MORDEN WHARF.
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
REGENERATION RETHOUGHT On behalf of MORDEN WHARF Cathedral (Greenwich Beach) Ltd and Morden College NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
Date May 2020
Project Number 1620000199
Project No. 1620000199 Issue No. 2 Date 14/05/2020 Made by Rebecca Raby Smith Checked by Ben Weldin Approved by Michelle Wheeler MORDEN WHARF ENVIRONMENTAL Made by: Checked/Approved by: STATEMENT NON-TECHNICAL This report is produced by Ramboll at the request of the client for the purposes detailed herein. This report and accompanying documents are intended solely for the use and benefit of the client SUMMARY for this purpose only and may not be used by or disclosed to, in whole or in part, any other person without the express written consent of Ramboll. Ramboll neither owes nor accepts any duty to any third party and shall not be liable for any loss, damage or expense of whatsoever nature which is caused by their reliance on the information contained in this report.
Version Control Log
Revision Date Made by Checked by Approved by Description
1 11/05/2020 RRS BW MW First Issue for Client Review
2 14/05/2020 RRS BW MW Final Issue for Planning
Ramboll 240 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8NW United Kingdom T +44 20 7808 1420 www.ramboll.co.uk
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
CONTENTS 8.8 Wind 51 8.9 Townscape, Heritage and Visual 52 9. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 57 9.1 Intra-Project Cumulative Effects 57 1. INTRODUCTION 1 9.2 Demolition and Construction 57 1.1 Purpose of Non-Technical Summary 1 9.3 Completed Development 57 1.2 Viewing of ES and Application 1 9.4 Inter-Project Effects 57 1.3 Commenting on Application 2 10. SUMMARY 59 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 3 2.1 EIA Process and Methodology 3 LIST OF TABLES 2.2 EIA Scoping 3 2.3 Topics Included in EIA 4 Table 6.1: Proposed Development Area Schedule...... 30 2.4 Topics Excluded from EIA 4 Table 6.2: Proposed Development Unit and Tenure Mix by Percentage...... 31 2.5 Assessment Approach 4 Table 6.3: Proposed Development Building Heights ...... 31 3. EXISTING SITE AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT 6 Table 6.4: Proposed Development Public Realm and Open Space Provisions ...... 34 3.1 Application Site Location 6 Table 6.5: Proposed Development Play Space Provision ...... 34 3.2 Application Site Description 7 3.3 Environmental Sensitivity 10 LIST OF FIGURES 4. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 15 4.1 Policy Context 15 Figure 3.1: Application Site Location ...... 6 4.2 Planning History 15 Figure 3.2: Application Site Redline Boundary ...... 8 5. DESIGN EVOLUTION AND ALTERNATIVES 16 Figure 3.3: Application Site Photographs ...... 10 5.1 ‘Do Nothing’ Alternative 16 Figure 3.4: Surrounding Environmental Constraints ...... 14 5.2 Alternative Sites 16 Figure 5.1: 2018 Early Design Options...... 18 5.3 Alternative Land Uses 16 Figure 6.1: Proposed Development Site Arrangement Plan ...... 21 5.4 Alternative Designs and Design Evolution 17 Figure 6.2: Gloriana Boathouse Site Plan ...... 23 6. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 20 Figure 6.3: Proposed Basement Extent Parameter Plan ...... 26 6.1 Proposed Development Layout 20 Figure 6.4: Proposed Ground and First Floor Uses Parameter Plan ...... 27 6.2 Proposed Development Land Use 30 Figure 6.5: Proposed Upper Level Floor Uses Parameter Plan ...... 28 6.3 Proposed Development Built Form, Height and Massing 31 Figure 6.6: Proposed Roof Parameter Plan ...... 29 6.4 Proposed Development Material Palette and Façade Detailing 32 Figure 6.7: Proposed Southern Warehouse Façade Alterations ...... 33 6.5 Proposed Development Public Realm and Open Space Network 34 Figure 6.8: Proposed Ground Level Landscape and Open Space Parameter Plan ...... 36 6.6 Proposed Development Biodiversity Enhancements 38 Figure 6.9: Detailed Component Landscape General Arrangement...... 37 6.7 Proposed Development Lighting Strategy 38 Figure 8.1: Proposed Development Wind Tunnel Model ...... 51 6.8 Proposed Development Access 38 Figure 8.2: Greenwich Park General Wolf Statue View ...... 55 6.9 Proposed Development Deliveries and Servicing 40 Figure 8.3: Royal Navy College View ...... 55 6.10 Proposed Development Plant and Ventilation 40 Figure 8.4: Blackwall Entrance Pier View ...... 56 6.11 Proposed Development Climate Change Resilience Measures 41 Figure 8.5: Chrischurch Way, East Greenwich Conservation Area View ...... 56 6.12 Proposed Development Health and Wellbeing Measures 41 Figure 9.1: Location of Cumulative Schemes ...... 58 6.13 Proposed Development Operational Management Controls 42 7. DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION WORKS 43 7.1 Overview 43 7.2 Construction Environmental Management Plan 43 7.3 Community Liaison 43 7.4 Working Hours 43 7.5 Potential Construction Environmental Effects 43 8. WHAT ARE THE LIKELY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 44 8.1 Socio-Economics 44 8.2 Archaeology 44 8.3 Marine Ecology 45 8.4 Transport and Accessibility 46 8.5 Air Quality 47 8.6 Noise and Vibration 48 8.7 Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare 49
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 2
MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
1. INTRODUCTION x Non-Technical Summary (this document). This NTS and the full ES, together with the application and other supporting documents are 1.1 Purpose of Non-Technical Summary available for viewing on the RBG’s website: https://planning.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/online- This is the Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the Environmental Statement (ES) which has been applications/
prepared by Ramboll UK Limited (Ramboll) and a team of technical specialists in accordance with CD versions of the ES are available for purchase from Ramboll at: the statutory procedures set out in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England) Regulations 2017 (hereafter referred to as the ‘EIA Regulations’)1. 240 Blackfriars Road London, SE1 8NW The ES has principally been prepared to accompany a planning application for hybrid planning permission (hereafter referred to as the ‘application’) made to the Royal Borough of Greenwich Tel: 0207 808 1499 (RBG) by Cathedral (Greenwich Beach) Ltd and Morden College (hereafter referred to as 'the 1.3 Commenting on Application Applicant') for the intended residential-led, mixed-use redevelopment (hereafter referred to as ‘the proposed development’) of the Morden Wharf site, North Greenwich (hereafter referred to as Comments on the application should be forwarded to the RBG at: 'the application site'). Royal Borough of Greenwich The ES will also accompany a concurrent marine licence application to be submitted to the Marine Planning Department Management Organisation (MMO) for permission to undertake works below the mean high water The Woolwich Centre spring tide mark and therefore the ES has also had regard of the Marine Works (Environmental 35 Wellington Street Impact Assessment) Regulations 20172 where relevant. London, SE18 6HQ The proposed development would comprise the demolition of all existing buildings, with the Email: [email protected] exception of the Southern Warehouse which is proposed to be refurbished; excavation for a
basement; construction of up to 18 new buildings up to approximately 130 metres above ordnance datum (mAOD; an indicative storey height of 36); delivery of residential, industrial/ employment, retail, community and leisure floorspace; delivery of open space, public realm, landscaping; construction of a new river wall; refurbishment of the existing jetty and installation of the Gloriana boathouse; and improvements to the Thames Path, including the construction of a bridge link.
This NTS presents a summary of the main findings of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) that has been undertaken of the proposed development and that has been reported in the ES. The NTS provides:
x a description of the application site and surrounding context; x an outline of the reasonable development alternatives considered by the Applicant and an indication of the main reasons for their choice, taking into account the potential environmental impacts; x a description of the proposed development; and x a summary of the likely significant environmental effects predicted and key mitigation measures (as relevant).
The aim of the NTS is to summarise the main findings of the ES in a clear and concise manner to assist the public in understanding what the significant environmental effects of the proposed development are likely to be.
1.2 Viewing of ES and Application
The full ES comprises:
x Volume 1: Environmental Statement Main Report; x Volume 2: Townscape, Heritage and Visual Impact Assessment; x Volume 3: Technical Appendices; and
1 Secretary of State, 2017. The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, London, HMSO. 2 Secretary of State, 2017. The Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. London, HMSO.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 3 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 4
MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 2.3 Topics Included in EIA The following topics were scoped into the EIA, as confirmed with the RBG during the EIA Scoping 2.1 EIA Process and Methodology process, and their assessments are presented within ES chapters:
EIA is a process that identifies the likely significant effects on the environment (both beneficial x Socio-Economics; and adverse) of a proposed development and proposes mitigation to avoid or reduce any likely x Archaeology; significant adverse environmental effects. It is an iterative process which proactively seeks to integrate mitigation within the development proposals so as to avoid significant effects from x Marine Ecology; arising. x Transport and Accessibility;
The EIA process adopted for the proposed development has followed best practice guidelines, as x Air Quality; set out by the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) Quality Mark x Noise and Vibration; scheme. The process involved the following key steps: x Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare;
x Consultation was undertaken with key stakeholders such as the RBG, MMO, Greater London x Wind Microclimate; and Authority (GLA), EA, Transport for London (TfL) and Port of London Authority (PLA) on the x Townscape, Heritage and Visual. issues to be considered within the EIA; Significant environmental effects were considered unlikely to arise in respect of Ground x Collection, use and assessment of the most up-to-date information on the baseline scenario Conditions, Water Resources and Flood Risk; Light Spillage, Telecommunication Interference, and likely evolution of that baseline without the development or in the future; Aviation, as well as Terrestrial Ecology and therefore scoped out of the EIA. However, these x Interpretation of the development plans, schedule, parameters and commitments presented topics were assessed to inform the design process. The conclusions of these assessments are in the design code, as well as the formulation of assumptions in the absence of information, presented in technical reports which are included within the ES as the following technical as the basis for the individual technical assessments; appendices: x Use of relevant guidance and good practice methods to predict the potential nature, scale and x Ground Conditions Preliminary Risk Assessment; significance of any environmental change; and x Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy; x Reporting of the results of the EIA process in the ES in a transparent way, to provide the x Television and Radio Interference Report; information required to inform the decision-making process. x Lighting Strategy and Light Impact Assessment Report; 2.2 EIA Scoping x London City Airport Physical Safeguarding Assessment; and The EIA Scoping Report was formally submitted to the RBG on 9 October 20183 and accompanied x Updated Preliminary Ecological Assessment. a request for formal EIA Scoping Opinion pursuant to Regulation 15(1) of the Town and Country Planning EIA Regulations. The EIA Scoping Report set out a description of the emerging proposed 2.4 Topics Excluded from EIA development; the potential key environmental impacts and likely effects to be considered as part The following topics were scoped out of the EIA as confirmed during the EIA Scoping process: of the EIA; as well as the proposed approach that would be adopted for the EIA including the x Climate Change; proposed scopes and assessment methodologies to predict the scale of effects and to assess the significance in each case. x Major Accidents and Disasters; x Health and Wellbeing; A formal Scoping Opinion was issued by the RBG on 12 December 20184. The Applicant formally responded to the RBG to seek clarification on some of the EIA Scoping Opinion comments and a x Light Spillage; meeting was held with the RBG on 18 January 2019 to discuss the comments. x Telecommunication Interference; and
Given the passing of time, ongoing design evolution and subsequent amendments to the x Aviation. proposed development application format, an informal re-scoping exercise was undertaken with 2.5 Assessment Approach the RBG in January/February 2020 to confirm the validity of the scoping process and to identify updates to the EIA methodology, where required. The RBG confirmed in March 2020 that the The ES provides assessments of potential significant environmental effects during demolition and amendments to the proposed development are not significant and that the proposed construction and once the proposed development is complete and operational. Each technical development remains materially consistent with that described in the 2018 EIA Scoping Report. assessment considers different types of effects including direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, beneficial and
adverse effects. Where there is flexibility built in within the proposed development in terms of the land use areas (e.g. residential, commercial or community uses), the relevant topic areas within the EIA have assessed a scenario which reflects a worst-case scenario so as not to overinflate potential beneficial effects or underestimate potential adverse effects.
3The EIA Scoping Report was submitted to the MMO on 5 November 2018 and accompanied a request for a formal EIA Scoping Opinion pursuant to Regulation 13 of the Marine Works EIA Regulations. 4 MMO Scoping Opinion issued on 22 February 2019.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 5 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 6
MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
Of particular note, the transport and accessibility, air quality and noise and vibration assessments 3. EXISTING SITE AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT have assessed a worst-case scenario for the proposed safeguarded wharf site (currently operated by Sivyer), where it is in use as a 24/7 concrete batching plant. 3.1 Application Site Location
Each of the above issues are addressed in a separate technical assessment chapter in ES The application site is located in North Greenwich, immediately to the east of the River Thames Volumes 1 and 2. In each chapter, a description of the assessment methodology is given and immediately to the west of the A102, as shown in Figure 3.1. together with current application site conditions. This is followed by an assessment of the likely effects of the proposed development (beneficial, neutral and adverse) taking into account mitigation measures that are embedded in the development proposals; the consideration of the need for additional mitigation or any recommendations for enhancement measures to reduce or offset any significant adverse effects identified during the assessment; and a concluding assessment on the residual effects that would remain after these measures have been implemented, as well as the cumulative effects of the proposed development. The likely significant environmental effects attributed to the proposed development are then confirmed.
