London Borough of Newham Local Impact Report - National ...

0 downloads 118 Views 4MB Size Report
Jul 10, 2012 - The proposed development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would connect the main tunnel to the Lee Tunnel,
London Borough of Newham Local Impact Report PIN’s Reference Number: WWW01001 Newham Application Number: 13/00785/FUL Validation Date: 11/04/2013 Location: a) Abbey Mills Pumping Station b) Beckton Sewerage Treatment Works Ward: a) Stratford and New Town b) Beckton Applicants: Thames Water Agent: Thames Water

Purpose of Report / Proposal This is the Local Impact Report on behalf of the London Borough of Newham. The report sets out Newham’s response to the Planning Inspectorate’s formal consultation of the proposals submitted by Thames Water, which was received on the 11th April 2013. The proposals are for; The construction and operation of a wastewater storage and transfer in London known as the Thames Tideway Tunnel project. The project comprises of a wastewater storage and transfer tunnel (the main tunnel) between the operational Thames Water sites at Acton Storm Tanks and Abbey Mills Pumping Station. The project will control combined sewage flows from 34 combined sewer overflows (CSO's) identified as unsatisfactory by the Environment Agency. During and following storm events, when London's sewers are unable to handle extra wastewater flow, a series of interception structures will divert the flow into the tunnel system, where it will be stored and transferred to Abbey Mills Pumping Station, and then to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works via the Lee Tunnel. NAME OF LEAD OFFICER: Jo Negrini POSITION: Director of Strategic Regeneration, Planning and Olympic Legacy Originator of report: Sunil Sahadevan Tel no: 02033731423 E-mail address: [email protected]

Human Rights Act The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in the consideration of the Development Consent Order and the preparation of this report. Equalities In the consideration of the Development Consent Order and the preparation of this report the Council has regard to its equalities obligations including its obligations under section 149 of the Equalities Act 2010. For the purposes of this application there are no adverse equalities issues. Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Background papers used in preparing this report: • Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 • Background Papers Used in Preparing this Report • Planning Application • Statutory Register of Planning Decisions • Correspondence with Adjoining Occupiers • Correspondence with Statutory Bodies • Correspondence with other Council Departments • London Plan • Newham Core Strategy • UDP, SPGs • Other relevant guidance List of enclosures / Appendices: • Appendix 1 – London Wide Images • Appendix 2 – Abbey Mills Images • Appendix 3 – Beckton Images

REPORT 1.

OVERVIEW AND PROCESS

1.1

The Council were formally made aware of the proposals by the Planning Inspectorate on the 28th February 2013. The proposals submitted by Thames Water are for; The construction and operation of a wastewater storage and transfer facility in London known as the Thames Tideway Tunnel project. The project comprises of a wastewater storage and transfer tunnel (the main tunnel) between the operational Thames Water sites at Acton Storm Tanks and Abbey Mills Pumping Station. The project will control combined sewage flows from 34 combined sewer overflows (CSO's) identified as unsatisfactory by the Environment Agency. During and following storm events, when London's sewers are unable to handle extra wastewater flow, a series of interception structures will divert the flow into the tunnel system, where it will be stored and transferred to Abbey Mills Pumping Station, and then to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works via the Lee Tunnel. Planning Act 2008

1.2

By virtue of its location, purpose and storage capacity, the project constitutes a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), under Sections 14(1) (o) and 29 (1A) of the Planning Act 2008.

1.3

In accordance with the 2008 Act, Thames Water is making an application for development consent (the ‘application’) seeking the consent and powers necessary for the construction, operation and maintenance of the project. Localism Act 2011

1.4

Under the Localism Act 2011, the Planning Inspectorate became the agency responsible for operating the planning process for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs).

1.5

Any developer wishing to construct an NSIP must first apply for consent to do so. For such projects, the Planning Inspectorate examines the application and will make a recommendation to the relevant Secretary of State, who will make the decision on whether to grant or to refuse development consent.

1.6

Previously NSIPs were dealt with by the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC). Under the Localism Act 2011, the IPC was abolished on 1 April 2012. Its functions transferred to the Planning Inspectorate on that date and are now delivered by its National Infrastructure Directorate.

