna-tives for the Palace Terrace involving retaining andenhancing most of it as parkland but providing parkfacilities (such as play areas, toilets etc), a viewingplatform and with the potential of revitalising andreusing the Grade II listed Paxton Subway structure.The other alternative proposed all of the above, plusa new indoor themed attraction. The results of consultation showed more support for the first alternative. This alternative was also selected dueto the potential for visual and archaeological impactsin this location.

The option of retaining of the locally listed LodgeTower was considered so the structure could beused as a viewing tower for visitors to the Park.However, following a structural study it was foundthat this would not be viable. Alternatives for there-use of other locally listed structures were alsoconsidered but were not viable.

The design of each character zone within the Site has developed through careful considerationof environmental constraints and extensive consultation, involving LBB, English Heritage, the London Advisory Committee and the 20thCentury Society.

A L T E R N A T I V E S A N D D E S I G N E V O L U T I O N

5.0 ALTERNATIVES AND DESIGN EVOLUTION

29

5.0




30

6.0



The overall demolition and construction programmefor the Proposals is anticipated to be between 15to 20 years. The Proposals would be built in a number of phases (possibly nine phases) whichare likely to take between 1 to 3 years to complete and may overlap. The construction programme is not fixed at this stagewith the poten-tial for the phases to take place in any order asit is dependent on when funding is secured forthe various components. However, the works wouldbe designed to minimise disruption to Park usersand the local community as far as possible. Forexample, construction routes to the Site wouldbe carefully selected to allow for the safest and most efficient movement of vehicles into and out of the Site.

The activities during the construction period wouldinvolve:

• Site clearance, ground re-modelling and excavation;

• Restoring and repairing historic features,and recording historic features which would be removed;

• Demolition of buildings (including theAthletics Stadium, Lodge Tower and houses);

• Alterations to the NSC; and

• Construction of new buildings (including theNorth and South Greenhouses, Rockhills andSydenham Residential, College and Lodge,new Museum and Café and DinosaurInterpretation Centre).

The ground levels in parts of the Site would bealtered to improve the accessibility of the Park (i.e.by removing steep slopes) and views across thePark. This would involve moving soil around theZones to achieve the proposed ground levels.Significant re-grading of the ground levels wouldtake place in the Transitional Landscape Zone and up to 4 metres of material would be placedaround the NSC so that the ground levels are raisedaround it, making the building appear as a ‘pavilion’ sitting in the landscape. The RegionalSports Centre would sit mostly below ground andwould therefore involve significant excavation. TheProposals have been designed to ensure that material from the demolition of buildings is re-usedwithin the Site as far as possible and also that significant quantities of ‘fill’ material do not needto be brought into the Site.


6.0 DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION

31

6.0




32

6.0

It is recognised that all construction sites havethe potential to cause temporary disruption anddisturbance to neighbours and road users. AConstruction Environmental Management Plan(CEMP) would therefore be developed and imple-mented to monitor and review the constructionprogramme and manage the associated environ-mental impacts. The CEMP would specify a rangeof measures to control noise, vibration, dust, con-struction traffic, risks of pollution, as well asmeasures to protect wildlife, habitats, trees,archaeological remains, heritage features, andensure the safety of the public. The contents ofthe CEMP would be agreed with LBB. The CEMP would be prepared in line with relevant legislation and best practice. AConstruction/Neighbourhood Liaison Officer wouldkeep LBB, surrounding Boroughs and the localcommunity informed of progress and would beavailable to discuss concerns that may arise asa result of the works. CEMPs are an establishedmethod of managing environmental impacts whichcan result from demolition and construction worksand they are routinely and successfully adoptedfor other major schemes. A Site WasteManagement Plan (SWMP) would also be imple-mented to ensure waste created during the worksis as far as possible, or is recycled or reused.

Photograph of existing landscape setting at the Tidal Lakes, CPP 2007



33

6.0




34

7.0



A Planning Statement accompanies the planningapplication which provides a summary of relevantplanning history, planning policy and an assessmentof the Proposals with regard to planning policy. Asummary of this document is provided in the ES.The assessment concludes that the Proposals accordwith regional and local policy aims for the improve-ment of the Park as a recreation, sporting and leisuredestination. The Proposals substantially accord withaims of restoring and improving the Park with strong reference to its history. The resulting improved sportsfacilities would accord for the most part with nation-al, regional and local policy with regard to sport andrecreation.


7.0 PLANNING AND LAND USE

35

7.0




36

8.0



8.0 SOCIO-ECONOMICS

37

8.0An assessment of the Proposals on social and economic conditions has been undertaken usinga review of relevant planning policies and information on the local population, existing levels of employment, and community facilities.

The main impacts identified in the assessmentinclude those on employment, spending from visitors, improved sports and leisure facilities andother amenities at the Park, increases in the localresidential population, and associated demand forhealth and education.

Construction of the Proposals are expected to giverise to the equivalent of around 83 jobs which wouldbenefit the local population, although these wouldbe over a 15 – 20 year period. The Park currentlyprovides around 70 jobs, excluding casual staff during events and seasonal work. On completionof the Proposals, the Park would support between160 – 176 jobs which represents a net increase ofbetween 90 – 106 jobs. These new jobs would bebeneficial, especially to local unemployed people.