Mitigation is the term used to refer to the process of avoiding where possible and, if not, minimising, controlling and/or off-setting potentially significant adverse impacts and effects of a development. As part of the iterative process, mitigation measures have been integrated (embedded) into the design stage; the demolition and construction stage; or the activities associated with the operation of the completed proposed development.
ES Volumes 1 and 2 report upon the likely nature and scale of effect (whether it be Negligible, Minor/Slight, Moderate or Major), in order to determine what the likely significant effects of the proposed development would be. The results of this have been summarised in this document.
In addition to the above, the following two types of cumulative effects have been assessed:
x Intra-Project effects of different types of impacts from the proposed development that could interact to jointly affect a particular receptor at the application site. Potential impact interactions could include the combined effects of noise and dust during demolition and construction activities on a particular sensitive receptor; and x Inter-Project effects which are combined effects generated from the proposed development with other ‘approved or existing projects’ (‘cumulative schemes’). These ‘cumulative schemes’ may generate their own individually insignificant effects but when considered together could amount to a significant cumulative effect, for example, combined landscape and visual impacts from two or more (proposed) developments.
The list of cumulative schemes agreed during the RBG EIA Scoping process for the purpose of the
inter-project cumulative impact assessment is discussed in Section 9. Figure 3.1: Application Site Location
Geographically, the application site is located approximately:
x 1 km north of the north-east boundary of the Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site (WHS); x 0 m east of the River Thames and 680 m east of Mudchute Park and Farm; x 700 m south of North Greenwich Underground Station and O2 Arena; and x 400 m west of the Greenwich Peninsula Ecology Park.
The application site’s surrounding context is of a mixed nature with:
x existing industrial and emerging residential-led mixed-use development to the north and east as part of the Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan; and x existing industrial and existing and emerging residential uses to the north and south respectively.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 7
MORDEN WHARF
3.2 Application Site Description
The application site boundaries are defined to the:
x north by Go Ahead London Bus Garage, the Sivyer aggregates import and recycling facility at Tunnel Wharf (hereafter referred to as ‘Sivyer’) and the Brenntag UK chemical storage facility beyond; x east by Tunnel Avenue and the A102 Blackwall Tunnel Southern Approach, with the Greenwich Peninsula Low Carbon District Energy Centre and associated sculpture, ‘The Optic Cloak’, beyond; x south-east by City Cross Business Park (including Spicers Ltd, Glass Designs Ltd and Romax), with Tunnel Avenue and the A102 Blackwall Tunnel Southern Approach beyond; x south by emerging mixed-use, residential-led Enderby Wharf development and The River Gardens Development beyond; and x west by the River Thames, with the Isle of Dogs beyond.
The Applicant is in control of Tunnel Wharf which is proposed as a Safeguarded Wharf (‘the proposed safeguarded wharf site’) under the Mayor of London Safeguarded Wharf Review 20195 and has secured Siyver as the wharf operator.
As shown in Figure 3.2, the application site is an irregularly shaped parcel of land which covers an area of approximately 5.6 hectares (ha). The part of the application site for which outline permission is being sought covers an area of 43,475 m2 (4.4 ha) and the detailed part covers an area of 12,992 m2 (1.2 ha).
The application site lies at an elevation of between approximately 2.5 and 6 m AOD.
5 Greater London Authority, 2019. Safeguarded Wharves Review 2018 – draft Statement of Consultation. Summary of Round One Consultation August 2019.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 8 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 3.2: Application Site Redline Boundary
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 9 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 10 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
The application site currently comprises:
x predominantly open yard space which is leased by several tenants on a short-term basis for storage use, including temporary closed storage and pre-fabricated office units in the centre and east of the application site, a storage shed (a one-storey, corrugated steel building) in the south, and shipping containers in the west. The yard space comprises hardstanding also in use as a surfaced car park in the centre of the application site and internal through roads; x Thames Bank House, a three storey brick building, in the north-east of the application site. This building is mostly unoccupied, with the ground floor currently in office and light industrial use; x Southern Warehouse, which is a one storey brick building (approximately 12 m high) in the north of the application site. The building comprises SW1, SW2 and SW3 and is currently in Aerial view of jetty, Thames Path and container Southern Warehouse facing north-west manufacturing and storage use. Whilst SW1 and SW2 form part of the application, only the storage yard facing north-east
façade of SW3 is included within the application boundary; x a concrete jetty in the south-western extent of the application site, comprising two leg sections which extend from the main section; x river wall along the western boundary which comprises two distinct lengths of wall running parallel to the river; the north and south walls. The north wall is located around the Southern Warehouse and is constructed from tied sheet piles with a reinforced concrete capping beam. The south wall exists in two different sections with the southern portion understood to be comprised of a small mass concrete wall varying in height and condition. The southern extent is a much larger wall which is understood to be comprised of bricks, concrete and rendering;
x the Olympian Way river path (the Thames Path) which is a single walkway ranging from 1.5 m to 2 m in width comprising blockwork paving stones; Car parking facing north-east Storage yard and corrugated barn facing south
x the revetment which runs alongside the river path and slopes down from the path to the
foreshore area of the River Thames comprising a rubble mass of masonry with cementitious screed topping; x an area of the River Thames to the north of the jetty and along the river wall; and x Morden Wharf Road along the northern edge of the application site, used for access to the rear of the Southern Warehouse, the Go Ahead London Bus Garage and proposed safeguarded wharf site, as well as providing a secondary entrance for Brenntag UK.
There are no existing basements on the application site.
In total, 12 individual trees and one group of trees are present on the application site along with several small areas of introduced shrub, none of which are protected by Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs). Yard space with Enderby Wharf in background Thames Path adjacent to jetty facing south Representative photographs of the application site are shown in Figure 3.3. facing south
Figure 3.3: Application Site Photographs
3.3 Environmental Sensitivity
3.3.1 Ground Conditions x The geological sequence beneath the application site comprises ‘made ground’ (e.g. soil and other materials used to build up site levels in the past), overlying geologically recent superficial deposits of clay, peat and gravel), underlain by impermeable clay. The clay is in turn underlain by clay and sands, with the undelaying bedrock being chalk. The shallow superficial deposits and deeper sand and chalk are classified as aquifers.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 11 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 12 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
3.3.2 Water Resources Street found prehistoric land surfaces containing Neolithic and Bronze Age flint and pottery, th x The River Thames runs adjacent to the western boundary of the application site and is the the remains of a 12 century tide mill and evidence of the development of the foreshore from th th nearest surface water body. The application site is located entirely within Flood Zone 3 (High the 17 - 20 centuries. Probability) associated with tidal flooding from the River Thames; however, the designation of x A preliminary assessment of the application site indicates that it is located within an area Flood Zone 3 specifically ignores the presence of any flood defences or structures in the formerly known as Greenwich Marsh, which in prehistoric times (approximately 800,000 BC – floodplain. The application site is afforded flood protection by the Thames Tidal Defences AD 43) formed a low-lying floodplain. On-site archaeological horizons exist within the (TTD) which are designed to offer at least a 1 in 1,000 Standard of Protection, i.e. the floodplain gravels and floodplain alluvium, which mainly date from the prehistoric period, and defences afford protection against events with a 0.1 % annual probability. in some locations, from the medieval and early post-medieval periods.
3.3.3 Ecology x There are no statutorily designated heritage assets, such as scheduled monuments or registered parks and gardens, within the application site. The following six Grade II listed x No statutory designated nature conservation sites are located within the boundaries of the buildings are located within approximately 500 m of the application site boundary: application site. Moreover, the application site is not located within 2 km of any national or European designated sites including any associated with the marine or water environment. A Enderby House; section of the Thames Estuary is recommended as a Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ), the Millwall Wharf Riverside Range of Warehouse (Isle of Dogs); Swanscombe rMCZ, which is approximately 20 km downstream of the application site. The Southern Gatehouse to the Blackwall Runnel; Thames Estuary and Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Special Protection 70-84 River Way; Area (SPA) and Ramsar site are located approximately 30 km downstream of the application Rothbury Hall; and site. Thames Estuary and Marshes site is an internationally important wetland habitat and supports important numbers of wintering wildfowl and wading birds and migrating birds. The Plot. x Mudchute Park and Farm is also a local nature reserve (LNR). In addition, A small LNR, Bow x The Maritime Greenwich WHS is located 1 km to the south-west and includes the Grade II Creek Ecology Park, is located approximately 1.5 km to the north-east of the application site Registered Greenwich Park. on a peninsula created by a meander in Bow Creek. x The application site is not located within a conservation area. The following three x Seven Sites of Importance for Nature Conversation (SINC) are located within approximately 1 conservation areas are located within approximately 1 km of the application site boundary: km of the application site boundary, including the River Thames and Tidal Tributaries East Greenwich; immediately west, designated at the metropolitan level and Mudchute Park and Farm. Island Gardens (on the Isle of Dogs); and x Terrestrial ecological surveys of the application site were undertaken in 2015, 2018 and Coldharbour (on the Isle of Dogs). 2020. These surveys confirm that the terrestrial habitats comprising hardstanding; buildings and other structures; ephemeral short perennial vegetation; bare ground; introduced shrub; 3.3.5 Townscape and Views and scattered trees are of low ecological value. No evidence of black redstarts or roosting x The prevailing townscape character predominantly comprises a number of lower-rise bats were identified on the application site. warehouse structures and open areas to the north and east of the application site associated th x Aquatic surveys of the application site were undertaken in 2019, comprising the River with industrial uses and vacant sites for redevelopment; as well as early to mid-19 century Thames, a tidal estuary; an area of foreshore including Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) Priority houses to the south. The emerging Enderby Wharf development to the south has introduced Habitat of intertidal mudflats; the River Thames concrete river wall running along the western several residential buildings up to approximately 50 m AOD in height. Upon completion of extent of the application site; and the jetty located to the southern end of the foreshore area Enderby North (Enderby Place) it is expected to introduce residential towers up to 32 storeys in the southwest corner of the application site. The survey confirmed that the intertidal high, indicatively up to 100 m AOD in height. The emerging new townscape further north on habitat is largely barren, generally characterised by mud, sand and shingle beds with very the Greenwich Peninsula includes residential led mixed-use buildings up to approximately 36 low diversity and few individuals present. storeys high, indicatively 112.5 m AOD. x The River Thames provides a migration route for many aquatic species including salmonids x The gasholder located approximately 150 m north-east of the application site, forms a and eels. The River Thames is also a valuable nursery for many commercially fished species prominent townscape feature in the local townscape. However, the gas holder has a Prior in the North Sea. Marine mammals have been recorded in the River Thames including Approval for demolition and has been partly demolished. dolphins, porpoises and seals some species of which are legally protected as European 3.3.6 Transport and Accessibility Protected Species (Habitats Directive, 92/43/EEC)6. x The application site is accessed off Tunnel Avenue which is located parallel to the A102 3.3.4 Below and Above Ground Heritage Blackwall Tunnel Approach. The Silvertown Tunnel, linking the Greenwich Peninsula to x The application site is located within the Greenwich Peninsula and Foreshore Archaeological Silvertown, is anticipated to open in 2025 and is aimed at reducing congestion at the Priority Area (APA). Blackwall Tunnel. x Archaeological investigations adjacent to the application site revealed mainly 19th - 20th x The application site is situated in a location with low public transport accessibility with a century remains. In addition, an archaeological investigation 350 m to the south at Banning public transport accessibility level (PTAL) rating of 1a/1b. x The North Greenwich London Underground (LU) Station (serviced by the Jubilee Line) is
located to the north within approximately 1.4 km walking distance of the application site. 6 The Council of the European Communities, 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31992L0043
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 13 MORDEN WHARF
x Maze Hill and Westcombe Park national rail stations (serviced by Thameslink and Southeastern) are located to the south and south-east respectively at approximately 1.6 km walking distance from the application site. x The nearest bus stops are located on Tunnel Avenue/Dreadnought Street via a footbridge over the A102, from which the 108 service between Lewisham and Stratford can be accessed. There are also bus stops on Blackwall Lane, providing additional bus service options. x Cycle routes are limited to the centre and east side of the peninsula. National Cycle Route number 1 passes through the peninsula. x Pedestrian facilities are limited to footways and the Thames Path, again with segregated footpaths generally in the centre and east side of the peninsula. The A102 is a key source of severance for local walk and cycle routes across the peninsula.
