CWG (Wood Wharf Two) Limited

WW1.10 OUTLINE PLANNING APPLICATIONWOODWHARF

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NON TECHNICAL SUMMARYNovember 2013

828_ALL COVERS A4 portrait.indd 19 08/11/2013 16:41:51

FOREWORD

Thank you for taking the time to engage with the Proposed Development of Wood Wharf.

This foreword explains:

1. Why the Proposed Development is being advanced;

2. What applications are being made;

3. What documents have been submitted; and

4. What happens next.

1 WHY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS BEING ADVANCED Why are we making a planning application? 1.1 Canary Wharf Group acquired the Wood Wharf Site (“the Site”) in 2012 from its former development

partners, Ballymore Properties and British Waterways Board (now the Canal and River Trust). Canary Wharf Group have been reconsidering how the Site might be developed in the context of surrounding development and, following extensive engagement with stakeholder groups, have now determined how the Proposed Development (also referred to as the Masterplan) can be taken forward.

1.2 The Proposed Development requires a large number of changes to be made to the physical environment at Wood Wharf. These changes constitute development for which planning permission is required.

1.3 The planning application (or applications) that you are now reading, set out the nature of the Proposed Development for which Outline Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent is sought.

1.4 The applicant is CWG (Wood Wharf Two) Limited (“the Applicant”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Canary Wharf Group.

1.5 This ‘Foreword’, which appears at the front of every submission document, has been prepared to explain how the many submission documents ‘fit’ together in order to help stakeholders who want to understand the applications being made and to navigate their way through the application documents that have been prepared.

2 WHAT APPLICATIONS ARE BEING MADE The Proposed Applications 2.1 A total of four applications are submitted to the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) for approval.

These are made up of a large number of documents and plans.

2.2 The paragraphs below seek to provide guidance to the reader to explain the inter-relationship between the various applications made:

1. Outline Planning Application for the Site as a whole. The overarching application for the Site is made as an Outline Planning Application (or “the OPA”). Hereafter, the Site is referred to as the Outline Planning Application Site (or “the OPA Site") An outline application does not seek permission for the details of the Proposed Development, but instead seeks to establish the principles in line with which future more detailed Reserved Matters applications will be considered, in terms of both the general scale of development and the land uses considered appropriate throughout the OPA Site. In order to do this, the OPA sets out parameters for the layout, scale, access, appearance, and landscaping of the Proposed Development (“Specified Parameters”). In order to help stakeholders to understand what sort of development an Outline Planning Permission might allow to come forward,

we have developed a scheme which is ‘indicative’ of what could be built based on the Specified Parameters. This is referred to throughout the application documents as the Indicative Scheme. This scheme is only indicative, and the actual detail of each part of the Proposed Development (known as Development Zones and Development Plots) to be built will come forward only when Reserved Matters applications are made. In short, the Outline Planning Permission would set the rules which detailed proposals would need to comply with.

2. Listed Building Consent is required for the demolition or other works for the alteration or extension of a listed building in any manner that would affect its character as a building of special interest of special architectural or historic interest. In relation to the Proposed Development, Listed Building Consent is required for the partial demolition and alteration of sections of the listed dock walls to the Blackwall Basin and the East Quay of the Export Dock and Middle Cut between the Export Dock and the South Dock.

3. First Reserved Matters Application (or “the RM01 Application”) for the approval of details (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) relating to the following areas of the Masterplan:

i. Development Plots A1, A2, A3, A4, B3 and D1

ii. Infrastructure, landscaping and street works within Development Zone A and part of Development Zones B and D

iii. Infrastructure, landscaping and street works outside Development Zones but linked to i and ii

iv. Part of Development Zone T (basement and structures into the dock)

As noted above, the detailed design of Development Plots and the routes and spaces that sit between them are to be brought forward as Reserved Matters applications. In order to demonstrate the quality of the Proposed Development, we have elected to submit the first of these Reserved Matters applications at the same time as the OPA. This Reserved Matters application seeks approval for the detailed proposals for the majority of the indicative first phase of the Proposed Development (defined in the Indicative Development Phasing document, submitted with the OPA) – including the layout, scale and appearance of Development Plots, landscaping and access arrangements of Development Plots and surrounding areas. The RM01 Application shows how the proposed detailed design responds to the ‘design guidelines’ proposed by the OPA. The RM01 Application can only be determined following a grant of Outline Planning Permission – although the details may be considered by LBTH at the same time that it considers the OPA.

4. Full Planning Application for early Enabling Works associated with the Masterplan. This application is required for the construction of a cofferdam and any adjacent or associated engineering works and operations. The proposed Enabling Works are also included in the wider OPA, however, to enable early delivery, the Enabling Works are also being brought forward as a stand-alone application.

2.3 The strategic significance of the overall proposals means that the Outline Planning Application will be formally referred to the Mayor of London for his consideration.

3 WHAT DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED The Application Documents 3.1 The applications described above are each supported by a number of application documents. The

paragraphs below explain the purpose and intent of each of the submitted documents, how they inter-relate with one another and how they have been used to define the Proposed Development.

3.2 Some of the documents are submitted for approval whilst others provide background information to help LBTH to reach its decision as to whether to grant permissions for the applications being made. Those documents that are to be approved contain the guidelines and details of Proposed Development.

The Control Documents – for Approval

3.3 The OPA includes three control documents titled the Parameter Plans; the Development Specification; and the Design Guidelines. These documents define the Specified Parameters for the Proposed Development and their purpose is as follows:

• The Parameter Plans define the extent of the proposed routes, spaces and buildings across the OPA Site against a series of minimum or maximum dimensions. Each of these component parts is identified as a Development Zone which is identified by a letter (e.g. Development Zone A) and which is then further broken down into Development Plots, each of which is identified by a letter and number (e.g. Development Plot A1).

• The Development Specification sets out a written account of the Parameter Plans and details the description of the Proposed Development and the type and quantity of development that could be provided within each of the Development Zones and Development Plots across the OPA Site.

• The Design Guidelines are intended to provide guidance for future design teams involved in the preparation of Reserved Matters applications for the development of any of the Development Zones and Development Plots. Reserved Matters applications are likely to need to comply with the Design Guidelines if they are to be considered acceptable.

3.4 Whilst these three control documents need to be read together in order to understand the development potential of each Development Zone and Development Plot, the Development Specification sets out how the OPA has been organised and is likely to provide the best starting point for the reader.

Reserved Matters Application Documents – for Approval

3.5 The drawings and documents for the RM01 Application set out in full how the land contained with the RM01 application boundary will be developed, including details on matters of layout, scale and appearance of Development Plots, landscaping and access arrangements of Development Plots and surrounding areas.

Listed Building Consent Documents – for Approval.

3.6 The drawings and documents set out in full the details of those elements of the Proposed Development for which Listed Building Consent is required.

The Supporting Documents

3.7 The documents that are submitted in support of one or more of the applications set out information to help LBTH and the Mayor of London consider the proposals and determine the applications. A full suite of supporting documents is submitted in support of the OPA, RM01, Listed Building Consent and Enabling Works applications.

3.8 As noted above, the Indicative Scheme provides an indication of what the overall Proposed Development could look like. It is not submitted for approval, but shows one way in which a development of the type and scale proposed might fit within the Specified Parameters, for which Outline Planning Permission is being sought.

3.9 The Planning Statement sets out how the development responds to the planning policies of LBTH and the Mayor of London. It also sets out why the Proposed Development is being promoted and what benefits

are expected to flow from it. This reasoning underpins all of the applications. The Planning Statement also explains how the RM01 Application is consistent with the OPA and Listed Building Consent.

3.10 Volume 1 of the OPA Design & Access Statement explains the design evolution of the Masterplan. This document explains how the amount, scale, layout, appearance, landscaping, and inclusive design and community safety issues, have been developed. Volume 2 comprises the Waterspace and Public Realm Strategy, Volume 3 comprises details of the Access Design and Volume 4 comprises details of the Indicative Scheme. A Design Compliance Statement explains how the RM01 Application has evolved in the context of the Masterplan.

3.11 An Environmental Statement has also been submitted in support of the OPA. This document provides a summary of many of the technical environmental assessments that have been undertaken to understand the likely significant environmental effects of the Proposed Development. These assessments have been based on the Specified Parameter and where appropriate, they have also been based on the Indicative Scheme. The ES takes account of the proposed variation in layout, scale and appearance of future development and access arrangements as allowed for in the Specified Parameters and are based on ‘worst case scenarios’ which vary from topic to topic. An Addendum ES is submitted in support of the RM01 Application where any specific element of the detailed design warrants additional assessment.

3.12 A number of additional topic-based reports that fall outside of the ES complete the suite of supporting documents.

3.13 The table below provides a complete schedule of the documents which support the applications being made.

WW1: OUTLINE PLANNING APPLICATION WW1.A

WW1.B

WW1.C

WW1.D

WW1.01, WW2.01, WW4.01

WW1.02, WW2.02

WW1.03, WW2.03

WW1.04

WW1.05

WW1.06, WW2.04

WW1.07

WW1.08

WW1.09

WW1.10

WW1.11

WW1.12

WW1.13

WW1.14

WW1.15

APPLICATION FORMS

PARAMETER PLANS

DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICATION

DESIGN GUIDELINES

PLANNING STATEMENT

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL. 1) – MASTERPLAN

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL. 2) - LANDSCAPE

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL.3) – ACCESS

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL.4) – INDICATIVE SCHEME

HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

INDICATIVE DEVELOPMENT PHASING

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT VISUAL IMPACT STUDY

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY

TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

DRAFT TRAVEL PLAN FRAMEWORK

DRAFT RESIDENTIAL TRAVEL PLAN

AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATEMENT

RETAIL ASSESSMENT

WW1.16

WW1.17

WW1.18

WW1.19

WW1.20

WW1.21

WW1.22

WW1.23

WW1.24

WW1.25

WW1.26, WW4.21

REGENERATION STATEMENT

ENERGY STRATEGY

SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY

UTILITIES STATEMENT

WASTE STRATEGY

FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT

AVIATION SAFEGUARDING ASSESSMENT

ESTATE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

TELECOMMUNICATIONS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

TREE REPORT

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

WW2: LISTED BUILDING CONSENT

WW2.A

WW2.B

WW2.01, WW1.01, WW4.01

WW2.02, WW1.02

WW2.03, WW1.03

WW2.04, WW1.06

APPLICATION FORMS

APPLICATION DRAWINGS

PLANNING STATEMENT

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL. 1) - MASTERPLAN

DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT (VOL.2) - LANDSCAPE

HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

WW3: ENABLING WORKS APPLICATION

WW3.A

WW3.B

WW3.01

WW3.02

WW3.03

WW3.04

WW3.05

WW3.06

WW3.07

WW3.08

WW3.09

APPLICATION FORMS

APPLICATION DRAWINGS

PLANNING STATEMENT

DESIGN STATEMENT

CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT

ECOLOGY REPORT

FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT

GROUND CONDITIONS AND CONTAMINATION REPORT

HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY ASSESSMENT

NOISE AND VIBRATION STATEMENT

TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

WW4: FIRST RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATION (RM01)

WW4. A

WW4. B

WW4. C

WW4. D

WW4.01, WW1.01, WW2.01

WW4.02

WW4.03

APPLICATION FORMS

DRAWINGS FOR APPROVAL

DRAWINGS FOR INFORMATION

MASTERPLAN COMPLIANCE

PLANNING STATEMENT

DESIGN COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (VOL.1) – DESIGN

DESIGN COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (VOL.2) – ACCESS

WW4.04

WW4.05

WW4.06

WW4.07

WW4.08

WW4.09

WW4.10

WW4.11

WW4.12

WW4.13

WW4.14

WW4.15

WW4.16

WW4.17

WW4.18

WW4.19

WW4.20

WW4.21, WW1.26

WW4.22

WW4.23

ADDENDUM TO HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT VISUAL IMPACT STUDY ADDENDUM

ADDENDUM TO TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

DRAFT TRAVEL PLAN FRAMEWORK

DRAFT RESIDENTIAL TRAVEL PLAN

RETAIL ASSESSMENT COMPLIANCE NOTE

REGENERATION STATEMENT COMPLIANCE NOTE

ENERGY STATEGY STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

UTILITIES STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

WASTE STRATEGY STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

AVIATION SAFEGUARDING ASSESSMENT STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

ESTATE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY COMPLIANCE NOTE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS IMPACT ASSESSMENT STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

EQUALISATION STATEMENT

AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATEMENT COMPLIANCE NOTE

Where should I start reading? 3.14 Whilst you can start reading these documents in any order, the Planning Statement and Design & Access

Statement for each application provide a useful overview of the proposals.

3.15 What is the basis for the consideration of future 'Reserved Matters' applications?

Whilst not made at this time, additional Reserved Matters applications may be made for Development Plots and/or Development Zones in the future. These applications would be similar in form to the First Reserved Matters Application but would relate to different parts of the site. Reserved Matters applications will be considered on their merits in the context of the OPA (including the Specified Parameters as set out in the approved Parameter Plans, the Development Specification and Design Guidelines, any planning conditions and any planning obligations).

4 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT Next Steps 4.1 LBTH will formally consult on our proposals for a period of no less than 21 days during which period

interested parties have the opportunity to make any representations that they may wish to make.

If you are an interested party and you have any questions about the applications that have been made, please direct these in the first instance to either the LBTH case officer dealing with the application (Robert.lancaster@towerhamlets.gov.uk) or to Julian Carter (Julian.carter@gva.co.uk) or Steve Harrington

(Stephen.harrington@gva.co.uk) at GVA, the Applicant’s planning advisers.Thank you again for taking the time to read our submission.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Term Definition Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Approach to AssessmentChapter 3 Area for DevelopmentChapter 4 Description of ProposalsChapter 5 Planning Policy Chapter 6 Socio Economic AnalysisChapter 7 Cultural Heritage and ArchaeologyChapter 8 Townscape and VisualChapter 9 Transport Chapter 10 Waste Chapter 11 Noise and Vibration Chapter 12 Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing, Light Pollution and GlareChapter 13 Ecology and Nature ConservationChapter 14 Wind Microclimate Chapter 15 Air Quality Chapter 16 Water Resources and Flood RiskChapter 17 Ground Resources and ContaminationChapter 18 Cumulative Effects and Conclusion

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Approximately 15 million sq ft of office and retail space have been constructed to date across the Canary

Wharf Estate, providing accommodation for a workforce of over 93,000 people. The Proposed Development for Wood Wharf seeks to create a new urban quarter adjacent to Canary Wharf that will be a vibrant and high quality place to live, work and relax.

1.2 Before planning permission can be granted for major development proposals, which have the potential for significant environmental effects, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must be conducted to identify any environmental effects, both positive and negative. An Environmental Statement (ES) is then prepared to explain the results of the EIA. This process helps to ensure that the importance of any predicted effects, and the measures available to reduce any negative effects, are properly understood by the public and the planning authority before deciding whether or not to approve a development proposal.

1.3 This Non Technical Summary (NTS) relates to the ES accompanying the planning application for the proposed mixed use development at Wood Wharf. The planning application is submitted by submitted by CWG (Wood Wharf Two) Limited (the Applicant). A glossary of terminology is provided at the end of this document.

1.4 The application seeks:

‘Outline application (all matters reserved) for comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment of Wood Wharf comprising:

• Demolition of existing buildings and structures, including dwellings at Lovegrove Walk;

• The erection of buildings, including tall buildings, and basements comprising:

o Residential units (C3);

o Hotel (C1);

o Business floorspace (B1);

o Retail (A1-A5);

o Community and Leisure (D1 and D2); and

o Sui Generis uses including Conference Centres, Theatres, Launderettes, and Data Centres.

• Associated infrastructure, including the creation of structures in Blackwall Basin, the Graving Dock, and South Dock;

• Streets, open spaces, landscaping and public realm;

• Bridge links;

• Car, motorcycle, and bicycle parking spaces, servicing;

• Utilities including energy centres and electricity substation(s); and

Other works incidental to the proposed development.’

Site Location 1.5 The Outline Planning Application Site (OPA Site) covers 13.6 ha and is situated to the north-east of the

Isle of Dogs in East London. The OPA Site for the purposes of the EIA is shown on Figure 3.1 below.

1.6 The OPA Site is located immediately to the east of Canary Wharf and to the west of Prestons Road. The OPA Site is bound by Blackwall Basin to the north, South Dock to the south, the existing Canary Wharf Estate to the west, and Prestons Road to the east. It includes Montgomery Square and Cartier Circle (which is part of the existing Canary Wharf Estate) and part of Blackwall Basin and South Dock within its boundary.

Figure 3.1 – OPA Site Location Plan

Site Characteristics 1.7 The OPA Site which comprises existing land at Wood Wharf has been previously developed and is

occupied by a mix of post World War Two buildings, access roads, surface parking and yardage. The current uses on the OPA Site comprise a mix of low-rise buildings which are predominantly commercial in nature. The following uses are currently accommodated:

• A Cable and Wireless telecommunications hub;

• Large shed-style building mostly taking temporary/short term lets;

• A small amount of office space and a data centre;

• Part vacant/part occupied residential properties along Lovegrove Walk;

• A community sports facility called ‘Play on Sport’ (providing 5-a-side football, indoor cricket and several other indoor activities); and

• External storage yard.

1.8 The only features predating 1945 located within the OPA Site are Blackwall Basin and the East Quay of

the Export Dock and Middle Cut between the Export Dock and the South Dock (both Grade I listed structures), and a small building (now occupied as a nursery). Three dockside cranes which are no longer functional are located outside the OPA Site boundary to the south. A small part of the OPA Site is located within the Coldharbour Conservation Area, which extends beyond the OPA Site directly to the east.

1.9 The OPA Site also contains some areas of vegetation, including disused/derelict land which is overgrown. This is most evident in areas to the north along Blackwall Basin, to the south, inland from the South Dock Lock, and to the south-west of the OPA Site along South Dock. A number of trees and other vegetation are spread out around the OPA Site. The western end of the OPA Site has been temporarily landscaped and is now a well maintained park with some planting, trees and grassy lawn areas. This temporary park connects to Montgomery Square via a temporary pedestrian bridge.