1.7

The Planning Act 2008 process was introduced to streamline the decision-making process for nationally significant infrastructure projects, making it fairer and faster for communities and developers alike.

1.8

The 2008 Act was amended by the Localism Act 2011, and the key stages in the process are:



Pre-application

The process begins when the Planning Inspectorate is informed by a developer that they intend to submit an application to them in the future. Before submitting an application, the developer is required to carry out extensive consultation on their proposals. The length of time taken to prepare and consult on the project will vary depending upon its scale and complexity. In the case of this project, the applicants have engaged with the Council since 2010. •

Acceptance

The acceptance stage begins when a developer submits a formal application for development consent to the Planning Inspectorate. There follows a period of up to 28 days (excluding the date of receipt of the application) for the Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the Secretary of State, to decide whether or not the application meets the standards required to be formally accepted for examination. In the case of this project, the Planning Inspectorate accepted the application was valid on the 28th March 2013. •

Pre-examination

At this stage, the public will be able to register with the Planning Inspectorate and provide a summary of their views of the application in writing. At pre-examination stage, everyone who has registered and made a relevant representation will be invited to attend a preliminary meeting run and chaired by an Inspector. This stage of the process takes approximately 3 months from the developer’s formal notification and publicity of an accepted application. There is no requirement for Local Authorities to register, as they are automatically included. •

Examination

The Planning Inspectorate has six months to carry out the examination. During this stage, people who have registered to have their say, are invited to provide more details of their views in writing. Careful consideration is given by the Examining Authority to all the important and relevant matters, including the representations of all interested parties, any evidence submitted and answers provided to questions set out in writing and explained at hearings. Local Authorities can submit a Local Impact Report (LIR) setting out their views and comments during this examination. •

Planning Inspectorate recommendation / Secretary of State’s decision

The Planning Inspectorate must prepare a report on the application to the relevant Secretary of State, including a recommendation, within 3 months of the six month examination period. The Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to make the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent. •

Post decision

Once a decision has been issued by the Secretary of State, there is a six week period in which the decision may be challenged in the High Court. This process of legal challenge is known as Judicial Review.

The Applicants 1.9

Thames Water is a statutory water and sewerage undertaker. It is the United Kingdom’s largest water and wastewater service company, serving around 13 million customers across London and the South East of London. The application for development consent

1.10

The Draft DCO (Development Consent Order) would, if confirmed, grant development consent for the ‘authorised development’. The Draft DCO contains, insofar as possible, all consents and powers required to construct, operate and maintain the project, including: a. planning approval for the project subject to the Requirements specified within the Draft DCO b. provisions relating to the discharge of Requirements c. provisions specifying who may take the benefit of the development consent d. power to undertake works on and to public highways and provisions relating to the regulation of traffic e. powers to stop up public highways (including rights of way) permanently and temporarily and power to extinguish or suspend public rights of navigation f. powers to conduct survey works and monitoring works on land (including buildings and structures) and to undertake protective or remedial works to buildings and structures g. various other powers required to complete and operate the project including the ability to discharge water to watercourses and power to do works to trees h. powers to compulsorily acquire land, new rights over land and to extinguish existing rights i. power to use land temporarily during construction of the project j. the requirement to pay compensation in respect of compulsory acquisition of land and rights over land and the temporary use of land and in respect of the exercise of certain other powers, for example in respect of carrying out protective works to buildings k. powers to undertake works to statutory undertakers’ apparatus including provisions for the protection of those undertakers assets l. a deemed marine licence for works below the mean high water mark m. provisions relating to the safeguarding of land required for construction and operation of the project n. the removal of various other consent requirements that would otherwise apply to the project and the amendment of legislation that is inconsistent with the construction, operation or maintenance of the project. DCO Application sites affecting Newham

1.11

The DCO application covers a total of 14 Local Planning Authorities, of which Newham is also included. Within Newham there are 2 sites that are specifically affected; i) Abbey Mills Pumping Station ii) Beckton Sewerage Treatment Works.