3.3.7 Noise and Air Quality x Due to the application site's urban location, the main existing noise sources comprise road traffic noise from the A102 and noise from surrounding industrial and river activity (e.g. Thames Clippers, barges, etc.). Future noise sources are anticipated to be from the fully operational proposed safeguarded wharf site. A Noise Action Important Area (areas identified for local management of noise levels) is located approximately 600 m south of the application site, encompassing the Woolwich Road (A102) flyover. x The whole of the borough has been declared an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) for
both exceedances in NO2 and PM10 levels. Existing air quality at the application site is affected by road traffic emissions on the main road network to the east and by existing industrial uses to the north and south-east, including Brenntag UK and City Cross Business Park respectively.
3.3.8 Major Accidents and Disasters x Brenntag UK warehouse, a chemical distributor, is situated north of the application site and undertakes activities which are regulated under the Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) Regulations 20157. Brenntag UK is designated as a ‘Lower Tier’ COMAH site, holding lower quantities of dangerous substances than a ‘High Tier’ COMAH site. The north-eastern corner of the application site lies within the Inner, Middle and Outer Zones of the Consultation Distance (CD) of the Brenntag lower-tier COMAH site. Each zone within the CD is subject to specific HSE development guidance, which sets out criteria to be met for different development types to ensure the development is safe in the event of an accident or emergency.
3.3.9 Aviation x London City Airport lies approximately 2.7 km north-east of the application site, north of the River Thames. The physical safeguarding zone extends to 10 km from the airport in a circle centred on the midpoint of the runway. The most limiting restrictions apply along the runway axis, but elsewhere a horizontal limit of approximately 155 m AOD applies out to the 10 km radius from the airport. The application site lies in the transition area between the more limiting runway-aligned restrictions and the 155 m AOD outer horizontal surface.
3.3.10Telecommunications x A telecommunications mast operated by Arqiva is located within the application site on Thames Bank House.
Figure 3.4 shows some of the key environmental constraints within and surrounding the application site.
7 Health and Safety Excecutive, 2015. The Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 2015.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 14 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 3.4: Surrounding Environmental Constraints
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 15 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 16 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
4. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5. DESIGN EVOLUTION AND ALTERNATIVES
4.1 Policy Context The EIA Regulations require the ES to report on the reasonable alternatives (for example in terms In respect of the application for hybrid planning permission, it is necessary to consider the of development design, location, size and scale) studied by the Applicant, which are relevant to proposed development against relevant policies and guidance at national, regional and local the proposed project and its specific characteristics, and an indication of the main reasons for levels. At the national level, planning policy is contained within the National Policy Planning selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of environmental effects. 8 9 Framework (NPPF) , . The ES considers the following alternatives:
The relevant statutory development plan for the application site comprises the: x The ‘Do Nothing’ alternative; x London Plan (2016)10; and x Alternative sites; x Royal Greenwich Local Plan11. x Alternative land uses;
Within the London Plan, the application site is located within the Greenwich Peninsula Opportunity x Alternative layouts and massing; Area and partly located within the Thames Policy Area. x Alternative façades; and
In addition, the northern and eastern extent of the application site is designated as a Strategic x Alternative landscaping. Industrial Location (SIL) (Preferred Industrial Location) and part of the application site is 5.1 ‘Do Nothing’ Alternative designated as a Safeguarded Wharf. The Greater London Authority’s (GLA’s) Safeguarded Wharfs Review (2018-2019) recommends that the safeguarded wharf designation is ‘flipped’ from the The ‘Do Nothing’ scenario is a hypothetical alternative conventionally considered, albeit briefly, in ‘Southern Site’, which includes an area of the application site, to the ‘Northern Site’, located to the EIA as a basis for comparing the development proposal under consideration. the north of the application site (also known as the ‘proposed safeguarded wharf site’). The In the ‘Do Nothing’ alternative, the application site could be left in its current underutilised state Mayor of London’s formal recommendations were submitted to the Secretary of State (SoS) in resulting in the following: January 2020, which include the recommendation to flip the safeguarded wharf designation. A decision from the SoS on the wharves review is awaited. x No delivery of increased employment opportunities in accordance with planning policy objectives and the SIL designation; Within the Royal Greenwich Local Plan, the London Plan SIL, Safeguarded Wharf and Thames x No intensification of industrial floor space; Policy Area designations are carried through from the London Plan. The application site is also identified as falling within the Greenwich Peninsula West Strategic Development Location and is x No delivery of housing, including affordable homes, retail and community space contrary to identified as a location where tall buildings ‘may be appropriate’. Part of the river frontage of the planning policy objectives; application site is designated as part of the River Thames SINC and, in recognition for the need x No improvement in neighbourhood connectivity and permeability; for the Thames Path to be improved, the existing path is identified as a ‘Riverside Walk: New x No improvement in public realm or creation of open space (including the delivery of a new Improved’ route. The Tunnel Avenue frontage is also identified as falling within the River Crossing riverside park); Safeguarding designation associated with Tunnel Avenue, identified for a new improved route. x No improvement in biodiversity; The Mayor of London issued his ‘Intending to Publish’ version of the Draft New London Plan12 to x No improvement to Flood Defences; the SoS in December 2019. The RBG has also consulted on the Site Allocations Local Plan since x No improvement to the Thames Path, which is currently as narrow as 1.5 m and is identified 2016, within which the application site is proposed to form part of the ‘GP2 Former Tunnel as being in need of improvement; and Glucose Wharf (West)’, a strategic site allocation for mixed-use development on the Greenwich x No improvement works to the jetty, which includes a lost opportunity to provide a new peninsula. permanent home for the Queen’s rowbarge, Gloriana. A range of regional and local supplementary guidance documents are also relevant to the Consequently, the Applicant ruled out the ‘Do Nothing’ alternative. determination of the application and have been considered in undertaking the EIA.
4.2 Planning History 5.2 Alternative Sites
The application site has been in operation for light industrial use across the 21st century and has The Applicant owns the application site. No alternative sites were therefore considered. been occupied by several tenants. The last application submitted in relation to the application site It is recognised that the application site is located within the designated Greenwich Peninsula was for the installation of a temporary café and other associated works for a period of three Opportunity Area, as designated in the London Plan, which aims to create mixed-use areas and years, which was permitted in October 2015. Further information on the planning history of the deliver a substantial amount of the new homes and jobs. The application site is therefore application site is contained in the Planning Statement which accompanies the application. considered appropriate for the proposed development.
8 Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2019. The National Planning Policy Framework. London. HMSO. 5.3 Alternative Land Uses 9 In respect of the application for marine licence permission, the 2011 UK Marine Policy Statement (prepared and adopted for the The northern and eastern extent of the application site is designated as SIL and therefore the purposes of section 44 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009) and the South East Inshore Marine Plan are relevant. 10 Greater London Authority, 2016 (Updated 2017). The London Plan: The Spatial Development Strategy for London Consolidation with land uses within this section of the application site are limited to industrial uses and ancillary Alterations since 2011. London. GLA uses. Furthermore, the north-eastern extent of the application site lies with within the Brenntag 11 RBG, 2014 (Updated 2016). Royal Greenwich Local Plan: Core Strategy with Detailed Policies. London. RBG. COMAH Zones, which limits potential development options. 12 Greater London Authority, 2019. The London Plan Intend to Publish: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. London. GLA.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 17 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 18 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
Appropriate land uses for the redevelopment of the application site have also been informed by the London Plan Opportunity Area policy, Greenwich West Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document13, emerging Site Allocations Local Plan, as well as pre-application feedback from the RBG and the GLA which have identified the potential for a mixed-use development comprising industrial, residential, commercial and retail uses.
Accordingly, no alternative land uses were considered in the design evolution process.
5.4 Alternative Designs and Design Evolution
A long and iterative design evolution process has been undertaken since 2013 that has been informed by the following key environmental factors:
x Townscape character, visual and heritage impacts to designated heritage resources and views; x Noise, air quality and microclimate (wind, daylight and sunlight) impacts; x Flood risk; x Application site designations (SIL and Safeguarded Wharf) and site suitability in relation to industrial activities; Figure 5.1: 2018 Early Design Options x Socio-economics and the creation of employment opportunities; x Public, communal and play space provisioning; Option 1, comprising the typological mixture, was selected as the preferred option based on the following environmental comparison of the three options: x Permeability and accessibility; x Archaeology; x Townscape: compared to options 2 and 3, Option 1 mirrors the existing and emerging mixed typologies surrounding the application site, with the higher-rise elements of the scheme x Ground contamination; positioned adjacent to the emerging high-rise Enderby Place development, with other new x Marine ecology; buildings stepping progressively down in height to the low-rise industrial buildings at the x Major accidents and disasters; north and eastern edges of the application site. Furthermore, the provision of high-rise x Telecommunications; and buildings associated with Option 1 would enable a large public realm offering to be delivered x Aviation. via a large riverfront park. x Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing: Similar to townscape, Option 1 mirrors the Early design concepts, intended as a radical, ‘blue-sky’ design exercise, focused on a row of high- existing and emerging mixed typologies surrounding the application site. As such the extent rise buildings along the riverfront, a new pier, and the provision of Dutch-style housing around of overshadowing impacts from the proposed high-rise buildings on surrounding residential new water features on the landward side. There were a number of environmental issues with this properties would be reduced as a result of the high-rise cluster with the emerging Enderby design, including the overshadowing impacts resulting from the positioning of the proposed Place scheme. In comparison to Options 2 and 3, the site arrangement of Option 1 opens up buildings and the introduction of a new and substantial pier structure and the associated impacts the scheme, allowing for greater light penetration across the application site. Option 1 also on marine ecology. Furthermore, existing site constraints, namely the Brenntag COMAH Zones, minimises the number of north facing, single aspect units. meant that the design process was halted while the COMAH Zones were reviewed. x Wind Conditions: A mixed typology was considered most favourable in respect of wind The COMAH Zones were subsequently reduced in size and the scheme design was reviewed in conditions. Given the application site’s exposure to prevailing wind conditions along the River 2018. The following three massing and built form design options were explored, as illustrated in Thames, linear/formulaic building blocks perpendicular to the River Thames, such as those Figure 5.1: proposed for Options 2 and 3, raised concerns with regard to tunnelling/canyoning effects and x Option 1: Typological mixture, consisting of three distinct areas comprising lower-rise high wind speeds. (linear), mid-rise and high-rise buildings; x Site Suitability: Given the proposed industrial uses at the north of the application site x Option 2: Terraced massing, consisting of smaller, organised housing units stepping up associated with the SIL, as well as the proposed safeguarded wharf site, a site layout that gently in height towards the south-east of the application site; and separates industrial uses from residential uses was considered more suitable. Option 1 maximises the number of residential units away from the industrial uses through the x Option 3: Blades, consisting of organised larger housing units stepping up in height towards provision of towers at the south of the application site. the south of the application site. x Accessibility: The uniform nature of Options 2 and 3 would create a less permeable site
compared with Option 1, restricting throughflow to the rest of Greenwich Peninsula. The creation of three distinctive typologies provided by Option 1 enables the application site to be broken up into separate ‘character areas’ which can be connected by a series of access routes within and through the application site that connect with existing surrounding routes (e.g. along the River Thames and through Enderby Place. 13 Royal Borough of Greenwich, 2012. Greenwich Peninsula West Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 19 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 20 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
Throughout the course of 2018 to 2020, the above environmental factors continued to shape and 6. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT refine Option 1, resulting in the developed illustrative scheme proposals.
In addition to considering alternative layouts, heights and massing, alternative façade treatments The proposed development would deliver the comprehensive redevelopment of the application were also considered for the illustrative scheme, with particular regard to noise associated with site. The description of the proposed development as stated on the application form is: the proposed safeguarded wharf site and the A102. Various landscaping options were explored “Hybrid planning application for: that focused on providing connectivity and accessibility throughout the application site, as well as Outline planning permission with all matters reserved, for the demolition of existing on-site suitable microclimate conditions in respect of wind. buildings and structures (except the Southern Warehouse) and phased mixed-use redevelopment The illustrative scheme proposals evolved through extensive consultation with the RBG, GLA, Port comprising: of London Authority (PLA), Environment Agency (EA) and a wide range of other stakeholders. x up to 1,500 residential dwellings; Multiple rounds of independent design scrutiny were also undertaken with the Greenwich Design Review Panel and have been informed by a number of environmental assessments and specialist x up to 17,311 (sqm GIA) of commercial floorspace (Class A1/A2/A3/A4/B1/B1c/B2/B8/D1/D2); advice in respect of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing, wind, townscape and views, and noise and and vibration. x associated car and cycle parking; public realm and open space; hard and soft landscaping; highway and transport works; and associated ancillary works. The design evolution focused on the illustrative scheme and was used over time to inform the detailed plans of the detailed component and development parameters of the outline component. Detailed planning permission for: change of use of part of the Southern Warehouse from Class This has led to the floorplans and site layouts for the detailed component of the proposed B1c/B2/B8 to B1c/B2/B8/A3/A4; refurbishment (including mezzanines) and external alterations development and the design guidelines and parameter plans for the outline component. to part of the Southern Warehouse; change of use of the Jetty to public realm and installation on
the Jetty of Gloriana Boathouse (use class D1/D2); access; landscaping and public realm works including new river wall and upgraded Thames Path.”