1.10 The OPA Site is generally flat at a level however in the north-west of the OPA Site at Cartier Circle the site is, approximately 7m higher than the main OPA Site level and in the west Montgomery Square is approximately 5m higher.

1.11 There is currently pedestrian access to the OPA Site from the west, via steps leading down from Cartier Circle and via a temporary floating bridge. To the east, access for both pedestrians and vehicles is via a private estate road which forms a junction with Prestons Road. At present, there are no direct vehicular links between the OPA Site and the Canary Wharf Estate to the west. The north-eastern corner of the OPA Site (Lovegrove Walk) is also accessed by vehicle and on foot from a private road leading off Prestons Road.

1.12 The OPA Site is accessible by a number of modes of public transport including the London Underground Limited services (LUL), Docklands Light Railway (DLR) and buses. The DLR stations of Herons Quays, Canary Wharf, West India Quay, Poplar, Blackwall and South Quay and Jubilee Line station of Canary Wharf are all within walking distance from the OPA Site. The Canary Wharf Crossrail station is presently under construction in the North Dock of West India Quay. Local bus services run past the OPA Site with stops to the east on Prestons Road and to the west on Churchill Place.

Characteristics of the Surrounding Area 1.13 The OPA Site is situated within an area undergoing unprecedented change and redevelopment, with a

number of high-density residential and commercially-led developments taking place across the Isle of Dogs and wider area. The Isle of Dogs has experienced rapid growth in the past 20 years and continues to do so.

1.14 The OPA Site is surrounded by a mix of diverse uses. As mentioned previously, the Canary Wharf Estate is located directly to the west of the OPA Site comprising a mix of uses, including commercial, retail, residential, hotel, financial and business and community uses. The Canary Wharf development is contemporary, with the first phase of Canary Wharf completed by 1991 and the remaining buildings completed by 2002. One Canada Square is the focal point of Canary Wharf comprising a landmark building at 50 storeys (244m).

1.15 The Canary Wharf Estate comprises offices, retail malls and hotel facilities and is a thriving financial and business district accommodating the headquarters of many international companies. The area has become a place which is recognised globally as a focus for banking and business services and is recognised as playing a major role in enhancing London’s position in the global economy. Transport, infrastructure, and other developments have continued to occur in Canary Wharf up to the present day.

1.16 Aside from commercial land use, the majority of the Isle of Dogs is residential in character, comprising a mix of property types ranging from traditional housing to more recent modern apartment developments.

The River Thames has also formed a particular focus for new housing regeneration over the last 25 years. The rate of redevelopment and regeneration is reflected in the amount of key recent developments, planning permissions and forthcoming regeneration schemes in the area.

1.17 Adjacent to the OPA Site to the east are low-rise residential dwellings on Lancaster Drive and Prestons Road with further residential dwellings in the surrounding areas to the east and north-east. To the north, taller residential developments exist across Blackwall Basin and the Billingsgate Fish Market occupies a single storey building. To the south beyond South Dock, along Marsh Wall, is a mix of commercial, residential and warehouse uses. The scale of development is predominantly 6-15 storeys in height.

1.18 In both Blackwall Basin and Poplar Dock a number of houseboats and barges are accessed by secured private boardwalks. The enclosed southern end of the Graving Dock is a pool containing a central sculptural feature.

Site Planning History 1.19 On 18th May 2009, a hybrid application was approved for the comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment

of the Wood Wharf site (ref. PA/08/01215). The application approved the quantum of development by land use set out below. On 29th March 2012, this application was renewed by application ref. PA/11/02174 and this forms the extant consent for the site:

Approved Quantum of Floorspace and Residential Units - Ref. PA/08/01215

• Residential (Use Class C3) -1,668 units

• Office (Use Class B1) - 453,444 sqm

• Retail (Use Classes A1 – A5) - 19,488 sqm

• Leisure and Community Uses (Use Classes D1 & D2) - 4,984 sqm

• Hotel (Use Class C1) - 26,325 sqm

• Total – 504, 241 sqm

1.20 The OPA Site has been put to temporary use. Planning permission (ref: PA/11/01000) was granted in August 2011 for a range of temporary uses including exhibitions, corporate hospitality and sporting, cultural and community events. This permission expired on 31st December 2012 and there is a further temporary permission (ref: PA/12/02584) to continue such temporary uses of the Site comprising no more than 14,999 sqm of enclosed floor space including 2,400 sqm of class A3 and A4 for a limited period until 28th February 2014.

2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2.1 The OPA aims to create high quality urban environments where people will choose to live, work and visit,

and which are able to accommodate future growth and change within a sustainable development framework. The OPA provides the parameters for a high-density, residential-led, mixed use urban development.

2.2 The OPA is embodied in the Parameter Plans which provide the fundamental principles required to guide development, while preserving an appropriate degree of flexibility for the design of individual buildings and the balance of uses they will house.

Layout Streets

2.3 The proposed layout has been designed with people in mind, to create safe and accessible environments where the fear of crime does not undermine quality of life and community cohesion.

2.4 A new road network will connect Wood Wharf to Canary Wharf in the west and Prestons Road in the east. There will be three main connections to the existing road network at Montgomery Square and Cartier Circle in the west, and a reconnection to an existing junction with Prestons Road in the east. This through-road connection will allow vehicles to freely cross and move around the OPA Site from surrounding neighbourhoods.

2.5 Arriving from the west, the main road crosses Water Square with a new bridge structure. This road then forms the High Street, at the east end of which is a junction with North-South Street. Further to the east across North-South Street is Market Square, a vehicle free zone at the heart of the OPA Site. North-South Street slopes down from the elevated Cartier Circle in the north and connects two parallel east-west running streets that lay to the north and south of Market Square. These two roads, North Wharf Street and South Wharf Street, connect to two existing junctions onto Prestons Road.

2.6 The road layout allows for a series of regular Development Zones and public spaces in between the network of streets. The roads are spaced such that there are suitable sized areas for Development Zones both in the centre of the OPA Site and lining the water’s edge, either side of the road.

Character areas

2.7 The layout includes five overlapping character areas:

• A commercial area is located in the northwest corner of the OPA Site adjacent to Cartier Circle. It contains Development Zones that are similar in scale to the existing buildings of Canary Wharf.

• A residential area is located close to Canary Wharf in the south-west corner of the OPA Site where newly formed land is built out into the dock.

• The waterfront on the south of the OPA Site has panoramic views, ample sunlight and is distanced from the facing buildings by South Dock, making it suitable for a high density waterside living area which could contain tall buildings.

• The north-east of the OPA Site, adjacent to Lovegrove Walk and the Coldharbour Conservation Area, is suitable as a park side residential area set around East Park with a density more like that of its close neighbours.

• At the centre of the OPA Site is what can be considered as the central heart. This zone is directly on axis with Jubilee Gardens and Montgomery Square in the existing Canary Wharf estate.

2.8 A bridge will provide a direct link from Canary Wharf to the heart of Wood Wharf, drawing the two

developments together as one continuous piece of city.

Public Spaces

2.9 The OPA Site is surrounded by waterfront and each adjacent body of water has a different character. These areas already exist but access to some of them is currently limited. Exposing and enriching the dock side is a key priority of the OPA and individual Development Plots have been laid out to achieve this.

2.10 Four new public spaces are also proposed; ‘East Park’, ‘Junction Square’, ‘Market Square’ and ‘South Dock Park’:

• South Dock Park provides south facing riverside amenity that maximises exposure to the sun all year round. The park has been located on the south west, adjacent to Canary Wharf and the new residential area.

• Market Square and Junction Square are spaces at the heart of the OPA Site. They will be places which are full of activity, attracting new and existing local residents as well as people working in the area. These spaces are located in the centre of the plan in line with and with good access to Canary Wharf.

• East Park is the greenest space in the OPA, located in the heart of the residential area providing amenity for the new inhabitants and surrounding residential communities.

2.11 There are three areas of new land into the dock, with small marine decks providing a pedestrian walkway along the water edge of Blackwall Basin and basement areas to extend the Development Zones. A larger area of new land into the dock is proposed into South Dock consisting of a marine deck with basement areas below. A flood storage reservoir will be provided below this area.

2.12 A nature conservation area is proposed within the graving dock south of Lovegrove Walk and within Blackwall Basin a new area for residential boat moorings and pontoons will be provided.

Scale 2.13 Maximum and minimum footprints and the maximum heights of buildings are defined within the OPA,

however there are no minimum heights stipulated.

2.14 The minimum extent of open space will be defined as a no-build zone therefore guaranteeing space between buildings and safeguarding the larger public open spaces.

2.15 The scale of existing buildings around Wood Wharf varies greatly, from 235m tall skyscrapers containing 1.2 million square feet of office space in one building on one side to three storey townhouses on the other. The Proposed Development responds to the scale of the existing low-rise residential neighbourhood to the east, as well as mid-rise developments located north and south across the water.

2.16 The western side of the OPA Site is commercial in character and the tallest and largest buildings are located here. They create a place for the extended business of Canary Wharf and a streetscape bustling with retail and food and drink outlets.

2.17 The eastern side of the OPA Site largely contains shorter and smaller buildings which are predominantly residential. The streets are calmer with public and private green space dispersed amongst the buildings.

2.18 The scale of each Development Zone is summarised as follows

• Development Zone A – The larger residential buildings will form the gateway to Wood Wharf and as such they are the tallest buildings on the OPA Site. At 235m, One Canada Square will remain the tallest landmark in the northern Isle of Dogs and Development Zone A will take buildings such as 8&25 Canada Square, the HSBC and Citi Group towers as their local height

precedent.

• Development Zone B – This building will be a large office block similar in scale to the buildings on the eastern half of Canary Wharf, such as One Churchill Place and Bank Street. The southern part of Development Plot B is significantly shorter and steps down to the High Street where it is viewed from Montgomery Square.

• Development Zone C – Contains a large office block that is lower than Zone B to reduce overshadowing of Blackwall Basin. It lines the edge of the basin and provides a change in level between Cartier Circle and the OPA Site. Market Building C2 is a low rise building that relates to Market Square like a traditional market building.

• Development Zone D – Although smaller in footprint, these buildings are similar in height to those around Cabot Square. They line Market Square, as such are kept low to maximise natural light in the heart of the scheme.

• Development Zone E – Development Zone E has varied maximum height parameters with two high points. The towers in Zone E would descend from neighbouring Zone A, creating varied heights along the waterfront.

• Development Zone F – The high point in Development Zone F creates a varied skyline to provide visual interest when viewing Wood Wharf from across Blackwall Basin. The remainder of Zone F is mid to low rise to respond to adjacent residential buildings.

• Development Zone G – The high point of Zone G is in the northeast corner to maximise natural light to East Park. Development Zone G is on the scale of London townhouses and takes its height precedent from mid rise residential development at Boardwalk place to the north of Blackwall Basin.

• Development Zone H – Slightly lower but generally matched to Development Zone G where the buildings work together to enclose East Park. These mid rise blocks offer a combination of duplex apartments with flats above.

• Development Zone J – There are high points in block J which create a cluster of tall buildings with a varied skyline, these are also similar in height to surrounding residential developments.

2.19 The scale of development is controlled by the Parameter Plans. It is through these Parameter Plans that the maximum and minimum Development Zone footprints are set, along with the maximum heights for all the Development Plots within the Development Zone (there are no minimum heights controlled by the OPA).

Land uses 2.20 The type of uses proposed respond to the location adjacent to the financial centre of Canary Wharf, with

its excellent transport links to the rest of London, and to the growing demand to make this part of the Isle of Dogs a fully-functioning, ‘liveable’ part of London. The proposed mix of uses bridges the gap between the dominance of offices in Canary Wharf to the west, and the mainly residential areas to the north, east and south. A wide range of uses is proposed including a range of office and dwelling types, hotel rooms, shops, restaurants, and cafes, community spaces and potentially a primary school.

2.21 The OPA seeks approval for a total maximum amount of floor area which can be constructed when the OPA is completed. The total floorspace applied for is 728,880sqm GIA.

2.22 There is no exact figure for any one type of use class. Instead, a minimum and maximum range for each use is proposed, for example, the minimum amount of business (B1) floor space is 100,000sqm whilst the maximum is 350,000sqm. If the maximum allowable amounts of each use are added together, they equal

more than the total amount of floor area applied for. As such, the maximum amount of every use applied for will never be fully built out.

2.23 Each Development Zone in the OPA has the potential to house a range of uses. Development Zones are either assigned as ‘predominant use’ or ‘flexible use blocks’. In predominant use Development Zones at least 51% of the floorspace created must be given over to a specific use. The other 49% of the floorspace can be assigned to any of the other permitted uses (found listed in the Development Specification).

2.24 The predominant use in Development Zones A, E, F, J and H will be residential, which will create the basis for mixed-use residential neighbourhoods fronting Wood Wharf’s two parks.

2.25 The predominant use in Development Zones B and C will be office, making these an extension of Canary Wharf’s commercial centre.

2.26 Development Zones D, G, parts of B, C and H are flexible use blocks, meaning that the block is not defined as being dominated by any one particular use. Instead it can be developed to house any use from the list of permitted uses.

2.27 In addition, the Parameter Plans fix the ground floor and lower level uses in some locations. This is to ensure a healthy, focused, active frontage in the key community focal points at the heart of the scheme including High Street, Market Square and Junction Square which are considered to be the urban centre.

2.28 Above street level, buildings around the central space are flexible use blocks and so a particular use has not been fixed.

Indicative Scheme

2.29 The Development Plots designed within Development Zones A, E, F and H are almost completely residential above the lower level to maximise views to the south over the water and the park.

2.30 Development Zones B and C are in the heart of the OPA Site and directly accessible from Canary Wharf across both Montgomery Bridge and Cartier Circle; as such the Development Plots B1, B3 and C1 within these Development Zones are predominantly office use.

2.31 Development Zone D makes up the other edges of Market Square and they share the character of other Development Plots that line this space as office use.

2.32 Flexible use block G forms the western edge of East Park and as such shares the residential character of other buildings enclosing the park.

2.33 At its prominent location in line with One Canada Square, overlooking Blackwall Basin and enclosing Cartier Circle, flexible use block B2 is envisaged as a suite hotel for predominantly business users.

2.34 In addition, the Indicative Scheme includes a primary school and sports facility in Development Zone H adjacent to the graving dock. There is also provision for a possible cinema under Market Square, an Idea Store and other community spaces.

Transport 2.35 All the access routes to and through the site are shown on the Access and Circulation Routes Parameter

Plan (WWMP-PP 004).

Vehicle Access and Parking

2.36 The internal road network will provide vehicle access to drop-off, parking, delivery and servicing areas. The vehicle access arrangements make full provision for deliveries and servicing, waste and emergency vehicles. A maximum of 1300 car parking spaces will be provided and a minimum of 600 car parking spaces.

Pedestrian

2.37 A continuous network of pedestrian routes provides good connections across the OPA Site with pedestrian footways provided alongside vehicle access routes. Shared surfaces on the smaller roads will create an environment that is pedestrian friendly.

2.38 A new bridge (Montgomery Bridge) will provide direct access to Canary Wharf improving connections with local transport links to the west. New pedestrian bridges will also link Development Zone A to Churchill Place in the north and Canary Wharf to the west.

Cycle Access and Parking

2.39 The proposed layout will provide a cycle friendly environment. Cyclists will share roads with other users with the street characteristics designed to encourage slower vehicle speeds.

2.40 Cycle parking for residents and employees is in secure locations and surface level cycle parking is provided at key locations throughout the OPA Site for visitors. The Development Specification (Table 3) sets a minimum of 3000 cycle parking spaces.

2.41 Cycle hire docking stations are also provided on the OPA Site.

Construction 2.42 The Proposed Development is expected to be constructed over a 12 year period, starting in 2014 and

completed by 2026. The Proposed Development will not be constructed at once, instead it will be constructed in a number of stages, known as ‘phases’, so that different parts of the OPA will be finished and become active at different times. An indication of the likely phasing has been provided with the Proposed Development being constructed in 7 phases.

Waste Management 2.43 A Waste Management Strategy (Document WW1.20) is submitted with the OPA which explains how the

Proposed Development will use resources efficiently and reduce the amount of waste produced, including by maximising the use of recycled materials during construction and minimising the amounts of waste going to landfill during construction and operation.

2.44 Waste from the office, retail, residential, community and hotel uses on the western side of the OPA Site will be stored in rooms within the basement and collection will take place from one of three loading/servicing areas also located within the basement. The buildings located on the eastern side of the Proposed Development do not have access to the basement. Waste storage and collections will therefore take place at ground level.

Sustainable Design Features 2.45 A sustainable place is one which provides conditions that promote and maintain happy bodies and minds

while at the same time limiting the impacts on the environment. The OPA is aiming for the highest standards in sustainability and energy consumption.

2.46 The Proposed Development has been located and designed to limit carbon emissions. It is located on land that has already been developed in the past and in a place that is already developed. The surrounding area has good public transport links. The new bridges will provide good connections to public transport within the Canary Wharf Estate. The Proposed Development also makes the best possible use of land by providing a high density mixed use development which reduces the need to travel and provides a mix of residential, mixed retail, office, community/education and public open space.

2.47 An Energy Strategy has been produced to predict the energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2)

generated by the Proposed Development. It also provides information on the savings that will be made through design measures and technologies that reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Technologies will include a district heating network and roof-mounted photovoltaics.

2.48 High standards of sustainable design will be targeted, Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 for the residential buildings and BREEAM Excellent for the other parts.

2.49 In addition to the various green public spaces, ecological roofs will be provided across the OPA Site providing a minimum of 4,000 sqm of ecological habitat, with some roofs specifically designed to provide habitat for Black Redstarts, which are a protected bird species.

2.50 Systems will be used to recycle and collect rainwater, and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) will be used to reduce the flow of rainwater from the surfaces and into the drainage network. Fixtures and fittings will be used to conserve water in the buildings and in the landscape.

3.0 CONSULTATION 3.1 Discussions and meetings have been held with LBTH with regard to the OPA and EIA. The approach to

the EIA has been agreed informally through discussions and formally through the submission of a Scoping Report, which included a description of the Proposed Development, the proposed approach and content, and the list of the cumulative schemes.