1.12

This Local Impact Report covers both these sites. However, it is recognised that in the case of Abbey Mills Pumping Station, that site falls within the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) boundary where they are the Local Planning Authority. As such the LLDC will be submitting their own LIR for Abbey Mills. Given that the Council remains the Local Authority in all other respects apart from Planning, it is considered appropriate that Abbey Mills is included and covered in this LIR. The assessment of the impacts on both sites are on occasions considered together and on other occasions considered separately under each of the section headings below, depending on the issues and circumstances that arise.

2.0

BACKGROUND, NEED and ALTERNATIVES Background

2.1

London’s sewerage system was designed in the 1800s to handle wastewater and run-off rainwater through a combined collecting system or a Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO). CSOs were incorporated into the sewerage system as relief structures to prevent flooding caused by sewer overloading, especially during periods of heavy rainfall.

2.2

Much of London’s sewerage infrastructure consists of combined systems, where a single set of sewers convey both foul sewage and rainwater runoff to sewage treatment works. The current sewerage system is subject to significant flows from surface drainage and therefore generates large volumes of combined sewage (sewage mixed with rainwater). Rainfall causes combined sewerage systems to surcharge quickly. For this reason, it is normal practice to incorporate overflows that allow excess flows to discharge directly into a watercourse to reduce flood risk to properties and prevent the sewerage system overloading.

2.3

The capacity originally allowed for in the interceptor sewerage systems originally designed by Sir Joseph Bazalgette in the 1850s has been extended and is now regularly exceeded. This is largely due to increases in population and water usage. Areas of hardstanding have also increased. For example, the population of Inner London in 1851 was 2,652,0008, the current population of the Beckton and Crossness catchments is 5,242,000 and this is forecast to increase to 6,222,000 in the 2020s. Increased areas of hardstanding have reduced the capability of the land to absorb rainwater, which instead now enters the sewerage network. Thames Water advise that it now takes as little as a few millimetres of rainfall to cause some CSOs to discharge combined sewage into the tidal Thames. Need

2.4

Thames Water have submitted a Needs Report with the DCO application. The Report sets out that The National Policy Statement (NSP) for Waste Water was formally designated on 26 March 2012 by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs following a debate in the House of Commons on 19 March 2012. The NPS establishes the need for a Thames Tunnel. NPS para. 2.6.34 states that: “The examining authority and the decision maker should undertake any assessment of an application for the development of the Thames Tunnel of the basis that the national need for this infrastructure has been demonstrated. The appropriate strategic alternatives to a tunnel have been considered and it has been concluded that it is the only option to address the problem of discharging unacceptable levels of untreated sewage into the River Thames within a reasonable time at reasonable cost”.

2.5

NPS para. 2.6.16 sets out the drivers of demand for the project. It also explains that London’s CSOs overflow into the tidal reaches of the River Thames approximately 50 times per year and affect: a. biodiversity by reducing dissolved oxygen levels in the river potentially resulting in the death of adult fish and fish fry b. health by increasing pathogenic bacteria, which potentially pose risks to river users c. the attractiveness of the environment due to large quantities of offensive solid material being discharged into the tidal Thames and deposited on the foreshore.

2.6

The NPS states that a collecting system and treatment to meet the requirements of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD) (91/271/EEC) is required for the London agglomeration by 31 December 2000. NPS para. 2.6.20 summarises the requirements of the Directive as requiring “that sewage (domestic, industrial and rainwater run-off) is collected and conveyed to plants for secondary treatment, overflows are reduced and measures taken to limit pollution of the tidal Thames”. Alternatives

2.7

Other drivers include the Water Framework Directive, climate change and population growth. NPS para. 2.6.21 states that the UWWTD is the “initial driver” for the project and that full implementation of this Directive is a basic (obligatory) measure in the Water Framework Directive. The consideration of alternatives to a storage and transfer tunnel is outlined at NPS paras. 2.6.26 to 2.6.30. It recognises that Sustainable Drainage Systems can play a key role in increasing the capacity and resilience of London’s sewer network by reducing the volume of flows entering sewers. However, it also notes that the simultaneous retrofit of all London’s properties and sewerage systems to the required level would be disproportionately expensive and that it has not been demonstrated that this would sufficiently reduce combined sewage discharges.

2.8

Other alternatives considered included creating additional capacity within the sewerage system and converting the combined drainage system to a separate drainage system. As set out in NPS paras. 2.6.26 to 2.6.31, these alternatives were rejected on the grounds of the very high cost and level of disruption to London.