The detailed component of the proposed development comprises the following:
x Southern Warehouse 1 (SW1): Internal and external alterations and change of use to existing building; x Southern Warehouse 2 (SW2): Internal and external alterations to existing building; x Southern Warehouse 3 (SW3): Façade alterations only to existing building; x Morden Wharf Road (as existing); x New east-west access road from Tunnel Avenue (Sea Witch Lane); x Replacement river wall and new intertidal planting; x Upgraded Thames Path; x New bridge link; x New public realm and landscaping along the riverfront, including part of the new riverside park (Morden Park) and public square (Morden Park Square); and x Jetty: Change of use to public realm and installation of Gloriana boathouse.
The outline component of the proposed development comprises the following:
x Three new buildings within the SIL (Southern Warehouse 4 (SW4), New Warehouse (W01) and Building 1 (B01)); x 12 new commercial, retail and residential buildings B02-B09 and T01-T04, plus ancillary residential buildings (the pavilion and B08/B09 link building) underlain by a basement; x Two new north-south internal roads (Marsh Lane and Soames Street); and x New landscaped areas including the majority of Morden Park and Residential Gardens providing public and private amenity spaces and play space.
6.1 Proposed Development Layout
The proposed development site arrangement is illustrated in Figure 6.1.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 21 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.1: Proposed Development Site Arrangement Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 22 MORDEN WHARF
The industrial buildings would be delivered in the north and north-east of the application site, within the SIL, and the residential/commercial buildings would be delivered in the centre and south of the application site.
The buildings would be set back from the River Thames to enable a large open space to be delivered as public realm along the western boundary of the application site. In addition, the river wall and the revetment in the west, would be replaced and removed, respectively. The Thames Path would be upgraded and a bridge link provided in the north-west.
Access from Tunnel Avenue would be provided by means of the existing Morden Wharf Road and new Sea Witch Lane, to the north and south of the Southern Warehouse respectively. The new roads, Marsh Lane and Soames Street, would lead off from Sea Witch Lane.
The proposed buildings and key elements shown in Figure 6.1 are discussed below.
6.1.1 Southern Warehouse
The Southern Warehouse would be subdivided to allow the continuing operation of existing businesses whilst providing additional space and optimizing the building for new employment spaces. The external massing of SW1 and SW2 would remain unchanged.
Pedestrian access to SW1 and SW2 would be provided through the existing closed-off Thames Path route through the Southern Warehouse, which intersects SW1 and SW2. Pedestrian access to SW1 would also be provided via the outside seating area proposed along the Thames Path to the west of SW1.
SW1 would comprise industrial and non-industrial uses to allow for the potential provision of a pub/restaurant ‘the Sea Witch Pub’ and additional internal floorspace would be provided through the creation of a new mezzanine and new fenestration provided on the southern façade.
SW2 would offer a flexible industrial unit to accommodate a wide range of industrial uses. A small area of the existing mezzanine would be removed to create a larger, more flexible space. New fenestration is proposed to be inserted onto the southern façade of SW2 as well as artwork to create activity at street level. The roof for SW1 and SW2 would also be repaired/replaced.
While the SW3 building is not included within the planning application site boundary, the SW3 façade is included and the southern façade would be altered with large scale art installations to create activity and interest to the building façade at street level.
6.1.2 Jetty and Gloriana Boathouse
The existing jetty, located in the south-west corner of the application site, would be upgraded and would become public realm, accessible from the Thames Path. As shown in Figure 6.2, a new Gloriana Boathouse would be installed on the western end of the jetty to store the Gloriana (the ‘Royal Rowbarge’, 27 m in length) and would offer community uses. The boathouse footprint would be set back from the outer edge of the jetty to allow for a public walkway and maintenance zone around the building.
The footprint of the existing jetty would be enlarged on the western leg to include a mobile crane and track mechanism, to load/unload the Gloriana into/off the River Thames. The steel track would be installed on four new concrete piles in line with western arm of the jetty, rather than extending out into the river, to avoid creating a navigational risk to boat traffic within the River Thames and also enable safe loading/unloading of the boat in line with the tide movements. A fifth pile beyond the tracks would act as a guiding pile. When not in use, the mobile crane would be stored at the end of the building.
A floating pontoon would be located parallel to the boathouse and would provide a safe means of access for the crew to board and disembark the Gloriana. A dory or rib boat would be permanently stored on the pontoon.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 23 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.2: Gloriana Boathouse Site Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 24 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 25 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
and community floorspace at the upper levels as residential use would not be permitted if the 6.1.3 River Wall extent of the COMAH zones remain unchanged in the future. The new river wall would be constructed on the riverside of the existing Thames Path to replace The roof level across the proposed development is shown in Figures 6.3 – 6.6 and would largely the existing wall. The new flood defence would consist of a new sheet piled wall installed atop of comprise mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) equipment, biodiverse roofs, photovoltaic the existing revetment. The sheet piled wall and concrete capping beam would raise the flood panels, lift overruns, and playspace and residential amenity space. defences to the Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100) level of 6.1 mAOD, set by the EA to manage tidal flood risk to the end of the century.
A section of the existing revetment would be removed to create an intertidal planting terrace to provide ecological enhancement along the waterfront. The removal of part of the revetment structure would ensure no net loss of flood plain storage from the proposed development.
The existing retaining wall structure west of the Southern Warehouse would be left in place and a new sheet piled wall installed in front of it. The section of masonry wall to the side elevation facing south would be repaired and re-rendered.
A new pedestrian and cycle bridge link would be constructed in the north-west of the application site where the Thames Path currently meets at a right angle and would provide a clear and legible route that maintains the same level and proposed 6 m width of the Thames Path.
6.1.4 Industrial Buildings
SW4 would be constructed as an extension of the existing Southern Warehouse, albeit a separate and standalone structure.
A new warehouse (W01) would be delivered within the north-eastern area of the application site, adjacent to, and to the south of Sea Witch Lane.
A second new building, B01, would straddle the boundary of the SIL immediately to the west of W01 and to the east of the proposed residential buildings. B01 would offer a mix of industrial, commercial, retail and community floorspaces.
6.1.5 Residential, Commercial, Retail Buildings
The layout and massing of the 12 proposed buildings would form the following character areas:
x Morden Gardens Buildings (B02-B07): The six buildings would be located within the central extent of the application site and would be delivered in two parallel linear configurations. A large open space at ground level would be formed between the two rows of buildings, creating a residential communal garden. x Riverside Buildings (B08-B09): The two buildings would be located in the western extent of the application site, adjacent to the River Thames and south of the Southern Warehouse. The two buildings would be connected by a link structure (B08/B09 building link). x Parkside Towers (T01-T04): The four towers would be located along the riverfront within the southern extent of the application site. A pavilion would be located adjacent to T01, T02 and T03 to provide access to the basement.
As shown in Figure 5.3, a basement would be situated beneath B02-B09 and TO1-T04 and would comprise car parking, cycle parking and servicing facilities.
As shown in Figure 5.4, commercial, retail and community floorspaces would be provided within the ground and first floors of the majority of the proposed buildings, with the exception of B03, B05 and B07.
As shown in Figure 5.5, industrial and commercial uses would be provided at the upper levels of B01, SW4 and W01. The rest of the buildings (B02-B09 and T01-T04) would provide residential floorspace at upper levels. The exception to this would be in the northern extent of B02 which falls within the Brenntag middle COMAH Zone and therefore allows for flexible retail, commercial
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 26 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.3: Proposed Basement Extent Parameter Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 27 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.4: Proposed Ground and First Floor Uses Parameter Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 28 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.5: Proposed Upper Level Floor Uses Parameter Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 29 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.6: Proposed Roof Parameter Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 30 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 31 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
The proposed development could deliver up to 1,500 residential units. Residential units would be 6.2 Proposed Development Land Use provided through a range of apartments ranging from studio to 4-bedroom apartments. The The Applicant is seeking flexibility in respect of the non-residential uses across the proposed indicative proposed unit and tenure mix by percentage is presented in Table 6.2. development. To control the quantum of development, the total floorspace provided by the proposed development would not exceed 171,519 m2 Gross Internal Area (GIA), comprising Table 6.2: Proposed Development Unit and Tenure Mix by Percentage 2 2 2,830 m GIA within the detailed component and a maximum floorspace of 168,689 m GIA Tenure Unit Type within the outline component. Studio 1-Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3-Bedroom 4-Bedroom Table 6.1 presents the breakdown of the possible minimum and maximum floorspace areas by Affordable 0% 15-30% 40-60% 15-30% 3-8% non-residential use class which could be brought forward to achieve the overall maximum GIA of Rent 171,519 m2. Shared 0-5% 30-50% 50-70% 0-10% 0% Overall limits have been set for the following non-residential use classes to prevent the combined Ownership sum of maximum floorspace from being delivered: Private 5-10% 30-50% 40-50% 0-10% 0%
2 2 x Commercial is limited to 20,141 m GIA proposed across the detailed (2,830 m GIA) and Total 0-7% 30-50% 40-50% 10-15% 1-2% outline (17,311 m2 GIA) components; The delivery of a minimum of 35 % affordable housing (by habitable room) would be secured via x Retail, community and leisure floorspace is limited to: legal agreement attached to the planning permission. a maximum of 3,500 m2 GIA could be: (i) a maximum of 1,500 m2 GIA convenience retail floorspace with no single retail unit larger than 500 m2 GIA; (ii) a maximum of 2,000 m2 6.3 Proposed Development Built Form, Height and Massing GIA comparison retail floorspace; Table 6.3 summarises the heights of each of the proposed buildings (m AOD). To make this 2 a maximum of 3,000 m GIA could be food beverage floorspace; and relatable, the indicative number of storeys has also been provided. In respect of the buildings a maximum of 2,000 m2 GIA could be community/leisure floorspace. within the outline component, the maximum buildings heights are presented and therefore do not
Table 6.1: Proposed Development Area Schedule represent the actual form in which the proposed development is likely to be brought forward.
Uses Detailed Component Outline Component Total Table 6.3: Proposed Development Building Heights
GEA m2 GIA m2 GEA m2 GIA m2 GEA m2 GIA m2 Building Height (m AOD) Indicative Storeys
Residential Minimum 0 0 - - - - SW1/SW2 (existing) 18.0 2 (Class C3) Maximum 141,047 128,787 141,047 128,787 SW4 18.0 2
Residential Minimum 0 0 - - - - W01 26.5 2 Ancillary Maximum 23,089 22,491 23,089 22,491 B01 29.5 5 (Class C3) B02 43.1 9 Commercial Minimum 2,800 2,485 9,737 8,965 12,537 11,450 (Class B03 43.1 9 Maximum 15,067 14,294 17,867 16,779 B1c/B2/B8) B04 49.5 11 Commercial Minimum 0 0 1,182 1,080 1,182 1,080 B05 49.5 11 (Class B1) Maximum 5,256 4,770 5,256 4,770 B06 49.5 11 Retail (Class Minimum 1,402 1,163 - - 1,402 1,163 B07 49.5 11 A3/A4) Maximum B08 66.0 16 Retail (Class Minimum - - 1,336 1,206 1,336 1,206 B08/B09 Link Building 5.0 1 A1/A2/A3/A4) Maximum 4,819 4,356 4,819 4,356 B09 75.6 19 Community Minimum 354 345 258 232 612 577 T01 95.3 25 and Leisure Maximum 1,886 1,655 2,240 2,000 (Class D1/D2) T02 130.5 36
Total Floorspace within 3,154 2,830 - - - - T03 111.3 29 Detailed Component T04 82.5 21 Total Maximum - - 182,559 168,589 - - Floorspace within Pavilion 5.0 1 Outline Component Gloriana Boathouse 8.46 1
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 32 MORDEN WHARF
6.4 Proposed Development Material Palette and Façade Detailing
The proposed façade designs would take cues from the architecture of existing on-site and surrounding industrial buildings, as well as the emerging buildings to the south at Enderby Place, and across the Peninsula, developing an aesthetic that would sit sympathetically within this part of Greenwich and enhance rather than detract from its character.
Materials would generally be of an urban (i.e. mineral composition such as brick, stone etc.) and would include brick, glass fibre reinforced concrete panels, metallic panels, metal frames and glazing.
Within the detailed component, the following is noted:
x The proposed alterations to the façades of SW1 and SW2 would be kept simple and respectful to the existing character and would be limited to new glazing bays, zones for art and additional doors predominantly to the south facing façade which fronts onto Sea Witch Lane. x The alternations to the façade of SW3 would comprise large scale art installations. x The façade along each long elevation of the boathouse would be predominately glass allowing maximum visibility from land and river to the Gloriana boat. The remainder would be clad in a profiled sheet metal material, with a painted steel primary structure. The roof would comprise simple profiled metal sheeting.
