ddr design development report main report

8/3/2019 DDR Design Development Report Main Report

1/46

Thames Tunnel

Design development report


2/46

Phase two consultation documentation

Project informationpapers

Build

Changes

Consultation

Design

Environment

Funding

Managingconstruction

Odour

Options

Overow

Regulatoryframework

Routeandtunnelalignment

Routetoconsent

Settlement

Siteselection

Timing Transport

Technical documents

Airmanagementplan

Bookofplans

CodeofconstructionpracticePartA:Generalrequirements

Consultationstrategyandstatementofcommunityconsultation


Draftwastestrategy

Interimengagementreport

NeedsReport Phasetwoschemedevelopmentreport

Preliminaryenvironmentalinformationreport

Reportonphaseoneconsultation

Siteselectionbackgroundtechnicalpaper

Siteselectionmethodologypaper

Site information papers AbbeyMillsPumpingStation

ActonStormTanks

AlbertEmbankmentForeshore

BarnElms

BecktonSewageTreatmentWorks

BekesbourneStreet

BlackfriarsBridgeForeshore

CarnwarthRoadRiverside

ChambersWharf

ChelseaEmbankmentForeshore

CremorneWharfDepot

DeptfordChrurchStreet

DormayStreet EarlPumpingStation

FalconbrookPumpingStation

GreenwichPumpingStation

HammersmithPumpingStation

HeathwallPumpingStation

JewsRow

KingEdwardMemorialParkForehore

KingGeorgesPark

KirtlingStreet

Otherworks

PutneyBridgeForeshore

ShadThamesPumpingStation

VictoriaEmbankment

Foreshore

General

Yourguidetophasetwoconsultation

WhydoesLondonneedtheThamesTunnel?

Feedbackform

Equalitiesform

Customeroverviewleaet


3/46

Design development report i

Thames Tunnel


List of contents

Page number

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 11.1 Purpose of this report .............................................................................. 11.2 Report structure ....................................................................................... 2

2 The Thames Tunnel project ............................................................................. 32.1 Background to the project ........................................................................ 32.2 Summary description of the project ......................................................... 32.3 Main tunnel route ..................................................................................... 42.4 Main and connection tunnels ................................................................... 42.5 Site types ................................................................................................. 42.6 Stages and timing of the project .............................................................. 5

3 Design process ................................................................................................ 83.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 83.2 The need for good design ...................................................................... 103.3 How we will achieve good design .......................................................... 103.4 Design review ........................................................................................ 113.5 Ongoing design development ................................................................ 123.6 National and regional policy review ....................................................... 123.7 Environmental assessment .................................................................... 153.8 Operational and functional requirements ............................................... 163.9 Common design principles .................................................................... 173.10 Scheme-wide application of common design principles ........................ 193.11 Design development post phase two consultation ................................. 30

Glossary .................................................................................................................. 33Appendices ............................................................................................................. 41


4/46

Design development report ii

List of figures

Page number

Figure 2.1 Thames Tunnel project preferred route (Abbey Mills) ............................... 6Figure 2.2 Phase two preferred scheme .................................................................... 7Figure 3.1 Construction of Victoria Embankment adjacent to Temple Gardens ...... 20Figure 3.2 Original ventilation column located on the Chelsea Embankment .......... 21Figure 3.3 Diagram illustrating comparison of ventilation columns between phase

one and phase two consultation .............................................................. 22Figure 3.4 Diagram showing three sizes of ventilation column in the family ............ 23Figure 3.5 Computational fluid dynamics modelling showing water running down a

vortex drop in a shaft, a Victorian sturgeon lamp standard and cornucopialamp standard .......................................................................................... 24

Figure 3.6 Photograph of a cast metal penstock ..................................................... 25Figure 3.7 Illustration of a Type A column ............................................................... 25Figure 3.8 Illustration of a pair of type B columns .................................................... 26Figure 3.9 Illustration of three Type C columns ....................................................... 27Figure 3.10 Illustration of Victoria showing inscribed horizontal lines ...................... 29Figure 3.11 Examples of access cover designs ....................................................... 30

List of tables

Page number

Table 3.1 Structure of Section 3 ................................................................................ 9


5/46

Design development report iii

List of abbreviations

CABE Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (now DesignCouncil CABE)

CSO combined sewer overflow

DM development management

DPD development plan document

EU European Union

HGVs heavy goods vehicles

IPC Infrastructure Planning Commission

LDF local development framework

LPA local planning authorityMOL Metropolitan Open Land

NPS draft National Policy Statement on Waste Water

NSIP Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project

PPG planning policy guidance

PPS planning policy statement

SIS Secret Intelligence Service

SINC Site of Importance for Nature Conservation

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

sqm square metres

STW sewage treatment works

SUDS sustainable urban drainage system

UDP unitary development plan

UWWTD European Union Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive

UWWTR Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations


6/46

Design development report iv


7/46

1 Introduction

Design development report Page 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this report

1.1.1 This Design development reportdescribes the process behind the

development of the proposed designs of the permanent above-groundelements of the Thames Tunnel project as well as how these newelements would be integrated into their surrounding environment. Theabove-ground elements include ventilation structures or columns,ventilation buildings, electrical and control kiosks and potential new publicspace, footpaths and landscaping.

1.1.2 We held our first phase of consultation on the need for the Thames Tunnelproject, our preferred route and preferred sites from September 2010 toJanuary 2011. We are now undertaking our phase two consultation on ourproposals for the Thames Tunnel project.

1.1.3 Since phase one consultation we have reviewed consultation feedback,undertaken further detailed engineering work and had regard to relevantchanges in circumstances at specific sites. As a consequence, the phasetwo preferred scheme contains a number of changes to that presented atphase one consultation in terms of preferred sites. The Phase twoscheme development reportdetails how these preferred sites wereselected and provides an overview of general design changes. ThisDesign development reportprovides a more detailed description of theevolution of the design since phase one consultation for all the preferredsites and relevant other works sites as presented in phase twoconsultation.

1.1.4 The Design development reportforms part of a suite of documents whichhave been prepared for phase two consultation. A guide to phase twoconsultationhas been prepared which summarises all of the availableinformation and directs stakeholders to the information which is of mostrelevance to them. All documents can be found on the Thames Tunnelproject consultation website: www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk.

1.1.5 In relation to design matters particularly there are three key documents:

a. Design development report this report sets out the design processin detail and our design proposals for each of the preferred sites and

other minor works sites needed for the project.b. Project information papers which deal with project-wide matters

and other titles include Site selection, Build (how the tunnel is builtand other matters), Route to consent, Odour, Transport andTiming.

c. Site information papers these will be produced for each preferredsite and will describe the site location, why the site is needed, ourproposed construction works, environmental issues and broadmitigation, a description of permanent works including access andlandscaping with visualisations.


8/46

1 Introduction


1.2 Report structure

1.2.1 The Design development reportis divided into the following sections:

a. Section 2: The Thames Tunnel project provides a description of themain features of the scheme.

b. Section 3: Design process explains the design approach and thekey design principles which have been applied across the wholescheme. Also, it explains the next steps of the design developmentprocess following phase two consultation and how the design andaccess statement will be prepared for submission as part of theapplication.

c. Appendices AX: Design development by site describes how theproposed design of permanent structures at each preferred site hasevolved. This has been arranged under the following headings thatcorrespond closely with the Design Council CABE (Commission for

Architecture and the Built Environment) good practice guidance(www.cabe.org.uk/publications/design-and-access-statements) andDepartment for Communities and Local Government Circular 01/06:

i Location (local siting considerations; for the broader locationconsiderations please refer to the Phase two scheme developmentreport)

ii Use (the functional requirements where specific to the site, andany public or other use proposed for the permanent site)

iii Amount, layout and scale (the size of the development and its

arrangement)iv Landscaping and appearance (the look and visual impression of

above-ground works)

v Access and movement (how the public or other users such asour occasional maintenance vehicles will be able to use the siteand how we are designing the site to be accessible to all).

d. Appendix Y: Other works provides a description of the design ofother works to be undertaken.