2.9

NPS para. 2.6.26 states that a non-intervention, or ‘do nothing’ strategy, is not considered feasible due to the frequency and volume of discharges and their consequent environmental impacts. Therefore, as stated in NPS para. 3.4.1: “these strategic alternatives do not need to be assessed by the examining authority or the decision maker”.

2.10

The NPS is also clear, particularly in the Annex, as to the nature of the Thames Tideway Tunnel necessary in order to meet the identified need. NPS para. A1.3.2 states that the tunnel is “likely to run for approximately25km from West to East London to intercept storm sewage overflows and transfer them for treatment at Beckton sewage treatment works (STW) in East London. A major part of the tunnel route is likely to follow the course of the River Thames”. Similar text is also set out at NPS para. 2.6.25.

2.11

NPS para. A1.3.10 notes that although the exact location of the tunnel and associated shafts has not yet been confirmed, the proposed scheme would span up

to 14 London Boroughs, which it lists by name. The boroughs broadly span from Richmond upon Thames to Newham. 3.

Site and the Surroundings Abbey Mills

3.1

Abbey Mills Pumping Station (AMPS), located in the Stratford and New Town ward, is a strategic sewage pumping station on an extensive site, comprising a series of older and more modern pumping stations and associated infrastructure. A plan showing the site is provided at Appendix 2 of this report. The proposals affect the southern and western areas of the pumping station site, near the Lee Tunnel project works and the existing Station F pumping station.

3.2

The site is bounded to the north and northeast by operational infrastructure and buildings associated with the pumping station, to the east and southeast by the Channelsea River and Abbey Creek, to the west by the Prescott Channel, Three Mills Lock and allotments, and by Riverside Road to the northwest.

3.3

The pumping station is bounded to the north by a green corridor, ‘the Greenway’, which runs along the top of a man-made embankment above the Northern Outfall Sewer. The surrounding land to the north of the site is predominantly residential with allotments immediately abutting the site. Land use in the wider area is predominantly industrial. Beyond the Channelsea River and Abbey Creek to the east is an area of disused land and the Channelsea Business Centre on Canning Road and there is a gas works to the south. Abbey Mills Riverine Centre, which is currently in use as a Mosque, is situated to the south east of the site.

3.4

The land to the west of the site, known as Three Mills Island, comprises a landscaped grassed area and various warehouses including Three Mills Studio. Three Mills Green is designated as green space and a local park. The area to the northwest of the site is residential. The River Lee is tidal to the south of Three Mills Lock as well as Channelsea River to the south and east of the site, and non-tidal to the north of Three Mills Lock. Beckton

3.5

Beckton Sewerage Treatment Works (BSTW), located in the Beckton ward, and is the largest sewerage treatment works in the UK, with substantial areas of plant machinery, tanks and buildings.

3.6

The site itself comprises two areas within the southern and western sections of the operational BSTW compound. (See Appendix 3). The western section of the site comprises land under development for the Lee Tunnel and Beckton Sewage Treatment Works Extension scheme. The southern section comprises an area of hardstanding and operational infrastructure associated with the STW bounded by internal access roads.

3.7

Beckton STW is bounded by the Alfred’s Way trunk road to the north, Barking Creek to the east, the River Thames to the south, and by Royal Docks Road, Hornet Way and Armada Way to the west. Jenkins Lane waste transfer station, a cinema and a retail complex lie to the north of the STW. To the east of Barking Creek are a large timber yard and various warehouses. An area of vacant land lies on the opposite bank of the River Thames to the south. The area to the west comprises a mixture of business and retail parks and Royal Docks Road. There are no residential properties

in close proximity to the site. The nearest residential properties (in Beckton) are 799m away. 4.

The Proposal Abbey Mills Overview

4.1

The proposed development at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would connect the main tunnel to the Lee Tunnel, which is currently under construction. The discharges from the CSOs, collected by the Thames Tideway Tunnel would be transferred via the Lee Tunnel to Beckton Sewage Works. The Abbey Mills CSO would be intercepted by the Lee Tunnel. There would be no new combined sewer overflow interception at Abbey Mills Pumping Station as part of the project as the Abbey Mills CSO would already have been intercepted by the Lee Tunnel.