The proposed alterations to the façades of the Southern Warehouse are shown in Figure 6.7.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 33 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.7: Proposed Southern Warehouse Façade Alterations
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 34 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 35 MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF
x Morden Park: Morden Park would provide a high-quality green space with public play areas 6.5 Proposed Development Public Realm and Open Space Network and amenity lawn, extending from the riverfront to envelop the bases of B08 and B09 and 2 A minimum area of 12,800 m public realm and open space would be delivered within the T01-T04. proposed development as shown in Table 6.4. 6.5.2 Communal Space Table 6.4: Proposed Development Public Realm and Open Space Provisions The residents would be provided with a varied communal amenity offer at ground and roof level, Deliverable Outline Component Detailed comprising the following: (minimum commitment; m2) Component (m2) x Residential Gardens: Semi-private communal space would be located between the two Public Realm (Morden Square, 9,055 3,805 rows of the Morden Garden Buildings (B02-B03 and B04-B07) intended for use by residents jetty, bridge link, Sea Witch Pub wider public realm) of B02-B07. There would be informal un-gated play features and communal growing gardens; and Communal Space 4,247 - x Communal Roof Terraces: The Thames View Terrace proposed at roof level of T04 would In addition to the areas of communal space presented in Table 4.5, 85 m2 private communal provide communal space. space would be provided on the roof of T04, referred to as Thames View Terrace. 6.5.3 Private Amenity Within the public realm, open space and communal space, 6,800 m2 play space would be Residential units at the proposed development would be provided with private balconies, which delivered as presented in Table 6.5. would likely comprise a mix of inset/recessed balconies and protruding balconies. Enclosed winter Table 6.5: Proposed Development Play Space Provision balconies would be provided in certain locations in response to predicted worst-case noise levels.
Deliverable Outline Component Detailed Component Private terraces have also been proposed for residential units within Morden Gardens (B02-B07). (minimum commitment; m2) (m2) These terraces would be underlain by basement.
Play Space in Public Realm and 3,100 - 6.5.4 Play Space Open Space A play space strategy has been developed to include the following types of play space sufficient Play Space in Communal 3,700 - for all age groups: playable soft landscape areas; woodland play; benches; and interpretative Space, including at roof level play trail. The main areas of public realm and open space, as well as private amenity space, are discussed A minimum of 6,800 m2 play space would be provided, which would be delivered as follows: in the sections that follow and presented in Figures 6.8 and 6.9. x 0-5 years = 3,220 m2 on-site; 6.5.1 Public Open Space x 5-11 years = 2,310 m2 on-site; and The public open space would comprise the following distinct ground level urban spaces, each with x 12+ years = 1,270 m2 on-site. their own identity to ensure richness, variety and a distinct sense of place: Communal play space would be located within the Residential Gardens and on the roof space of a x Sea Witch Lane: As the primary route through and within the application site, a cycle and number of residential buildings (B02-B09). pedestrian area and a colonnaded footpath would be provided along the northern and southern sides of the street respectively. The street would predominantly comprise hard landscaping, using a cobbled surface to create a pedestrian feel. An open green arrival plaza would be provided in the space between where Sea Witch Lane and Morden Wharf Road meet Tunnel Avenue and an avenue of trees would line the northern extent of Sea Witch Lane; x Morden Park Square: Located at the meeting point of the Thames Path and Sea Witch Lane, the area would provide for public events at a range of scales, including an outdoor cinema, an ice-rink and a market; x Thames Path and Bridge Link: Following the existing alignment of the national trail route, the Thames Path would be raised to the same level as Morden Park. The path would accommodate a cycle and pedestrian lane; x Sea Witch Pub Spill Out: Located at the river end of SW1, the space would be accessible from the Thames Path and would offer prime views along the river; x Jetty: Low level timber benches to match the timber boardwalk would be provided on the upgraded jetty with views along the River Thames and into the Gloriana Boathouse. Safety features would include a steel and wire mesh balustrade and a gate where the jetty meets the Thames Path; and
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 36 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.8: Proposed Ground Level Landscape and Open Space Parameter Plan
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 37 MORDEN WHARF
Figure 6.9: Detailed Component Landscape General Arrangement
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 38 39
The existing Thames Path route along the western boundary of the application site would be 6.6 Proposed Development Biodiversity Enhancements enhanced and widened to incorporate segregated pedestrian and cycle paths, consistent with The proposed development would deliver extensive landscaping, comprising a diversity of habitat Enderby Wharf and the wider Peninsula. A new bridge link at the south-western corner of the with a mixture of amenity and diverse meadow. A minimum of 471 m2 biodiverse roofs would Southern Warehouse would provide a clear, more navigable route that maintains the proposed 6 also be provided where roofscape design allows. A variety of habitats would be created through m width of the Thames Path. The Thames Path would be raised to the same level as Morden sensitive planting and the provision of bird and bat boxes at ground floor level, and the creation Park, as part of the works to the river wall to better integrate with the wider public realm and of insect habitats on the biodiverse roofs. Morden Park.
Although the existing trees on-site would be removed (14 individual trees and one group of The primary north-south spine route for pedestrians and cyclists across the application site would trees), a minimum of 250 new trees would be introduced. be provided along the east of Soames Street, connecting with Sea Witch Lane to the north and Enderby Wharf to the south. Further pedestrian connections between Soames Street and the In addition, a section of the existing revetment within the River Thames would be removed to Thames Path would also be provided by a number of smaller internal pedestrian thoroughfares. create an intertidal planting terrace of 485 m2 to enhance the intertidal ecology. 6.8.2 Vehicular Access 6.7 Proposed Development Lighting Strategy Three vehicular access points off Tunnel Avenue would be delivered as follows, to separate the Outline and detailed lighting strategies have been development for the outline and detailed different types of traffic and minimise the volume of traffic along Sea Witch Lane: components of the proposed development respectively in accordance with relevant standards and guidance. x Morden Wharf Road: The existing two-way single carriageway would be for service and delivery vehicle access to the Southern Warehouse, including access to parking at SW4. The overall aim of the outline lighting strategy is to ensure that lighting is fit for purpose, suitable Vehicles would use the turning area at the end of Morden Wharf Road towards the north for the proposed development and sensitive to potential environmental, ecological and human elevation of SW1. sensitive receptors. The strategy would focus on the human scale, ground and near-ground x Sea Witch Lane: Would provide predominantly residential access. Vehicles and residents levels, in order to improve the sense of security and safety, as well as promoting pedestrian accessing the basement car park would turn left at Marsh Lane. A security point (comprising usage and night-time activity. bollards or controlled gate) would restrict vehicular access beyond this point on Sea Witch The detailed lighting strategy sets the key outdoor lighting approach for the following areas: Lane to taxi/car drop-off, buses, deliveries and emergency services. Vehicles would also turn left after W01 for servicing access to W01 and B01. x Morden Wharf Road: Lighting would be required for pedestrian and vehicular safety via a combination of column and wall mounted luminaires no greater than 8 m tall; x Warehouse (W01) Access: W01 would have a separate access point of Tunnel Avenue. The layout maintains flexibility to accommodate a range of vehicle and access requirements, x Sea Witch Lane: As the main access route, lighting strategy would consider lighting including for a full heavy goods vehicle (HGV) turning circle to ensure all vehicle would leave requirements for areas where pedestrian and vehicular traffic is mixed. Lighting would be the application site in a forward direction. provided by a combination of column and wall mounted luminaires (no greater than 8 m tall); x Morden Park Square: The lighting would be adaptable in terms of intensity, colour and 6.8.3 Emergency Access
texture to allow multiple opportunities for the events space during the hours of darkness. The Emergency vehicle access would be provided throughout the proposed development via the lighting would be intelligently controllable to ensure that functional task lighting levels are proposed internal road and thoroughfare network, as described above. All routes would comply implemented when no specific events are scheduled. Lighting would be provided by a with the minimum 3.7 m width for fire tender access. combination of column lighting (no greater than 8 m tall) and lighting integrated into architectural features; As agreed with the Environment Agency, a 10 m buffer zone between the river wall and proposed buildings would be maintained to ensure emergency repair works can be undertaken to river wall x Thames Path: Lighting would be required for safety and would be designed to ensure spill into if required. the River Thames is limited. Column luminaires would be no greater than 4 m tall; x Jetty: Lighting would be located on the outer edges of the jetty (at a height not exceeding 1 6.8.4 Building Access m) and would focus light inwards towards the centre of the jetty to minimise light spill into Access to and within each of the buildings for the proposed development would be delivered in the River Thames; and accordance with the appropriate design standards and guidance. Common elements of the access x Gloriana Boathouse: No exterior lighting would be provided. From dusk until dawn, lighting design (in respect of building entrances, vertical circulation and horizontal circulation) would be would be provided to the Gloriana boat itself to reduce light spill into River Thames. evident across the proposed development and would include disabled access (e.g. step free) to all residential buildings. 6.8 Proposed Development Access 6.8.5 Parking 6.8.1 Pedestrian and Cycle Access Cycle parking and storage would be provided according to the minimum rates for each land use Pedestrian and cycle access to the proposed development would be from Tunnel Avenue via a and would comprise a mixture of predominantly short stay cycle parking on-street and long-stay new pedestrian footpath and cycle path along Sea Witch Lane. Sea Witch Lane would be the residential cycle parking in the basement parking area and in the ground floors of the residential primary arrival route into the proposed development and would provide a new east-west link, blocks. connecting Tunnel Avenue to the Thames Path.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 40 41
The Mobility Hub would be located at the junction of Sea Witch Lane and Soames Street, 6.10.3Industrial comprising a key location for cycle and e-cycle hire and alternative means of transport. Sea Witch Pub and the office, toilets and reception areas of SW4 would be provided with Residential car parking spaces would be located within the basement, initially providing 353 heating/cooling via ASHPs located within plant rooms located at roof level and level 2 standard spaces but reducing over time to 300 to account for the conversion of up to 150 for respectively. Ventilation to Sea Witch Pub would be provided via AHUs located at roof level. disabled parking. Heating/cooling to the new warehouse (W01) would be provided via dedicated variable A ‘ratchet’ mechanism would then reduce the non-disabled parking provision over time, as the refrigerant flow systems (VRFs). proposed development moves from ‘car-lite’ to car free, ultimately leaving only disabled For areas defined as industrial use, each tenant would provide a dedicate ventilation system, with provision. intake and exhaust louvres located at roof level. Active charging facilities for electric or Ultra-Low Emission vehicles would be provided in at least 6.10.4Car Park 20 % of all car parking spaces. All remaining spaces would have passive provision for electric vehicles in the future. The basement car park would be mechanically ventilated.
An appropriate level of car parking would be provided for the warehouse, employment, retail and 6.11 Proposed Development Climate Change Resilience Measures food/beverage land uses, including appropriate levels of disabled provision and electric charging Climate change resilient and adaptation measures have been key considerations in the design facilities. evolution process. Accordingly, opportunities have been sought to future-proof the proposed 6.9 Proposed Development Deliveries and Servicing development against climate change; whilst at the same time, limiting the proposed development’s contribution to climate change. Accordingly, the following have been integrated 6.9.1 Deliveries and Servicing Management within the development proposals: Servicing and loading areas across the proposed development would be sized to accommodate all x Measures to reduce the risk of flooding through the construction of a new river wall as well deliveries, refuse collection and demands of residents moving-in/out during peak demand. sustainable drainage; Delivery and servicing for the residential and commercial uses of the proposed development x Measures to minimise water consumption, such as through the installation of water saving would take place using four dedicated loading areas along Marsh Lane, Soames Street and the devises in all residential properties; loading strips/zones access from Soames Street respectively. x Measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and overheating through energy efficient Delivery and servicing access would be provided separately for W01 and B01. design. Using the GLA’s methodology, the outline component of the proposed development would deliver a 44 % reduction of CO emissions when measured against a Building 6.9.2 Waste Management 2 Regulations 2013 Part L compliant scheme, which represents an annual saving of
An operational waste strategy is submitted with the planning application and provides information approximately 859 tonnes of CO2. This would include the provision of 416 m² of photo voltaic of the waste arisings and waste management provisions of the proposed development. panels. The remaining domestic regulated carbon emissions from the proposed development
The waste arisings for residential units are anticipated to be up to 202,400 litre (l) per week of are 892 tonnes / annum. Any applicable offset payment would be calculated £60/tonne of recycling, 166,100 l per week of residual waste, and 2,500 l per week of organics recycling. The CO2 for 30 years and a total of 26,760 tonnes may require an offset payment of £1.6 million. waste arisings of commercial units have been estimated at 122,177 l per week based on British A 41 % CO2 savings has been estimated for the detailed component, achieving the target of Standard methodologies, assuming a 50:50 split of waste between recycling and general waste. 35 % set for non-domestic elements; x Measures to minimise the generation of waste and to maximise re-use or recycling; 6.10 Proposed Development Plant and Ventilation x Sustainably sourcing and procurement of materials with lasting life spans; 6.10.1Residential x Protection of existing green infrastructure, including existing trees on the application site Heating to residential units would be provided via dedicated air source heat pumps (ASHPs) boundary; and situated on the roof area of each building. Heating to the residential units in T01-T04 would be x Delivery of biodiversity enhancement and green infrastructure, including green roofs. complemented by a common gas fired boiler plant located in the basement for peak winter loads. 6.12 Proposed Development Health and Wellbeing Measures Residential dwellings would be equipped with whole house Mechanical Ventilation Heat Recovery (MVHR) to extract air from the kitchen and bathroom(s) and to provide fresh air to the living Health and wellbeing have been key considerations in the design evolution process. In this areas and bedrooms. Purge ventilation would be provided through the use of openable windows regard, the proposed development has sought to promote and encourage healthier lifestyles as well as attenuated louvres. through the following measures:
6.10.2Commercial and Retail x Providing access to open space and amenity space; x Providing access to employment opportunities; The commercial and retail units would be heated/cooled and ventilated via standalone systems which would be provided by future tenants. Heating and cooling to the office units in B01 would x Providing housing in a rage of residential unit types and tenures; appropriately sized; energy be provided via dedicated ASHPs and air cooled chillers respectively. Ventilation to B01 would be efficient; warm and dry; provided via air handling units (AHUs) located at roof level. x Providing on-site community and retail uses; x Providing safe, accessible spaces;
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 42 43
x Providing cycle spaces and promoting walking; and 7. DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION WORKS x Avoiding exposure to excessive noise, light spill, overheating or poor air quality. 7.1 Overview 6.13 Proposed Development Operational Management Controls The demolition and construction works would be phased over approximately 111 months (9 The following would be implemented as part of the operational management of the proposed years). It is anticipated that works would commence in Q3 2021, with completion targeted for Q4 development: 2030.