9/46

2 The Thames Tunnel project



2.1 Background to the project

2.1.1 Londons sewer system was designed in the 1800s to handle wastewaterand runoff rainwater through a combined collecting system. Combinedsewer overflows (CSOs) were incorporated into the sewer system as reliefstructures to prevent flooding caused by sewer overloading, especiallyduring periods of heavy rainfall.

2.1.2 The capacities originally allowed for in the interceptor and combined sewersystems designed by Sir Joseph Bazalgette in the 1850s andsubsequently extended, have now been substantially exceeded. Thisresults in frequent and substantial discharges into the River Thames.Currently, overflows from the sewers to the Thames Tideway (being thetidal reaches of the River Thames) occur more than 50 times per year atthe most frequently overflowing CSOs.

2.1.3 There is a need to reduce these incidents in order to comply with the EUUrban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD) and the related UKUrban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (UWWTR), and for ThamesWater to implement the UK Governments request for solution.

2.1.4 The Thames Tunnel project, in conjunction with the Lee Tunnel andupgrades to Londons sewage treatment works (STW), has beendetermined (by independent studies and confirmed by Thames Water) tobe the best technological solution and most cost-effective means to dealwith the discharges and to meet the regulatory requirements.

2.2 Summary description of the project2.2.1 The Thames Tunnel project is a linear infrastructure scheme whose

primary objective is to capture discharges from 34 of the mostunsatisfactory CSOs into the River Thames, in order to meet EuropeanUnion (EU) and United Kingdom (UK) Government legal requirements.

2.2.2 The combined sewage (which is sewage combined with rainwater) thatcurrently flows directly into the River Thames from CSOs would becaptured and stored in the main tunnel and connection tunnels. The flowswould then be transported along the tunnel, from west London to AbbeyMills in east London. The Lee Tunnel would then transfer flows to Beckton

STW, where it would be treated when capacity exists.

2.2.3 The preferred route of the main tunnel would be approximately 25km longand would pass under the administrative areas of 14 London localauthorities in order to intercept the identified CSOs.

2.2.4 To determine the preferred scheme, a site selection process has beenundertaken, using a methodology which was adopted after consultation onthe proposed methods with the relevant local authorities and pan-Londonstakeholders. The Site selection methodology paperdescribes this indetail and is available on the Thames Tunnel project consultation website:www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk.


10/46



2.3 Main tunnel route

2.3.1 In broad terms the main tunnel route starts in west London and generallyfollows the route of the River Thames eastwards, intercepting those CSOsidentified for interception and ensuring flows can be transferred to theconnection with the Lee Tunnel at Abbey Mills, and onwards to BecktonSTW. A range of routes have been considered for the main tunnel, andthree routes were put forward at the phase one consultation stage. Thesewere the River Thames route, the Rotherhithe route, and the Abbey Millsroute (see Figure 2.1). In all options considered, the horizontal alignmentof the main tunnel generally followed the River Thames where possible.

2.3.2 The Abbey Mills route was identified as the preferred route at the phaseone consultation stage. The Report on phase one consultation(seewww.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk) details the feedback received andconcluded that the Abbey Mills route remains the preferred route.Therefore only the Abbey Mills route was taken forward for further scheme

development, and this is the preferred route proposed for phase twoconsultation.

2.3.3 The alignment of this route follows the River Thames between westLondon and Rotherhithe, but then moves away from the River Thamesfollowing the Limehouse cut north-eastwards to terminate at Abbey MillsPumping Station. This reduces the length of the main tunnel byapproximately 9km as compared to the two alternative routes previouslyconsidered.

2.4 Main and connection tunnels

2.4.1 The internal diameter of the majority of the main tunnel is up to 7.2m,while the western end (to Acton) would be up to 6.5m. A range ofconnection tunnels would also be required to join the CSOs to the maintunnel. The longest connector tunnel from Greenwich Pumping Station toChambers Wharf is proposed to be up to 5m in diameter.

2.4.2 The depth of the main tunnel would be between approximately 30m inwest London and up to 70m at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. Theconnection tunnels are expected to be shallower.

2.5 Site types

2.5.1 Two main categories of sites are required to construct and operate theThames Tunnel project:

a. The works for interception and control at existing CSOs andconnection to the main tunnel would require a series of sites (CSOsites).

b. A series of sites are required for the construction and operation of themain tunnel (main tunnel sites).

2.5.2 Each CSO site must accommodate the permanent structures required forthe operation and control of the CSO and, on a temporary basis, theconstruction equipment and activities required to create the CSOinterception and control facilities.


11/46



2.5.3 Main tunnel sites are needed as the start or end point for a tunnel boringmachine (TBM), which would build the main tunnel. A series of maintunnel construction sites are required to allow the TBMs to start thetunnelling, and to be taken out when digging is complete.

2.5.4 The locations of preferred CSO sites and main tunnel sites at phase twoconsultation stage are indicated in Figure 2.2.

2.5.5 Other works are also needed to make modifications to the existing sewersystem, including modifications to Beckton STW.

2.6 Stages and timing of the project

2.6.1 The project is subject to many external influences, notably the outcome ofpublic consultations and the planning process, but also governmentdirection, regulatory approval and funding will dictate the pace of anyimplementation.

2.6.2 The main development and implementation steps required for the projectto be delivered are all linked together and include:

a. design

b. planning and consenting

c. communication and consultation

d. field investigations

e. land acquisition

f. procurement

g. enabling worksh. construction

i. commissioning

j. operation.


12/46



Figure 2.1 Thames Tunnel project preferred route (Abbey Mills)


13/46



Figure 2.2 Phase two preferred scheme


14/46

3 Design process


3 Design process

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 This Design development reportdescribes the process behind thedevelopment of the proposed designs of the permanent above-groundelements of the Thames Tunnel project as well as how these newelements would be integrated into their surrounding environment. Theabove-ground elements include ventilation structures or columns,ventilation buildings, electrical and control kiosks and potential new publicspace, footpaths and landscaping.

3.1.2 In phase one consultation we presented our initial, generic designs acrossall of our sites for the above-ground structures to gain feedback to informdesign development. In terms of permanent design, we consulted oninitial ideas on the above-ground permanent look and use of each siteafter all construction work is complete.

3.1.3 In phase one consultation, we set out the background to the ThamesTunnel project and the need, the early feasibility work, and the alternativesconsidered. We consulted upon the conclusions of our work up toSeptember 2010 on the route and main alternative routes, preferred sitesand the main alternative sites, as well as on information regardingengineering, environment, community, planning and property issues thathad been identified during the site selection work.

3.1.4 Since then we have taken into account the consultation feedback, carriedout further technical work and have been engaging with the relevant localauthorities and pan-London stakeholders, such as the Port of London

Authority, Environment Agency and English Heritage, for guidance on thedesigns presented at phase two consultation. The designs we arepresenting for phase two consultation are site-specific, taking account oflocal context, although we are examining the possibility that somecommon elements or themes may be carried across the sites.

3.1.5 The size and functional requirements of the above-ground structures havechanged since phase one consultation, particularly in respect of ourrevised strategy for how the tunnels are ventilated. This revised strategymeans we need fewer large ventilation buildings and the ventilationcolumns do not need to be as tall. Please refer to the project information

paper Odourand the Air management planfor more details.


15/46

3 Design process


3.1.6 This section sets out the following:

Table 3.1 Structure of Section 3

Section Detail

Section 3.2 The need for gooddesign

This section describes the need forgood design in policy terms andconsiders different strategies,including a description of theselected strategy.