3.2 A formal Scoping Opinion was received from LBTH on 11th December 2012 and the EIA has been informed by the responses. The main statutory and local authority consultees for the Scoping Report were the Environment Agency (EA), the Greater London Authority (GLA), Transport for London (TfL), Natural England (NE) and English Heritage (EH). The Scoping Report was also sent to a further 15 consultees, as listed in Appendix A of the Scoping Opinion (Technical Appendix 1.1).

3.3 The EIA Scoping process identified that the following key environmental issues would need to be assessed as part of the EIA (in addition to the introductory chapters and an analysis of the relevant planning policy context):

• Socio-economic;

• Archaeology and Cultural Heritage;

• Townscape and visual;

• Transport;

• Waste;

• Noise and vibration;

• Daylight, sunlight, overshadowing, light pollution and solar glare;

• Ecology;

• Wind;

• Air quality;

• Water resources and flood risk;

• Ground conditions and contamination; and

• Cumulative effects.

3.4 The EIA Scoping process also identified that the issues of telecommunications, aviation, health and wellbeing and climate change should be scoped out of the EIA.

3.5 Consultation with relevant bodies and groups has also continued beyond the scoping stage, and throughout the EIA process, to inform the baseline assessment, the assessment of effects and to define the appropriate mitigation.

3.6 Full details of all consultation responses can be found in chapter 1 of the ES and the relevant technical chapters.

4.0 APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT 4.1 The approach taken for this EIA has been to assess the likely significant effects of the Proposed

Development on sensitive receptors and environmental resources that are likely to be affected. This involves identifying the current condition of the environment and then evaluating how that condition might change as a result of the Proposed Development.

4.2 The ES describes the significance of any environmental effects identified using the following scale:

• Major adverse.

• Moderate adverse.

• Minor adverse.

• Neutral.

• Negligible.

• Minor beneficial.

• Moderate beneficial.

• Major beneficial.

4.3 The development parameters for the OPA take the form of the Specified Parameters; a series of spatial Parameter Plans, accompanied by a series of which non-spatial parameters set out in the Development Specification and Design Guidelines documents.

4.4 The EIA focuses primarily on an assessment of the Specified Parameters, as identified within the Control Documents, being:

• The Parameter Plans define the extent of the proposed routes, spaces and buildings across the OPA Site against a series of minimum or maximum dimensions. Each of these component parts is identified as a Development Zone which is identified by a letter (e.g. Development Zone A) and which is then further broken down into Development Plots, each of which is identified by a letter and number (e.g. Development Plot A1).

• The Development Specification sets out a written account of the Parameter Plans and details the description of the Proposed Development and the type and quantity of development that could be provided within each of the Development Zones and Development Plots across the OPA Site.

• The Design Guidelines are intended to provide guidance for future design teams involved in the preparation of Reserved Matters applications for the development of any of the Development Zones and Development Plots. Reserved Matters applications are likely to need to comply with the Design Guidelines if they are to be considered acceptable.

4.5 The OPA is supported by an Indicative Scheme which demonstrates what the OPA Site might look like with the development parameters in place by showing a potential arrangement of the building, entrances, routes and open spaces.

4.6 The ES focuses mainly on the development parameters submitted for approval in the Parameter Plans and Development Specification. The maximum development parameters are assessed in most of the technical assessments because they are likely to result in the worst environmental effects. However, in some cases the minimum development parameters or Indicative Scheme could potentially create worse effects and are therefore assessed instead of or in addition to the maximum development parameters.

4.7 The Parameter Plans and Development Specification provide flexibility as to the land uses that could be

developed across the OPA Site. Flexibility is included in the OPA where some Development Zones are ‘any permitted use’. In addition, the Development Specification (Table 2) provides floorspace ranges for each use class within a total maximum floorspace for the OPA Site.

4.8 Each technical ES topic has considered this flexibility to determine a reasonable worst case scenario for the likely significance of effects arising from the development that could be delivered within the Specified Parameters. Where the potential for additional significant effects was identified as a result of the aforementioned flexibility, and to ensure that the worst case was tested, a sensitivity analysis has been conducted. If no sensitivity analysis was required, where the flexible approach to land uses was not relevant to the specific topic, this is clearly stated and explained.

4.9 Each technical chapter clearly identifies which development parameters have been assessed and includes an explanation of why they represent the reasonable worst case scenario.

4.10 The EIA also identifies any measures required to reduce adverse effects; these are known as ‘mitigation measures’. Other measures that could be included in the Proposed Development to improve its environmental performance further are also described in the ES; these are known as ‘enhancement measures’.

4.11 The EIA process takes account of the ‘cumulative effects’ which are the combined effects arising from the Proposed Development and other planned future development projects in the study area.

5.0 PLANNING POLICY 5.1 ES chapter 5 provides a full analysis of the planning policy context of the Proposed Development, with

particular regard to how planning policies relate to the environmental issues.

5.2 The planning policy framework for the redevelopment of the OPA Site is set out in the statutory development plan and in government policy. The assessment will have regard to the following planning policy documents:

National Planning Policy

• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March, 2012).

• Draft National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (August, 2013)

Regional Planning Policy

• The London Plan (July, 2011);

• Revised Early Minor Alterations to the London Plan (October, 2013);

• Relevant adopted GLA Strategies and Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents.

Local Planning Policy

• London Borough of Tower Hamlets Core Strategy (September, 2010);

• Managing Development Document (MDD) (April, 2013)

• Wood Wharf Masterplan SPG (2003);

5.3 The individual ES chapters contain a focused analysis of the specific planning policies, legislation and standards that are relevant to the chapter topic.

6.0 SOCIO ECONOMIC 6.1 This chapter assesses the socio-economic effects of the Proposed Development, meaning the effects on

people and the economy. The OPA Site is located within the Blackwall and Cubitt Town ward on the Isle of Dogs. This chapter in particular considers the likely effects on the social and economic conditions within Blackwall and Cubitt Town ward and Millwall ward, the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) and across London.

6.2 The socio-economic assessment has assessed the Indicative Scheme along with a sensitivity analysis of the residential and commercial floorspaces.

6.3 In terms of socio-economic effects of development, sensitive receptors include the existing and new population, existing and future labour market, and the existing social infrastructure.

6.4 Local policy states that development of high quality office space, in the Wood Wharf area, “can significantly contribute to providing the additional employment necessary to confirm the Isle of Dogs as a global financial and business centre”, as well as helping to achieve other aims and objectives across the Borough, such as supporting the development and growth of small businesses and helping local residents to find employment.

6.5 The existing buildings within the OPA Site are mostly vacant, but there are a few remaining occupiers. The majority of the 125 people employed on the OPA Site work in light industrial businesses, such as a data centre, a pharmaceutical research company and a storage company. The OPA Site also contains a leisure facility operated by Play On Sports, and there are 29 residences along Lovegrove Walk. Three of these residences are owner occupied, with the remainder owned by the Applicant and privately rented.

6.6 The existing businesses and residents will be removed from the OPA Site as a result of the Proposed Development. The loss of the existing businesses and residences is likely have a direct temporary, short term minor adverse effect at the local level.

6.7 In 2011 the London Borough of Tower Hamlets had a population of 254,000 people, which has grown significantly since the 2001 census. The local area has a high proportion of well-educated working age residents. The level of economic activity within the local area is higher than the overall Borough average, with a lower level of unemployment.

6.8 Deprivation is measured by assessing a combination of social, economic and housing issues which effect resident’s socioeconomic conditions. Areas with high levels of deprivation are commonly affects by social issues such as unemployment, low educational attainment, poor housing conditions and a lack of community facilities to serve local people. The Borough as a whole has substantial areas of deprivation, particularly in the area directly north of the Isle of Dogs where the OPA Site is located. In fact, parts of the Isle of Dogs fall within the 20% most deprived in the country meaning that there are areas with a high level of deprivation surrounding the OPA Site.

6.9 There are a number of primary and secondary schools within easy travelling distance of the OPA Site (within the local area for primary schools and borough wide for secondary schools). These schools currently have space for 140 children of primary school age and 1,115 children of secondary school age. However, those existing spaces are expected to be taken up over the coming years by the projected growth in school age children with the Borough.

6.10 The local area is well supplied with healthcare facilities, including 9 GP surgeries. However, there is limited space within existing GP surgeries for additional patients to register.

6.11 There are a number of parks and open spaces within the local area, some of which include children’s play space.

6.12 The demolition and construction stages of the Proposed Development would create approximately 2,200 permanent (Full Time Employed) construction jobs. There is also the potential for the benefit of these construction jobs to be maximised for the local population by job brokerage schemes, apprenticeships and training schemes. The Applicant has previously been involved in these types of schemes and will work in partnership with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and others to make the most of the opportunities. It is assessed that the effect of the demolition and construction phase of the Proposed Development would have a direct, temporary, short to medium term minor beneficial effect in the local area in relation to construction employment training.

6.13 The construction workers on-site during the various demolition and construction phases would have an indirect effect on the local economy through additional spending. The likely effect upon local spend is considered to be an indirect, temporary, short to medium term minor beneficial effect at the local level.

6.14 Based on the development shown in the Indicative Scheme, the Proposed Development would create 3,107 new homes with a new population of 5,025 residents. The delivery of new homes would make a substantial contribution towards LBTH’s housing targets. It is considered this would be a direct, permanent, long term major beneficial effect within the district.

6.15 Within this new population, there is an expected to be a demand for a 143 additional primary school places and 58 additional secondary school places. Without mitigation, the increased demand for primary school places would be a direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect at the local level. At secondary level, it is considered the increased demand would be a direct, permanent, long term minor adverse effect at the district level without mitigation. However, should a new school be delivered as part of the Proposed Development it is considered this would have a direct, permanent, long term major beneficial effect at the local level.

6.16 The Proposed Development would increase the demand for social infrastructure in the local area, which could include community facilities such as schools, health services, open space and playspace. Without measures to provide additional facilities, the Proposed Development could therefore an adverse effect on the local area. However, the Proposed Development includes new space for community uses which could include social facilities such as a primary school, library (Ideas Store) and / or a health centre. The community facilities required by the Proposed Development in the context of the wider area will be subject to further negotiation with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and others to make sure enough is provided. Demand for additional social facilities as a result of the Proposed Development would therefore be met either by new facilities provided on-site or through contributions towards new facilities off-site. Following mitigation the effect of the Proposed Development on community facilities would range from negligible to a direct, permanent, long term major beneficial effect on the local level.

6.17 The new commercial space proposed, which includes retail, offices, hotel, community and leisure floorspace, would create new job opportunities. It is estimated that the Proposed Development would create 16,920 additional new jobs. The Proposed Development would have a direct, permanent, long term major beneficial effect at the local and district level and moderate effect at the regional level.

6.18 This increase in people and jobs is likely to have a beneficial effect on the local economy by increasing spending by residents and employees, with a knock on effect for local businesses, which could be in the region of £61.1 million per year. This would have a direct, permanent, long term major beneficial effect on the local area.

6.19 The Proposed Development includes a range of new outdoor open spaces, including a new linear parks, public squares, communal residential space, playspace and improved access to the waterside. Playspace would be provided in line with policy guidance. The effect of the Proposed Development on delivering

new open space would have a direct, permanent, long term moderate beneficial effect on the local area.

6.20 The increased numbers of people living in the area, combined with the creation of new high quality streets and outdoor spaces, will have a positive effect on safety, crime and the fear of crime by increasing the number of people on the streets and ‘natural surveillance’, meaning the informal way that the presence of people deters crime and anti-social behaviour, especially in the evening and at the weekends. The effect on crime and safety would have a direct, permanent, long term minor beneficial effect on the local area.

6.21 The Proposed Development would provide spaces that are accessible to the mobility impaired and would be designed to meet the relevant standards and regulations. As the Proposed Development will provide a mixture of office, retail and leisure spaces, it is expected to create a range of different jobs for different skill levels, including a significant number of job opportunities for local people requiring entry-level jobs for those entering or re-entering the workforce. As a result there are not expected to be any negative effects on equalities which could affect people who are protected under the 2010 Equalities Act. This seeks to protect a set of particular characteristics of people who may suffer from discrimination, such as age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race and religion, or belief. The effect of the Proposed Development upon equalities would range from negligible to a direct, permanent, long term minor beneficial effect in the local area.

6.22 The OPA includes the minimum and maximum amounts of building space that can be provided in the Proposed Development according to the different types of use, such as residential, office and retail. This assessment has considered the different effects that could arise on the economy and population as a result of those different amounts.

6.23 The number of new homes that could be provided within the Proposed Development ranges from a minimum of 1,700 to a maximum of 4,500. Based on this range, the potential population created is between 2,810 and 7,190 people with demand for 92 – 201 additional primary school places and 39 – 76 additional secondary school places.

6.24 The amount of new commercial space that could be provided would create an estimated minimum of 6,715 additional new jobs and a maximum of 23,880 additional new jobs.

6.25 The resulting effect on the local economy would be positive by increasing the spending by residents and employees by £52.7 - £65 million per year.

6.26 Overall, while there will be a small number of businesses and homes lost from the OPA Site, the Proposed Development is expected to have many positive effects on people and the economy by creating a large number of new homes and jobs.

7.0 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 7.1 The Proposed Development has the potential for direct effects on the Coldharbour Conservation Area,

Grade I listed structures (on the dock wall of Blackwall Basin and the West India Dock and East Quay (Export Dock)), and to cause removal of archaeology on the OPA Site.

Archaeology 7.2 The OPA Site contains archaeological remains of Post Medieval date including: the Junction Dock, filled

in 1979-80; part of the original extent of the Blackwall Basin; a Graving Dock of 1876-8 date; a linking channel from Blackwall Basin to the West India Dock East Quay; part of the South Dock, filled in during the 1920s.

7.3 Due to the construction of the above features, it is unlikely that significant archaeological remains

predating the 19th century will remain within the OPA Site. However, if deep alluvial sequences are present the Proposed Development is likely to affect any archaeological deposits within the sequence.

7.4 A comprehensive and appropriate archaeological and geo-archaeological mitigation strategy will be implemented prior to development. This would comprise an archaeological and geo archaeological evaluation which, if positive, would be followed by a full archaeological excavation (preservation by record) on Site. This would be followed by a programme of post excavation and publication.

7.5 The effect of the proposals on remains contained within any deep alluvial sequences is judged to be direct, long term, permanent minor adverse following appropriate mitigation.

7.6 The effects to the below ground dock remains on the OPA Site will be irreversible. The proposals will affect the structure of the Junction Dock which is thought to be intact below the surface. The historical importance of Junction Dock is low in historical or architectural terms and this effect can be mitigated by archaeological investigation.

7.7 No effects are derived from the operation of the Proposed Development. All archaeological effects will be appropriately mitigated before the buildings are constructed.

Cultural Heritage 7.8 An assessment has been undertaken of the likely effects of the Proposed Development on relevant

sensitive cultural heritage receptors in and around the OPA Site, including listed buildings, conservation areas, and the Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site (WHS).

7.9 The baseline conditions relating to the cultural heritage assessment have been established by:

• Identifying and mapping of WHSs, Grade I, II* and II listed buildings and Registered Parks and Gardens within a 1km radius of the centre of the OPA Site.

• Identifying and mapping of conservation areas within a 1km radius of the centre of the OPA Site.

• Identifying and mapping of all locally listed buildings within a 500m radius of the centre of the OPA Site.

7.10 The previous EIA conducted for the extant 2008 planning consent included the Balfron Tower Conservation Area. This is now over 1 km from the OPA Site because under the revised Proposed Development the centre of the OPA Site is located further to the south. However, in order to ensure consistency with the previous EIA the Balfron Tower Conservation Area has been included within this assessment.

7.11 The Maritime Greenwich WHS is over 2 km from the OPA Site, which is well outside the 1 km study area. Despite the distance however, the Proposed Development will be visible from Greenwich Park, so the WHS has been included in the assessment, in light of the greater sensitivity reflected in the GLA guidance.

7.12 Following this stage of assessment the relevant sensitive cultural heritage receptors noted within and around the OPA Site were identified as:

• Blackwall Basin, a Grade I listed building;

• The Gun Public House, a Grade II listed building;

• Blackwall River Police Station, a Grade II listed building;

• 15 Coldharbour, a Grade II listed building;

• 3 & 5-7 Coldharbour, Grade II listed buildings;

• Isle House, a Grade II listed building;

• Bridge House, a Grade II listed building;

• Poplar Dock (Original Eastern Part) , a Grade II listed building;

• Accumulator Tower to South East Corner of Poplar Dock, a Grade II listed building;

• Accumulator Tower to West Side of Poplar Dock, a Grade II listed building;

• Quay Walls, Copings and Buttresses to Import Dock and Export Dock, a Grade I listed building;

• Warehouses and General Offices at Western End of Northern Quay, a Grade I listed building;

• St Mathias Church, a Grade II* listed building;

• Coldharbour Conservation Area;

• Naval Row Conservation Area;

• All Saints Church Conservation Area;

• St Mathias Church Conservation Area;

• West India Docks Conservation Area;

• Lansbury Conservation Area;

• St Frideswide’s Conservation Area

• Three unlisted dockside cranes;

• The Canal and River Trust Building, an unlisted building located in the Coldharbour Conservation Area;

• The Maritime Greenwich WHS; and

• The Balfron Tower Conservation Area.

7.13 The main elements of the Proposed Development relevant to cultural heritage are:

• The direct effect on cultural heritage assets in and around the OPA Site, particularly works to the listed dock walls of the Blackwall Basin and the Quay Walls, Copings and Buttresses to Import Dock and Export Dock, as well as the demolition of the Canal and River Trust Building, which is located in the Coldharbour Conservation Area; and

• The direct effect on the setting of cultural heritage assets in and around the OPA Site, particularly relating to the construction of tall buildings.

7.14 The Proposed Development includes the demolition and alteration of the docks walls to the Grade I listed Blackwall Basin and East Quay of West India Dock. The dock walls would be recorded prior to this work taking place and the retained sections would be repaired. A scheme of interpretation is proposed relating to the dock walls, comprising a trail around the OPA Site with information boards setting out the history of the Blackwall Basin and the wider West India Docks.

7.15 It is also proposed to demolish a building located within the Coldharbour Conservation Area. The building is known as the Canal and River Trust Building. It is considered that the building does not make a positive contribution to the Conservation Area and the proposed demolition would have a neutral effect.