At present, the total number of visitors to the Parkand its facilities including the NSC is estimated tobe approximately 1.9 million per annum. The Park,once complete, would attract more visitors and thenumber of visitors could reach between 2.6 millionand 2.9 million per year. This represents an increaseof between 700,000 and 1 million people per year.These visitors could spend an extra £1.7million inand around the Park which may help to create afurther 50 jobs and would represent a substantialbeneficial impact.

The Proposals for Crystal Palace Park seek toenhance its sporting and leisure amenities. Thiswould be achieved through the construction of anew Regional Sports Centre, alterations to the NSCto provide an indoor multi-use games area, andimproved cricket pitch and new pavilion. Overall,these facilities would be a significant beneficialimpact. The Proposals would also create a high-quality and well-designed environment within whichpeople would be more likely to walk or exercisefor recreation bringing about health benefits fromincreased activity.

The new attractions and educational elements on offer in the Park are expected to attract additional visits to the Park, for example by families who may wish to combine an educationalvisit with a day out. The overall accessibility of the Park would also be significantly improved bymaking entrances more obvious, removing stepsand altering ground levels.

The Proposals would mean that the Crystal PalaceCaravan Club Site would be returned partly to parkland. The Caravan Club Club would need tobe relocated to achieve this and this would alsobe used to construct part of the RockhillsResidential area. This would represent an adverseimpact although the LDA would work with theCaravan Club to find a suitable alternative location.

The new permanent residential areas proposed atRockhills and the Sydenham would provide up to180 residential apartments in an area where thereis a need for housing. Given the relatively smallnumber of people who would live in the newresidential development, there would be nosignificant impacts on the demand for school placesor doctors.




38

9.0



9.0 BUILT HERITAGE

39

9.0

An assessment of the impacts of the Proposalson listed and locally listed buildings and structureshas been undertaken which included a detailedstudy of the history of the Site and the proposedalterations to the NSC.

The Site contains a number of listed and locallylisted buildings and structures including:

• Grade I listed Dinosaurs and GeologicalIllustrations (a limestone cliff and leadmine); and

• Grade II listed Paxton Bust, Upper andLower Terraces, Gate Piers to ‘Rockhills’(Paxton’s former house) and the PaxtonSubway (beneath Crystal Palace Parade).

The Grade II listed Crystal Palace Station is located immediately adjacent to the Site boundary.The Site also contains several locally listed featuresincluding the Lodge Tower, Athletics Stadium, watertower foundations, City Farm, Gorilla Statue and smaller features. Several of the park-side houses on Thicket Road and Crystal Palace ParkRoad, are locally listed, but these fall outside theSite boundary.

The Proposals would not result in any impacts tothe Grade I listed features as they would beretained. Their setting would however, be improvedthrough landscaping. The proposals for the NSChave been carefully designed to ensure that thosefeatures of the building which are part of the rea-son why it is Grade II* listed are retained andsensitively refurbished. The Proposals have alsobeen designed to improve the setting of the building and to achieve a satisfactory future usefor it. All-weather pitches within the sports halland former swimming pool spaces would behoused within the NSC, and the prominent exter-nal concrete walkway would be removed. A newentrance in the southern side of the building wouldbe created and the ground would be raised sothe levels are the same as the surrounding landscape. The impact of the alterations to theNSC would not damage the special interest of thebuilding and the setting of the building would beimproved which would represent a beneficialimpact.

Historic dinosaur model




40

9.0

Overall, it is considered that the Proposals wouldhave a net beneficial effect on built heritage within the Site due to the improvements to the condition and setting of historic features, thereduction in the built up areas and improvementsto the major surviving features of Paxton’s Parkincluding the ‘Paxton Axis’ and the listed terraces.

The Grade II listed Paxton Subway beneath CrystalPalace Parade would be reopened and displayedto the public as part of the new Museum’s attractions. The Subway would be restored andits poor structural condition would be improved,resulting in a beneficial impact. The Paxton Bustwould be relocated to the Palace Terrace.Construction of two sunken gardens and the Northand South Greenhouses has the potential to dis-turb features relating to terraces, although therestoration and repair of the historic walls, stepsand balustrades of the Grade II listed terraceswould constitute a minor beneficial impact. The Grade II listed gate piers would be retainedwithin the Proposals in the Rockhills area.

The Proposals require the removal of several buildings within the Site which are locally listed,notably the Lodge Tower and Athletics Stadium.In advance of their removal these features wouldbe fully recorded and the resulting impacts would be minor adverse. Method statements forconstruction activities would also be prepared toensure historic buildings or features to be retained are not accidentally damaged duringconstruction.

Historic dinosaur model



41

9.0





42

10.0



10.0 HERITAGE LANDSCAPE

43

10.0

An assessment of the Proposals on the historic Paxtondesigned landscape was undertaken which consid-ers the impacts on the Crystal Palace ConservationArea and the Grade II* status of Crystal Palace Parkon English Heritage’s Register of Parks and Gardensof Special Historic Interest in England. This assess-ment was informed by the assessments of Viewsand Visual Amenity, Archaeology, Built Heritage andspecialist surveys of important features.