Section 3.3 Design reviewandSection 3.4 Ongoing designdevelopment

These sections explain the designprocess and reviews, as well asongoing design development andthe iterative nature of design

development.Section 3.5 National and regionalpolicy

Describes a summary of nationaland regional policy relating todesign matters that are applicableto the project.

Section 3.6 Environmentassessment work

Explains the role that the ongoingenvironment assessment work hashad on design development.

Section 3.7 Operational andfunctional requirements

Describes the operational andfunctional requirements that the

design must respond to.

Section 3.8 Common designprinciples

Outlines the common designprinciples that the project has beenusing for design development.

Section 3.9 Scheme-wideapplication of the common designprinciples

Elaborates on the scheme-wideapplication of the common designprinciples of the statement ofarchitecture and landscape design(refer to the project informationpaper, Design, and Section 3.8 ofthis report) and explains how thedesign of the above-groundstructures have developed torespond to it.

Section 3.10Design developmentprocess

Explains the design developmentprocess post phase twoconsultation and how the designand access statement would beprepared for submission as part ofthe application.


16/46

3 Design process


3.2 The need for good design

3.2.1 Developing good design, including good urban design, is an essentialcomponent of the Thames Tunnel project and a requirement of planningpolicy. We have taken into account the policies of the draft National PolicyStatement on Waste Water(NPS) (Sections 3.7.3 and 3.6.3 of thisdocument), which advocates a good quality of design in all areas. Thedraft NPS acknowledges that the aim should be for good aesthetic andfunctional design, although the nature of wastewater infrastructure maylimit the degree of contribution to enhancing the quality of an area. TheThames Tunnel project must also take account of regional planning policycontained in the London Plan 2011 and all relevant and extant localplanning policy contained in the extant unitary development plan (UDP)and local development framework (LDF) documents. These documentsset out the policies that the local planning authorities (LPAs) considerdevelopment proposals against, and which the Infrastructure Planning

Commission (IPC), or its successor, will consider in its decision making.Refer to the project information paper, Route to consentregarding theconsent process, and the IPC. The relevant national and regional policy isdescribed in Section 3.6.

3.3 How we will achieve good design

3.3.1 The design team appointed to the project consists of engineers, architectsand landscape architects. Our architects and landscape architects havebeen working closely with the engineering, planning and environmentteams and with local authorities and our other pan-London stakeholders todevelop the designs for our proposed sites and ensure that the

above-ground structures, buildings, walls and landscaping areappropriately designed to suit their environment and context.

3.3.2 The project has considered various strategies to achieving good design:

a. Continual engagement with local authorities and our pan-Londonstakeholders

b. Selection through a competitive tendering and interview process, of aproject architect to work in a co-located project office with engineering,environmental, property, communications and planning disciplines

c. Design competition for selected key buildings and continual

engagement with local authorities and our pan-London stakeholders

d. Independent and transparent design review process.

3.3.3 Prior to phase one consultation, an appropriately qualified andexperienced project architect was selected to work as part of an integratedproject team on the development of pre-application designs. As part ofongoing engagement and the formal public consultation process, feedbackfrom local community groups, land owners and the public on the proposeddesigns has been received and considered.

3.3.4 After phase one consultation, a design competition for the design of

selected elements of the proposed Thames Tunnel project wasconsidered. However, based on the feedback we have received from the


17/46

3 Design process


local authorities and our own considerations, we decided that a designcompetition was not the best option to ensuring good design at this stage.As a result, we decided to undertake a design review of our proposals.

3.3.5 As part of phase two consultation, we are presenting architectural andlandscaping designs for our preferred sites, which have benefitted fromthis design review process. The consultation process will seek to obtainfeedback on these designs, which can then be assessed and fed intofurther design development.

3.4 Design review

3.4.1 Between phase one consultation and phase two consultation, we havecontinued to engage with all the affected LPAs and our pan-Londonstakeholders in order to take account of local constraints andopportunities, and to develop good design. We believe that by ensuringcontinuous engagement and building good working relationships, we can

bring about a transparent design process for affected parties to feed intoand influence the design.

3.4.2 In addition to continually engaging with LPAs and key stakeholders, it wasagreed that the project would benefit from an independent and transparentreview of our designs. The use of design reviews is supported in nationalplanning policy, including paragraph 120 of the draft National PlanningPolicy Framework. Consequently, we commissioned a series of designreviews hosted and chaired by the Design Council CABE.

3.4.3 The Design Council CABE (Commission for Architecture and the BuiltEnvironment) was appointed to undertake a two-stage design review

process for each site. This has been undertaken with affected LPAs andpan-London stakeholders. This independent, two-stage review hasassisted in the design development process and influenced the designleading to phase two consultation. Further details are given below.

3.4.4 Design Council CABE is a statutory consultee of the IPC, in common withbodies such as the Environment Agency and English Heritage. From1999 to 2011, it was the Governments advisor on architecture, urbandesign and public space, then on 1 April 2011, CABE merged with theDesign Council to become the Design Council CABE. As part of thismerger, all of CABEs panel members were transferred across to theDesign Council, jointly they were able to select from a large pool ofnational panel experts.

3.4.5 The Design Council CABE has considerable experience reviewingcitywide and Thames-side projects, having recently completed a numberof reviews for various Crossrail sites and major mixed-use developmentsat sites in Leamouth, Fulham, Battersea and Wandsworth.

3.4.6 The Design Council CABE panel for the Thames Tunnel project comprisedindependent architects, landscape architects, engineers, urban plannersand an access specialist. The reviews have been observed andcontributed to by affected LPAs and pan-London stakeholders to capture

any concerns and aspirations they have about the proposals.


18/46

3 Design process


3.4.7 To make the process meaningful, we undertook two stages of designreview: sketch reviews and final reviews. Sketch reviews focussed onurban design and were based on options and sketch designs produced inadvance of the detailed engineering design and environmental surveys,which are ongoing. Three separate reviews were held over three days

covering each of the sites during April and May 2011. Representatives ofall the relevant stakeholders including local authorities, the GreaterLondon Authority, Environment Agency, Transport for London, NaturalEngland, Environment Agency and English Heritage were invited andattended, where possible.

3.4.8 The reviews were undertaken in the following format:

a. Short presentation by the designer

b. Invitation to stakeholders to add comments

c. Review and discussion by the panel experts.

3.4.9 The final reviews were held in June 2011 only for those sites that involvedamendments from the sketch reviews. The final reviews were based onmore developed proposals. The final reviews followed the same format asthe first round, but were based on a single option with more complete anddetailed information.

3.4.10 After the review, the Design Council CABE issued the Thames Tunnelproject team with a clear appraisal of the proposals and how they think thedesign should proceed. The independent reviews challenged our designsand provided valuable feedback, which has helped to influence and shapethe proposals that we are presenting for phase two consultation.

3.4.11 As a statutory IPC consultee, Design Council CABE will also have theopportunity to publish a response to the proposals as part of phase twoconsultation.

3.5 Ongoing design development

3.5.1 Our ongoing consultation, engagement and design development willcontinue in accordance with Statement of community consultationand theCommunity consultation strategy.

3.6 National and regional policy review

3.6.1 The draft NPS for Waste Water was issued for consultation in November2010 and consultation has now concluded. It is currently anticipated thatthe NPS will be placed before Parliament towards the end of 2011 andsoon after may then be designated in its final form. Once designated, andeven as a draft, it will be the key policy document against which the projectwill be judged by the IPC (or Secretary of State) or its successor. Thedraft NPS specifically cites the Thames Tunnel project and sets out thefactors to be considered by the IPC (or its successor) when examining anddetermining a DCO application.

3.6.2 Section 10 of the Planning Act 2008states that in designating and

reviewing national policy statements, sustainable development must be an


19/46

3 Design process


objective. In particular, this is to include the desirability of mitigating, andadapting to, climate change and achieving good design.