7.16 The Proposed Development would affect the setting of heritage assets located on and around the Site. The setting of the majority of cultural heritage assets has already been significantly altered by the development of Canary Wharf directly to the west of the Site since the 1980s; this has included the partial infilling of

West India Dock and construction of a cluster of tall commercial buildings, which in many instances has created an interesting visual juxtaposition of new and historic development. The quality of the existing buildings and townscape on the OPA Site is poor. The Proposed Development will replace this with contemporary architecture and landscaping which will significantly regenerate the area and enhance the setting of many cultural heritage assets.

7.17 In many locations the Proposed Development will reinforce the existing, visually interesting contrast between old and new to good effect. There would be an overall beneficial effect on the setting of the majority of the heritage assets located on and around the OPA Site.

Construction effects

7.18 The proposed demolition and alteration of the listed dock walls to the Blackwall Basin would have a direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect, even when considering proposed mitigation measures such as recording the walls and interpretation on the site. The repair of retained dock walls would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate beneficial effect.

7.19 The proposed demolition and alteration of the listed dock walls to the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock) would have a direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect, even when considering proposed mitigation measures such as recording the walls and interpretation on the site. The repair of retained dock walls would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate beneficial effect.

7.20 The construction of bridges in the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock), and public walkways, floating, moored and piled landscape areas, and piling and fixings for moorings and pontoons in the Blackwall Basin and the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock), would have direct, permanent, long term, moderate adverse effect. Mitigation through design is considered in the assessment of operational effects below.

7.21 Construction effects such as dust and vibration would have an indirect, temporary, medium term, minor adverse effect on listed building and conservation areas on and around the OPA Site and the three unlisted dock side cranes. These effects can be mitigated through the use of hoardings and the three dockside cranes will be protected during construction.

7.22 The demolition of the Canal and River Trust Building would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate adverse effect on the heritage receptor, and a direct, permanent, long term, negligible effect on the Coldharbour Conservation Area. This is because the building makes a neutral contribution to the Conservation Area.

7.23 The construction effects on the setting of the Maritime Greenwich WHS would be negligible.

Operational effects

7.24 The proposed demolition and alteration of the listed dock walls to the Blackwall Basin would continue to have a direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect in the operational phase, even when considering proposed mitigation measures such as recording the walls and interpretation on the OPA Site. The repair of retained dock walls would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate beneficial effect.

7.25 The proposed demolition and alteration of the listed dock walls to the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock) would continue to have a direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect in the operational phase, even when considering proposed mitigation measures such as recording the walls and interpretation on the OPA Site. The repair of retained dock walls would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate beneficial effect.

7.26 When mitigated through high quality detailed design, the overall effect in the operational phase of the construction of bridges in the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock), and public walkways, floating,

moored and piled landscape areas, and piling and fixings for moorings and pontoons in the Blackwall Basin and the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock), would be direct, permanent, long term, minor adverse.

7.27 Following recording and interpretation of the associated dock walls, the overall effect of walkways on top of the retained dock walls and cantilevered over the water edge would be direct, permanent, long term, minor adverse.

7.28 When mitigated through high quality detailed design, the overall effect in the operational phase of the new buildings on the setting of the Blackwall Basin and the West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock), would be direct, permanent, long term, major beneficial.

7.29 Even with mitigation through high quality design, the overall effect of bridges and floating, moored and piled landscape areas in the docks would be direct, permanent, long term, minor adverse. This is because of the effect of these features on the setting of the heritage receptors.

7.30 As for the construction phase, in the operational phase the demolition of the Canal and River Trust Building would have a direct, permanent, long term, moderate adverse effect on the heritage receptor, and a direct, permanent, long term, negligible effect on the Coldharbour Conservation Area. This is because the building makes a neutral contribution to the Conservation Area.

7.31 As the Proposed Development will change the Historic Character of the All Saints Church Conservation Area, there will be a direct, permanent, long term, minor adverse effect on the setting of this heritage receptor.

7.32 When mitigated through high quality detailed design, there would be a direct, permanent, long term, moderate beneficial effect on the setting of the following heritage receptors:

• The Gun Public House;

• Blackwall River Police Station;

• 15 Coldharbour;

• 3 & 5-7 Coldharbour;

• Isle House;

• Bridge House;

• Poplar Dock (Original Eastern Part);

• Accumulator Tower to South East Corner of Poplar Dock;

• Accumulator Tower to West Side of Poplar Dock;

• Coldharbour Conservation Area;

• Naval Row Conservation Area;

• Three unlisted dockside cranes; and

• The Maritime Greenwich WHS.

7.33 When mitigated through high quality detailed design, there would be a direct, permanent, long term, minor beneficial effect on the setting of St Mathias Church and the St Mathias Church Conservation Area.

7.34 There would be a negligible effect on the setting of the following heritage receptors:

• St Frideswide’s Conservation Area;

• Lansbury Conservation Area; and

• Balfron Tower Conservation Area.

7.35 There would be no effect on the setting of the following heritage receptors:

• Warehouse and general offices, West India Dock Road; and

• West India Dock Conservation Area.

8.0 TOWNSCAPE 8.1 The townscape character of the OPA Site and surroundings has been identified and described based on a

review of existing characterisations studies, conservation area appraisals and site visits to the area surrounding the OPA Site. This review has identified 11 townscape character areas surrounding the site:

• Canary Wharf;

• Aspen Way Corridor;

• Poplar Neighbourhoods;

• Leaside South;

• Blackwall;

• Poplar Dock;

• Coldharbour;

• River Thames;

• Manchester Road;

• Millwall Docks; and

• Millennium Quarter.

8.2 A review of the area in which the Proposed Development would be visible was undertaken and 33 views selected to assess the effects of the Proposed Development in distant, mid-distance and local views. Photos from each of these view locations were taken and then photomontages with the Proposed Development prepared for comparison.

8.3 The townscape and visual assessment is based on the Maximum Height Parameters as this represents the worst case scenario for townscape and visual effects. A set of Accurate Visual Representations (AVRs), provide photomontages with a 3D Computer Generated Image (CGI) of the proposed development positioned within the photograph. AVR1 (wireline) is used in all views tested to illustrate the location, size and degree of visibility of proposed development, based on the Maximum Height Parameters. AVRs have also been prepared for the Indicative Scheme for information, however the effects reported are based on the AVRs for the Maximum Height Parameters.

8.4 The OPA Site will be cleared of the existing low scale buildings, which are of low townscape and visual quality. As such, and given the scale of the Proposed Development there will be a major change to the appearance of this part of Canary Wharf, in townscape and visual terms. It offers an opportunity to substantially regenerate and enhance the existing OPA Site and its surroundings.

Construction Effects 8.5 Construction of the Proposed Development will be a continual process during the 12 year indicative

construction programme and will result in visual change, on the OPA Site for a temporary period. The most significant visual and townscape effects associated with the construction process will be the presence of tower cranes. Their presence is inevitable in connection with construction of the type and scale envisaged. The top of a tower crane is likely to be higher than the top of the building, so it will be more visible than the finished building. However this temporary situation which is a common consequence of building activity in London and there is no practical way of avoiding it. Therefore construction of the Proposed Development will result in a temporary, short to medium term minor adverse effect upon views and the townscape surrounding the OPA Site.

Operational Effects 8.1 Beneficial effects are anticipated for the majority of character areas, where the Proposed Development

will reinforce the identity and character of the Isle of Dogs, helping to unite a somewhat disjointed townscape and reinforce the regeneration context of the area. This includes direct, long term minor beneficial to minor to moderate beneficial effects on Leaside South, Manchester Road, Millwall Docks and Millennium Quarter, Canary Wharf, Blackwall Way, Poplar Dock and the River Thames. There will be negligible effects on the Aspen Way Corridor and Poplar Neighbourhoods townscape character areas.

8.2 The assessment has concluded a moderate adverse effect on Coldharbour townscape character area. The scale and contemporary nature of the proposed buildings will directly contrast that of the existing Coldharbour townscape, effect the wider townscape setting and causing a notable and material deterioration in the quality and value of the townscape. Although to a lesser extent this effect is currently established by the existing Canary Wharf cluster, the Proposed Development is still considered to have a direct, permanent, long-term moderate adverse effect on the townscape of Coldharbour.

8.3 The Proposed Development has a beneficial effect upon the majority of the local views, contributing to visual interest and creating compelling elements. However, the Proposed Development does have a moderate to major adverse effect upon view L10 due to its discordant scale and dominant nature.

8.4 The Proposed Development generally has a beneficial effect upon the amenity of mid-distance range views. Adding depth and variation to views creates visual interest and supports the Isle of Dogs’ unique sense of place. Whilst for the majority of the views the contemporary Proposed Development would create a compelling juxtaposition with surrounding historic development, view M13 would be subject to a moderate to major adverse effect due to the sensitivity of this view.

8.5 The Proposed Development respects the form of the existing Canary Wharf cluster, strengthening the Isle of Dogs cluster as a compelling backdrop and a visually interesting skyline. The distant views range from negligiblem where the Proposed Development is not clearly visible, to moderate to major beneficial where the Proposed Development sits in proportion and balances the existing cluster of buildings of Canary Wharf.

8.6 Due to the incomplete nature of the OPA Site during the various phases and the presence of cranes and other construction elements the Proposed Development will detract from the amenity of a number of the views resulting in a direct, temporary, minor adverse effect. In the later phases of development the OPA Site will begin to resemble the completed Proposed Development and as such have a beneficial effect on a number of views.

8.7 Potential night time visual effects from lighting at night have been considered in respect of the main visual receptors. The final lighting scheme has not yet been completed however given the existing cluster of buildings in the Docklands and at Canary Wharf, it is apparent that there is a significant level of existing night time light and illumination in the immediate vicinity. Whilst the Proposed Development would result in an increase in the level of night time light/illumination, the effect on views and townscape is likely to be direct, long term, permanent and negligible to minor adverse.

8.8 As the planning application is submitted in outline, the townscape and visual assessment includes reference to the Design Guidelines, to explain the design measures that will be employed to ensure that design quality is maintained in later Reserved Matters applications.

Cumulative Effects 8.1 Visualisations (AVR’s) of the Indicative Scheme and the cumulative schemes have been prepared for all

33 views. The cumulative schemes have a beneficial effect for the majority of the views. Cumulative

schemes balance the structure of the Isle of Dogs development and contribute to integrating the Proposed Development within its wider setting. From a number of the selected views the Proposed Development is obscured by cumulative schemes.

8.2 The effect of the cumulative schemes and the Proposed Development in the majority of views is broadly similar. For local view the effects range from moderate to major adverse (View L10) to moderate to major beneficial and for mid-distance views they range from moderate adverse (View M13) to moderate to major beneficial .Views L10 and M13 cumulative schemes have an adverse effect, reinforcing the dominant contemporary development. The effects for distant views range from negligible to moderate to major beneficial.

9.0 TRANSPORT 9.1 An assessment of the likely transport effects has been undertaken in support of the OPA considering all

aspects of movement by employees, visitors and residents, servicing and delivery requirements and waste collection upon completion of the Proposed Development as well as movement associated with the demolition and construction phases.

9.2 Travel Plans accompany the OPA to promote sustainable travel for all residents, employees and visitors to the OPA Site. A Delivery and Servicing Plan and Construction Logistics Plan are also provided to promote the sustainable movement of goods, servicing and construction activity.

9.3 The highway network considers the area surrounding the OPA Site including Aspen Way to the north, Prestons Road to the east, Marsh Wall to the south and Westferry Road to the west.

9.4 The likely effects on the following junctions outside the OPA Site have been assessed, which are considered sensitive external receptors:

• Cartier Circle;

• Montgomery Square;

• Prestons Road Roundabout;

• North Wharf Street (Lovegrove Walk) / Prestons Road;

• South Wharf Street (Harbour Quay) / Prestons Road; and

• Upper Bank Street / Aspen Way.

9.5 The local public transport connections have also been assessed as sensitive external receptors, including the Jubilee Line, DLR, Bus and Riverbus network along with the proposed Crossrail link.

9.6 An assessment of the pedestrian environment surrounding the OPA Site, including links to local public transport and community facilities, along with cycle links to the local cycle network, has also been undertaken.

9.7 The internal transport, pedestrian and cycle network has the potential to create future sensitive receptors within the OPA Site. However, due to the quality of the design, significant effects associated with these receptors are unlikely and no further assessment is required. The Design and Access Statement, Pedestrian Connectivity Report and Design Guidelines set out the design principles for the OPA. The principles within these documents ensure that the Proposed Development has been designed in accordance with the required standards, including vehicle, pedestrian and cycle facilities and the internal highway network.

9.8 To assess the likely effects of the Proposed Development the transport assessment considers a number of scenarios which represent how the Proposed Development could be built based on the parameters within the Development Specification.

9.9 The Development Specification also defines maximum ranges for residential and commercial floorspace (the Maximum Residential Scheme and the Maximum Commercial Scheme) which could be built within the maximum floorspace. Two sensitivity analyses have also been conducted for both of these scenarios. These sensitivity analyses represent a worst case scenario, although the overall transport effects would be similar to the Indicative Scheme.

9.10 The assessment focuses on the floorspaces in the Development Specification and the Indicative Scheme, where it shows a scheme that could reasonably be developed based on the maximum allowable floorspace within the Development Specification and within the physical limitations of the Parameter Plans. As such, the Indicative Scheme represents the reasonable worst case scenario in terms of trip generation and the

resulting effects on the local transport network.

9.11 As the Proposed Development would be constructed in seven indicative phases, a number of assessment years have been tested to assess the interim effects when the different phases are complete, but before the final OPA is delivered. The years of assessment have been agreed with TfL and LBTH and are 2018, 2022 and 2026.

9.12 This major development will generate a change in travel patterns, both within the OPA Site and to/from surrounding areas by residents, employees and visitors. Overall, around 100,000 daily two-way trips are forecast to be generated by the Indicative Scheme. The effect of these trips in the morning and evening peak commuting hours has been assessed, when around 13% and 9% of the daily trips are forecast respectively.

9.13 The Proposed Development is located close to a number of strategic highway links including the A1261, A12, A13 and A102. Proposed vehicle access to the OPA Site will be via Cartier Circle to the north, Montgomery Square (via a road bridge) to the west, a two-way connection with Prestons Road to the south-east of the OPA Site and an exit-only connection with Prestons Road to the north-east of the OPA Site.

9.14 The effects during construction are summarised as follows:

• The increase in construction traffic is equivalent to approximately 3% of the existing traffic flow on Prestons Road. On this basis, the effect of construction on the highway network would be a direct, temporary, short term minor adverse effect.

• The effect of the Proposed Development on pedestrian and cycle safety and amenity is direct, temporary, short term and negligible.

• The majority of construction workers would access the OPA Site using public transport, and the effect on public transport will be direct, temporary, short term minor adverse.

• Strict parking controls and enforcement should ensure that minimal on-street parking by construction workers occurs, and therefore the effect will be direct, temporary, short term minor adverse.

9.15 The effects during operation of the completed OPA are summarised below, on the basis of the Indicative Scheme.

9.16 The effects on the local highway network have been considered and are as follows:

• The operational effect on the two-way traffic flows is overall direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse.

• The effect on the junctions of Cartier Circle and North Wharf Street/Prestons Road is direct, permanent, long term and negligible.

• The effect on the operation of the Montgomery Square highway network, South Wharf Street/Prestons Road and Upper Bank Street/Aspen Way is direct, permanent, long term and minor adverse.

• A direct, permanent, long term and moderate adverse effect on the operation of Prestons Road Roundabout.

9.17 A maximum of 1,300 car parking spaces will be provided on site as part of the OPA and servicing will take place at designated areas at ground and basement level. Overall, around 10% of trips for the Indicative Scheme are forecast to be made by vehicle (car driver or passenger, taxi or servicing vehicle).

9.18 The OPA Site is well connected in terms of public transport achieving a Public Transport Accessibility Lever (PTAL) of 3-4 which is classed as moderate to good. Heron Quays and Canary Wharf DLR stations, Canary Wharf Jubilee Line station, the future Crossrail station and seven local bus services, including one dedicated night bus service, are all within walking distance. It is forecast that the majority of trips accessing the Proposed Development would be by public transport.

9.19 The DLR is forecast to operate within capacity with the operational Proposed Development, whilst the Jubilee Line is shown to operate over planning capacity. However, some of this demand is expected to transfer to Crossrail when it opens in 2018. Across DLR, Jubilee Line and Crossrail combined; rail is forecast to operate at 81% of total capacity to/from the west during the AM peak (which represents the worst case scenario) with the Proposed Development in place.

9.20 The Proposed Development will have a direct, permanent, long term major adverse effect on the operation of the Jubilee Line and a direct, permanent, long term minor adverse effect on the operation of the DLR. The introduction of Crossrail will have a direct, permanent, long term moderate beneficial effect.

9.21 The Proposed Development will increase passenger loadings on existing bus services. Provision for a potential reroute of bus services through the OPA Site has been built into the OPA to further improve public transport connections. The Proposed Development will have a direct, permanent, long term minor adverse effect on the operation of local bus services.

9.22 It is expected that comparatively few river bus trips will be generated by the Proposed Development. Therefore it is considered that it will have a direct, permanent, long term negligible effect on the operation of river bus services.

9.23 The public realm in the OPA Site will be of a high quality, and cycling facilities such as cycle hire docking stations and cycle stands will be provided. The Proposed Development will provide new pedestrian connections and around 6,000 cycle stands along with shower and locker facilities for residents, employees and visitors. As a result around 16% of trips to the OPA Site are forecast to be made by bicycle or on foot. Therefore it is considered that the Proposed Development will have a direct, permanent, long term minor beneficial effect on the quality and amenity of pedestrian and cycle linkages from the OPA Site to surrounding areas.

9.24 The effects of phasing (2018, 2022, 2026 and 2026 Sensitivity) and the cumulative schemes have been considered.

9.25 In terms of phasing, this NTS summarises the effects of the Indicative Scheme. Further details on the effects of the 2018, 2022 and 2026 Sensitivity Analysis scenarios can be found in the Transport Chapter of the ES.

9.26 The construction effects of the cumulative schemes on the local highway network are considered to be direct, temporary, short term minor adverse.