A detailed appraisal of the historic features of the Parkwas carried out which concluded that the features whichformed part of Paxton’s original 1854 design or the1911 Festival of Empire Exhibition are of high impor-tance. All of the Zones within the Park have a highsignificance as they were part of the original Park laidout by Paxton. Of the individual Zones, the PaxtonAxis, the Palace Terrace, the Italian Terraces and TidalLakes are of the most significance. The EnglishLandscape is also of high significance and the CentralArea, Anerley Hill Edge, Transitional Landscape, andCricket Pitch of are of medium significance. The Parkas a whole is considered to be in fair but variable con-dition. The parts recently repaired are generally ingood condition, but the main structure of the Parkand its most significant features (with the exceptionof the Tidal Lakes and the Grade I listed features)are in poor condition. The main character of the CrystalPalace Park Conservation Area relates to Paxton’s orig-inal park design and significant elements of this, including its overall structure are in poor condition.

The Proposals would temporarily affect the setting of the Crystal Palace Park Conservation Area,nearby conservation areas and the Grade II* sta-tus of the Park during the demolition andconstruction phase. This impact would be minoradverse and would be reduced as far as possibleby efficient phasing of construction works and bestpractice management of construction activities.

The Proposals affect an area of high significance andof national importance (i.e. the Grade II* registered landscape) which has aspects of very high(i.e. international) importance (the Grade 1 listed struc-tures). The Proposals have been informed by anunderstanding of the Site’s history and they includea combination of conservation, reinterpretation andinsertion of new elements into the landscape. Therewould potentially be minor adverse impacts from con-struction activities to the area between the PalaceTerrace and Anerley Hill, the Crystal Colonnade,Terraces, Grand Plateau and site of Rockhills.However, there would be a substantial beneficial impacton the most significant aspects of the Park which includeits overall structure, views, the site of the former Palace,the terraces and the Paxton Axis. These interventionswould reveal the scale and structure of Park and over-all, result in a substantial beneficial impact. There wouldbe no significant impacts on the setting of the WestowHill, Upper Norwood Triangle and Belvedere RoadConservation Areas.




44

11.0



45

11.0

An assessment of the impacts of the Proposalson views in and around the Site has been car-ried out. A total of 71 viewpoints were selectedf o rthe assessment which were agreed with LBB, including short, middle and long distance viewsof the Site. Accurate computer generated imagesof what the Proposals would look like were thengenerated to inform the assessment.

Due to the scale of the Proposals, the construc-tion phase would result in some disruption of viewsfrom within the Park and in the surrounding area.The programme of construction phasing and gen-eral good site management would however, mainly limit impacts to areas within the Park. As a resultof tree removal, views would temporarily beopened up until new planting is established.

Some new buildings are proposed on the edge ofthe Site boundary. With appropriate detailed designand landscaping, the proposed buildings would notresult in significant impacts to theexisting street scenes. The prominent landscapefeatures within the Site, such as the Terraces, thePaxton Axis, NSC and Tidal Lakes would be retainedand enhanced as a result of the Proposals. Thequality and character of the Park would also beenhanced.

Whilst some trees would be removed as a resultof the Proposals, the numbers of trees plantedwould be greater than the number of treesremoved. The removal of a small proportion ofthe trees would not have a significant impact onviews of the Park. The Park is designated asMetropolitan Open Land which means that the‘openness’ of the Park should not be compromised.The Proposals would significantly reduce the builtform within the Park through the removal of carparking areas and hardstanding, and demolitionof prominent buildings such as the Lodge Towerand Athletics Stadium. The openness of the Parkwould therefore be enhanced.

The Proposals would inherently alter the views fromwithin Crystal Palace Park, but the majority of the views would be improved. Where adverseimpacts on views in the Park do occur, these wouldbe limited to areas where the new buildings are locat-ed and therefore change the composition or extentof the view. In the case of the Treetop Walk, thiswould allow for the creation of new, high qualityviewing opportunities, offsetting adverse impactsthe structure may have from ground level.

The Proposals would change the views currentlywithin Crystal Palace Park. The majority of theviews considered would be improved. The major-ity of views from outside the Park would also beenhanced as a result of the Proposals. Theseimprovements would benefit both users of the Parkand those on its borders and would improve theexperience of people using the park.

V I E W S A N D V I S U A L A M E N I T Y

11.0 VIEWS AND VISUAL AMENITY




46

12.0



12.0 ARCHAEOLOGY

47

12.0

V I E W S A N D V I S U A L A M E N I T Y

An assessment of the impacts of the Proposalson archaeological remains has been carried out.The assessment has been informed by desk-basedresearch and archaeological investigations with-in the Site. Research included a comprehensivereview of historical documents, maps and pho-tographs, and limited archaeological investigationhas recently been carried at the Palace Terraceand Italian Terrace.

The Site is designated by LBB as an area ofArchaeological Importance. The Park is Grade II*Listed and contains a number of Listed Buildings.The Park has an uncertain, probably low, archae-ological potential for remains from the prehistoric,Roman, and early to late medieval periods.However, a number of features associated withthe 19th-Century Crystal Palace and its landscapedsetting (i.e. Paxton's Park) have been identified.The recent field evaluation indicated that belowground remains of the foundations of the palacesurvive intact, and it is possible that footings ofother structures within the Park also survive belowground. Whilst the Palace has no formal desig-nation (it is not Scheduled), well-preserved remainsof the Palace features are considered to be of con-siderable (national/international) significance.