3.6.3 In accordance with Section 5(6) of the Planning Act 2008, the current draftNPS sets out a number of criteria for the design of wastewaterinfrastructure under Section 5.5, which states the following:

a. Ensuring attractive, usable, durable and adaptable places andcontributing to sustainable development. The expectation should bethat good aesthetic and functional design can go together although thenature of much wastewater infrastructure development will often limitthe extent to which it can contribute to the enhancement of the qualityof the area. Nevertheless, the IPC needs to be satisfied thatwastewater infrastructure developments are sustainable and, havingregard to regulatory and other constraints, are as attractive, durableand adaptable (including taking account of natural hazards such asflooding) as they can be. In so doing, the IPC should be satisfied that

the applicant has taken into account both aesthetics and functionality(including fitness for purpose).

b. The development should, by the use of good architecture andappropriate landscaping, be as visually attractive as possible. Whilethe applicant may have no, or very limited choice in the physicalappearance of some wastewater infrastructure, there may beopportunities for the applicant to demonstrate good design in terms ofsiting, relative to existing and currently planned landscape character,landform and vegetation. Furthermore, the design and sensitive useof materials in any associated development, such as control rooms

and pumping stations, will assist in ensuring that such developmentcontributes to the quality of the area.

c. Applicants should set out the main alternatives to the design that theyhave considered and the reasons why the favoured choice has beenselected. There should be a presumption that all proposed andalternative infrastructure meets the relevant EU or UK technicalstandard for design, construction, installation and maintenance, wheresuch standards exist; and where they do not, that these componentsof design are fully explained by the applicant. In consideringapplications, the IPC should take into account the ultimate purpose ofthe infrastructure and bear in mind the operational, safety and security

requirements which the design has to satisfy.

3.6.4 We have had regard to these draft NPS criteria in developing our designsfor above-ground structures, buildings, walls and landscaping.

3.6.5 As reflected in the draft NPS, it is important to recognise that there aresustainability, operational, safety and security requirements for wastewaterinfrastructure, as these constraints can significantly limit the scope ofdesign options.

3.6.6 In addition to the NPS, the IPC (or its successor) must have regard to theNPS and also any other matters which it considers are both relevant and

important to its determination. This might include various nationalplanning policies covered in planning policy statements (PPS) or planning


20/46

3 Design process


policy guidance (PPG) documents. These are in the process of beingamalgamated into a single national planning policy framework (NPPF),which will supersede the existing PPSs and PPGs. It is likely that the finalNPPF will be issued prior to the submission of our application.

3.6.7 Other documents which might be relevant and important to thedetermination of the Thames Tunnel project proposals by the IPC includepublications by Department for Culture Media and Sport, Department forLocal Communities and Government, Department for Environment, Foodand Rural Affairs, English Heritage, the Design Council CABE, and theEnvironment Agency. Such documents include the Marine PolicyStatementand Climate Resilient Infrastructure(both published 2011),which set out HM Governments overarching policy objectives for theseareas. The Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100) Plan sets out the strategicdirection for managing flood across the estuary to the year 2100.

3.6.8 At a national level, the Environment Agency is responsible for many

aspects of the environment, including the water quality of rivers, and floodrisk from rivers and the sea. Through guidance and advice on planningapplications, it seeks improvements to the habitat of rivers and generallyresists development that encroaches in front of tidal flood defences, asreferred to in its guidance, Building a better environment a guide fordevelopers(2006), available at www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/32695.aspx.

3.6.9 PPSs, PPGs and the draft NPPF also provide the policy context fromwhich regional and local planning policies flow. At a regional level, theLondon Plan 2011 sets out the Mayors spatial planning framework for

London, which aims to promote an attractive, well designed and greenercity. The London Plan 2011 is a strategic plan, setting out an integratedsocial, economic and environmental framework, to support planning forgrowth in population, housing and employment, and thus supportinginfrastructure and improved quality of the environment. It contains policiesthat may be considered relevant and important in relation to the design ofthe Thames Tunnel project by the IPC, including the following:

a. Policy 6.10, Walking identify, promote and complete the relevantsections of the strategic walking routes, such as the Thames Path

b. Policy 7.4, Local Character development should have regard to the

form, function and structure of an area and should improve itsconnection with natural features

c. Policy 7.5, Public Realm public spaces should be secure,accessible, easy to understand and maintain and incorporate highestquality landscaping, planting, furniture and surfaces

d. Policy 7.6, Architecture architecture should make a positivecontribution to coherent public realm and streetscape

e. Policy 7.8, Heritage Assets and Archaeology the historicenvironment should be identified, preserved and restored

f. Policy 7.11, London View Management Framework development willbe assessed for its impact on designated strategic views


21/46

3 Design process


g. Policy 7.13, Safety, Security and Resilience to Emergencydevelopment needs to be resilient against flooding

h. Policies 7.14 and 7.15, Improving Air Quality and Reducing Noise andEnhancing Soundscapes addressing the requirements of the AirQuality Strategy and Ambient Noise Strategy

i. Policy 7.17, Metropolitan Open Land Metropolitan Open Land (MOL)is protected from development adversely affecting its openness, withessential appropriate ancillary facilities acceptable where theymaintain its openness.

j. Policies 7.18, 7.19 and 7.21,Protecting Local Open Space andAddressing Local Deficiency, Biodiversity and Access to Nature andTrees and Woodland protection of open space and trees and toensure a proactive approach to biodiversity

k. Policies 7.24 and 7.26, Blue Ribbon Network and Increasing its use for

Freight Transport need to enhance the quality of the Blue Ribbonnetwork and increase its use for freight, including the protection andenhancement of safeguarded wharves

l. Policies 7.27 and 7.28, Blue Ribbon Network SupportingInfrastructure and Recreational Use and Restoration of the BlueRibbon Network protect Blue Ribbon Network supportinginfrastructure and restore and enhance the network

m. Policy 7.29, The River Thames the River Thames should beprotected and its use and enjoyment promoted consistently with theThames Policy Area appraisal.

3.6.10 We have had regard to these policies in developing our design proposalsand the designs for above-ground structures, buildings, walls andlandscaping are consistent with them.

3.6.11 The London Plan 2011 provides clear and strong support for the ThamesTunnel project through Policy 5.14, which states that the development ofthe Thames Tideway Tunnels to address Londons combined seweroverflows (CSOs) should be supported in principle, and that relevantboroughs should include policies within their LDFs frameworks to supportthe scheme in principle.

3.6.12 Local planning policies contained in LDFs are required to be in generalconformity with the London Plan 2011. Further details of these localplanning policies in summary are contained within the site specificsections of the Preliminary environmental information report, and thoserelated to design are contained in appendices AX of this report.

3.7 Environmental assessment

3.7.1 The environmental impact assessment process in respect of the ThamesTunnel project commenced during 2010 and has focussed on theidentification of likely significant environmental effects associated with theproject. The findings to date are documented in the Preliminary

environmental information reportissued at phase two consultation.


22/46

3 Design process


3.7.2 The term impact has been used to describe actions or processes whichexert an influence on a receptor, while effects refers to the response of areceptor to an impact. If an effect has been identified as being a potentialsignificant environmental effect, it is scoped into the assessment.

3.7.3 The 2009 Infrastructure Planning EIA Regulationsstate that the

Environmental Statement accompanying the application must describe thelikely significant effects of the project, with reference to population, fauna,flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets (including thearchitectural and archaeological heritage), landscape and theinterrelationships between the above factors.

3.7.4 The methodologies for the environmental assessments vary from topic totopic. In general, however, all of the assessments involve a process ofinteraction between engineering, design and environmental considerationsto ensure that any required mitigation measures are incorporated in theproject. Throughout the design process, attention has been given to

preventing, reducing and mitigating adverse effects on the environmentduring construction and operation. The project will incorporate wherepossible measures to prevent adverse effects arising and seek to increasethe likely beneficial effects. It is recognised that as further informationbecomes available, further mitigation measures may be necessary andthis interactive process will continue as the scheme is developed andfinalised.