9.27 The construction effects of the cumulative schemes on pedestrian and cycle safety and amenity within close proximity of the OPA Site are likely to be direct, temporary, short term and negligible.

9.28 It is anticipated that the majority of construction workers associated with the OPA Site would use public transport. Given the excellent transport accessibility of the Isle of Dogs, it is anticipated that this would also be the case for the construction of the cumulative schemes. Therefore the effect on public transport are considered to be direct, temporary, short term minor adverse.

9.29 The effect of the cumulative schemes on the local highway network during operation of the Proposed Development will be direct and permanent. The effect on the operation of Cartier Circle, Montgomery Square and North Wharf Street/Prestons Road will be direct, permanent, long term and negligible.

9.30 The effect at South Wharf Street/Prestons Road and Upper Bank Street/Aspen Way will be direct, permanent, long term minor adverse.

9.31 The effect on the operation of Prestons Road Roundabout will be direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse.

9.32 In terms of mitigation, the Applicant proposes the production of a full Site Travel Plan for the Proposed Development that will be consistent with the latest Travel Plan guidance produced by Transport for London and the Greater London Authority.

9.33 The Proposed Development includes new vehicle, pedestrian and cycle links that will significantly improve access to surrounding areas, including public transport services. The proposals would have an adverse effect on the operation of public transport services. However, overall it is considered that there is sufficient capacity available to accommodate all projected future demands, including travel associated with other cumulative schemes.

10.0 WASTE 10.1 The Proposed Development aims to be a sustainable development and thus due consideration has been

given to the waste generated by the buildings during demolition, construction and operation. A Waste Strategy has been produced in support of the OPA which aims to:

• Ensure that all legal requirements for handling demolition, construction and operational waste management are complied with;

• Exceed current and long-term Government, GLA and Tower Hamlets targets for waste minimisation, recycling and re-use;

• Maximise the use of re-used and recycled building materials wherever possible;

• Standardise materials specifications and sizes within the development to ensure excess materials are not brought onto OPA Site and then wasted;

• Ensure that the building materials used for the development are reusable and recyclable at the end of the OPA Site’s lifespan;

• Provide residents and tenants with convenient, clean and efficient waste management systems that enhance the operation of the buildings and promote high levels of recycling; and

• Provide residents and tenants with reliable, cost effective waste management solutions that allow them to maximise recycling and re-use and aim to enhance profitability.

10.2 The waste assessment has assessed considered the generation, effects, proposed management and mitigation of construction, residential and non-residential waste for the Proposed Development.

10.3 A Construction Management Plan (CMP) will be submitted as part of the OPA which includes a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) to ensure that waste production is minimised and that recycling and re-use is maximised through the monitoring, recording, sorting and separating of construction waste wherever practicable.

10.4 The Proposed Development will generate demolition, excavation and construction waste at the OPA Site. The likely significant environmental effect of the completed Indicative Scheme construction waste on the local and regional waste management infrastructure is considered to be direct, temporary, medium term and minor adverse.

10.5 In terms of operational waste, London Borough of Tower Hamlet’s (LBTH) will be responsible for residential waste collection. Waste will be separated into three streams, non-recyclable, recyclable and compostable which will be stored in 1,100 and 1,280 litre Eurobins and 660 litre wheelie bins respectively. LBTH’s Managing Development Document (April, 2013) sets out minimum waste storage requirements. However, LBTH have confirmed that they will consider the collection of residential waste twice a week; this would halve the residential waste storage requirement. The minimum requirement for waste storage would then be defined by the guidelines published by British Standard BS5906 in line with guidance from The Code for Sustainable Homes.

10.6 Analysis of information on household waste arisings forecasts that residential waste at the Proposed Development will be significantly lower than the total residential waste storage requirements. Therefore the proposed residential waste storage is considered to be sufficient.

10.7 The likely significant effects of the residential operational waste relating to the Proposed Development are considered to be direct, permanent, long term and minor adverse.

10.8 The proposed non-residential parts of the Proposed Development will contract out activities relating to the

collection, handling, treatment and disposal of waste to a private waste management company, or alternatively to LBTH. Waste will be separated into three streams; non-recyclable, recyclable and glass. Some tenants may generate large volumes of organic/compostable waste. In this case a separate waste storage and collection procedure for this additional waste stream will be considered.

10.9 The storage facilities required at the Proposed Development for non-residential waste have been designed to provide for two days waste storage. Waste will be compacted wherever practicable and will be stored in a range of receptacles including portable compaction units up to 27m3 volume and Eurobins up to 1,280 litres. It is proposed that recyclable waste and non-recyclable waste will be compacted and stored separately.

10.10 The likely significant effects of the non-residential operational waste relating to the Proposed Development are considered to be direct, permanent, long term and minor adverse.

10.11 Mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce the likely significant environment effects of waste generation further.

10.12 The assessment also considers the effects of the phasing of the Proposed Development and cumulative schemes.

10.13 No additional effects are anticipated as a result of operational waste during the phasing of the Proposed Development and as such it is considered that the effects are negligible. The phasing effects of construction waste are considered to be direct, temporary, short term, minor adverse.

10.14 The combination of the cumulative schemes with the Proposed Development will place additional demands on LBTH and merchant waste collection and treatment capacity within the local area and region. The assessment demonstrates that the cumulative schemes will create approximately 7.0% of waste from LBTH. The effects are likely to be direct, permanent, long term and moderate adverse.

10.15 As detailed designs for the scheme are prepared, further consultation will be required from the local authority waste management team, or other providers, to ensure that the arrangements for waste being proposed are in line with the current arrangements with the authority, or other providers, in place at the time.

11.0 NOISE 11.1 The noise and vibration chapter of the ES assessed the likely effects from noise and vibration on future

buildings within the OPA Site and the existing noise and vibration sensitive receptors in the surrounding area, in this instance nearby residential properties, commercial property and houseboats.

11.2 The Noise and Vibration Chapter provides a summary of the applicable National, Regional and Local planning policy and relevant guidance and supplements this information with established industry code of practice, calculation procedure and assessment methodologies.

11.3 Specifically the chapter includes the following noise and vibration assessments:

• Demolition and construction noise and vibration from building phase 1;

• Demolition and construction noise and vibration from building phase 3 (including the effects on future sensitive receptors within the completed phase 1 buildings);

• Increase in traffic noise associated with the Proposed Development;

• Noise from building services associated with the Proposed Development

• Cumulative noise effects associated with the Proposed Development in conjunction with other nearby proposed cumulative schemes

11.4 Baseline noise and vibration conditions were established through measurement within the vicinity of the OPA Site during September 2012.

11.5 Future noise levels due to increases in traffic, with and without the Proposed Development have been taken from data provided by the transport consultants Steer Davies Gleave.

11.6 The assessment of noise and vibration was conducted based upon the policies and standard procedures listed within the chapter. The assessment methodology is based upon a comparison between the predicted noise levels due to activity associated with the Proposed Development against either the baseline and/or predicted future noise and vibration conditions without the Proposed Development.

11.7 The prediction of demolition and construction noise and vibration is based upon type of plant and equipment expected to be used in each key phase, the noise and vibration levels generated by such equipment, the amount of time equipment will be in use and the cumulative noise and vibration generated by all equipment used. Noise and vibration effects associated with demolition and construction are expected to result range from direct, short term, temporary, negligible to major adverse effects. A number of mitigation measures have been identified which are considered suitable for managing such effects upon existing and proposed noise sensitive receptors.

11.8 The assessment of likely effects arising from an increase in noise from traffic was based upon the traffic flow data received from Steer Davis Gleave for the completed development year at 2026, both with and without the Proposed Development. The difference in traffic flows is sufficiently small so as not to result in a significant difference in noise level at the noise sensitive receptors and therefore any effects are expected to be permanent, long term, direct and negligible.

11.9 Noise limits associated with plant serving the Proposed Development (e.g. fans for air conditioning) have been set based on existing lowest background noise levels measured during the baseline survey. The new building services associated with the Proposed Development will be designed so that they do not increase the background noise level and therefore the resultant effects during operation are expected to be permanent, long term, direct and negligible.

11.10 Aircraft noise has been taken into account based upon data within published noise contours for London

City Airport.

11.11 The cumulative operational noise level has been assessed within the traffic flow data and, on the basis that any nearby cumulative schemes will also design their building services to a similar level as those at the Proposed Development, the cumulative noise and vibration effects are expected to be permanent, long term, direct and negligible.

12.0 DAYLIGHT, SUNLIGHT, OVERSHADOWING, LIGHT POLLUTION AND GLARE 12.1 This chapter presents an assessment of the baseline conditions of the OPA Site and surroundings,

identifying internal and external sensitive receptors and assessing the potential effects on those receptors and their significance. It identifies measures to mitigate or reduce any likely significant adverse effects.

12.2 The chapter is supplemented by various documents in Technical Appendix 12.1 to 12.8 that include information to assist the understanding of the principles of the assessments and their particular application to the Proposed Development.

12.3 The effects of the Proposed Development on daylight and sunlight availability, overshadowing, light pollution and solar glare have been assessed on a quantitative or qualitative basis. The Design Guidelines submitted with the OPA have been used when making qualitative assessments on the possible effects of the detailed designs as they come forward under future Reserved Matters Applications.

12.4 The methods used to assess likely effects are described under the Policies, Guidance, Legislation and Standards in the chapter and form an expansion to those identified in the planning policy review section in chapter 5.

12.5 The possible effects relating to external receptors are as follows:

• The potential loss of daylight availability, which could reduce the quality of interior daylight and increase the need for artificial light;

• The potential loss of sunlight availability due to increased shadowing effects arising from the proposed development which could cause a reduction in perceived brightness and warmth;

• The potential for occupants and users of affected sensitive areas (e.g. residential properties) to notice a reduction in the quality of natural light (daylight and sunlight), arising from the scheme which may give rise to complaint;

• The potential for obtrusive artificial light is a form of pollution; and

• The potential for instances of reflected sunlight occurring at sensitive locations around or within the OPA Site causing temporary blindness to drivers or other relevant receptors, known as ‘solar glare’.

12.6 The daylight and sunlight assessments cover the surrounding existing residential properties within a 300 metre radius.

12.7 Commercial properties have a lower requirement for natural lighting as they have a greater reliance upon supplementary electric lighting and are therefore not considered as sensitive receptors for the purposes of this assessment.

12.8 The following existing residential properties surrounding the OPA Site have been assessed as sensitive receptors to the effects of daylight and sunlight:

• 116-417 Poplar Dock;

• 1-18 Landon’s Close;

• 1-14 Bridge House Quay;

• Arran House, 1-22 Preston’s Road;

• Kintyre House, Coldharbour;

• Lewis House, Coldharbour;

• 1-43 Lancaster Drive;

• 1-21 and 24-38 Vantage Mews;

• 1-5 and 7 Coldharbour;

• 9-19 and 40-60 Coldharbour;

• 35-49 Coldharbour;

• 1-22 Concordia Wharf, Coldharbour;

• 1-15 Horatio Place;

• 71-101 and 416 Preston’s Road;

• 607-615 Manchester Road;

• 1-18 Dollar Bay;

• 1-67 Stewart Street;

• 1-52 Antilles Bay;

• 1-114 Meridian Place; and

• Houseboats moored at Poplar Dock.

12.9 For sun hours on ground, there are four areas of open space located to the north of the OPA Site that have been assessed as sensitive receptors. These are:

• The open courtyard spaces within Fraser Place;

• The open courtyard spaces within Poplar Dock;

• The open space adjacent to Poplar Dock Cut; and

• The open space between Landon Close and Bridge House Quay.

12.10 In addition, Blackwall Basin is a sensitive receptor. There are approximately twenty existing houseboats on the northern side of Blackwall Basin and these are also considered as sensitive receptors.

12.11 There are no sensitive receptors within the OPA Site as all existing buildings will be demolished. The aspects of the Proposed Development that have been assessed (on request from LBTH) as future sensitive receptors are:

• The facades of the buildings that are proposed as or could become residential buildings and the potential school in terms of daylight and sunlight; and

• The proposed areas of outdoor communal and public space in terms of overshadowing.

12.12 The assessment mainly focuses on the Parameter Plans as they define the extent of the proposed streets, spaces and buildings across the OPA Site with maximum dimensions. As the Parameter Plans also determine the maximum potential height of the Proposed Development (Maximum Building Heights Parameter Plan WWMP-PP010), they provide a worst case scenario which is likely to result in the most significant adverse effects in relation to this chapter. Where relevant, the likely effects of the Parameter Plans are assessed against the baseline conditions with respect to all relevant criteria described under the relevant Polices, Guidance, Legislation and Standards section of the chapter.

12.13 The OPA is also supported by an Indicative Scheme, which demonstrates one way in which the Parameter Plans could be interpreted by showing the potential locations of buildings, their uses and open spaces. As the Indicative Scheme illustrates how the maximum allowable floor area could be delivered, but within

the scope of the Parameter Plans, it represents a reasonable worst case scenario for this chapter. Where relevant, the likely effects of the Indicative Scheme are assessed against the baseline conditions with respect to all relevant criteria described under the relevant Polices, Guidance, Legislation and Standards section of the chapter.

Construction Effects 12.14 During construction the demolition of the existing buildings and other structures on the OPA Site would

lead to a temporary improvement in the daylight, sunlight and overshadowing to nearby adjacent properties and amenity areas. The effects would be short to medium term, local and of negligible or minor beneficial significance with regards to the surrounding receptors close to the OPA Site.

12.15 It is unlikely that there would be any significant effects in terms of solar glare as a result of demolition and, therefore, the effects would likely be short to medium term, local and negligible.

12.16 There would be a gradual effect upon daylight, sunlight, overshadowing, light pollution and solar glare during construction from the new buildings. The effects would be no worse than those experienced in the operational stage, discussed further below.

12.17 Any temporary accommodation or equipment such as cranes would likely have a minimal effect on daylight, sunlight, overshadowing and solar glare, and the effects are expected to be temporary, medium term and negligible.

12.18 There is the potential for temporary, medium term, negligible to major adverse light pollution effects caused by the temporary working lights during demolition and construction. However, this can be mitigated by the careful orientation of the fittings and as such the significance of effects can be reduced to temporary, medium term and negligible. In particular, light pollution should be monitored wherever buildings are being constructed in close proximity (within 20 metres) of residential accommodation.

Operational Effects 12.19 The effects on daylight, sunlight and overshadowing to external sensitive receptors, including

neighbouring residential properties and houseboats, would likely be direct, permanent, long term negligible, minor, moderate or major adverse in relation to both the Parameter Plans and Indicative Scheme.

12.20 In terms of daylight, 84% of the rooms in the sensitive properties around the OPA Site would meet the relevant guidelines with a direct, permanent, long term and negligible effect. Of the remaining 16% there are windows and rooms which do not meet the guidelines in the following properties:

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term minor adverse effects in 1-14 Bridge House Quay.

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term minor to moderate adverse effects in 1-21 and 24-38 Vantage Mews, 9-19a&b and 35-60 Coldharbour, 607-615 Manchester Road, and 1-67 Stewart Street.

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effects in 116-417 Poplar Dock, 1-16 Landon’s Close, 1-15 Horatio Place, 71-101 and 416 Prestons Road, 1-114 Meridian Place, and the houseboats in Blackwall Basin.

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term moderate to major adverse effects in 1-43 Lancaster Drive, and 1-52 Antilles Bay.

12.21 In terms of sunlight 74.2% of windows in neighbouring properties are fully compliant with the guidance

with a direct, permanent, long term and negligible effect. Of the remaining 26% there are windows and rooms which do not meet the guidelines in the following properties:

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term minor adverse effects in 1-21 and 24-38 Vantage Mews, 9-19a&b and 35-60 Coldharbour

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term minor to moderate adverse effects in Arran House, 1-22 Prestons Road, Kintyre House, Coldharbour

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effects in 1-16 Landon’s Close, 1-14 Bridge House Quay

• There would be up to direct, permanent, long term moderate to major adverse effects in 116-417 Poplar Dock, 1-43 Lancaster Drive, and the houseboats moored at Blackwall Basin.

12.22 There would be a negligible effect on 1-18 Dollar Bay in the future both in terms of daylight and sunlight.

12.23 In terms of overshadowing, the overall effects upon the surrounding environment, including existing public spaces and the Blackwall Basin, are likely to be direct, permanent, long term and minor to moderate adverse.

12.24 The likely effects of the Proposed Development have also been compared with the consented 2008 planning permission. The results indicate that the daylight, sunlight and overshadowing effects of the Indicative Scheme are generally comparable to that consent.

12.25 The Proposed Development has been designed to respond to its urban context, whilst being mindful of the external receptors in terms of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing effects. Consideration has therefore been given to the location of massing blocks to minimise adverse effects, particularly to the areas identified as being most sensitive to daylight and sunlight loss to the east of the OPA Site. Consequently, the main areas of massing are concentrated on the west and south of the OPA Site, and as such, the resultant overall retained daylight and sunlight values and overshadowing effects are comparable with the consented 2008 Masterplan.

12.26 In terms of daylight, sunlight and overshadowing internally to the Proposed Development, the recommendations contained within the Internal Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Study in Technical Appendix 12.7 of the Environmental Statement will enable the design teams to maximise the levels of daylight and sunlight within the residential elements as they work towards the Reserved Matters Applications. However, there will be some habitable rooms with levels of daylight and sunlight lower than those recommended by the BRE Guidelines, which is to be expected within high-density central London development.

12.27 For light pollution and solar glare qualitative assessments have been undertaken and there is the potential for significant light pollution effects on external and internal sensitive receptors ranging from direct, temporary (night time only), long term, negligible to major adverse.

12.28 A range of potential mitigation measures are outlined in the Mitigation Measures section of this chapter and will be incorporated as part of the Reserved Matters Applications to mitigate any significant adverse effects so that there will not be any long term, permanent and major adverse effects. However, as potential significant adverse effects have been identified above, further technical assessments may be required to support the Reserved Matters Applications to confirm the light pollution effects subject to the detailed design.

12.29 Finally, where appropriate, the cumulative effects of other nearby proposed developments are considered. The assessments conclude that any additional effects on daylight, sunlight and overshadowing to the

external receptors would likely be direct, permanent, long term and negligible.