Because of the potential archaeological value ofremains of the Crystal Palace and Paxton's Park,sensitive design measures would be implement-ed to ensure the Proposals avoid archaeologicalimpacts. These measures include a mitigation strat-egy which would ensure important archaeologicalremains are left undisturbed wherever possible(preservation in situ). Further archaeological inves-tigations would be required to inform the detaileddesign, such as the exact location of trees and pro-posed foundations. The Design Guidelines for theproposed North and South Greenhouses includea series of measures to avoid or minimise impactson the remains of the North and South Wings ofthe Palace. Impacts from tree planting on the for-mer site of the Crystal Palace would be minimisedthrough careful planning of tree locations and alsorestricting the growth of the roots in this area.

For archaeological remains of lesser significancewithin the Site, a programme of preservation byrecord (targeted excavation and recording, and/ora watching brief) is proposed as mitigation. Anysuch work would be carried out in consultation withthe local authority and its advisors.

Possible residual impacts on archaeology (i.e. aftermitigation measures have been implemented)would relate to changes in ground levels in ZoneA which would remove any below ground remainsof flues and other significant features that onceformed an integral part of the Crystal Palace (andare thus are also considered to be of high impor-tance). The affected area is located betweenBrunel's south water tower and the South Wingof the former Crystal Palace. The removal of top-soil, landscaping and tree planting (in additionalto other works) would also result in the removalof possible remains of a number of other featuresassociated with the original Park. There would bea cumulative impact of removing these potentialremains, and this may require well-preserved exam-ples of surviving elements, to be preserved in situ.




48

13.0



49

13.0

An assessment of ground conditions and contam-ination has been undertaken to establish the likely risks which the Proposals might pose to construction workers, the public and the environ-ment, especially during construction. Thisassessment has been informed by inspections ofthe Site, a review of historical information and soil investigations. An investigation of soil contamination at the Palace Terrace and ItalianTerraces has also been carried out.

The geology beneath the Site differs slightly betweeneach Park zone but in general, comprises from thetop down: Made Ground (which is man-made material, such as construction rubble), London Clay, Woolwich and Reading Beds and Upper Chalk.

Normally, Parks are not at risk of having signifi-cant levels of contamination. However, historic usesof the Site have included uses which may havegiven rise to the contamination of soil. In the late1800s and early 1900s the Site was predominant-ly parkland although small scale uses may havegiven rise to contamination including engine hous-es, blacksmiths, tanks, and landscaped areas whichmay have imported ‘fill’ material. In November1936 the Crystal Palace was destroyed by fire.The basement of the former Palace site was sub-sequently filled with rubble from buildingsdestroyed during the Blitz in World War II. Themain pollutants at the Palace site were recordedas being metals and asbestos. Other areas with-in the Site may contain ‘hotspots’ of contamination.

G R O U N D C O N D I T I O N S

13.0 GROUND CONDITIONSDemolition and construction activities, includingexcavation and re-profiling of ground levels, wouldbe subject to a range of controls required by legislation to protect human health and the environment. These measures would be implement-ed as part of the CEMP to prevent constructionworkers, park users, groundwater resources andhabitats being exposed to soil contamination andasbestos, where present. Where present, contam-inated soil would be cleaned up and methods havebeen identified for this which would be finalised atthe detailed design stage. Specialist contractorswould be called in to deal with asbestos in buildings or in the ground. The clean up of contaminated material, where required, would represent a minor beneficial impact as it wouldremove a potential risk to the environment. Therewould be no significant risks from the completedProposals to the public, water resources or wildlife.

Illustrative view of proposed residential buildings Sydenham Residential from Crystal Palace Park Road




50

14.0



The impacts of the Proposals on water resources andthe risk of flooding has been informed by a reviewof ground levels and drainage features, consultationwith the Environment Agency and Thames Water, anda review of the proposed water strategy. The waterresources considered in the assessment include surface water (i.e. ponds, lakes and ditches) and waterwhich is below ground (referred to as ‘groundwater’).

The Site is located on a ridge and is therefore atlow risk of flooding from nearby rivers. The riskof flooding from the existing drainage system is also negligible. However, in line with planningpolicy, a Flood Risk Assessment has been preparedwhich considers the risks associated with surfacewater within the Site and whether this could resultin flooding.

In Paxton’s Park, 11,788 fountains and cascadeswere installed which used up to approximately120,000 gallons (545,530.8 litres) of water perminute passing through approximately 10 milesof pipes. Many of these features are no longer pres-ent today. There are five water bodies within theSite which are the Concert Bowl pond, theIntermediate or Fishing Lake, the Lower Lakes(located in the Tidal Lakes zone), Paxton’s Pondand a Conservation Area Pond. In addition, anunderground Thames Water reservoir is locatedwithin the Park which is used as part of the localwater supply system. Water from the Site cur-rently drains close to No. 5 Crystal Palace ParkRoad via a sewer which connects to Penge Streamand eventually to the River Pool. The London Claybeneath the Site is a non-aquifer which meansthat it does not hold water and it does not sup-ply water. The chalk which does supply water islocated below the London Clay which is some80.0m to 140.0m thick.