3.8 Operational and functional requirements

3.8.1 Each site is different and the design must respond to relevant site context,location and varying local planning authority policy requirements.Nevertheless operational and functional requirements are both critical todesign development and form the basis of the design work.

3.8.2 It is necessary to substantially reduce and control the overflows from anumber of polluting CSOs throughout London. Those requiring control aredetailed in Figure 4.2 of the Thames Tunnel project Needs Reportdatedsummer 2010 (Ref No 100-RG-PNC-00000-900007, available atwww.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk). These CSO works and the worksproposed at the main tunnel sites involve a range of permanentengineering works that are described in the relevant site informationpapers. These permanent engineering works are governed by a range of

safety, functional, maintenance and access requirements.

3.8.3 Examples of these requirements include: Hydraulic capacity, sizing thesystem to achieve the necessary CSO control and provide hydraulicallyrobust and operationally safe system; de-aeration, system ventilation andodour control; safe inspection, access and egress provisions; electroniccontrol and instrumentation; controlling impacts on river flows andminimising bed scour, structural and durability requirements.

3.8.4 As an essential piece of infrastructure for the functioning of the city, it isimportant that the structures are durable and easy to maintain. ThamesWater has regular maintenance and inspection cycles and this requires

periodic access to the access hatches and electrical and control kiosks bya light commercial vehicle. More substantial infrequent access by cranes


23/46

3 Design process


and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) for long-term or possibly emergencymaintenance would also be required. This would require plant set-up andlay-down space for equipment, and possibly welfare facilities. The sitedesigns have taken account of local townscape issues and have beenarranged so that this can be achieved.

3.8.5 The surface structures would be situated in open public environments thatcould be subject to abuse and vandalism. It is important that they aresecure, durable and robust.

3.9 Common design principles

3.9.1 The text of the overarching Statement of architecture and landscapedesignis contained in the project information paper, Design, and below isa fuller explanation of these common design principles.

3.9.2 The Thames Tunnel project is being developed in the civic infrastructuretradition of the original Victorian sewer and embankment works. Those

projects improved the quality of the river for the enjoyment and safety ofthose using and living around the River Thames, while successfullyintegrating the wastewater infrastructure works with the existing city andcreating opportunities for new public space.

3.9.3 The Thames Tunnel project would be a major addition to Londonsinfrastructure. It would build on Bazalgettes legacy, maintaining thelong-term sustainability of London as a world-class city and the quality ofits largest open space: The River Thames. Our site designs would be ofhigh quality and provide value and would respect each sites individuallocation and setting, while recognising the common contribution of all sites

to providing a cleaner, healthier river.3.9.4 The main tunnel and connection tunnels pass under London and the

above-ground structures emerge in a large variety of spaces across it withdifferent considerations and site constraints. The site information papersfor each site describe these proposals. Good design will be achieved bybeing responsible, flexible and creative, as well as meeting functionalrequirements, through adherence to a number of common principles (setout below) that we will apply to all sites throughout the project.

Being responsible

a. Respecting and contributing positively to local context in terms ofpolicy, massing, land use, materials and heritage will be vital inensuring that all above-ground buildings/structures fit with their localcontext. All works whether in private or public realms are designed tofit in with their local context with due regard to the character, detailingand likely future use of the site.

b. Continual engagement with LPAs, pan-London stakeholders, interestgroups and affected parties is essential in order that proposals arereviewed and new ideas can be properly considered.

c. Ensuring that the functional needs of sites also meet the requirements

of surrounding users and fit within their surroundings.


24/46

3 Design process


d. The cleaner river that would result from the project would improve theriver habitat for aquatic and terrestrial ecology and for river users. Weare aware of the need to limit encroachment into the river, but we needto ensure that the necessary engineering requirements of the projectare satisfied while ensuring that potential effects to the river through

considerations of river flow, the needs of river users and of aquaticecology are also accounted for.

e. Using our emerging environmental impact assessment (as currentlycontained in the Preliminary environmental information report) as thebasis, ensuring that the principles of sustainability are integral to ourdesigns, incorporating a range of environmental solutions andmitigation, where appropriate and possible. These may include greenor brown roofs, sustainable materials sourced responsibly, sustainableurban drainage systems (SUDS), planting and habitat creation, andthe recycling of materials.

f. Developing a signature that recognises the common importance ofsites and the project to the river. It is important that key ThamesTunnel project permanent works present a coherent design that drawspeoples attention to the rivers importance in the life of the city as awhole. This would be expressed in a commonality in certain designelements, providing a signature for the project. Therefore, we havesought to develop the design of the access hatches and ventilationcolumns to give information on the project and draw attention to localfeatures such as Londons lost rivers. These elements would bepositioned in landscaped environments that have been designed torespond to their local context.

Being flexible and creative

a. Create new, high quality public realm where the sites in the projectprovide an opportunity to provide additional space in or adjacent to theriver or inland. These spaces would often provide new places to enjoythe river and may possibly include planting and surface materialsand/or provide enhanced views. These opportunities would beexplored in consultation with appropriate stakeholders.

b. Many site locations afford opportunities to provide enhanced tree andshrub planting and ground cover and surface materials, especially

those in public locations. Careful choice of plant species would benecessary as well as a careful choice of high quality, robust anddurable surface materials, particularly accommodating the need forpermeability of surfaces and specific treatment, where necessary.

c. On potential development sites, working with developers and siteowners to achieve mutually suitable solutions that are flexible asappropriate to changing circumstances.

d. Where proposals use Thames Water operational sites, designs needto be functional but respect their context and wider surroundings.


25/46

3 Design process


Meeting functional requirements

a. We need to develop high quality, well designed and durable solutionsthat provide safe sites that are accessible to all.

b. We must have due regard for planning policy and best practice.

c. Where the project impacts on the Thames Path, we have looked foropportunities to connect, enhance and potentially widen, resurface orproviding better signage, subject to consultation, appropriateagreements and fulfilling our obligations.

3.10 Scheme-wide application of common design principles

3.10.1 During phase two, the design team has developed and presented anarchitecture that responds to the design principles and feedback andinformation received. We have developed our Statement of architecturaland landscape design, which can be read in the project information paper,

Design. This section elaborates on that statement and this report explainshow the design of above-ground structures has developed to respond to it.

3.10.2 At the heart of the statement is a recognition that the designs mustbalance the need for the project, while integrating into the local anddiverse urban conditions. Getting the balance right between these twoaspects is important to the project.

3.10.3 The citywide Victorian sewer system works of Sir Joseph Bazalgetteincluded the creation of the Victoria (see Figure P.10), Albert and Chelseaembankments between 186269, by reclaiming almost ten hectares ofland from the river Thames. As well as sewers, these embankments

contain other elements of essential infrastructure (such as cable subwaysand the Tube) below-ground, while providing high quality public gardensand improved circulation (vehicular and pedestrian) above-ground. Theyalso improve the citys flood defences. However, many people arecompletely unaware that the spaces and assets of the embankments werecreated, primarily because of the need to intercept sewage before it flowedinto the River Thames. Refer to Figure 3.1 for an image of theconstruction of the Thames Embankment.


26/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.1 Construction of Victoria Embankment adjacent to Temple Gardens

(Source: Illustrated London News, February 1865)

3.10.4 The Thames Tunnel project could set a modern benchmark for howinfrastructure projects can contribute positively to the urban fabric. Theparallels with the Bazalgettes scheme are obvious, but where theVictorians swept embankments through large swathes of central Londonwith consistent materials and features, such as the sturgeon lampstandard (see Figure 3.5 and Figure P.10) and ventilation column (seeFigure 3.2), our scheme has sought a series of discreet interventionsinterspersed throughout the city. A design that is appropriate for ariverside site in central London may not be appropriate for a park setting ina more residential area. Therefore, we must question what degree of

commonality is appropriate between the designs. However, certainabove-ground elements are proposed to share some common designfeatures to signify the Thames Tunnel project. These are described in thefollowing pages.