13.0 ECOLOGY 13.1 The ecological assessment was undertaken by Ramboll UK. It assesses the likely effects of the Proposed

Development on habitats and species. This includes an assessment of the effect on designated sites, protected species and habitats and species listed on UK and London Biodiversity Action Plans.

13.2 The baseline assessment comprised a review of local ecological records and a Phase 1 Habitat Survey conducted by a Ramboll Ecologist. In addition to the habitat survey, further surveys were conducted including surveys for roosting bats, black redstart (a small bird species), insects and other small animals living on land on the wharf and the habitats and species of the docks themselves, including fish.

13.3 Following this stage of assessment the relevant sensitive ecological receptors noted within the OPA Site were identified as:

• Blackwall Basin Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) of Grade 1 Borough Importance – comprising open mosaic habitats and open water important for overwintering and breeding birds. The OPA Site is partly within the SINC;

• Millwall and West India Docks SINC of Grade 2 Local Importance which is important for overwintering and breeding birds. The OPA Site is partly within the SINC;

• Black Redstart – a Red list bird species which is nationally rare, but which has a stronghold in London preferring brownfield sites with open mosaic habitats. The surveys carried out indicate that this species breeds regularly at Wood Wharf;

• Bird Species of Blackwall Basin SINC and herring gull – Common tern is a species of medium conservation concern that breeds on rafts in Blackwall Basin, herring gulls (of high conservation concern) nest on a roof in the OPA Site and the dock is used by wintering ducks.

13.4 The Proposed Development has potential to affect the ecological receptors due to the following proposals:

• Complete clearance of the OPA Site, and therefore removal of existing terrestrial habitats;

• Land reclamation, and therefore loss of open water space and aquatic habitat (such as dock walls and dock bed); and

• Shadowing and shading as a result of potential height of buildings.

13.5 The clearance of the OPA Site without mitigation would result in the permanent loss of the entire terrestrial habitat identified on the OPA Site, with a certain adverse effect at the Borough scale. Creation of new habitats through strategic landscape planting and the provision of brown and green roof spaces including native species planting will provide mitigation for this loss. Therefore a significant residual adverse effect at the Borough scale is unlikely. Potential effects upon terrestrial invertebrates during construction will also be mitigated in this way and a significant residual adverse effect on invertebrates of value at the local scale is unlikely.

13.6 The construction effects on the aquatic habitats and species in the docks would be adverse and significant at the Borough scale without mitigation; however these effects can be mitigated by the proposed area for nature conservation and aquatic habitat creation. Therefore a significant adverse effect at the Borough is unlikely after mitigation.

13.7 There is the potential for indirect adverse effects upon the aquatic habitats from species disturbance (e.g. to fish) or potential pollution events, and these are temporary effects with a significance effect at the Borough scale (for SINC habitats) and Local for aquatic species. However a significant residual effect is unlikely due to mitigation measures proposed, including for example the controls in place from a

Construction Management Plan.

13.8 Bats forage at the OPA Site but no roosts are present. Construction effects on bats at a local scale would result from the removal of foraging habitat. However it is near certain that there would be no significant adverse effect on bats due to the replacement of terrestrial habitats discussed in paragraph 13.5 above.

13.9 Loss of habitat suitable for black redstart would be a certain adverse effect at the national scale, and there would be indirect disturbance effects without mitigation. Another potential indirect effect is disturbance of black redstart and other birds from increased noise during construction activities; however a significant adverse effect is unlikely on the basis of the location of the OPA Site within an urban context.

13.10 The potential effects to black redstart nesting would however be mitigated through controls applied through the Construction Management Plan. Habitat loss would be mitigated by the provision of new habitats including soft landscaping at ground scale and green and brown roofs. Therefore a significant adverse effect is unlikely after mitigation.

13.11 Disturbance and habitat loss effects would also be significant and adverse for other birds, notably common tern, of value in the borough context without mitigation. However rafts currently used for loafing and nesting by common terns in Blackwall Basin will be retained or replaced to mitigate this effect; evidence indicates these birds have become conditioned to the busy and noisy activity within the locality and are predicted to continue breeding and therefore a significant adverse effect at the Borough scale is unlikely after mitigation.

13.12 Creation of new terrestrial habitats due to proposed parkland and provision if green and brown roofs will provide a direct, long term, permanent beneficial effect.

13.13 The Proposed Development includes provision of a network of green spaces incorporating native planting and a wetland area for nature conservation which will provide biodiverse habitat within the Blackwall Basin SINC. Additional aquatic habitat will also be provided for small animals through cladding parts of the dock walls with wood and providing fish refuges.

13.14 During operation there may be some permanent effects on aquatic habitats (of value at the borough level) and species (of value at the local level) as a result of shading within the Blackwall Basin, and there will be some loss of open water due to the proposed residential moorings in Blackwall Basin. However a significant adverse effect at these scales is unlikely due to the mobility of species within the basin and the presence of pontoons in the baseline conditions.

13.15 Potential direct adverse effects upon foraging bats will be mitigated by providing replacement foraging habitats and implementing a sensitive lighting plan that would avoid lighting suitable foraging areas. Therefore it is near certain that there will be no significant effects after mitigation.

13.16 Without mitigation a significant adverse effect on black redstart would be near certain during the operational phase, but with the provision and management of green and brown roofs and appropriate landscaping at ground scale a significant adverse effect at the national scale is unlikely after mitigation.

13.17 Adverse effects on common tern (of value at the borough level) would be significant during operation as a result of the lack of habitat (resulting from the removal of rafts in the construction phase); however the provision of nesting rafts and their maintenance in the operational phase would mean that a significant adverse effect at the borough scale is unlikely after mitigation.

13.18 In conclusion, with the recommended mitigation and enhancement measures as described above the Proposed Development will not result in any significant effects upon the ecological receptors identified that are present within and outside the OPA Site.

14.0 WIND 14.1 The Wind Chapter assesses the wind environment created by the Proposed Development in terms of

established criteria for pedestrian comfort known as the Lawson Comfort Criteria. The Proposed Development was modelled and tested in a wind tunnel to assess the wind speeds at various locations.

14.2 Both the Parameter Plans (the Maximum Height Parameters) and the Indicative Scheme were assessed. This is because the Maximum Height Parameters present the greatest massing and is considered to provide the worst case scenario around the perimeter streets, whereas the Indicative Scheme includes courtyards and massing details that are more representative of the likely wind environment. Both the windiest season (winter) conditions and those measured in the summer are presented.

14.3 Five scenarios were tested:

• Configuration 1: The existing baseline (2013).

• Configuration 2: The Maximum Height Parameters with existing surrounds;

• Configuration 3: The Indicative Scheme with existing surrounds;

• Configuration 4: The Maximum Height Parameters with cumulative surrounds; and

• Configuration 5: The Indicative Scheme with cumulative surrounds.

14.4 The studies were conducted for the OPA Site without landscape planting to create a worst case set of results at ground and terrace level.

14.5 In addition to pedestrian comfort, the assessments also report on the occurrence of strong winds.

14.6 The wind microclimate at the existing OPA Site is largely suitable for standing or leisure walking during the winter season, which reflects the relatively low-rise nature of existing buildings. The windiest location is within Montgomery Square where business walking conditions are reported. The wind speeds at locations in Montgomery Square would occasionally be strong enough to make walking difficult.

14.7 The wind microclimate at the OPA Site during construction is expected to be suitable for the desired pedestrian activities and will progressively adjust to the conditions for the completed development. The effect on the wind conditions during construction is considered direct, long term and negligible.

14.8 The wind environment for the Proposed Development (Maximum Height Parameters) generally reflects the wind conditions reported for the existing baseline; however a larger number of locations are classified as suitable for leisure walking with the Proposed Development in place during the windiest season, particularly along streets around and connecting to the perimeter of the west and south elevations of the OPA Site.

14.9 The likely effects at the majority of street locations are direct, long term, negligible to moderate beneficial. There are however two locations (95 and 115), between Development Plots D2 and E and at a corner of Development Plot J, where wind speeds would be windier than desired with a direct, long term, moderate adverse effect reported and mitigation would need to be considered. Planting is advised to ease conditions in these areas to those suitable for leisure walking, alternatively staggered screening could be used to create calmer conditions at street level.

14.10 Although the location of entrances within the Proposed Development are not fixed within the Parameter Plans, the potential effect predicted at entrances ranges from direct, long term, minor beneficial to major adverse, where conditions range from those suitable for sitting to carpark/road, respectively. It is advised that entrances be kept away from areas where conditions suitable for standing/entrance use are exceeded for Configurations 2 and 4. For entrances in these areas, the adverse effects could be mitigated by

including in the detailed design simple measures like recessing the entrances and providing localised vertical screening.

14.11 The effect on amenity areas is largely classified as negligible as the majority of locations will be suitable for sitting. However locations such as South Dock Park and Montgomery Square would benefit from shelter which could be provided by suitable landscaping in the summer as the conditions are suitable for a mix of sitting and standing, with a direct, long term, negligible to minor adverse effect reported.

14.12 For configuration 3, the wind microclimate reported around the Indicative Scheme is similar to that for the Maximum Height Parameters. However with the Indicative Scheme in place, there were more receptor locations due to the detail available for courtyard spaces, and a greater number of locations are suitable for standing and leisure walking.

14.13 The effects for street locations are direct, long term, negligible to moderate beneficial; entrance receptors are classified as direct, long term, minor adverse to minor beneficial, and ground level and terrace level amenity areas were direct, long term, negligible to minor adverse. Localised mitigation measures have been recommended for the windier entrances, in the form of screening, recessing or entrance relocation. The ground level and terrace level amenity areas will also benefit from measures such as suitable soft landscaping and taller perimeter screening.

14.14 With cumulative schemes in place (configuration 4) there is minimal change to the wind environment reported for the Proposed Development (Maximum Height Parameters – configuration 2), and the results remain as reported for configuration 2. The effects along streets range from direct, long term, moderate adverse to moderate beneficial, at entrances the effects were direct, long term, minor beneficial to major adverse and the effects within amenity areas were reported as direct, long term, minor adverse to negligible. As such the mitigation recommended for configuration 2 apply.

14.15 The results for configuration 5 (the Indicative Scheme with cumulative schemes in place) showed a similar range of conditions to those expected when surrounded by the existing buildings. The effects on street locations are direct, long term, negligible to moderate beneficial; entrance receptors are classified as direct, long term, minor adverse to minor beneficial, and ground level and terrace level amenity areas are direct, long term, negligible to minor adverse.

14.16 As such, while the effects are more favourable, mitigation measures recommended for the Maximum Height Parameters and Indicative Scheme are also recommended for the cumulative schemes scenario.

15.0 AIR QUALITY 15.1 An air quality assessment has been undertaken, considering potential effects on local air quality during

construction and operation of the Proposed Development.

15.2 An assessment has been undertaken for a worst case scenario for the likely air quality effects and therefore assessed the Indicative Scheme, including the proposed gas fired boilers and CHP engines as set out in the Energy Strategy for the Proposed Development.

15.3 The Development Specification defines maximum ranges for residential and commercial floorspace (the Maximum Residential Scheme and the Maximum Commercial Scheme) which could be built within the maximum floorspace. The Maximum Commercial and Maximum Residential Schemes have been considered as a sensitivity analysis to determine that no new or worse air quality effects are expected.

15.4 LBTH has declared the whole Borough an Air Quality Management Area due to concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and fine particulate matter exceeding the relevant air quality objective and limit values. Recent air quality monitoring in the Borough confirms that nitrogen dioxide levels are exceeded but shows that fine particulate matter concentrations are below the relevant objective and limit value.

15.5 The main potential air quality effect during construction of the Proposed Development will be from emissions of dust. If released in sufficient quantities, this could result in a nuisance from soiling at nearby properties. To mitigate this, dust emissions will be controlled using mitigation measures detailed in an approved Construction Environmental Management Plan. This will ensure any adverse effects are minimised as far as possible. The effect of the Proposed Development during the construction phase was assessed to be direct, short term minor adverse and localised to within 350m of the OPA Site boundary.

15.6 The main operational air quality effects will be from traffic and energy raising plant associated with the Proposed Development. The changes in air quality as a result of the traffic effects have been assessed using an agreed calculation method to compare the effect of the ‘with development’ scenario proposal against the ‘without development’ scenario. A number of scenarios have been assessed between 2018 and 2026 to account for the phased nature of the Proposed Development.

15.7 The assessment of traffic changes showed that the predicted effects of the Proposed Development on local air quality are direct, long term and negligible at all assessed locations.

15.8 In order to provide a robust worst case scenario, emissions from energy raising plant associated with the Proposed Development, such as boilers and CHP, have been assessed using detailed dispersion modelling. The assessment showed that the pollutant contribution related to operation of energy raising plant is medium at the area of maximum impact and hence the significance has been assessed as direct, long term moderate adverse.

15.9 Combined effects on nitrogen dioxide concentrations from both energy raising plant and traffic have been assessed at sensitive receptors. The effect on annual mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations was found to be direct, long term minor adverse.

15.10 Overall the significance of the operation of the Proposed Development is minor with regard to local air quality.

15.11 As such, the potential for mitigation measures should be considered particularly in regard to the plant installed at the Proposed Development if pollutant concentrations do not improve over the coming years. The most efficient and low emissions boilers should be installed where possible to minimise the effect on local air quality.

16.0 GROUND RESOURCES AND CONTAMINATION 16.1 Industrial and commercial land uses, both historic and current, have been identified at the OPA Site from

historical records and a site inspection. These are mostly associated with docks (including backfilled docks), timber storage, engineering and ship building. As a consequence of these former potentially polluting uses and activities it is necessary to investigate and assess ground conditions.

16.2 The assessment of the baseline conditions at the OPA Site has used available ground investigation and historical data. The assessment assumes that the ground investigation data reviewed provides a reasonable indication of the ground conditions present at the OPA Site.

16.3 The results of soil analysis, from exploratory investigations undertaken in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2008 indicate that contaminant concentrations are generally low and below residential screening criteria (assuming no consumption of home-grown produce). Asbestos was identified in one sample out of 82. A few concentrations of arsenic, lead and hydrocarbon compounds exceeded the residential screening criteria. All of the results were below screening criteria for a commercial land use.

16.4 The analysis of groundwater samples indicates that the shallow perched groundwater, and to a lesser extent, the groundwater in the minor aquifer, is slightly affected by arsenic, ammoniacal nitrogen and hydrocarbons when compared to drinking water standards. Given the environmental setting and current use of the OPA Site it is considered that the results do not represent significant contamination of the ground, a significant risk of significant harm to human health or a risk of significant pollution of the minor aquifer and other controlled waters nearby.

16.5 The Proposed Development includes a basement which will require deep excavations that will remove most, if not all, of the Made Ground and some Alluvium. As a result of excavation, treatment and disposal of potentially contaminated soils, the Proposed Development has the potential to cause adverse effects on the health of site workers, site neighbours and the quality of controlled waters during the construction phase. Piling to the deep aquifer through existing ground and shallow groundwater has the potential to contaminate deeper strata.

16.6 It is assessed that the potential adverse effects on human health and environmental receptors can be fully mitigated though the implementation of appropriate precautionary measures, which the Applicant will undertake through phased detailed ground investigations, risk assessments, remediation plans (if necessary), the adoption of a construction management plan (CMP), appropriate piling methods and verification reporting.

16.7 The Applicant proposes to undertake the phased ground investigations and risk assessment prior to construction. The risk assessment is to be agreed with the LBTH and Environment Agency and will inform a remediation strategy for the Proposed Development if significant contamination is found. Following construction works a verification report will be written summarising the works undertaken relevant to ground contamination.

16.8 Effects during construction of the Proposed Development on human health (construction workers, neighbours within 100m of the OPA Site boundary and more than 100m from the OPA Site boundary) are assessed to be negligible following mitigation. Mitigation includes undertaking further ground investigation works in advance of construction and, based on the results of the investigation, adopting suitable construction practices and mitigation measures.

16.9 Effects during construction on environmental receptors due to piling and excavations and discharge of water generated by dewatering to surface or groundwater are assessed to be negligible, provided appropriate measures are put in place based on the results of the proposed ground investigation.

16.10 Effects during the operational phase of the Proposed Development (after the construction phase) on human health (site users and neighbours within and more than 100m from the OPA Site boundary) are assessed to be negligible. This is due to the presence of hard standing or building slab across the majority of the OPA Site and because the proposed basement will result in the majority of Made Ground being removed from the OPA Site during construction.

16.11 Effects during the operational phase of the Proposed Development on surface water and groundwater are assessed to be direct, long term minor beneficial due to a reduced risk of pollution. The beneficial effects arise due to the removal of the potentially contaminated soils and perched water.

16.12 Effects during the operational phase of the Proposed Development on building materials and services as a result of contact with potentially aggressive ground and water are assessed to be negligible. This is because all building materials and services will be designed to be resistant to the ground conditions at the OPA Site.

17.0 WATER RESOURCES AND FLOOD RISK 17.1 The Water Resources and Flood Risk Chapter assesses the effect of the Proposed Development on the

following:

• Surface water drainage & hydrology;

• Foul water drainage;

• Groundwater quantity;

• Dock & river water quality; and

• Flooding.

17.2 The scope of the assessment covers the onsite and surrounding drainage infrastructure, the water quality of the docks, the aquifers located beneath the OPA Site and the influence on the River Thames. Department for Transport‘s Transport Analysis Guidance has been adopted and modified for use for the assessment.

17.3 The main elements of the Proposed Development relevant to water resources and flood risk are summarised below:

• The Proposed Development would lead to a general raising of the ground levels across the OPA Site;

• To facilitate the Proposed Development, a basement structure would be constructed across much of the plan area of the OPA Site;

• To facilitate the Proposed Development, existing listed dock walls will be stabilised and old non-listed structures will be replaced with new dock walls;

• The OPA Site would incorporate a mixture of impermeable hard landscaping and soft landscaping;

• A new surface water drainage system is proposed. The predominant form of SUDs being proposed will be to discharge storm water to the docks (which will introduce fresh water and promote circulation) and to attenuate any surface water discharge to the combined Thames Water sewer in Prestons Road; and

• To compensate for the loss of flood storage created by the development into the dock water, a flood storage reservoir is proposed beneath the park to the south of the OPA Site (South Dock Park).