14.0 WATER RESOURCES AND FLOOD RISK

51

14.0

The existing ponds and lakes would be retainedalthough the edges of the lakes would be improvedto benefit wildlife. The Concert Bowl pond wouldbe reduced in size. During the demolition and con-struction works, measures would be put in placeas part of the CEMP to ensure that the quality ofwater within the existing ponds and lakes is notharmed by silt or other pollutants.

A drainage strategy has been designed toenhance the quality of water in the existing pondsand lakes and to ensure that water is collectedand re-circulated within the Park, making surethere is enough water in the system at all times.Natural water treatment would take place in new‘treatment basins’ which would be planted withreeds. The drainage strategy would also ensurethat rain falling within the Park does not flowtowards neighbouring properties, and that rain-water is collected, stored and re-used to minimisewastage.




52

14.0

Existing water bodies on site

Approximately 80% of the Site is currently softlandscaping, i.e. grass and other vegetation. TheProposals would result in an overall reduction inthe total area of buildings and hard surfaces whichdo not currently allow water to filter into theground. New drainage features within the Park,including ponds, paving which allows water to fil-ter through, and ‘green roofs’ would mean therewould be an overall reduction in the volume ofwater which would be drained from the Park intothe local sewer system which would help in reduc-ing flood risk elsewhere. Provided that new sewersand drains required for the new the buildings areappropriately designed, the Proposals would notincrease flood risk at the Park or elsewhere.



53

14.0




54

15.0



15.0 ECOLOGY

55

15.0A detailed desk-based study, ecological surveysand consultation with wildlife organisations havebeen undertaken as part of the assessment ofthe Proposals on ecology within and around theSite, i.e. on habitats and species. Surveys wereundertaken for bats, birds, habitats, reptiles andinvertebrates, such as butterflies and moths andother insects.

The Site is not subject to any statutory wildlifedesignations; however, 49.15 hectares of the Parkhave been designated as a Site of Importance forNature Conservation (SINC) by LBB due to thebreeding birds and waterfowl around the TidalLakes and the green areas within the Park. Thereare seven other SINC's within 1 km of the Siteboundary.

Habitat surveys undertaken in 2007 identifieda variety of habitats across the Site, of whichscattered trees and woodland (including someveteran trees), scrub, wasteland and the wetlandsof the lakes and ponds are the most significant.A tree survey was also undertaken to establishthe value of the trees and hedgerows within theSite. With regards to species, the surveysrecorded that the Park comprises 230 species offlowering plant; 172 species of invertebrate includ-ing 14 that are Nationally Scarce, 11 species thatare of Local Importance and a total of 19 speciesof butterfly; 8 species of bat; over 40 species ofbreeding bird; and a wide variety of wintering andmigrant bird species. The surveys found noevidence that bats were using the buildingswithin the Site, although the woodland, scrub andwetland areas provide important feeding groundsfor bats.

Some areas of habitat would be lost as a result ofconstruction activities and ground re-modelling. Thesehabitats would include small areas of woodland, anumber of trees and parkland habitat. New plant-ing would take place, although the loss of someveteran trees would be difficult to compensate forin the medium term because of their age.


Existing woodland next to the Crystal Palace Railway Station




56

During demolition and construction, measureswould be put in place as part of the CEMP to ensurethat trees and habitats to be retained are not dam-aged during construction and that the works donot disturb protected species, such as bats andbreeding birds. For example, habitats suitable forbreeding birds would not be removed during thenesting season and protocols would be in placeto ensure no bats are impacted upon by tree fellingor other construction related activities.Construction lighting and noise and dust emissionswould also be kept to a minimum.

Habitats within the site

15.0



The current and potential wildlife value of the Siteis recognised as one of the fundamental aspectsof the Proposals. The Proposals would bring about:

• Improvements in the water quality of pondsand lakes and the habitats they supportthrough planting;

• Creation of new habitats including newponds, reed beds, wasteland, woodland,meadows and an orchard;

• The replacement of trees that would beremoved by a factor of two (i.e. two trees planted for every one lost);

• The extension of existing areas of woodland;

• An overall gain of approximately 2.5hectares of parkland through the removal of hard surfaces including car parking androads; and

• More effective management of habitats tobenefit wildlife.

Overall, it is predicted that there would be a net gain in wildlife at the Site as a result of the habitatcreation incorporated into the Proposals and that thedesignation of part of the Park as an SINC wouldbe preserved. The context of the Park within the GreenChain and ‘stepping stones’ of other local green spaceswould be enhanced, and as a result, the wildlife links with these areas would be strengthened.

57


15.0




58

16.0



16.0 TRANSPORTATION, MOVEMENT AND ACCESS

59

A detailed study of the effects of the Proposalson local roads, public transport and pedestriansand cyclists has been undertaken. This TransportAssessment has been based on a range of exist-ing information sources, visitor and trafficsurveys, compute modelling and consultation with the local planning authority and TfL.

The Site currently has good public transport linkswith Crystal Palace Station located just outside thesouthern Site boundary, and Penge West railwaystation to the east. A bus interchange is locatedto the east of the Site on Crystal Palace Paradeand bus services are available in the local area.The East London Line is currently being extendedboth north and south to link into the suburban railnetwork. The southern extension is scheduled torun to Crystal Palace Station. This extension is currently under construction and will be operatingfrom 2010. It has therefore been taken into accountin the assessment. The future delivery of theTramlink Extension has also been considered in theassessment, as have the effects of different sizedevents within the Park.