27/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.2 Original ventilation column located on the ChelseaEmbankment

3.10.5 The project team and the consultation and engagement processes haveelicited various views on this matter, such as: On the one hand, weshould hide the above-ground elements out of site or as other urbanelements (such as statues); while on the other hand, we should celebratethe project and its importance by including clear signage and identificationof the Thames Tunnel project structures and information on their function.

3.10.6 The Thames Tunnel project team has developed the design to develop a

signifier of the presence of the tunnel, without demanding attention.Therefore, all urban design, landscape design and architectural designwould be appropriate in its context. However, included in this designwould be a signifier of the presence of the Thames Tunnel project. Thissignifier is likely to be the ventilation columns and man access covers.Commonalities have also been sought (to a lesser extent) in the design ofthe river walls. Generally, the ventilation column would be used on allsites that are within the public realm and, where appropriate, in private(non-domestic) sites as well. Please refer to the site specific appendicesAX for exceptions.


28/46

3 Design process


Ventilation column design

3.10.7 The ventilation columns are generally the most noticeable element (apartfrom river walls) of the permanent works. At phase one consultation, theventilation columns were between 10m and 15m high. Since phase oneconsultation, the design has progressed and the columns no longer needto be so tall. Our current Air management planis outlined in the projectinformation paper, Odour. The reduced height of between 4m and 6mmeans that the columns are closer to the scale of street furniture (such aslampposts) than of buildings. A comparison is illustrated in Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3 Diagram illustrating comparison of ventilation columnsbetween phase one and phase two consultation

3.10.8 While a standard height for ventilation columns across the project isproposed, there is great variance in the cross-sectional area required fromsite to site. This generally increases from west to east and is determinedby the required volume of air to be expelled or drawn in.

3.10.9 The variation in the required cross-sectional area (from approximately0.4m2 to 5m2

Figure 3.4

) makes the creation of a single standard ventilation columndesign difficult. However, a family of columns could be employed atdifferent sizes, with multiples of these, where necessary, to achieve therequired cross-sectional area as shown in . This creates acommonly designed signifier of the project at each site.


29/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.4 Diagram showing three sizes of ventilation column in thefamily

3.10.10 In developing an appropriate aesthetic for these columns, many factorshave been considered, from the marine architecture of boats (whichinfluenced earlier designs) to iconic pieces of British design such as thetraditional K2 phone box or the Routemaster bus. We also seek torespect the existing architectural elements of the embankments of theVictorian sewer works such as the sturgeon lamps.

3.10.11 As shown in Figure 3.5, these evoke the pattern of flowing water as itpasses down the shaft. Fluid dynamic modelling shows it runs in gentle

spirals down the vortex drop. This has been chosen as the primaryinfluence on the design of the ventilation columns.


30/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.5 Computational fluid dynamics modelling showing waterrunning down a vortex drop in a shaft, a Victorian sturgeon lamp

standard and cornucopia lamp standard

3.10.12 Cast metal is the proposed material for the column for a number ofreasons:

a. It creates a strong, self-supporting structure that can have relativelythin walls, allowing an elegant and non-bulky appearance, and istherefore used for such structures throughout London and marineenvironments.

b. It is appropriate to sites near to existing built heritage assets, as it wasused extensively in the Victorian sewer works.

c. It is evocative of the large, cast metal structures used in the sewer,such as flap valves and penstocks.


31/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.6 Photograph of a cast metal penstock

(Source: www.sewerhistory.org)

3.10.13 The proposed design of the column is slightly funnelled from top to bottomwith a subtle twist along its height.

Figure 3.7 Illustration of a Type A column


32/46

3 Design process


3.10.14 The metal would generally have a matte finish, but a flat ridge along thetwist would be polished and possibly inlaid or engraved with informationabout the location. For example, if the site is at the end of a lost river,where it joins the River Thames it would state the name of the river or theproject, if appropriate. This polished strip extends to make a collar at the

base drawing attention downwards to the ground within which the majorityof the engineering work is located. A grille sits in the top rim to preventmatter from entering the column. The metal finish of the outlet maychange from site to site as appropriate to its location.

Figure 3.8 Illustration of a pair of type B columns

3.10.15 At several sites, it is necessary or desirable to have combinations of the

Type B and C columns. Combining both types could reduce the overallimpact of the structures size, and their arrangement on the site couldrespond to site specific considerations and invite a degree of play,interpretation and interaction between and around the structures.


33/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.9 Illustration of three Type C columns

3.10.16 The design of the ventilation columns will be developed further after phasetwo consultation, taking account of comments received.

River wall design

3.10.17 The largest vertical surface area created by the project (above-ground) arelikely to be the river walls, which also act as flood defence structures. Thecharacter of the walls of the River Thames varies from the formality of theVictorian embankment walls with their granite facing and lion headmooring rings, to more functional concrete and sheet piled walls andtimber fenders.

3.10.18 When considering the design of the river walls, a number of factors needto be considered:

a. Local context, heritage and townscape issuesb. Vessel impact

c. Flood defence levels existing and future

d. Ecological impact and opportunities for improvement

e. Limiting loss of flood storage volume (encroachment)

f. Guardings and personal safety

g. River access and passage over flood defence levels

h. Visual access from shore to river.


34/46

3 Design process


3.10.19 The design of the river walls is one of the most complex tasks, and it willcontinue to develop during and after phase two consultation as we learnmore about all of these factors.

3.10.20 Generally, the flood levels within the Thames estuary are expected to risedue to climate change. New flood levels have been predicted in theThames Estuary 2100 Plan and the Tidal Thames Joint ProbabilityExtreme Water Levels Study (Thames Tidal Defences Joint ProbabilityExtreme Water Levels Final Modelling Report. Environment Agency, April2008) for the year 2100 that are approximately 600mm higher thanexisting levels. While the Thames Tunnel projects structures do not haveflood defences to these levels, they are designed so that they can beeasily adapted.

3.10.21 As with the design of the surface works, the design team has sought tofind a commonality in the design of the river walls that can be adapted asnecessary to each site.

3.10.22 The river is an ever-changing but constant part of our city. Accordingly,the design team have chosen to draw attention to the River Thamess ebband flow by providing information on its tidal levels. A series of horizontallines to be engraved, cast or marked with fenders to show where meanhigh water level, mean low water level and flood defence levels are setcurrently. Where possible, these could be joined by the Thames Estuary2100 (TE2100) flood defence level. Inscribing levels on bridges and onthe hulls of ships has long been a quick and informative way of assessingthe current height of water.

3.10.23 Where possible, horizontal fenders have been employed to mark river

levels and provide an enhanced habitat for river ecology. This is because,while vertical beaches for habitat creation would increase encroachmentand make it difficult to inspect the river defences, the horizontal ledgescreated by fenders and setbacks create some habitat for invertebrates,plants and birds. Refer to Figure 3.10 for an illustration of Victoriashowing inscribed horizontal lines.


35/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.10 Illustration of Victoria showing inscribed horizontal lines

3.10.24 The design team is aware that the foreshore structures provide idealembarkation points for vessel access. While we have not designed suchstructures, several of the sites have higher platform levels, above flooddefence, from where new gangways to pontoons may be implemented.These platforms would be fully accessible for wheelchair users and would

increase visual access to the river, as parapet walls are not required andseated persons would be able to see through open or low balustrades.