17.4 The sensitive receptors assessed include the surface water and foul drainage infrastructure within and surrounding the OPA Site, groundwater quantity in the upper and lower aquifer beneath and surrounding the OPA Site, the dock and the River Thames water quality and the risk of flooding to both people and property.

17.5 The OPA Site lies within the EA’s indicative flood plain of the River Thames; however it is protected by the Thames Defences. The OPA Site is located within Flood Zone 3, defined as having a high probability of flooding.

17.6 Dock walls would be refurbished, rebuilt, or new dock walls provided, to a design standard to match the design life of the Proposed Development. In addition, the dock wall level throughout the Proposed Development would be increased to at least 6m AOD with the potential to be raised to 6.2m AOD in the future. This is in line with EA requirements, set out in their Thames Estuary 2100 strategy work.

Therefore, there would be a direct, permanent, long-term, minor beneficial effect on flood risk.

17.7 There will be a temporary loss of flood storage within the docks prior to the completion of the flood storage reservoir during phase 2. This issue has been discussed with the EA and it has been accepted that, due to the relatively short timeframe, the nominal loss of flood storage is acceptable subject to the full compensation being provided on completion of the Proposed Development.

17.8 Currently most of the existing storm water flows from the OPA Site discharge to the docks, therefore the proposed strategy replicates the existing situation. Both the docks and the River Thames have considerable capacity to accommodate these flows. The Environment Agency and Canal and River Trust confirmed that there is no restriction to the peak discharge rates into the docks.

17.9 To reduce the volume of storm water flows into the Thames Water sewer, storm water from the building roofs and areas of hard landscaping would drain directly to the dock where possible subject to Canal and River Trust approval.

17.10 Based on reviewing CRT water quality data, it is noted that the docks currently suffer from poor water quality, due to low flows through them. The proposed storm water strategy would increase the volume of water and improve water circulation within the docks. The resultant effect on the docks would be direct, permanent, long-term minor beneficial.

17.11 Some surface water from the Proposed Development would be discharged to the combined sewer in Prestons Road. Discharges to the combined sewer network would be regulated by Thames Water Utilities Ltd (TWUL). This regulated additional discharge from the Proposed Development may contribute to the sewer overflowing and discharging into a watercourse further down the catchment. This effect to the River Thames would be indirect, temporary short-term minor adverse.

17.12 Foul water from inside the buildings would be discharged to the existing combined sewer in Prestons Road with approval from TWUL. Peak foul flows once the Proposed Development has been completed have been estimated to be 80 to 85l/s. This compares with the existing peak foul flow estimation of 5l/s.

17.13 In 2006, TWUL confirmed that the proposed peak flows could be accommodated within the Prestons Road sewer; however, this was for the extant 2008 planning permission which resulted in a slightly smaller peak discharge rate. Further consultation with TWUL will be undertaken during the Reserved Matters Application stage, where it is likely TWUL would undertake a capacity check on their network along Prestons Road. Therefore, the effect of this increased foul water discharge on the Prestons Road sewer is direct, permanent, long-term minor adverse.

17.14 The effects of the Proposed Development on water resources range from minor adverse to minor beneficial. When the importance of each attribute has been considered, the effect of the Proposed Development has been assessed as negligible and therefore insignificant for every attribute.

17.15 When comparing the Proposed Development with the alternative scheme proposed in 2008, from a water resources and flood risk perspective, the schemes are very similar in terms of likely effects.

18.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND CONCLUSIONS 18.1 This ES chapter provides a summary of the likely combined, interactive and cumulative effects of the

Proposed Development to conclude the ES.

18.2 This chapter has been prepared by BDP and is based on the findings of the assessments reported within each of the technical ES chapters. It has been prepared on the basis of professional judgement used to assess the results of the technical ES chapters and determine the potential for likely significant additional combined and interactive effects on the relevant sensitive receptors.

18.3 In addition, it draws on the findings from the various technical ES chapters to summarise the likely cumulative effects of the Proposed Development with the cumulative schemes listed in ES Appendix A.

18.4 This chapter has considered the likely combined, interactive and cumulative effects of the Proposed Development, drawing on the effects identified within ES chapters 6 – 17 to identify two types of effect:

• Type 1 Effects – the combined effects on the relevant sensitive receptors and effects arising from the interaction between different effects identified within the various technical assessments.

• Type 2 Effects – the cumulative effects of the Proposed Development with other cumulative schemes on the relevant sensitive receptors.

18.5 Each technical chapter presents the approach to assessing the likely environmental effects in accordance with the relevant legislation, policies and guidance. As the Type 1 and Type 2 Effects are derived from the results of those assessments, the reader is directed to the Approach to Assessment section of each technical ES chapter for full details of the assessment methodology.

Type 1 Effects 18.6 The assessment of Type 1 Effects is based on professional judgement, drawing on the results of the

various technical assessments that have been conducted for the EIA. The purpose of this analysis has been to summarise the likely effects that remain following mitigation which are greater than negligible, and to identify where they may combine to result in additional effects on the relevant sensitive receptors (‘combined effects’).

18.7 It has also identified where any individual effects may interact to result in additional effects on the relevant sensitive receptors (‘interactive effects’). Type 1 Effects are derived from the assessments of the likely effects on the baseline as a result of the reasonable worst case scenario for the Proposed Development.

18.8 The assessment firstly identified the relevant sensitive receptors upon which significant effects are likely and these have been grouped into categories. Relevant sensitive receptors have been identified within the following categories:

• Human Health and Well-Being;

• Housing Supply;

• Employment and Businesses;

• People and Cyclists;

• Public Transport;

• Highways;

• Townscape;

• Heritage;

• Ecology;

• Water Resources; and

• Waste Generation.

18.9 The results of the assessment of Type 1 Effects are summarised below.

Human Health and Well-Being

18.10 With the implementation of the measures set out in the CMP and the implementation of the measures proposed, the Type 1 Effects on the health of residents and workers within and around the OPA Site during construction are not anticipated to be greater than direct, temporary, short term and minor adverse.

18.11 While there is the potential for adverse effects on human health and well being of people in and around the OPA Site during operation, none are considered significantly adverse provided the recommended mitigation is implemented. However, beneficial effects are anticipated which will be delivered by the Proposed Development and many of these are significant, ranging from minor to major beneficial depending on the final details of the floorspaces. It is judged therefore that there is the potential for a combined long term, permanent minor to moderate beneficial effect on the human health of future residents and workers within the OPA Site.

18.12 While there will be adverse effects on human health and well being of people in and around the OPA Site during the various phases, the majority of these are all temporary and short term and the no significant combined effect is anticipated in the interim before the Proposed Development is fully completed and operational beyond the effects already identified. Furthermore, the range of beneficial effects which will result from the Proposed Development once fully completed and operational are sufficiently significant as to outweigh the adverse effects, particularly in regard to the access to open space, healthcare facilities, increased employment opportunities and improvements in regard to crime, safety and community cohesion.

18.13 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.14 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Housing Supply

18.15 There are a small number of existing residences within the OPA Site that would be removed during the construction stage. Given the scale of the residential units proposed within the Proposed Development, the loss of these uses will be a direct, temporary, short term and minor adverse effect at the local level. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.16 The effect of the Proposed Development in terms of its contribution to meeting housing objectives is considered to be a direct, permanent, long term, beneficial effect of moderate (Minimum Residential Scheme) to major (Maximum Residential Scheme) significance at the district level and of minor (Minimum Residential Scheme) to moderate (Maximum Residential Scheme) significance at the regional level. This will have a beneficial effect on the housing market as a whole, both within and external to the OPA Site. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.17 The phased nature of the Proposed Development will contribute increasingly to the housing market supply, with resulting effects on the housing market increasing from negligible to major beneficial significance at the district level and of minor significance at the regional level as each phase is brought forward. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.18 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.19 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Employment and Businesses

18.20 While there will be minor adverse effects on existing businesses within the OPA Site during construction, beneficial effects are anticipated on construction workers and local businesses. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.21 There will be minor to major beneficial effects on existing businesses outside the OPA Site during operation and on the population through new job creation. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.22 The phased nature of the Proposed Development will contribute increasingly to the employment levels, with resulting effects increasing from negligible to major beneficial at the district level and to moderate at the regional level (subject to the amount of commercial floorspace delivered) as the development progresses.

18.23 In addition, the phased development will contribute increasingly to the total additional expenditure, with resulting effects increasing from negligible to major beneficial as the development progresses. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.24 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.25 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

People and Cyclists

18.26 The demolition of the existing buildings and other structures on the OPA Site would lead to a temporary improvement in the daylight, sunlight and overshadowing to nearby amenity areas, with the resulting temporary, short to medium term effects ranging from negligible or minor beneficial with regards to the surrounding receptors close to the OPA Site boundary. Sensitive receptors at a greater distance from the OPA Site would experience a negligible effect.

18.27 The main potential for combined effects on people and cyclists within the OPA Site in future are from the wind environment and sunlight availability to the public spaces. The majority of internal amenity areas, and therefore the people using those spaces in future, will enjoy good levels of sunlight during the summer months. While there is the potential for adverse wind effects, mitigation is recommended that would create calmer conditions. As such, there are no additional combined effects anticipated on people and cyclists within the OPA Site during operation.

18.28 The majority of medium and distant views are too far away from the OPA Site to cause additional significant effects on people and cyclists in combination with changes to the pedestrian and cycle linkages, wind environment and sunlight availability and therefore no additional combined effects are anticipated. However, additional combined effects could occur on local sensitive receptors in terms of pedestrian and cycle accessibility, wind conditions, sunlight availability and visual amenity.

18.29 With respect to the combined effects on public spaces as a result of the wind conditions, overshadowing and the viewer experience, there are no sensitive receptors that coincide in the different topics and therefore no significant combined effects are anticipated. For example, Montgomery Square, which is a sensitive receptor for wind, is not a sensitive receptor for overshadowing or visual effects and combined effects are not therefore anticipated.

18.30 It is judged that there could be additional beneficial effects on people using pedestrian thoroughfares as a result of the improvements to the quality and amenity of pedestrian linkages and wind environment.

However, as there is a minor adverse effect predicted as a result of increased pedestrian flows, the combined effect is not considered significant.

18.31 While there is the potential for adverse effects during phasing, none of these are significant and the interim effects are generally temporary and short term. While there will be some adverse effects, there will also be interim beneficial effects and on balance the combined effects on people and cyclists during phasing are judged to be negligible.

18.32 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.33 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Public Transport

18.34 There are no internal public transport receptors within the OPA Site. There is the potential for combined effects on the relevant sensitive public transport receptors external to the OPA Site during construction. However, the only likely effect identified that is greater than negligible relates to the fact that the majority of construction workers would access the OPA Site using public transport, and therefore the effect on public transport will be direct, temporary, short term and minor adverse. As such there are no additional combined effects identified during construction.

18.35 While likely adverse effects have been identified on a number of the public transport receptors during operation and phasing of the Proposed Development, there are no combined effects anticipated. The great majority of new trips would be by public transport and this would place pressure on some services, resulting in minor or moderate adverse effects on peak directions on the majority of public transport, and major effects on the Jubilee Line. Effects could be mitigated, for example by improved frequencies for buses. Crossrail would provide a significant increase in rail capacity that would allow other rail routes to operate with reduced levels of overcrowding with a direct, permanent, long term and moderate beneficial effect on the operation of rail services to/from the west in the peak hours as a result.

18.36 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.37 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Highways

18.38 It is judged that the combined effect on highways receptors external to the OPA Site during construction will be no greater than direct, temporary, short term and minor adverse. No additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.39 While there will be individual adverse effects during operation of the Proposed Development and phasing as identified in the Transport Chapter, it is judged that there will be no additional significant combined effects on highways receptors external to the OPA Site during operation.

18.40 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.41 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Townscape

18.42 Construction of the Proposed Development will result in a negligible effect upon views and the townscape surrounding the OPA Site and no additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.43 Beneficial effects are anticipated for the majority of character areas, where the Proposed Development will reinforce the identity and character of the Isle of Dogs, helping to unite a somewhat disjointed

townscape and reinforce the regeneration context of the area. This includes direct, long term minor beneficial effects on Leaside South, Poplar Dock, Manchester Road and Millwall Docks and direct, permanent, long term moderate beneficial effects on Canary Wharf, Blackwall Way, the River Thames and Millennium Quarter.

18.44 A direct, permanent, long term moderate adverse effect on Coldharbour conservation area. The scale and contemporary nature of the proposed buildings will directly contrast that of the Coldharbour area, effecting upon the wider townscape setting and causing a notable and material deterioration in the quality and value of the townscape. Although to a lesser extent this effect is currently established by the existing Canary Wharf cluster, the Proposed Development is still considered to have a direct, permanent, long-term moderate adverse effect on the townscape of Coldharbour.

18.45 While there will be individual effects, it is judged that there will be no additional significant combined effects on townscape receptors external to the OPA Site during operation.

18.46 The assessment of the townscape effects focuses on final completed Proposed Development as this represent the worst case scenario. The likely effects arising from the Indicative Phasing will result from some areas of the OPA Site being built out whilst others will still be under construction, resulting in a number of partially constructed buildings during and between phases, with cranes and other elements relating to the construction occupying the OPA Site. However, no additional significant effects are anticipated beyond those identified for the operational phase.

18.47 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.48 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Heritage

18.49 It is judged that there are no additional combined effects on the relevant heritage receptors beyond those identified in the ES chapter during construction. While there will be both moderate adverse and moderate beneficial effects on Blackwall Basin and West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock) it is judged that, due to the difference in the nature of these effects, they cannot be offset against each other. However, there are no additional significant combined effects anticipated that have not already been identified.

18.50 While there will be both moderate adverse and moderate beneficial effects on the Blackwall Basin and West India Dock East Quay (Export Dock) during operation, it is judged that, due to the difference in the nature of these effects, they cannot be offset against each other. There are no additional significant combined effects anticipated.

18.51 The construction stages relating to the alteration and demolition of the listed dock walls, and demolition within the Coldharbour Conservation Area, will have direct permanent effects on the cultural heritage receptors as set out earlier in this chapter. Later phases will affect the settings of cultural heritage receptors, and those closest to the heritage receptors will have a more significant effect that those that are not – for example, with regard to the setting of the Coldharbour Conservation Area.

18.52 As with the construction and operational effects, no significant additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.53 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.54 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Ecology

18.55 There is the potential for combined effects on the relevant sensitive ecological receptors from the site preparation and construction activities. However no likely effects have been identified through the EIA which are deemed significant following mitigation.

18.56 Similarly, no likely effects have been identified during operation or phasing which are deemed significant following mitigation.

18.57 The clearance of terrestrial habitats would occur over all phases and works across the OPA Site would be continuous until completion. The greatest effect on the habitats would occur during phases 4 and 5 as these areas support the greatest amount of semi-natural habitats and incursion into the Blackwall Basin SINC.

18.58 18.112 Phases 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 would result in the greatest disturbance of aquatic habitats and species as these would see the cofferdam installation, basement construction, land reclamation, marine decking, new bridge and moored pontoon construction take place. The construction of the proposed nature area represents an opportunity to enhance the aquatic habitat at the Graving Dock and enhancement measures there are recommended in the mitigation section below.

18.59 All of the operational effects resulting from the Proposed Development would be introduced in a phased manner. Shading is one example of this as full shadowing and the effect on dock water temperature fluctuations would not be experienced until the completion of the final phase. This would afford time to the habitats and species present, allowing the ecosystems in the dock to adapt over a period of several years to the ultimate operational regime.

18.60 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.61 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Water Resources

18.62 There is the potential for combined effects on the relevant sensitive water resource receptors (including ground water, surface water and water bodies) from the site preparation and construction activities.

18.63 Assuming that appropriate measures are put in place based on the results of the proposed ground investigation, which may include remediation if significant contamination is identified, or treatment of discharge water, then the overall effect of the construction of the Proposed Development on controlled waters will be negligible or permanent minor beneficial (if remediation is required).

18.64 No other likely effects have been identified through the EIA which are deemed significant following mitigation. Therefore no additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.65 Similarly, no likely effects have been identified during operation or phasing which are deemed significant following mitigation.

18.66 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.67 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Waste Generation

18.68 There is the potential for combined effects on waste generation from the site preparation and construction activities. The change in the generation of waste has however been judged to be not important at a local and regional scale and the construction of the Proposed Development is expected to have a direct, temporary, medium-term, minor adverse effect. No other likely effects have been identified through the

EIA which are deemed significant following mitigation. Therefore no additional combined effects are anticipated.

18.69 While there will be adverse effects on waste generation during operation and the various phases, these effects are not anticipated to be greater than direct, permanent, long term minor adverse; therefore no additional combined effects on waste generation are anticipated.

18.70 No significant additional interactive effects have been identified.

18.71 As no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated beyond those identified in the ES chapters, no further mitigation is recommended.

Type 2 Effects 18.72 Type 2 effects are significant effects that are likely to arise as a result of the Proposed Development with

other relevant cumulative schemes. As defined in the Scoping Report the cumulative schemes selected for the assessment were chosen on the basis of the following factors:

• Scale – Only those developments likely to have significant environmental effects are selected. This is based on the scale of the development, and in particular whether the proposal constitutes a major development according to the floorspace created (see below) or whether they fall within Schedules 1 or 2 of the EIA Regulations.

• Sensitivity of Receptors – Only developments that have the potential to affect the sensitive receptors that are relevant to the Proposed Development are selected, which is related to the distance of the development from the OPA Site. The schemes included for assessment are those within a distance of 1.5 km from the centre of the OPA Site.

• Likelihood of Implementation – Only those developments that are likely to be implemented are selected. This is based on the date at which planning permission was granted and whether the planning permission is extant. Schemes that do not have planning permission are only included in exceptional cases where there is a resolution to grant consent. Completed schemes are excluded from the assessment as these are already included within the baseline.

18.73 Based on the above criteria, the following types of schemes are included within the assessments of Type 2 Effects:

• Schemes with a valid planning permission (or a resolution to grant planning permission) within 1.5 km of the OPA Site with a floorspace uplift of greater than 10,000 sq m GEA ; and

• Schemes with a valid planning permission (or a resolution to grant planning permission) within 1.5 km of the OPA Site where the uplift in GEA is less than 10,000 sq m, but which introduce sensitive receptors that could potentially be significantly affected by the Proposed Development.