x Travel Plan; 7.2 Construction Environmental Management Plan x Operational Management Plan; The framework presented in ES Chapter 5: Demolition and Construction Environmental x Deliveries and Servicing Management Plan; and Management would form the basis for a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and has been developed in tandem with the draft Demolition and Construction Logistics Plan x Flood Evacuation Management Plan. (DCLP), which accompanies the application as a standalone report. The framework has been Disaster management measures have been incorporated into the proposed development to prepared in accordance with standard best practice and regulatory requirements, including the respond to the following potential incidents: RBG’s on-line demolition and construction guidelines and codes of practice.
x Fire: All internal roads within the proposed development would be accessible by emergency The detailed CEMP would include a detailed CLP, Air Quality Dust Management Plan (AQDMP) and vehicles and all buildings have been designed to be compliant with relevant Fire Safety Law Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP). and Guidance. Design measures have also been incorporated into the Southern Warehouse It is envisaged that the CEMP would address as a minimum the following: and B01 with respect to the risk of fire associated with the Brenntag COMAH zones. x Flooding: All residential accommodation across the proposed development would be set x Roles and responsibilities; above the modelled ‘maximum likely flood level’ for breach of the river Thames defences x Control and management of construction wastes; (also taking into account climate changes). Surface water drainage systems would be sized to x Housekeeping procedures and environmental control measures relating to incidents, ecology, attenuate surface water run-off for storms up to the 1 in 100 year event (taking into account water, waste, noise, air quality, and contamination; climate change), including two surface water attenuation tanks located beneath SW4 and the x Details of any environmental monitoring proposed; yard space south of W01. x Details of prohibited or restricted operations (locations, hours etc); The Gloriana would be lifted in and out of the River Thames multiple times a year. Any licenses x Details of proposed routes for HGVs travelling to and from the application site; and and consents required for the operation of the Gloriana would be sought by the Gloriana Trustees, the current operators. x Details of works involving interference with a public highway, including temporary carriageway/footpath closures, realignment and diversions.
7.3 Community Liaison The Applicant would engage with and inform the local community and local stakeholders of particulate construction tasks and indicative timelines across the development programme.
7.4 Working Hours
Working hours would be as directed by the RBG. General site hours would therefore be:
x 08.00 to 18.00 Monday to Friday; and x 08.00 to 13.00 Saturday. There may be a specific need to work outside of these hours to manage certain noisy works and deliveries to limit impact on the local area. In these circumstances the contractor would liaise with all parties, including the RBG and local community groups and residents as applicable.
7.5 Potential Construction Environmental Effects
The main sources of potential environmental effects during demolition and construction of the proposed development have been identified as demolition and construction transport and associated noise and vehicle emissions; noise and vibration from machinery; and dust emissions. The evolving massing of the proposed development would also be a source of environmental effect, but in all cases it would be less than the effect associated with the completed development. Potential impacts have been identified and standard best practice mitigation measures have been incorporated into the development proposals to reduce the likelihood for significant environmental effects.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 44 45
8. WHAT ARE THE LIKELY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL x Post-medieval remains (AD 1485 – present), such as land reclamation/drainage ditches, of EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT low heritage significance; x 19th to 20th century remains of the industrial buildings which previously occupied the site, of 8.1 Socio-Economics low heritage significance; and
8.1.1 Demolition and Construction x Structural remains and isolated artefacts from any period within the alluvial deposits of the River Thames Foreshore, of low to medium heritage significance. The proposed development would generate approximately 2,458 jobs and an economic output of £230.1 million per year at the demolition and construction stage. For this reason, the proposed The potential for these resources to be present at the application site varies from low to high. development would have a beneficial effect on the receptors locally and within the borough, The proposed development, including demolition and construction works such as piling, basement which would be significant. and attenuation tank excavation and services installation, would truncate or remove entirely any 8.1.2 Completed Development archaeological remains within their footprint. The proposed development would result in significant effects in the absence of mitigation. The proposed development would deliver 1,500 dwellings across a range of tenures, which would help to meet the requirement for affordable housing in the borough. Accordingly, the proposed Archaeological mitigation work would be undertaken in accordance with an approved Written development would have a beneficial effect which would be significant. Scheme of Investigation (WSI) and would be carried out under the terms of a standard planning condition set out under the grant of planning consent. The mitigation strategy is likely to Based on a worst-case assessment, the job creation on-site would deliver a net minimum comprise archaeological excavation for remains of higher significance and a watching brief for increase of 265 jobs when compared to the existing baseline, and support a further 66 jobs in the remains of a lesser significance. supply chain and through the expenditure of employee wages. Such jobs would also give rise to additional local expenditure, estimated to be a net increase of £21.9 million per year in the The mitigation strategy would ensure that any archaeological (i.e. palaeoenvironmental, borough and £25.4 million per year in London. prehistoric or post-medieval) remains are not removed without record.
The 1,500 dwellings included in the proposed development alongside the new employment 8.2.2 Completed Development opportunities would offer existing residents with the opportunity to access a wider variety of Following completion of the proposed development, there would be no effects upon housing and opportunities to enter higher paying occupations or enter employment for the first archaeological assets apart from scour on the River Thames foreshore caused by a change in the time, thereby, helping to lower deprivation. Accordingly, the proposed development would have a fluvial regime as a result of the jetty extensions and new river walls. As the effect of scour is beneficial effect on deprivation in Peninsula Ward, which would be significant. uncertain, i.e. damage to assets is difficult to assess, it is proposed that the most appropriate In respect of demand on social infrastructure, the newly introduced, additional residents would mitigation would comprise a programme of monitoring of the foreshore, at low tide, by an put additional pressure on primary healthcare. There is currently no surplus capacity within the archaeological contractor experienced in foreshore archaeology at intervals during the initial six GP surgeries in the local area. Mitigation in the form of financial contributions secured through months of operation. This would provide a baseline understanding of the rate of erosion and CIL would aid in the provision of additional capacity within healthcare facilities. identify and record any archaeological remains exposed on the foreshore. This would be secured by a WSI approved in advance by RBG’s archaeological advisor. Child yield modelling reveals demand for 371 school places from the proposed development – 267 primary school places and 104 secondary school places. There is currently surplus capacity The effects on archaeological assets from the proposed development during demolition and locally and across the district at both primary and secondary school level which would construction and once the development is complete and operational would be adverse and accommodate the demand created by the proposed development. significant.
The proposed development would deliver 6,800 m2 of play space and 12,800 m2 of publicly 8.3 Marine Ecology accessible open space, including a new riverside park. The play space provision would meet the A Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the intertidal zone of the application site was conducted to policy requirements set out by the GLA. The proposed development would deliver open space to characterise the baseline ecological conditions. a site where none exists currently. 8.3.1 Demolition and Construction 8.2 Archaeology During demolition and construction, impacts on fish ecological and marine mammal receptors 8.2.1 Demolition and Construction would include noise and vibration and permanent habitat loss through pile installation and the The archaeological assets that may be affected by the proposed development comprise: creation of a floating pontoon, overshadowing from new structures and modification to existing habitat through repair and replacement of the river wall. x Palaeoenvironmental remains, such as preserved organic remains and evidence of the ancient landscape, of low to medium heritage significance; Impacts on bird assemblages would include noise and vibration, permanent habitat loss through pile installation, and collision risk by the addition of new structures and modification to existing x Prehistoric remains, such as land surfaces and occupation levels of low to medium heritage habitats through repair and replacement of sections of the river wall. significance; x Medieval remains (AD 410 – 1485), such as land reclamation/drainage ditches, of low Impacts to the organisms living on the riverbed (benthos) would include permanent habitat loss heritage significance; through pile installation, overshadowing by the addition of new structures (e.g. the floating pontoon, buildings and structures) and modification to existing habitats through repair and replacement of sections of the river wall.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 46 47
8.3.2 Completed Development junction of Tunnel Avenue, with the Blackwall Lane junction being the point from which trips would distribute on the wider highway network. Impacts to the fish ecology resulting from the completed proposed development would include permanent habitat loss through the presence of the structural piles for the jetty extension, The development net total vehicle generation is estimated to be only a small increase on this overshadowing by the presence of new structures (e.g. the floating pontoon, buildings and baseline junction load which is unlikely to cause adverse effects on the junction performance and structures) and modification to existing habitats through replacement of sections of the river wall therefore changes to driver delay are not anticipated. and the creation of the intertidal planting zone. The completed proposed development would not generate a significant amount of public Impacts to the marine mammals resulting from the completed proposed development are not transport passengers compared to the available capacity of the existing bus, rail or highway considered likely to occur. networks. In addition, it is noted that there may be opportunities for additional TfL bus routes being introduced either along Tunnel Avenue or directly into the application site (either as a Impacts to the estuarine bird assemblages would include permanent habitat loss through the terminating loop and/or as a through route to Enderby Wharf), subject to agreement with TfL. If presence of the structural piles for the jetty extension and collision risk by the presence of new such a service was added this would clearly add further local bus service capacity and route structures (e.g. the floating pontoon and riverside buildings) and modification to existing habitats options, thereby further ensuring sufficient bus capacity for the proposed development. through repair and replacement of sections of the river wall and the creation of the intertidal planting zone. No effects on estuarine birds would be significant as all effects would occur within The proposed development has been designed to provide a high quality, safe and permeable the barren intertidal zone that presents an area with little foraging opportunity. Furthermore, the pedestrian environment where vehicles are separated out of the public realm, providing a greater addition of floating pontoons may act as both high-water and low water roost sites, especially area of parkland with “car as guest”, where pedestrians have priority. The effect on severance during winter when the largest numbers of estuarine birds are likely to be present, and human would be beneficial and the effect on pedestrian and cyclist delay, amenity, fear and intimidation, disturbance is often much reduced. and accidents and safety would be significant beneficial.