4.2

The main tunnel shaft will have an internal diameter of approximately 20m and depth of 67m. Associated development comprises works to establish a main tunnel reception site including construction of structures for air management equipment, including filters and ventilation columns and associated below ground ducts and chambers. Construction

4.3

Construction at Abbey Mills Pumping Station is anticipated to take approximately four years and would involve the following stages (with some overlaps): a. site set-up (approximately four months) b. shaft construction (approximately 15 months) c. tunnelling/tunnel boring machine (TBM) reception and main tunnel secondary lining (approximately eight months) d. construction of other structures (approximately seven months) e. completion of works and site restoration (approximately ten months).

4.4

This site would operate to the standard, extended and continuous working hours for various phases and activities as set out in the draft CoCP (Code of Construction Practice) Part A and B (Section 4). The draft CoCP was submitted as part of the application and includes standard practices and standards to be employed during the construction phase. Part A deals with project wide CoCP, while Part B is site specific for each of the sites.

4.5

Construction traffic would access the site from High Street (A11), turning right into Abbey Lane and turning left into the site via an existing entrance from Gay Road. Traffic would leave the site via the same route. Suspension of parking bays and parking restrictions would be required on Abbey Lane and Gay Road during construction.

4.6

Should the applicants decide to use river transport, it would be necessary to divert the existing footpath along the east side of the Prescott Channel and provide a temporary footbridge over the Prescott Channel.

4.7

It is anticipated that an average of 17 heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) would access the site per day for the majority of the construction period. This would rise to approximately 70 HGVs per day over an estimated four month period during the

construction of the main tunnel shaft. There may be additional periods during key construction activities when these HGV numbers would need to be exceeded. 4.8

The 20m internal diameter main tunnel shaft would then be constructed by diaphragm wall techniques. During diaphragm wall excavation the trench would be filled with bentonite for ground support; on completion of the excavation cycle, steel bar reinforcement cages would be lowered in before concrete is pumped into the trench in order to displace the bentonite and form a wall panel.

4.9

A concrete batching facility would be set up on site for main tunnel and shaft secondary lining works. The new shaft would be used to receive the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) driven from Chambers Wharf. A temporary cradle would be constructed to receive the TBM and it would be dismantled. Large mobile cranes would be used to raise the TBM sections from the shaft for removal offsite by road.

4.10

The breakthrough to the existing shaft would be carried out through a preformed soft eye only once the Lee Tunnel has been temporarily taken out of use (the tunnel connection would require taking the Lee Tunnel out of operation for a period and pumped out. Once broken through and the connection has been made, a temporary bulkhead seal between the two systems would be installed. The Lee Tunnel system would then be reinstated until the commissioning period when a further shut down period would be required.

4.11

The applicants are expecting that on completion of the tunnelling phase, a batching plant would be mobilised to site. The plant would supply the secondary lining of the main tunnel, the short connection tunnel and the shaft. Concrete would be batched on the surface and pumped or skipped to the tunnel.

4.12

The applicants assume that the majority of air management infrastructure required at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would already have been installed as part of the Lee Tunnel project. However, the new Thames Tideway Tunnel shaft would still need to be connected to this and this would require the construction of a ventilation outlet at the top of the shaft and some near surface piping or culverts to allow the ventilation to be connected into the Lee Tunnel infrastructure.

4.13

On completion of the construction works the permanent works area would be restored. No additional landscaping works are proposed.

4.14

The main tunnel shaft would have an approximate internal diameter of 20m and be approximately 66m deep from ground level to invert of the tunnel. The base of the shaft would join up with the main tunnel. Ground level access covers would be installed on the top of the shaft for inspection and maintenance purposes.

4.15

The ventilation column serving the shaft would have an approximate internal diameter of 1m and be approximately 9m high. The diameter of the ventilation column is dictated by the peak air flow rate. The minimum height of the ventilation column is determined by the results of odour dispersion modelling and the maximum height is influenced by the aesthetics proportions of the columns. The application includes parameter plans to agree the scope of the eventual dimensions for these structures.