Additional heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) wouldresult from the demolition and construction stageof the Proposals. Estimates of the numbers of lor-ry loads that would be generated indicates thatan additional four truckloads would be generat-ed which is the equivalent of eight additional HGV

trips per day. This is not considered to be signif-icant and would not affect the percentages of HGVson the local highway network. The impacts of theconstruction and demolition traffic on the local high-way network would therefore be negligible.

There would inevitably be some disruption to cyclistsand pedestrians during the construction period,although this would vary depending on the areawhere works are being carried out and which gatesand routes are being affected. These impacts wouldrange from minimal disruption, restricted accessto certain areas, or diversion. These impacts wouldbe temporary as only parts of the Park would besubject to construction activities at any one time.

The increase in visitors generated from theProposals would impact on the local transport net-work. Taking into account general visitors to thePark, the new attractions and events, the totalvisitor levels are forecast to be approximately 2.85million per year. The busiest times are forecastto be during summer weekends where all visitorattractions would experience their highest levelsof visitors. Due to the fact that the periods areoutside the normal rush hour periods, theimpacts on the local public transport and high-way networks are considered to be negligible.

The Proposals are designed to encourage peopleto use public transport and to walk or cycle, there-by reducing reliance on use of the car. The levels

of traffic generated by the Proposals would be verylow compared to the overall traffic on the localnetwork. The Proposals would also improve keyjunctions for pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Inparticular, the opening of the new Rockhills gate-way would provide important pedestrian links tothe northwest of the Site. Both the East LondonLine Extension and the Croydon Tramlink Extensionplanned for the southern side of the Site wouldalso greatly enhance the accessibility of the Siteby public transport in future.

The environment within the Site for pedestriansand cyclists as well as connections to the surround-ing area would be significantly improved as a resultof the Proposals. The use of more sustainable formsof transport would be further encouraged throughthe development of a Travel Plan for the all ele-ments of the Site.

When events are hosted on Site, additional trans-port provisions would be put in place via an EventManagement Strategy which would be agreed withLBB and other relevant authorities. The EventManagement Strategy would include details ofcoach parking and use of neighbouring areas forparking, as agreed with the local Boroughs. Trafficwould be restricted from areas of the local high-way network, and signalling would be adjustedto ensure traffic can flow to and from the Site withminimal disruption.

16.0




60

17.0

Potential dust effects from the works would beminimised through appropriate environmentalmanagement controls relating to site managementpractices such as the CEMP. The measures wouldinclude regular monitoring, damping down of stock-piles, and sheeting of trucks and wheel washing.It is thus envisaged that impacts related to dustwould be localised and temporary minor adverseimpacts, at worst.



17.0 AIR QUALITY

61

The north west region of the London Borough ofBromley has been designated as an Air QualityManagement Area (AQMA) due to the existing andpredicted future levels of air pollution. There arealso a number of residential properties and schoolsin proximity to the Site which could be affectedby changes in dust from demolition and construc-tion and pollution from road vehicles associatedwith the Proposals. An air quality assessment wasundertaken which involved a review of the like-ly demolition and construction activities, andcalculations of the predicted levels of air pollu-tion using traffic data provided by the transportconsultants for the project.

The impacts of construction plant operating on theSite and construction vehicles entering and leav-ing the Site would be negligible in the context oflocal air pollution concentrations or existing adja-cent road traffic emissions.

Increases in air pollutants as a result of traffic generated by additional visitors to the Park have beenmodelled and are not considered to be significant.Therefore, the effect of the traffic associated with thecompleted Proposals to local air quality is predictedto be negligible, both with and without the TramlinkExtension in place.

Illustrative section showingpotential option for a new

Crystal Palace Park Museumadjacent to the historic subway

17.0




62

18.0



18.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION

63

18.0

The noise and vibration impacts of the Proposalshave been assessed in accordance with publishedguidelines. The assessment included a survey ofbaseline noise and vibration levels in July 2007. Atotal of nine monitoring locations were selected inand around the Site.

Demolition and construction activities wouldinevitably give rise to some noise and vibration effects.However, with the implementation of appropriatemeasures to reduce and control noise from construc-tion works in accordance with the CEMP, the workswould proceed with the minimum disturbance to localresidents, and users of the Park, and would resultin temporary, minor adverse impacts.

Given the proximity of the listed NSC building, thePaxton Subway and the Crystal Palace Station (locat-ed off site) to some of the demolition and constructionactivities, vibration monitoring would be undertakento ensure compliance with national standards and tominimise the risk of complaints or building damage.


Noise calculations of predicted traffic levels asso-ciated with the completed Proposals confirm thatthere would be no significant noise impacts fromtraffic. There would also be no significant impactsassociated with the operation of facilities within thePark with the exception of any increased use of theNSC facilities or the use of the Park for concertsor similar events. Concerts and events already takeplace at the Site and noise controls which areenforced by LBB would also apply to events in thefuture. Therefore, there should be no adverseimpacts on the amenity of existing residents as aconsequence of the proposed Park improvements.

Analysis of the baseline noise monitoring indicatesthat the areas proposed for new housing (atRockhills and Sydenham) would be suitable for thisuse. All proposed buildings would be designed to appropriate standards to ensure the internal conditions are suitable.