Impacts to the benthos would include permanent habitat loss through the presence of the Minimal car parking would be provided with a ratchet mechanism to progressively reduce this structural piles for the jetty extension, overshadowing by the presence of new structures (e.g. over time, and sustainable modes of transport, such as cycling and car sharing schemes, would the floating pontoon, buildings and structures) and modification to existing habitats through be promoted. repair and replacement of sections of the river wall and the creation of the intertidal planting zone. 8.5 Air Quality A six-month air quality monitoring exercise was undertaken to inform the development proposals The proposed development, during demolition and construction and once completed and and the assessment. The scope of the survey was agreed with the RBG. operational, would give rise to adverse effects, but none would be significant. 8.5.1 Demolition and Construction 8.4 Transport and Accessibility During the demolition and construction works, there is the potential that emissions of dust arising Various transport surveys were undertaken, the scope of which was agreed during consultation from the application site could result in a loss of amenity at nearby existing residential and with the RBG and TfL. commercial properties. With the implementation of suitable mitigation measures and standard 8.4.1 Demolition and Construction industry best practice, which would be set out within the proposed development’s CEMP to be agreed with the RBG, it is anticipated that dust effects would be mitigated at existing receptors, A peak of 138 construction vehicle movements per day would to arise in the worst-case year such that significant effects would be avoided. (2025) of the development works. The highest average number of heavy-duty vehicles and the average light duty vehicles Modelling indicates that the predicted on and off-site vehicular activity during the demolition and generated during the demolition and construction works has been assessed. Emissions from this construction stage would not be of a significant level within the context of the existing traffic flow number of vehicles would result in temporary effects on local air quality. However, additional on the network and therefore would not have a significant effect on pedestrian and cyclist mitigation would be provided through measures set out in a CLP within the CEMP in order to severance, fear and intimidation, amenity, delay; driver delay and stress; pedestrian comfort; reduce these effects further. accidents and safety; and hazardous loads. While this level of effect is not significant, for surety the demolition and construction activity would be managed as part of the CLP to minimise the 8.5.2 Completed Development likelihood of adverse effects. The proposed development road traffic would not result in any effects. Public transport demand associated with the demolition and construction stage would not be At the new residential receptors introduced by the proposed development, air quality is predicted significant in comparison to available capacity and therefore would not have a significant effect to meet all relevant air quality objectives and therefore the proposed development would not on public transport network capacity. introduce new receptors into an area of poor air quality. 8.4.2 Completed Development Potential impacts on air quality from industrial activity associated with the continued use of the Trip generation modelling for the proposed development was based on a worst-case proposed safeguarded wharf site to the north of the proposed development has also been interpretation of the area schedule, i.e. those use classes with the highest trip generation rates. considered as part of the assessment. On the assumption that both existing and future operators would comply with standard industry best practice to manage and mitigate emissions of air For all vehicular trips, Tunnel Avenue would be the point of entry to / arrival from the local pollutants and dust, there are considered to be no potential significant effects. highway network. It is assumed that all traffic would travel between the application site and the
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 48 49
The proposed development would not be ‘air quality neutral’. It is noted that these results are do not exceed the stated noise criteria, whether through the application of noise control considered to be provisional and based on a worst-case approach and do not account for techniques or otherwise, no significant effects are predicted on existing and future NSRs within or embedded mitigation measures which would help to reduce transport emissions associated with around the proposed development. the proposed development. Furthermore the ‘air quality neutral’ assessment is a requirement of As such, no significant effects at existing noise sensitive receptors are anticipated as a result of regional policy and not the EIA Regulations. the completed development. Significant effects are anticipated in respect of the site suitability for It is recommended that potential energy impacts and likely air quality effects from the energy residential occupants in relation to external amenity noise levels and internal noise levels in the strategy and the ‘air quality neutral’ calculations are revised at the reserved matters stage, which event of overheating. As is standard practice, mitigation options would be explored at the would be secured by means of an appropriately worded planning condition. reserved matters stage.
Overall, there would be no significant air quality effects as a result of the proposed development. 8.7 Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Solar Glare
8.6 Noise and Vibration To assess the surrounding sensitive receptors, the BRE Report guidelines provide two main methods for assessing daylight: ‘Vertical Sky Component’ (VSC) and ‘Daylight Distribution’ (DD). Environmental noise surveys were undertaken at the application site in order to establish the The VSC method measures the amount of light available on the face of a window. The DD existing noise and vibration climate. Data obtained during the surveys was used as the basis for method is a measure of the distribution of daylight at the ‘working plane’ within a room. Where the noise modelling and predictions. The scope of the surveys was agreed with the RBG. all of the windows meet the VSC criteria and all of the rooms meet the DD criteria within a 8.6.1 Demolition and Construction residential property, the effect would not be noticeable to the occupants. In accordance with the Using industry available noise data for typical demolition and construction activities, predictions BRE Report, ‘Average Daylight Factor’ (ADF) was assessed to the approved cumulative scheme, were undertaken to provide an estimate of the potential noise emissions from the application site Enderby Place, and measured the average illuminance at working plane height within a habitable during the demolition and construction works at identified noise sensitive receptors (NSRs). room expressed as a percentage.
Taking into account the proposed mitigation measures that would be incorporated into the For the assessment of sunlight, the approach considered the ‘Annual Probable Sunlight Hours’ proposed development’s CEMP, temporary adverse demolition and construction noise effects (APSH) for a reference point on a window. Windows were tested if see if they are facing within would arise at NSRs. The effects would not be significant for the majority of existing NSRs, 90-degrees of due south, with the emphasis on main living rooms and other rooms such as the except for residential receptors at Enderby Wharf where there would be a temporary significant kitchen and bedrooms being of less importance. adverse effect. Those future occupants of the proposed development who move in while In the existing baseline conditions, 431 (43 %) of the 993 existing residential receptor windows construction works are ongoing, would also experience temporary significant adverse effects. assessed would comply with the VSC criteria and 417 (86 %) of the 483 rooms tested would
The effect of demolition and construction vibration and demolition and construction traffic flows comply with the DD criteria. In total, 133 (71 %) of the 188 windows orientated within 90- would not give rise to significant effects at NSRs. degrees of due south would meet the APSH criteria.
8.6.2 Completed Development In the future baseline conditions with the Enderby Place scheme assumed to be built out, daylight to the existing sensitive receptors would be restricted and 283 windows (28 %) would meet the A site suitability assessment was undertaken for the proposed development and a glazing scheme VSC criteria, 350 rooms (72 %) would meet the DD criteria and 130 windows (69 %) would meet developed on the basis that whole house ventilation would be adopted across all residential units. the APSH criteria. Of the 485 rooms assessed in Enderby Place, 415 (85 %) would comply with On the assumption that the glazing and ventilation schemes are secured by means of an the ADF criteria, 416 (86 %) would comply with the DD criteria and 58 windows (39 %) would appropriately worded planning condition, internal noise levels within the proposed development’s meet the APSH criteria. residential elements would be compliant with industry standard noise criteria. The baseline and future baseline assessment results demonstrate levels of daylight and sunlight In the event that residential units overheat in summer months, opening windows would result in amenity that are consistent with an urban environment although those rooms and windows with internal noise levels not being achieved. Mitigation measures would be explored during the a direct outlook over the site do benefit from unusually high levels of daylight amenity. reserved matters stage to inform the selection of the preferred mitigation option. In relation to the assessment of overshadowing, the transient overshadowing drawings show that External amenity noise levels across some areas of the proposed development would exceed the there would be limited shadowing to the River Thames and Thames Path in the existing baseline relevant guideline criteria and mitigation measures would need to be explored at the reserved conditions. The approved Enderby Place scheme would cast shadows between 8 am and 10 am matters stage in order to address this. Suitably quiet external amenity space would be provided on March 21st in the future baseline conditions. across other areas of the proposed development. In relation to the assessment of solar glare, the existing buildings within the site are Changes in road traffic flows on nearby links as a direct result of the proposed development, predominantly of brick construction and low rise. As such, there is limited opportunity for these would result in negligible changes in noise levels at existing NSRs along the road network. buildings to reflect sunlight and cause solar glare.
Operational noise from the industrial activities generated by the proposed development 8.7.1 Demolition and Construction associated with vehicle movements and vehicle idling would also result in negligible changes in noise levels at the nearest NSRs. The effects during demolition and construction would fluctuate throughout the demolition and construction programme but would gradually increase in magnitude as the massing of the Noise rating limits have been set for fixed items of building services plant associated with the proposed development increases. However, the overall effect on daylight and sunlight amenity, proposed development. Providing that the rating noise levels from such development components
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 50 51
overshadowing and solar glare would be no more than the effects identified for the completed accompany the reserved matters applications/discharge of planning conditions relating to development. materiality and articulation of the building facades. Based on professional judgement, it should be possible to design out all instances of disabling solar glare identified. 8.7.2 Completed Development
Daylight 8.8 Wind
Compared to the existing baseline conditions, 786 (79 %) of the 993 existing residential receptor The assessment of wind microclimate was undertaken by means of wind tunnel testing as shown windows assessed would comply with the VSC criteria and 467 (97 %) of the 483 rooms tested in Figure 8.1. would comply with the DD criteria. When compared against the future baseline conditions, which includes Enderby Place between the application site and the majority of sensitive receptors, 903 (91 %) of the windows assessed would meet the VSC criteria and 460 (95 %) of the rooms tested would meet the DD criteria.
In total, 234 (48 %) of the 485 rooms assessed in the future sensitive receptor, Enderby Place, would meet the ADF criteria and 300 (62 %) would meet the DD criteria.
Compared to the future baseline conditions, the analysis results have identified significant effects to Ossel Court, Enderby Wharf and the approved Enderby Place development. The effects to all other sensitive receptors would not be significant.
It is considered that the retained level of daylight amenity to all the neighbouring properties would be commensurate with occupier expectations in an urban environment and directly comparable with values seen elsewhere in developments across London and Greenwich.
Sunlight
All 188 of the windows assessed on existing buildings would meet the APSH criteria and therefore sunlight to these buildings would not be adversely affected.
The sunlight to one approved building, Block Z Enderby Place, would be significantly affected with 13 of the 30 windows orientated within 90-degrees of due south. All 30 windows would meet the guidelines for winter sunlight. The affected windows are orientated in a westerly direction.
The retained levels of sunlight are consistent with a high-density urban environment for the Figure 8.1: Proposed Development Wind Tunnel Model identified opportunity area. 8.8.1 Demolition and Construction Overshadowing During demolition and construction, the wind conditions at the application site would be expected The proposed development would cast shadows between 8 am and 11 am on March 21st and to gradually adjust from those at the existing application site to those of the proposed st st between 9 am and 10 am on December 21 and June 21 . After 11 am throughout the year, the development in the context of the existing surrounding buildings. As such, it would be expected River Thames and Thames Path would receive high levels of sunlight and would not be that wind conditions during the demolition and construction phase would be suitable for a overshadowed by the development. The shadows cast on the river and Thames Path would be working construction application site, or pedestrian thoroughfares around the application site constantly moving with the sun path and therefore the same section of river / path would not be (with hoarding in place) and no significant effects would be anticipated. affected for more than two to three hours at a time. No section would be in permanent shadow. 8.8.2 Completed Development Accordingly, the overshadowing effect of the proposed development would not be significant. With the introduction of the proposed development, the detailed extent of the application site Solar Glare would have wind conditions suitable for the intended use, with the exception of a designated The solar glare assessment shows that solar glare has the potential to occur at the ten key points seating location, which would require localised mitigation in the form of soft or hard landscaping identified around the proposed development. Of these instances, six points would present elements. Within the outline component of the proposed development, wind conditions would significant effects when compared to the existing baseline conditions and two when compared to range for from being suitable for the intended uses, such as thoroughfares, amenity spaces, and the future baseline conditions. entrances, to being up to two categories windier than suitable. Some locations across the outline extent of the proposed development would also exceed the 15 m/s threshold for more than 2.2 The assessment of the outline components has been conducted based on a worst-case scenario hours per year, which would be a potential safety concern for cyclists and more vulnerable using mirror façades. The assessment identifies when and where glare has the potential to occur pedestrians. but does not assess whether that glare would be disabling. There would be no potential for glare to occur from the facades of the detailed components of the proposed development. Given the outline nature of the proposals, and as is standard practice, during the detailed design, consideration would be given to the following mitigation measures which have been developed Mitigation will be required during the detailed design of the outline components to ensure that through further wind tunnel testing: disabling solar glare does not occur. It is envisaged that the further detailed analysis will
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 52 53
x Building form, scale and massing: Mitigation could be achieved by means of the articulation Demolition and Construction of the building scale, footprint and mass of the developments. The temporary effects of the demolition and construction works on townscape character, visual x Elevational treatment: Fins, canopies, balustrades, arcades, screens can be used on buildings amenity and the settings of built heritage assets would vary according to the nature of the to slow and redirect wind flow preventing vertical flow down the building reaching pedestrian construction works over the anticipated demolition and construction programme. Such effects areas at ground level. would be associated with the visual intrusion of large demolition and construction plant and x Recessed building entrances: Entrances can be recessed into buildings or built with screening machinery and the presence of partially completed built form of the proposed development. nearby to provide an area of shelter for building users entering and exiting the buildings. There would be an adverse effect on the visual settings of all heritage assets considered. This Pedestrians are particularly sensitive when leaving a controlled environment so a sheltered impact would be greatest for one heritage asset which is situated close to the application site, the region will allow time to acclimatise. Grade II Listed Enderby House; however, it is situated within the Enderby Wharf site and its x Screening: Screening in the form of sculptures which may be particularly useful to provide setting is already characterised by demolition and construction works. The impact on the settings pedestrian shelter at sensitive areas such as entrances and seating areas. Porous screens of other heritage assets is likely to be the visibility of cranes and the part-constructed tall parts of allow some wind to penetrate but disperse the wind energy, while solid screens can deflect the proposed development, seen within their wider setting. The aspects of the setting of the the wind by creating an area of high pressure. heritage assets which contribute to their significance would not be affected. The fabric of all x Landscaping: Landscaping provides shelter in a similar way to screening. Raised and lowered heritage assets considered would not be affected. Therefore, there would be no effect on heritage terrain features can provide shelter and reduce exposure to the wind and break up air flow. significance.