Access cover design

3.10.25 Access covers have also been identified as a potential signifier in thedesign. The layout of the below-ground works is site specific and theequipment removal hatches usually differ according to the capacity andlayout of the shaft/CSO. However, each site has several man accesscovers and a common Thames Tunnel project cover for these wouldidentify the sites without being intrusive, and would also make it easy formaintenance staff to identify the correct hatch. The covers will bedesigned in the next stage of design development. Figure 3.11 illustratesan access cover in Berlin.


36/46

3 Design process


Figure 3.11 Examples of access cover designs

3.11 Design development post phase two consultation

3.11.1 The site specific sections of this Design development reportprovide

further detail of how these common design principles are proposed to betaken forward in the design proposals, accounting for the specific contextof each site. In addition, the site information papers summarise our designproposals for each site.

3.11.2 Following completion of the phase two consultation, all responses relatingto design will be analysed and we will record and give feedback on thewritten comments received. A report, similar to that produced followingphase one consultation (the Report on phase one consultationis availableat www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk) will be produced and will beavailable on our website or on request, which will show a description of the

consultation process, compliance with legislative and other requirements,record responses to comments received and how we have had or willhave regard to the responses.

3.11.3 Following phase two consultation, the designs will be amended, havingregard to the comments received. We will subsequently publicise (inaccordance with Section 48 of the Planning Act 2008) our proposedapplication during 2012 and have regard to responses to that publicity.We will formally submit our application later in 2012 and, as required bySection 37 of the Planning Act 2008, this will include a consultation report,describing all consultations and Section 48 publicity.

3.11.4 The application will contain a design and access statement, which isrequired under conventional planning procedures under the Town and


37/46

3 Design process


Country Planning Act 1990for most planning applications and isrecommended by the IPC in support of any application for a nationallysignificant infrastructure project (NSIP) (IPC Advice Note 6). A Designand access statement is a report to illustrate the process that has led tothe development proposal, and to explain the proposal in a structured way.

Design and access statements help to ensure that development proposalsare based on a thoughtful design process and a sustainable approach toaccess. Furthermore, they enable LPAs and community groups, accessgroups, amenity groups and other stakeholders to better understand theanalysis which has underpinned the design and how it has led to thedevelopment of the scheme.

3.11.5 The design and access statement should cover both the design principlesand concepts that have been applied to the proposed development. Thisincludes the amount, layout, scale, landscaping and appearance of thedevelopment, and how issues relating to access to the development have

been dealt with and with a full understanding of the local physical,economic and social context. Department for Communities and LocalGovernment Circular 01/2006sets out the requirements in more detail.

3.11.6 With this in mind, this Design development reporthas been structured toinform the subsequent design and access statement to accompany theapplication by setting out the design strategy, design process, stages andprinciples, policy background and the design development, and the designconcepts and principles that have been applied for each site.


38/46

3 Design process



39/46

Glossary


Glossary

Term Description

air managementstructures

Collective term for ventilation equipment to be provided bythe Thames Tunnel project.

Blue Ribbon Network The Blue Ribbon Network, which is part of the LondonPlan, includes the Thames, the canal network, and othertributaries, rivers and streams within London and London'sopen water spaces, such as docks, reservoirs and lakes. Itincludes culverted (or covered over) parts of rivers, canalsor streams.

brownfield land/brownfield site

Previously developed land and premises which could bepartially occupied or used. Is most commonly associated

with derelict urban land with redundant industrial buildings.Excludes agriculture or forestry land.

Climate ResilientInfrastructure:Preparing for aChanging Climate

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairspublication (May 2011) produced as a response to callsfrom industry infrastructure owners, investors andinsurers for a Government vision and policy on adaptinginfrastructure to climate change. It is designed to catalyseaction to adapt infrastructure in the energy, ICT, transportand water sectors (infrastructure networks).

combined sewer A sewer conveying both rainwater and wastewater of

domestic or industrial origin.

combined seweroverflow (CSO)

A structure, or series of structures, designed to allowspillage of excess wastewater from a combined sewerunder increased rainfall conditions. Flows may dischargeby gravity or by pumping.

connection culvert See interception chamber

connection tunnel See interception chamber

conservation area This is defined in the Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990as an area of special

architectural and historic interest, the character orappearance of which it is desirable to preserve orenhance.

core strategy Every local planning authority should produce a corestrategy, which includes an overall vision which sets outhow the area and the places within it should develop.These documents are a key part of the local developmentframework.


40/46

Glossary


Term Description

CSO site A site that contains the CSO interception chambers,connection culverts and the drop shaft from which theconnection tunnel is built. Each site needs to provide

enough space for all the construction related activities,which vary depending on the diameter of the drop shaftsand the method of tunnel construction.

culvert A covered structure that conveys a flow under a road,railroad or other obstruction. Culverts are mainly used todivert stream or rainfall runoff to prevent erosion orflooding on highways.

design and accessstatements

A statement to be submitted as part of an application forplanning consent covering the concepts and principles ofdesign and addressing access issues.

Design Council CABE An enterprising charity comprising the Design Council andthe Centre for Architecture and Built Environment (CABE),providing advice and support on all aspects of design,including architecture.

design reviews Hosted by the Design Council CABE, and undertaken inconsultation with the local planning authorities andpan-London stakeholders, these two-stage reviews haveprovided independent advice and guidance on theemerging design of the Thames Tunnel project sites.

development consentorder

Planning consent awarded by the IPC which combines thegrant of planning permission with a range of otherseparate consents such as listed building consent.

development plandocument (DPD)

Development plan documents are a statutory element ofthe local development framework and are subject to anindependent examination by an Inspector. DPDs includethe following types of documents:

core strategy this sets out the long-term vision andoverarching policies for the borough

site specific land allocations and policies

area action plans (where needed) these documentsset out the planning framework for areas of significantchange and conservation

general development control policies

a proposals map, illustrating the spatial extent ofpolicies.

development plan In London, this refers to a local planning authoritys unitarydevelopment plan, core strategy, other development plandocuments (DPD), and the London Plan.


41/46

Glossary


Term Description

drive site A main tunnel site containing the shaft from where theTBM is driven forward, ie, starts from. Excavatedmaterial is removed from and segments are fed into the

tunnel via the shaft at the drive site.drop-in sessions Events held after the close of phase one consultation and

before phase two consultation, to inform the public ofpotential new sites and to obtain their views. Theoutcomes are reported in the Interim engagement report.

drop shaft See interception chamber.

eaves Projecting overhang at the lower edge of a roof.

effect The result of an impact on a particular resource orreceptor.

electrical control kiosk Used to describe a structure where control equipmentwould be housed (not necessarily a building).

encroachment With regards to the Thames Tunnel project, this refers tothe extent that proposed structures extend into the river orforeshore.

environmental impactassessment (EIA)

An assessment of the possible positive or negative impactthat a proposed project may have on the environment,consisting of natural, social and economic aspects. Thepurpose of the assessment is to ensure that decision-makers consider the ensuing environmental impacts whendeciding whether to proceed with a project.

environmentalstatement

A document to be prepared following an EIA whichprovides a systematic and objective account of the EIAsfindings.

Examination in Public(EiP)

This is designed to test the soundness of the documentsproduced as part of the local development framework orLondon Plan. A development plan document isconsidered sound if it has been produced based on goodevidence and prepared in accordance with procedures,

including those outlined in the statement of communityinvolvement, as well as PPS12. Whether or not there arecomments in support of or opposed to policies produced,this examination considers all policies and the inspectorsreport is binding.

excavated material The earth/soil/ground material removed when the shaftsand tunnels are excavated. Excavated material can beeither topsoil, subsoil or other material, such as rock, etc.

fluvial modelling Modelling of the processes associated with rivers andstreams and the deposits and landforms created by them.

foreshore Ground uncovered by the river when the tide is low.