64

19.0



19.0 WASTE MANAGEMENT

65

19.0

An assessment has been undertaken to establishthe volumes of waste which would be likely to arisefrom both the demolition and construction worksand the completed Proposals. The assessment hasgiven consideration to a draft waste strategy whichhas been developed for the Proposals.

It is estimated that approximately 58,130 cubic metres(m3) of waste would arise from the demolition of thebuildings and removal of hard-standing / tarmac. TheApplicant has set a target for contractors to re-use100% of demolition materials within the Site for land-scaping and construction although this target isobviously subject to the material being suitable for re-use. The proposed ground contourshave been designed to avoid the need for significant volumes of material to be imported or exported from the Site.

Throughout demolition and construction a SiteWaste Management Plan (SWMP) would beimplemented in line with best practice. This wouldhelp reduce construction waste and ensure thatwhere possible, waste is reused or recycled within the Site. The SWMP would require auditsto be undertaken at intervals throughout the construction works, in order to monitor the amountand type of waste generated and to identify reuseand recycling opportunities.

Although the Proposals increase the residentialand other new uses within the Site, adequate storage space and the provision of informationregarding sustainable methods of dealing withwaste would aim to encourage high levels of recycling. Green waste would also be collectedand transported to a facility within the Site forcomposting or other re-use.




66

20.0



An assessment of the lighting impacts which are likely to result from the Proposals has beenundertaken which has included a site survey toestablish the existing lighting conditions within thePark and its surrounds.

The majority of Crystal Palace Park is notpresently lit, with the exception of the Central Area,where floodlighting is provided which is usedduring sports related activities and major events.The Park is located within Greater London and is surrounded by a network of well lit roads, as wouldbe expected for a busy urban area. Hence the areassurrounding the Park are currently subject to highlevels of lighting.

Lighting associated with construction and demolitionactivities would be localised in different parts of theSite. Depending on the phase of works which wereongoing, there could be temporary, lightingimpacts on the surrounding residential properties,park users and some wildlife, such as bats. TheCEMP would contain measures to minimise lightingimpacts by specifying working hours, the use andlocation of lighting.

Almost all of the existing lighting in the Park wouldrequire removal or replacement. Lighting would bedesigned in accordance with the principles set outin the Design Guidelines and best practice documentsin order to avoid unnecessary spillage of light whichcan cause glare and light pollution or ‘skyglow’.Network Rail would be consulted on lighting proposals adjacent to the railway. The majorityof lights would be screened from the areas outside the Park by landscaping around the bound-aries. Lighting for events is not anticipated to beany more significant than that used at present,although modern lighting would be used which ismore efficient and reduces unnecessary lightspillage. The new lighting system would providesuitable levels of light for the safe use of the Parkduring the hours of darkness.

20.0 LIGHTING IMPACTS

67

20.0




68

21.0



21.0 MICROCLIMATE - DAYLIGHT, SUNLIGHT & OVERSHADOWING

69

21.0

An assessment has been undertaken to establishthe effects of the Proposals on the amount of day-light and sunlight received by properties adjacentto the Site and the proposed residential proper-ties, as well as overshadowing of open spaces andgardens. The assessment has involved comput-er modelling of the proposed buildings and a sitevisit to establish the surrounding uses.

Demolition of existing buildings within the Sitewould have a temporary beneficial effect on thelevels of daylight and sunlight received by neigh-bouring buildings and amenity areas. In addition,demolition of the Lodge Tower would result in minorbeneficial impacts to the surrounding parkland asit currently overshadows parts of the park. Theconstruction process itself would give rise to tem-porary effects due to the introduction ofconstruction equipment such as cranes, but thesewould not be significant.

The South Greenhouse, Crystal Palace ParkMuseum, Park Ranger Building and SydenhamResidential buildings would all have negligibleimpacts on surrounding residential properties interms of daylight and sunlight. When assessedagainst the maximum building heights, the pro-posed College and Lodge and Rockhills Residentialwould result in, at worst, a small number of roomsin neighbouring properties receiving a reductionin daylight. However, the detailed design of these


Illustrative drawing of the Paxton Axis at the Central Sports Area at night




70

21.0

buildings would ensure that impacts are reducedto a negligible level.

The maximum height of the College and Lodgeis likely to cause a small number of impacts to15, 13, 11, 9, 7 and 3 Anerley Hill, but, with care-ful detailed design the impacts can be mitigatedto negligible levels. The maximum height of theproposed Rockhills Residential buildings are like-ly to cause a small number of adverse impactsto the ground and first floor windows of 54-51Crystal Palace Park Road and one ground floor win-dow to 108 Crystal Palace Park Road. However,careful planning at the detailed design stage wouldensure any impacts to 108 Crystal Palace Park Roadand the ground floor windows of 54-51 CrystalPalace Park Road are reduced as far as possible.

The Proposals would not result in any significantovershadowing to the rear gardens of 29a and 25Crystal Palace Park or other amenity spaces. Allthe proposed residential buildings would receiveadequate levels of interior daylight and sunlight.There would be no adverse overshadowing effectson the Park during the operational phases.