x Planting: Planting should be relatively dense for maximum impact otherwise benefits will be The demolition and construction works for the proposed development are likely to have a high relatively local. Semi-mature planting will provide some shelter from an early stage as the magnitude of impact on the Peninsula Industrial TCA because the application site occupies a plants gain maturity. Whilst deciduous plants offer maximum shelter in summer months, this substantial part of the TCA. Effects on other TCAs would be more distant, largely visual. None of is greatly reduced during windier winter months when the plant has shed its leaves. Trees the effects would be significant. and planting would provide localised shelter with greater mitigation to be expected from Adverse effects are likely to occur to visual amenity and close views in which the demolition and larger, well established trees. construction works would be dominant. It is likely that there would be a medium-high magnitude x Pergola Structures: Pergolas provide similar mitigation to planting and porous screening of impact on visual amenity close to the application site, that is due to the visibility of large-scale combining their effects. Pergolas can disrupt and slow airflow providing shelter. machinery and equipment required for the works and the visibility of part-constructed buildings. Wind tunnel testing would be secured by means of an appropriately worded planning condition These effects would be short-term and temporary and not significant. and undertaken at the detailed design stage to refine and demonstrate the effectiveness of these Completed Development measures. The results of this assessment would be used to inform the design of the public realm to ensure that proposed uses achieve the required wind conditions. Built Heritage
Based on professional judgement and experience, as well as wind tunnel testing of an illustrative There are no designated heritage assets on the application site. There is one heritage asset close wind mitigation strategy, significant adverse and unsafe effects identified within the assessment to the application site, the Grade II Listed Enderby House. The contrast in scale introduced by could be successfully mitigated. the massing in close relation to the 2 storey, 19th century Enderby House in the foreground would be balanced by the low quality of the existing context of the listed building and outweighed 8.9 Townscape, Heritage and Visual by the substantial improvement to the routes and landscape around it, and the high design Consideration of the proposed development’s effects on the existing townscape character, views quality of the proposed group of buildings, as specified in the outline parameters and Design and settings of built heritage assets have been an integral part of the design approach. The Code. The river outlook of Enderby House would be preserved. The special architectural and design of the proposed development has been adapted and modified throughout the design historic interest of Enderby House would be unaffected. process to take account of likely townscape and visual and built heritage constraints and The other listed buildings within the study area are situated further away from the application opportunities. Through iterative design development and visual impact testing, potentially site than Enderby House. Parts of the proposed development may be seen within their wider adverse effects have been identified and removed or mitigated through design development. As settings; however, parts of the existing visual setting of all heritage assets considered include such, there would be no adverse effects. modern urban development. No key views or other aspects of significance particular to each The visual assessment has considered the likely effects of the proposed development on one listed building would be adversely affected. The special interest of the buildings would be designated view and 35 selected district and local views (including 1 night view) around the preserved. application site. The townscape assessment considered potential effects on six townscape In respect of the conservation areas there would be views of the taller parts of the proposed character areas (TCAs) within 1 km of the application site. The built heritage assessment development from the river front and along streets aligned with the application site in the East considered potential effects on the heritage significance of listed and locally listed structures Greenwich Conservation Area. The proposed development would also be seen from with the river within 500 m of the application site and three conservation areas within 1 km of the application front of the Island Gardens Conservation Area and Coldharbour Conservation Area, both situated site, and potential effects on the outstanding universal value’ (OUV) of the Maritime Greenwich on the Isle of Dogs. Tall modern development on the Isle of Dogs and on Greenwich Peninsula is WHS. already visible from parts of these conservation areas. The particular special character and appearance of the streets and spaces within these conservation areas is unlikely to change as a result of this consolidation of the urban character of their wider setting.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 54 55
The Maritime Greenwich WHS is situated just over 1 km form the application site. The proposed Effects on all views are judged to be beneficial or neutral in nature. That is due to the high development would have limited visibility within the Maritime Greenwich WHS and would mainly quality design of the proposed development, the massing of which has been considered in be seen from within parts of Greenwich Park and in views along the river. Where visible, the relation to the views throughout the design process. No key views of heritage assets or other proposed development would be understood within the existing urban setting of the WHS and landmarks would be obstructed. The proposed development would be seen in the context of other would clearly be a secondary form on the skyline. The buildings and spaces within the WHS modern, urban-scaled development on the skyline. Of the 37 views assessed, 16 would see would continue to dominate views experienced within the WHS. The ‘outstanding universal value’ significant beneficial changes. Verified views of the proposed developments are shown in Figure of the WHS – the exceptional architecture of its key buildings, its significant historic importance 8.2 - 8.5, with the proposed development shown in blue wireline and cumulative schemes in in human history and its particular interest in the development of navigation and also global orange wireline. trading links - would remain fully appreciable and would be preserved.
Townscape
In respect of the six TCAs, there would be a significant beneficial effect on the Peninsula
Industrial character area. The proposed development would introduce a scale of development and residential uses which would transform the character of the application site and this townscape character area, as has occurred elsewhere on the Peninsula. There would be a new riverside path and routes connecting to it through soft and hard landscaped spaces around the
new buildings. In addition to the new residential neighbourhood, there would be a consolidation
of the industrial character of the application site, through the retention of the Southern Warehouse and construction of new warehouse buildings. In this manner, the industrial heritage of the character area, which has evidential value and interest, would be maintained through a
close co-existence of industrial and residential uses and building typologies which is particular to the history of development on the Greenwich Peninsula.
The proposed development would complement but not alter the character of townscape in the Peninsula Residential townscape character area. The improved connections and landscaped
spaces on the application site would result in a low level of impact on this townscape character
area. There would be a negligible-low effect on townscape character areas in the wider area,
where the upper parts of the proposed development would be visible.
Visual Amenity Figure 8.2: Greenwich Park General Wolf Statue View In distant views, the upper parts of the proposed development would be visible. They would be little noticed in most views over 1 km away from the application site, due to the distance and the visibility of existing tall buildings at Canary Wharf and on the Greenwich Peninsula within the same views. In distant views seen by visitors to the Greenwich Park in the WHS, the proposed development would be closer to the WHS than other existing tall buildings but would have a similar degree of visibility in the views as the Canary Wharf cluster due to the lower heights of the proposed buildings. The proposed development would be seen and understood within the existing wider urban context of the WHS in these views.
In local river prospects, enjoyed by tourists, residents and workers alike, the proposed development would be more clearly visible, and the different building heights and profiles would have a positive layered character, with an overall cascading skyline which would flow down from the tallest, landmark point to the retained and new low-lying industrial structures to the north. The presently fragmented character of the river frontage on the application site would be transformed with well-composed buildings set within landscaped spaces. Views across and along the river would be enhanced.
In views from within the townscape of the Peninsula, the upper parts of the proposed development would have a close, mounded profile on the skyline, comprised of slender tall buildings with spaces visible in between adding depth and interest to the group. The substantial redevelopment of the application site and the new routes to the riverfront and new public landscape spaces would be clearly and positively marked within the local townscape and to the residents and workers there. Figure 8.3: Royal Navy College View
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 56 57
9. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
9.1 Intra-Project Cumulative Effects
Intra-project cumulative effects from the proposed development itself on surrounding sensitive receptors and on-site receptors during the demolition and construction works and also once the proposed development is completed, have been considered.
9.2 Demolition and Construction
There would be the potential for intra-project effect interactions during the demolition and construction stage, primarily in respect of noise, vibration, air quality and transport, as well as socio-economics, daylight, sunlight, overshadowing and solar glare. The combined cumulative effects have the potential to affect existing off-site residential occupants and future commercial occupants.
It is generally accepted that as part of any construction works, receptors in close proximity would be affected to some degree by a combination of noise and dust disturbance. However, by minimising all of these effects at source through application of control measures in the CEMP; maintaining good housekeeping; undertaking monitoring where necessary; requiring just-in-time deliveries; and providing a public liaison whereby the public can communicate any complaints or unforeseen effects to the Applicant, it is expected that those combined effects that include noise and or air quality impacts would not be significant.
Figure 8.4: Blackwall Entrance Pier View 9.3 Completed Development
There would be the potential for intra-project effect interactions during the completed development stage, primarily in respect of socio-economics, daylight, sunlight and overshadowing, air quality, wind microclimate and transport. Beneficial effects would arise in respect of housing, employment opportunities and improved pedestrian and cycling environment to existing off-site and future on-site residential receptors. Adverse effects would arise in respect of reduction of daylight, creation of solar glare, dust and particulate emissions due to industrial activities, and unsuitable wind conditions to on-site thoroughfares, building entrances, and amenity spaces. However, in respect of the adverse effects relating to solar glare and wind conditions, it is noted that the effects relate to the outline component only and are therefore based on a worst-case assessment and would be expected to be appropriately mitigated at the detailed design stage such that adverse effects would be avoided.
The proposed development, when complete, would lead to intra-project cumulative effects on receptors that would be both beneficial and adverse. The combination of individual effects on a receptor or receptor group would not lead to new significant effects.
9.4 Inter-Project Effects
Nine cumulative schemes were identified for the purpose of the inter-project cumulative impact assessment. The location of the schemes is shown in Figure 9.1. The schemes were agreed with the RBG during the EIA Scoping Process, as follows: x Enderby Wharf including Enderby Wharf North (Enderby Place);
Figure 8.5: Chrischurch Way, East Greenwich Conservation Area View x Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan 2015; x Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan 2019 (to revise part of Masterplan 2015); x Plot 201; x Greenwich Millennium Village; x Silvertown Tunnel; x Victoria Deep Water Terminal; and x 1 Boord St, Travelodge Hotel.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF MORDEN WHARF 58 59
10. SUMMARY
The iterative nature of the design process has enabled the design of an appropriate development response at the application site. Overall, the proposed development would deliver a high quality residential led, mixed-use scheme that fits into the existing and emerging surrounding area.
The EIA process has concluded that there would be following significant environmental effects for the demolition and construction stage:
x Significant adverse effects: Truncation/removal of archaeological remains; Piling within any archaeological remains of the River Thames foreshore; and Noise for sensitive receptors of the Enderby Wharf development and for early occupants of the proposed development. x Significant beneficial effects: x Additional employment and GVA; and x Employment opportunities.
For the completed development stage there would be the following:
x significant adverse effects: Scour/damage to archaeological assets within the River Thames;
Site suitability of external amenity noise levels and internal noise levels in the event of Figure 9.1: Location of Cumulative Schemes overheating of residential units; Consistent with the effects of the proposed development, the cumulative schemes would deliver Daylight losses to sensitive receptors at Ossel Court, Enderby Wharf and Enderby Wharf high quality new housing, generate employment and have a beneficial effect on the local North; economy through additional spending. Inter-cumulative daylight losses to sensitive receptors at More Lodge, Loop Court, Trefoil The cumulative schemes would deliver high quality design and public realm improvements. The House, Ossel Court, Distel Apartments, and Lariat Apartments; schemes would seek to promote more sustainable modes of transport (with the majority being Sunlight losses to Block Z of Enderby Place; car free) and would be expected to make appropriate financial contributions towards community infrastructure, public transport capacity and highway works as necessary. Potential for solar glare on six views in the existing baseline and two views in the future baseline; The cumulative schemes would contribute to the ongoing high-rise redevelopment of the study Wind conditions at potential entrances, amenity spaces and thoroughfares; area and thereby significantly add to the changing townscape character and local views. x significant beneficial effects: During demolition and construction, significant adverse cumulative noise effects would be Additional employment and GVA; experienced by residential receptors at Enderby Wharf development. These effects would be temporary Housing delivery; Reduction in deprivation; Upon completion, significant adverse cumulative daylight amenity effects would be experienced s at More Lodge, Loop Court, Trefoil House, Ossel Court, Distel Apartments and Lariat Apartments. Change in pedestrian severance, delay, amenity, fear and intimidation; Change in accidents and safety; With the inclusion of the cumulative surrounding buildings, the wind conditions would improve to the south of the proposed development as the cumulative schemes (particularly Enderby Wharf Change in public transport capacity; North) would provide shelter against the prevailing wind conditions. A safety exceedance would Improvements to local townscape; occur at one off-site location; however, it is noted that the landscape scheme within Enderby Improvements to local river views and views on the peninsula; Wharf was not modelled/considered and this is expected to eliminate the safety condition. Inter-cumulative improvements to townscape and views. No significant cumulative archaeology, ecological, air quality, sunlight, or overshadowing effects The EIA process has identified the following enhancement measures: would arise as a result of the proposed development and the cumulative schemes due to a combination of distance and timing of proposed works. x Intertidal planting within the River Thames
Overall the EIA concludes that the inter-project cumulative effects would give rise to new The EIA process has identified the need for the following additional mitigation measures: significant environmental effects, over and above those reported for the proposed development, x CIL contributions towards primary healthcare provisioning; in respect of noise during the demolition and construction stage, as well as townscape, views and x The implementation of a targeted Archaeological Mitigation Strategy; and daylight amenity during the completed development stage.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY MORDEN WHARF 60
x Acoustic mitigation measures to be adopted during the proposed development's demolition and construction works: Hydraulic cutters, breakers and piling rigs screened with an acoustic tent, such as echo barrier acoustic tent, to provide a 10dB reduction across all of the construction stages. Handheld breakers and scabblers screened with a moveable barrier, to provide a 5dB reduction across all of the construction stages.
During the reserved matters stage further design and assessment will be undertaken in respect of solar glare, external and internal amenity noise levels, as well as wind microclimate to ensure appropriate mitigation options are integrated within the detailed proposals.
R1620000199_2_Morden Wharf Non Technical Summary