18.74 Based on the specific criteria set out above, the assessment of Type 2 Effects has considered the cumulative effects of the Proposed Development with the schemes listed and shown on the map in ES Appendix A.

18.75 The Type 2 cumulative effects are presented in each technical chapter, the findings of which are summarised in chapters 6 – 17 of this Non Technical Summary.

GLOSSARY

Term Definition Air quality objective Policy target generally expressed as a maximum ambient concentration to be achieved, either without exception or with a permitted number of exceedences within a specific timescale (see also air quality standard).Ambient sound The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, usually composed of sound from all sources near and far.Annual mean The average (mean) of the concentrations measured for each pollutant for one year. Usually this is for a calendar year, but some species are reported for the period April to March, known as a pollution year. This period avoids splitting winter season between 2 years, which is useful for pollutants that have higher concentrations during the winter months. Amenity A positive element or elements that contribute to the overall character or enjoyment of an area. For example, open land, trees, historic buildings and the inter-relationship between them, or less tangible factors such as tranquility.The Applicant ‘CWG (Wood Wharf Two) Limited’.Aquifer A below ground, water-bearing layer of soil or rock.Archaeology The scientific study of ancient or historic physical remains of human activity, both above and below ground. Background noise Background noise is the term used to describe the noise measured in the absence of the noise under investigation. It is described as the average of the minimum noise levels measured on a sound level meter and is measured statistically as the A-weighted noise level exceeded for ninety percent of a sample period. This is represented as the L90 noise level. Baseline Existing environmental conditions present on, or near a site, against which future changes may be measured or predicted.Biodiversity A term used to describe all aspects of biological diversity.Brownfield site Sites that comprise previously developed land.Building Line Where the elevation of a building should meet the ground.Built heritage Upstanding structure of historic interest.Business use The use for which purposes of offices, research and development or industry, providing that such use can be carried out in a residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area. Character A term relating to ‘Conservation Areas’ or ‘Listed Building’, but also to the appearance of any rural or urban location in terms of its landscape or the layout of streets and open spaces, often giving places their own distinct identity.Code for Sustainable Homes A national standard for sustainable design and construction of new homes launched in December 2006. Conservation Area An area designated under Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as being of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance.Construction Management Plan A plan to undertake activities which provide for sound environmental management of a project so that adverse environmental effects are minimised and mitigated. Contaminated Land As defined by section 78A(2) Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, this refers to "any land which appears to the District Council in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or b. pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be caused;…" under the land, that: a. significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused; or b. pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be caused;…"

Term Definition Contamination Contamination is the addition, or the result of addition, or presence of a material or materials to, or in, another substance to such a degree as to render it unfit for its intended purpose.Control Documents The ‘Specified Parameters’ are set out in the three ‘Control Documents’: the ‘Parameter Plans’, the ‘Development Specification’ and the ‘Design Guidelines’. Controlled water Inland freshwater (any lake, pond or watercourse above the freshwater limit), water contained in underground strata and any coastal water between the limit of highest tide or the freshwater line to the three mile limit of territorial waters. Note 1: See Section 104 of The Water Resources Act 1991.Controlled waters Ditches rivers, estuaries, coastal waters, lakes and groundwaters – as distinct from sewers.Convenience Shopping The provision of everyday essential items, such as food.Core Strategy A Development Plan Document setting out the spatial vision and strategic objectives of the planning framework for an area, having regard to the Community Strategy. Cumulative effect Effects that result from incremental changes caused by other past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions.Density In the case of residential development, a measurement of either the number of habitable rooms per hectare or the number of dwellings per hectareDesign Guidelines The ‘Design Guidelines’ set out the guidelines by which any ‘Reserved Matters Applications’ would need to follow (for the development of any of the ‘Development Zones’ defined in the ‘Parameter Plans’ and the ‘Development Plots’ described in the ‘Design Guidelines’) if they are to be considered acceptable.Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines set out the guidelines that any 'Reserved Matters' applications for the development of any of the Plots defined in the 'Parameter Plans' would need to follow if they are to be considered acceptable.Development Plot A building that can arrive within a ‘Development Zone’, which is defined by a maximum height and envelope. ‘Development Zones’ may contain single or multiple Development Plots. Development Specification The ‘Development Specification’ sets out a written account of the ‘Parameter Plans’ and describes the ‘Outline Planning Application’ and the type and quantity of development that could be provided within each of the ‘Development Zones’ across the ‘OPA Site’ as a whole.Development Plan A Development Plan comprises a set of documents that set out the policies and proposals for the development and land use of an area. The relevant Development Plan for LBTH is the London Plan (2011) and the LBTH Local Plan which consists of the Core Strategy (2010) and Managing Development Document (MDD, 2013). Development Zone Areas within which buildings can arrive, which are defined by a maximum length, width andheight. Dewatering The removal of water or effluent.Dust Fine particles of solid materials ranging in size from 1 to 75 um diameter (see British Standard 3405) capable of being resuspended in air and settling only slowly under the influence of gravity where it may cause nuisance.Ecology The study of living organisms in relation to their surroundings.Environmental effect The total effect of any operation on the surrounding environment. Effluent A fluid discharged or emitted to the external environment.EIA Development Development that falls under the Schedule 1 or 2 of the Town and Country Planning (EIA) 1999 as requiring an EIA.

Term Definition The Environmental Statement Addendum The ‘Environmental Statement Addendum’ or ‘ES Addendum’ is prepared to assess a ‘Reserved Matters Application’ which comprises details that are submitted for approval, pursuant to the ‘Outline Planning Permission’. The ‘ES Addendum’ is related to the ‘ES’ for the ‘Outline Planning Application’. The Environmental Statement for the Outline Planning Application The ‘Environmental Statement’ for the ‘Outline Planning Application’ or the ‘ES’. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) A technique for ensuring that the likely effects of new development on the environment are fully understood and taken into account before the development is allowed to go ahead. It provides a focus for public scrutiny of the project and enables the importance of the predicted effects, and the scope for modifying or mitigating them, to be properly evaluated by the decisionmaking authority.Emission A material that is expelled or released to the environment. Usually applied to gaseous or odorous discharges to the atmosphere.Emission rate The quantity of a pollutant released from a source over a given period of time. Excavation (archaeological) An archaeological excavation is a ‘programme of controlled, intrusive fieldwork with defined research objectives which examines, records and interprets archaeological deposits, features and structures, and as appropriate, retrieves artefacts, ecofacts and other remains within a specified area. The records made and objects gathered during fieldwork are studied and the results of the study published in detail appropriate to the project design’. Exceedence A period of time where the concentrations of a pollutant is greater than, or equal to, the appropriate air quality standard.Fauna Animal life. Floodplain The area of land available for flood waters to occupy.Flora The plant life of a particular geographical area.Foreword Introductory statement featured at the beginning of each Control and Supporting Document. Frequency Frequency is the rate at which a sound wave cycles or repeats itself. The unit used is the Hertz (Hz) and represents the number of cycles a second that the sound wave travels at. The human hearing range is typically 20 Hz to 20 kHz. For Acoustic design purposes the octave bands of 63 Hz to 8 kHz are most commonly used. When a more detailed analysis is required 1/3-octave bands are used.Frontage Portion of building envelope built out to the Building Line.Geology The physical and chemical structure of the ground.Gross The sum total, without deduction.Gross External Area (GEA) Residential – This includes Gross External Areas of indoor space of the proposed residential units, core and plant areas on a typical floor level and lobby/entrance areas at ground floor but excludes car parking areas for residential use, cycle stores, refuse stores, concierge facilities, ground floor and basement plants, roof level plants, private terraces and gardens and any balcony space. Groundwater Water associated with soil or rocks below the ground surface but is usually taken to mean water in the saturated zone.Habitat The living place of an organism characterised by its physical or biotic priorities. Habitable rooms Any room used or intended to be used for sleeping, cooking, living or eating purposes. Enclosed spaces such as bath or toilet facilities, service rooms, corridors, laundries, hallways, utility rooms or similar spaces are excluded from this definition.

Term Definition Hard/Soft Landscaping Hard landscaping is the provision of features such as paving, lighting, seating, etc. whilst soft landscaping is the provision of plants, shrubs and trees to improve the quality of the environment. Harm Adverse effect on the health of living organisms, or other interference with ecological systems of which they form part, and, in the case humans, including property. Hazard Inherently dangerous quality of a substance, procedure or event. Heritage Asset A building, monument, Site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. ‘Heritage Asset’ includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).In situ In the natural, original or appropriate position.Inclusive design Designing the built environment, including buildings and their surrounding spaces, to ensure that they can be accessed and used by everyone.Indicative Scheme The ‘Indicative Scheme’ demonstrates one interpretation of the ‘Specified Parameters’ by showing the potential locations of buildings, uses and open spaces. Access arrangements including connections to and routes through the Site are also shown indicatively. This includes the area schedule which details the total quantity of land uses for the maximum floor area as drawn in the Indicative Scheme.Interceptors Used to intercept rainwater or spillages contaminated with oil and to retain the liquid for subsequent separation.Intrusive investigation An in-depth investigation involving further sampling and analysis, such as the gathering of samples from the ground, walls, ceilings for the detection of contamination, asbestos and or archaeological remains.Invertebrate An animal that does not possess a backbone.Landmark Prominent features in the landscape.Listed Building A building or structure of special architectural or historic interest. ‘Listed Buildings’ are graded I, II* or II with grade I being the highest. Listed Building Consent Application The ‘Listed Building Consent Application’ which is required for the partial demolition and alteration of sections of the listed dock walls to: Blackwall Basin, the East Quay of Export Dock and Middle Cut between Export Dock and South Dock.Locally listed building While not statutory listed, buildings are of good quality design and appearance or have historical significance, or are important features in their own right and which also make a significant contribution to the character and appearance of the locality. London Plan The ‘London Plan’ is the name given to the Mayor of London’s spatial development strategy for London. Made Ground Artificial deposit. Artificial deposit. An archaeologist would differentiate between modern made ground, containing identifiably modern inclusion such as concrete (but not brick or tile), and undated made ground, which may potentially contain deposits of archaeological interest. The Masterplan The ‘Proposed Development’ takes the form of a ‘Masterplan’ and as such, these terms can be used interchangeably.Maximum floorspace The maximum GIA of 728,880 sq m of development across the Site for which the planning application seeks permission, as set out in Table 1 of the Development Specification.

Term Definition Maximum Height Parameters Where specifically referencing the maximum built spatial parameters as defined on (Parameter Plan WWMP-PP010). The phrase ‘maximum parameters’ should not be used. Generally the term Specified Parameters should be used or maximum height parameters where specifically referencing the maximum built spatial parameters. Mitigation The measures put forward to prevent, reduce and where possible, offset any adverse effects on the environment.Mixed use (or mixed use development) Provision of a mix of complementary uses, such as residential, community and leisure uses, on a site or within a particular area.Multiplier Figure used to calculate the number of induced and indirect jobs created. Net After all deductions have been made.Noise Sound which a listener does not wish to hear.Non Technical Summary (NTS) A summary of the Environmental Statement in non-technical language providing a concise, yet comprehensive summary of the likely effects of the project on the environment.Nuisance A minor annoyance or inconvenience.Open space All ‘Open Space’ of public value, including not just land, but also areas of water (such as rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs) which offer important opportunities for sport and recreation and can act as a visual amenity.Ordnance Datum (OD) A vertical datum used by Ordnance Survey as the basis for deriving altitudes on maps.Outline Planning Application The ‘Outline Planning Application’ for the ’Outline Planning Application Site’ or the ‘OPA Site’.The Outline Planning Application Site The ’Outline Planning Application Site’ or the ‘OPA Site’. The site area enclosed by the ‘Outline Planning Application’ red-line boundary on application drawings. Outline Planning Permission The type of planning permission which is being sought for the ‘Proposed Development’ of the ‘OPA Site’ Overlooking A term used to describe the effect when a development or building affords an outlook over adjoining land or property, often causing loss of privacy.Overshadowing The effect of a development or building on the amount of natural light presently enjoyed by a neighbouring property, resulting in a shadow being cast over that neighbouring property.Parameter Plans The ‘Parameter Plans’ define the extent of the proposed routes, open spaces and ‘Development Zones’ across the ‘OPA Site’ against a series of minimum or maximum dimensions. Each of these component parts is identified as a ‘Development Zone’ which is identified by a letter (e.g. ‘Development Zone’ A).Particulate matter Discrete particles in ambient air, sizes ranging between nanometres (nm, billionths of a metre) to tens of micrometres (μm, millionths of a metre).Pathway Mechanism or route by which a contaminant comes into contact with, or otherwise affects, a receptor. Permeability The extent to which an environment allows a variety of access routes through it. A permeable environment is one where there is ease of movement and where people have a choice in the routes they may use.Permitted Uses Those uses which are permitted on Wood Wharf, defined in the Development Specification.Phase 1 Habitat Survey Broad scale and rapid technique for identifying and mapping habitats according to standard definitions and based on vegetation.

Term Definition Indicative Phasing The phasing assessment refers to the Indicative Phasing as provided within phasing plans for phase 1 – 7 and the construction programme. The ‘start date’ of the project is 2015. Key dates for the construction works (as opposed to site enabling works) are contained within the construction programme. The build time is 12 years. Pile or piling A timber, steel or concrete post that is driven, jacked or cast (bored) into the ground to carry vertical or horizontal loads.Planning Obligation A legally enforceable obligation entered into under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to mitigate the impacts of a development proposal. Sometimes called ‘Section 106’ agreements.Predominantly Equates to at least 51% of the specified use, length, area, frontage, etc. Predominant Use The use which dominates by occupying the largest amount of floor area within the building.The Proposed Development The applications (‘Outline Planning Application’ and ‘Listed Building Consent’) will be made for the ‘Proposed Development’.Public open space Public Open Space is defined as those areas where access for the public is secured by virtue of a legal agreement (irrespective of ownership). In accordance with the definitions set out in the LBTH Open Space Strategy (2006) it does not include areas of water, private residential gardens or incidental areas, such as road verges, or streets (unless these form part of a link in the open space network).Public Realm Those parts of a village, town or city (whether publicly or privately owned) available, for everyone to use. This includes streets, squares and parks.Reasonable worst case scenario The development scenario, being either a development that could be delivered within the Specified Parameters or the Indicative Scheme, which results in the most significant adverse effects. Receptor Human beings, flora, fauna, soil, water (including aquifers), air, climate, landscape, townscape, archaeological and built heritage sites, transport networks, local communities and other material assets.Relevant receptor Receptors that are relevant to the particular assessment.Remediation Cleanup or other methods used to remove or contain a toxic spill or hazardous materials.Reserved Matters The ‘Outline Planning Application’ seeks approval for ‘Specified Parameters’ relating to the use and amount of the ‘Proposed Development’ and reserves details relating to matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (‘Reserved Matters’), for approval in ‘Reserved Matters Applications’.Reserved Matters Application A ‘Reserved Matters Application’ seeks the approval of one or more Reserved Matters (See ‘First Reserved Matters Application’)Retail Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended). Retail Floorspace Total floor area of the property that is associated with all retail uses. Usually measured in square metres. May be expressed as a net figure (the sales area) or in gross (including storage, preparation and staff areas). Refer to Development Specification for permitted floorspace. Risk Probability of the occurrence, magnitude and consequences of an unwanted adverse effect on a receptor. Risk assessment Process of establishing, to the extent possible, the existence, nature and significance of risk.Sampling Methods and techniques used to obtain a representative sample of the material under investigation.

Term Definition Scheduled monument An archaeological monument that is included in the Schedule required to be maintained by the Secretary of State under Section 1 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. Such monuments are protected by law.Scoping An initial stage in determining the nature and potential scale of environmental effects arising as a result of a development, and an assessment of what further studies are required to establish their significance.Secured by Design The national police scheme which aims to minimise crime and opportunities to commit crime through better design of buildings and places.Sensitive receptor Receptors that are sensitive to the effects of the Proposed Development. Setbacks Where the Frontage of a building is not extended to the limits of the building envelope.Setting The context in which a building or area can be appreciated.Soil Upper layer of the earth's crust composed of mineral parts, organic substance, water, air and living matter. Note 1: In accordance with BS 10175:2001 the term soil has the meaning ascribed to it through general use in civil engineering and includes topsoil and subsoil; deposits such as clays, silt, sand, gravel, cobbles, boulders and organic deposits such as peat; and material of natural or human origin (e.g. fills and deposited wastes). The term embraces all components of soil, including mineral matter, organic matter, soil gas and moisture, and living organisms. Source Location from which contamination is, or was, derived. Note 1: This could be the location of the highest soil or groundwater concentration of the contaminant(s). Specified Parameters The ‘Proposed Development’ will be defined by ‘Specified Parameters’. The ‘Specified Parameters’ are set out in the three ‘Control Documents’. The ‘Environmental Statement for the Outline Planning Application’ will assess the ‘Specified Parameters’. Statutory Consultees Groups or bodies that, by law, must be consulted as part of the planning application process for certain types of development.Strategic views View corridor; viewing corridor as defined in LPAC Strategic Views. Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) ‘Supplementary Planning Guidance’ or ‘SPG’ may cover a range of issues, both thematic and site specific and provide further detail of policies and proposals in a development plan.Supporting Documents The ‘Supporting Documents’ are submitted in support of one or more of the applications and set out information to help the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) and the Mayor of London consider the proposals and determine the applications. A full suite of supporting documents is submitted in support of the ‘Outline Planning Application’ and, where necessary, ‘Addendum’ and ‘Statement of Compliance’ documents will be submitted in support of the ‘Reserved Matters Application(s)’. Sustainable development Development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.Tall Building ‘Tall Buildings’ are defined in the LBTH ‘Core Strategy’ as ‘any building that is significantly taller than their surroundings and/or have a significant impact on the skyline.’ Topography The natural or artificial features, level and surface form of the ground surface. Transport Assessment An inclusive process to determine all aspects of movement by people and vehicles associated with the new development. It demonstrates how the development affects demand for travel and how all travel demands and servicing requirements will be met. Travel Plan A transport plan whose aim is to reduce reliance on private cars and increase use of public transport.