4.16

Air movement in the shaft is also managed by three other ventilation structures. The plan areas and heights of these structures are approximately: a. 2m by 2m by 2m high minimum and 4m by 4m by 4m high maximum b. 2m by 3m by 2.5m high minimum and 4m by 5m by 4.5m high

maximum c. 4m by 3m by 2m high minimum and 7m by 6m by 5m high maximum 4.17

There will also be a electrical and control kiosk erected, which will be approximately 4m by 2m by 3m high.

4.18

Vehicle access to the site during construction and operation would be from the existing Thames Water entrance off Gay Road. Vehicles would travel along The High Street (A11), turn right into Abbey Lane and then left into the site via an existing entrance to the pumping station from Gay Road. Traffic would egress the site via the same route.

4.18

A permanent hardstanding area would be provided around the main tunnel shaft for access purposes. This would be accessed via access roads within the Thames Water site either existing or constructed for the Lee Tunnel.

4.19

Maintenance in the form of site visits will be carried out every 3 to 6 months, where inspections of the ventilation chamber, ventilation column, and electrical and control kiosk will be carried out. It is likely that this would involve a visit by staff in a small van. Staff would open access covers to inspect and carry out minor maintenance of below-ground equipment.

4.20

The drive tunnel will be from King’s Stairs Gardens (Chambers Wharf) in the London Borough of Southwark Abbey Mills Pumping Station. One principal reason for this was that Chambers Wharf has better access to the tidal Thames and can facilitate the use of 1,500 tonne barges whereas Abbey Mills Pumping Station has limited access to the River Lee, which experiences significant tidal variations and can only accommodate smaller barges in restricted numbers. Because of the barging constraints at Abbey Mills Pumping Station the proposed use as a main tunnel drive site would lead to increased dependence on road based transport which in this instance would be considered unsustainable and would not be a preferred option. Beckton Overview

4.21

The proposed works at Beckton STW comprise the installation of infrastructure to transfer CSO flows from the London Tideway Tunnels to Beckton STW and the connection of a new siphon tunnel to the Lee Tunnel overflow shaft. This would entail the construction of two shafts, a siphon tunnel and the installation of two pumps.

4.22

The majority of the works required at Beckton STW are currently under construction as part of the Lee Tunnel and other projects. Works are currently being undertaken at the site to increase the capacity of Beckton STW to process CSO flows from the London Tideway Tunnels in preparation for future population growth.

4.23

The proposed structures and works at this site do not fall under the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project. However, the works at this site are associated development and include construction of works above and below ground to transfer flows from the Tideway Pumping Station to the inlet works of the STW, installation of additional equipment at the inlet works; construction of a siphon tunnel inlet shaft, construction of a siphon tunnel outlet shaft, construction of a siphon tunnel with superstructure above the siphon inlet shaft from the Tideway Pumping Station to the siphon tunnel outlet shaft; and construction of pits, chambers, ducts and pipes for

cables, hydraulic pipelines, utility connections, utility diversions and drainage, including facilities for drainage attenuation. Construction 4.24

Construction at Beckton STW is anticipated to take approximately four and a half years and would involve the following phases (with some overlaps): a. site setup (approximately two months) b. shaft construction (approximately ten months) c. tunnelling (approximately seven months) d. construction of other structures (approximately 18 months) e. completion of works and site restoration (approximately 16 months).

4.25

The applicants advise, that the connection of utilities and diversion of utilities may be conducted in advance of the main activities listed above. The site would operate to the standard, extended and continuous working hours for various phases and activities as set out in the draft Code for Construction Practice (CoCP). Standard working hours would be applied to all of the above phases of construction work apart from elements of shaft construction, secondary lining and tunnel works as described below.

4.26

Extended working hours would be required at this site to allow for major concrete pours for shaft construction including diaphragm wall panels and other large elements. The applicants assume that extended hours would be required approximately twice a week during diaphragm walling for a total duration of approximately four months (two months per shaft). It is also assumed that continuous hours would be required during the tunnel boring machine (TBM) drive for approximately seven months and during secondary lining for approximately two months. The applicant’s intend to notify and consult the Council at the exact timing of any extended hours of working. This could be a clause to be included within the CoCP.