42/46

Glossary


Term Description

habitat walls Wall which acts as a wildlife resource for insects and smallmammals where they can feed, shelter and procreate.

impact A physical or measurable change to the environment

attributable to the project.

interception chamber A structure built around an existing combined sewer whichdiverts combined sewage from the sewer into the newsystem of structures, allowing combined sewage flows tobe transferred to the sewage treatment works (STW). Inorder to transfer the flow from the existing sewer to theSTW, a series of structures need to be built and theseinclude:

connection culvert this covered channel structureconnects the interception chamber to the drop shaft

drop shaft this vertical circular structure is used todrop the flow down to the main tunnel level andtherefore connects the connection culvert to theconnection tunnel

connection tunnel this tunnel connects the drop shaftto the main tunnel

main tunnel this tunnel connects the connectiontunnels to the Beckton Pumping Station at the end ofthe tunnel

pumping station this vertical circular structure withpumps located at the bottom is used to lift thestormwater flows up to the STW.

Infrastructure PlanningCommission (IPC)

An independent body that will take development consentdecisions on nationally significant infrastructure projects.

Lee Tunnel The Lee Tunnel comprises a storage and transfer tunnelfrom Abbey Mills Pumping Station to Beckton STW andthe interception of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station CSO.

listed buildings Buildings or other built structures included in the statutorylist of buildings of special architectural or historic interest of

national significance, which is compiled by the Secretary ofState for Culture, Media and Sport. Buildings are gradedand are protected, both internally and externally. Listedbuilding consent is required for almost all works to a listedbuilding.

local developmentframework

The local development framework is the collection of localdevelopment documents produced by the local planningauthority which collectively delivers the spatial planningstrategy for its area. The core strategy is the key planwithin the local development framework.

London Plan The London Plan 2011 is the overall strategic plan forLondon, and it sets out a fully integrated economic,


43/46

Glossary


Term Description

environmental, transport and social framework for thedevelopment of the capital to 2031. It forms part of thedevelopment plan for Greater London. London boroughslocal plans need to be in general conformity with theLondon Plan, and its policies guide decisions on planningapplications by councils and the Mayor.

main tunnel site A site used to construct the main tunnel.

Marine PolicyStatement

The Marine Policy Statement applies to all UK waters. It isthe framework for preparing marine plans, and providesdirection for new marine licensing and other authorisationsystems. It sets out the general environmental, social andeconomic considerations that need to be taken intoaccount in marine planning. It also provides guidance on

the pressures and impacts which decision-makers need toconsider when planning for, and permitting developmentin, the UK marine area.

Metropolitan Open Land(MOL)

Metropolitan Open Land is a London specific designationwhich protects strategically important open spaces withinthe built up area of London and affords them the samelevel of protection as the Green Belt.

mitigation measures Actions proposed to moderate adverse impacts and toenhance beneficial impacts arising from the whole orspecific elements of the development.

National PlanningPolicy Framework(NPPF) (draft forconsultation July 2011)

The National Planning Policy Frameworkis a streamliningof existing planning policy statements, planning policyguidance notes and some circulars to form a singleconsolidated document. The framework sets out theGovernments key economic, social and environmentalobjectives and the planning policies to deliver them. Theframework will have the same legal status as currentGovernment policy documents. Local and neighbourhoodplans and policy should be prepared, having regard to thecontent of national planning policy.

National PlanningPolicy Statement onWaste Water(draft)

This draft National Policy Statement on Waste Watersetsout government policy for the provision of majorwastewater infrastructure. It will be used by theInfrastructure Planning Commission to guide itsdecision-making on development consent applications forwastewater developments that fall within the definition ofnationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP), asdefined in the Planning Act 2008.

orthogonal Having a set of mutually perpendicular axes; meeting atright angles.

other works Some CSOs would be controlled by modifications to thesewerage system and pumping stations.


44/46

Glossary


Term Description

pan-London strategicstakeholders

Transport for London (TfL), Greater London Authority(GLA), English Heritage (EH), Port of London Authority(PLA), Environment Agency (EA).

parapet A wall-like barrier at the edge of a roof, terrace, balcony orother structure.

planning policyguidance (PPG)

Planning policy guidance notes, and their replacements,planning policy statements, are prepared by theGovernment after public consultation to explain statutoryprovisions and provide guidance to local authorities andothers on planning policy and the operation of the planningsystem.

They also explain the relationship between planningpolicies and other policies which have an important

bearing on issues of development and land use.Local authorities must take their contents into account inpreparing plans. The guidance may also be relevant todecisions on individual planning applications and appeals.

planning policystatements (PPS)

See planning policy guidance.

public realm The public realm is defined as any publicly owned areasincluding streets, pathways, parks, publicly accessibleopen spaces, and any public and civic facilities.

reception site A main tunnel site containing the shaft from where theTBM would be received, ie, exits. Main tunnel receptionshaft sites are at the end of a tunnel drive.

receptors People (both individually and communally) and thesocio-economic systems they support.

safeguarded wharf Wharves which are protected by the Mayor of London andthe Port of London Authority, which ensures they areretained as working wharves and are protected fromredevelopment into other uses.

saved policies 'Saved' policies are the planning policies contained in theUDPs produced by the London boroughs which will remainas part of the development plan until they are replaced bythe local development framework, which boroughs arecurrently preparing.

scour Erosion of the riverbed, banks or structures in the rivercaused by water flows.

shaft Duct/pipe/vertical tunnel

Site of Importance forNature Conservation

(SINC/SNCI)

Locally important sites of nature conservation, adopted bylocal authorities for planning purposes, and identified in the

local development plan.


45/46

Glossary


Term Description

Site of Special ScientificInterest (SSSI)

A site identified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act1981 (as amended by the Countryside and Rights of WayAct 2000) as an area of special interest by reason of any

of its flora and fauna geological or physiological features(basically plants, animals and natural features) relating tothe earths structure.

slipway A sloping surface leading down to the water, from whichboats may be launched.

stormwater Rainwater which funnels into sewers to be mixed withsewage and is either treated at sewage works, oroverflows into rivers.

sustainable drainagesystems/sustainable

urban drainage (SUDS)

Drainage system which controls the quantity and speed ofrainwater runoff from a development.

Thames Path Designated footpath following the route of the RiverThames.

Thames Policy Area A planning policy designation designed to conserve andenhance the character and setting of the River Thames.

Thames Tunnel project The Thames Tunnel project comprises a storage andtransfer tunnel, from west London to Beckton STW in eastLondon, and the interception of 34 CSOs along theThames Tideway.

townscape/streetscape Urban landscape.

Transport for LondonRoad Network (TLRN)

The 580km network of major roads that are administeredby Transport for London. It accounts for 5% of Londonsroads but carries 33% of its traffic.

tunnel alignment The horizontal and vertical routes of the proposed tunnels,including connection tunnels and shaft sites.

tunnel boring machine(TBM)

A machine used to excavate tunnels with a circularcross-section through a variety of ground conditions.

unitary developmentplan (UDP)

Statutory document which sets out planning policies toguide future development within each London borough.Currently in the process of being replaced by the localdevelopment framework.

valve chamber An underground structure on the sewer system containingvalves which are used to isolate the flow between differentparts of the sewer system. For example, flap valvesprevent the flow from the river travelling back up the seweror into the tunnel.

ventilation buildings A building containing fans and filters to remove and treat

air from the tunnel.


46/46

Glossary

Term Description

ventilation columns/shaft

Pressure release pipe.

ventilation ducts Pipework (generally below ground) through which air

moves.

ventilation structures Above-ground or below-ground structures that are part ofthe tunnel ventilation system.

View ManagementFramework

The Mayor of Londons policy framework to protect andmanage designated strategically important views ofLondon and its major landmarks.

wastewater/sewage Waterborne wastes from domestic uses of water, derivedfrom households, trade and industry.

weir Small dam in a watercourse or sewer to alter and manage

the flow.

works All construction work associated with the construction ofthe Thames Tunnel project.

worksite Location of construction works.

ddr design development report main report

Documents