Illustrative drawing showing a potential option of the South Greenhouse overlooking the Italian Terrace



71

21.0





72

22.0



22.0 MICROCLIMATE - WIND

73

22.0A desk based analysis of the buildings within the Sitewas undertaken to predict the likely conditions forpedestrians using these areas, particularly atentrances to buildings and pedestrian routes. Thisstudy was informed by data on wind for the local areaand the Parameter Plans.

Wind data for the Site indicate that the prevailingwinds are from the south west throughout the year.During the late spring/early summer there are alsowinds from the north east direction. Overall, the Siteis unusual as it experiences windier conditions thanother parts of London because of its exposure andlocation on a ridge.

Demolition of the existing buildings on Site wouldnot have any significant impact on wind conditionsfor pedestrians. The expected conditions within thecompleted Site are generally considered to be suit-able for the intended pedestrian use, for examplewalking or sitting. Care would be taken at the detaileddesign of certain buildings, including RockhillsResidential, the new Museum and the Greenhouses,to ensure that wind conditions at these locations aresuitable for the intended use. This would includedetailed consideration of landscaping and the loca-tion of entrances. All pedestrian routes andimportant access points are expected to be suitablefor ‘leisure walking’ or better throughout the year.

Illustrative drawing showing thePaxton Axis looking up towardsthe Palace Terrace




74

23.0



23.0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS

75

23.0

The effects of the Proposals on broadcast radioand television signals as well as satellite recep-tion have been determined through a desk basedstudy. This used technical knowledge of how radioand TV signals are transmitted together with areview of the Parameter Plans.

The Crystal Palace television transmitter providesBBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5digital and analogue broadcasts to this area ofLondon and this is located in the EnglishLandscape zone adjacent to the Palace Terrace.

The main potential effects associated with dem-olition and construction on telecommunicationswould be the temporary use of tower cranes, whichmay result in signal blocking. However this is notconsidered to be significant and in any event cranescould be correctly aligned to minimise interfer-ence during out of hours working.

Due to the height of the area combined with theproximity of the BBC transmitter within the Site andthe scale of the proposed buildings, the complet-ed Proposals would not affect the television, radioor satellite reception of neighbouring properties.




76

24.0



24.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

77


Sometimes, two or more environmental impactscan act together to give a greater effect than theywould on their own. These are known as ’cumu-lative impacts. Two types of cumulative impactswere assessed:

i) The interaction of individual impacts fromthe Proposals. For example noise, dust,vibration, traffic and visual impacts; and

ii) The combined effects resulting from otherrelevant schemes and the Proposals.

During the demolition and construction works ofthe Proposals there would be some temporarycumulative impacts predominantly associated withnoise, dust and visual effects. These impacts wouldbe reduced as far as practically possible, althoughsome impacts would remain.

Schemes which were considered to be ‘reason-ably foreseeable’ were included in the cumulativeassessment including:

• A housing development at St Saviour’sCollege, 110 Hamilton Road;

• A mainly commercial scheme with housingand a restaurant at Clyde Terrace; and

• Proposals for the White Swan Public House, atWestow Hill and 10 -20 Crystal Palace Parade.

Transport for London’s Tramlink Extension propos-al through the Park has also been considered.

During construction, there would be some combined,albeit temporary, cumulative impacts upon the exist-ing and new residents, Park users and the surroundingcommunity. These would be mainly associated withtraffic, dust, noise, vibration and visual issues. However,due to the scale of the cumulative schemes listed aboveand the distances of most of these sites from CrystalPalace Park, these would be negligible. Site manage-ment and controls during construction would alsoensure that adverse are minimised as far as possi-ble. Some beneficial cumulative impacts have beenidentified for socio-economic and built heritage issues.

In conjunction with the Proposals, the Tramlink exten-sion would be expected to give rise to cumulativebenefits by making the Park more easily accessibleto local populations, which would widen the poten-tial benefits associated with easier access to theimproved sports and leisure facilities which would beon offer in the Park.

The Proposals for Crystal Palace Park would also promote regeneration in the wider area inthe following ways:

• The upgrade of the Park and its facilitieswould ensure that it plays its full role as aMetropolitan Park, supporting sustainablegrowth in jobs and homes in South London;

• Improvements to the Park would bringabout considerable amenity benefits for resi-dents of the five London Boroughs whichadjoin the Park;

• The Park would be re-instated as a signifi-cant heritage site with new and improvedfacilities. This would benefit the local areaas well as the wider region;

• The Proposals would secure a long-termfuture for the Grade II* listed NSC andwould provide an efficient and modern sportsand leisure development for the region;

• The Proposals would re-enforce CrystalPalace Park as the primary visitor attractionin this part of South London helping to draw700,000 additional visitors per year. Thiswould the Park of strategic significance inLondon as whole, ranking it among the top20 free attractions in London; and

• The Proposals would see the Park becomean economic asset by creating around 80new jobs during construction, up to 106jobs within the Park (and its related facili-ties), and around 50 jobs in the wider area.It would also promote increased expenditurein the local area.

24.0




78

If you would like to receive further copies of thisdocument or would likely to purchase a copy ofthe ES, please contact:

Gerald Eve7 Vere StreetLondonW1G 0JBT: 020 7493 3338

m a s t e r p l a n Ð e n v ir o n m e n t a l s t a t e m e n t n o n -t e c h … · 2008. 2....

Documents