4.27

Construction traffic would access the site from Alfred’s Way (A13), through the existing sewage treatment works entrance off Jenkins Lane. Traffic would leave the site via the same route. It is anticipated that an average of 10 heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) would access the site per day for the majority of the construction period. This would rise to approximately 25 HGVs per day over an estimated five month period during the construction of the siphon tunnel. There may be additional periods during key construction activities when these HGV numbers would need to be exceeded.

4.28

The siphon tunnel would be driven from the siphon inlet shaft. It is assumed that the tunnel would be constructed by a slurry or earth pressure balance TBM. Ground treatment would be required for the TBM launch and reception. Once launched the TBM would cut the ground by rotating the cutter head whilst hydraulic shove rams would propel it forward. The TBM would move forward and a temporary railway built behind it within the tunnel as the TBM proceeds to bring material to the TBM including precast concrete segments. The TBM would be received into the shaft on a cradle and would be lifted out of the shaft by heavy lift mobile crane, cleaned then dismantled and transported off site.

4.29

Approximately 0.5km of approximately 2.4m internal diameter pipe line would be constructed for flow transfer to the inlet works, either elevated above ground or in the tunnel below ground, depending on the design of the Lee Tunnel Flow Transfer System which it would duplicate. The discharge chamber which connects the flow

transfer pipeline to the existing elevated inlet works would include a weir chamber and distribution pipes. 4.30

The siphon inlet shaft would be connected to the flow transfer pipeline by two approximately 2.1m diameter pipes constructed in open trench. The siphon inlet shaft would also have two 600mm internal diameter and 30m long drain-down pipes connecting to the existing connection shaft at a depth of approximately 35m. Prior to constructing the pipes, eyes would be formed in the base of the siphon inlet shaft and in the connection shaft and the ground in between treated to control groundwater.

4.31

The siphon outlet shaft would be connected to the Lee Tunnel overflow shaft via a reinforced concrete valve chamber and connecting culvert, constructed using an open trench approach. Two additional pumps and motors, pipe work and controls are required in the pumping station currently under construction by the Lee Tunnel project. The Lee Tunnel project will install four of the six pumps required (and the Thames Tideway Tunnel project would install the two additional pumps). A mobile crane would be used to lower the pumps and motors to the base of the pumping station dry well, the existing station crane (located near the base of the station) would then be used to move the pumps and motors into their final positions. Completion of works and site restoration

4.32

On completion of the construction works the permanent works area would be finished in accordance with the landscaping requirements. The flow transfer pipeline would be sized for a flow of 7.65m3/s, being half the maximum discharge from the Tideway Pumping Station. The flow transfer pipeline currently under construction for the Lee Tunnel will take the other half of the flow.

4.33

The discharge chamber for the flow transfer pipeline would be approximately 15m x 4m in plan, extending about 2m above ground level and 5m below ground level. A duplicate set of three new grit removal gantries are to be installed at the inlet works grit channels. The new grit removal gantries would be standby units to the existing gantries. They would be operated and maintained by the same on-site teams.

4.34

The siphon tunnel would connect the Tideway Pumping Station to the Lee Tunnel outlet shaft. The tunnel would have an approximate internal diameter of 2.8m and approximate depth of 20m. The siphon tunnel inlet shaft would be approximately 9m internal diameter. The siphon tunnel outlet shaft would be approximately 7m internal diameter. The Lee Tunnel outlet shaft would carry bypass flows from the pumping station to the overflow shaft outfall culverts. The 17m by 7m by 8m high electrical and control kiosk for the siphon tunnel inlet shaft is sized to accommodate the technical, electrical and control equipment and access facilities associated with the siphon inlet tunnel.

4.35

Existing access to the site is from Alfred’s Way via Jenkins Lane and operational access roads within the site. During construction vehicle access would be via Alfred’s Way (A13), and through the existing Beckton STW entrance off Jenkins Lane. Traffic would egress the site via the same route. Permanent hardstanding areas would be provided around shafts and chambers to facilitate maintenance. These would connect to existing hardstanding or access roads within Beckton STW. Once the development is in operation, for safety and security reasons, Beckton STW would remain accessible only to Thames Water personnel and contractors.

4.36

Inspections of below-ground equipment would be required approximately every three to six months, and would be carried out as part of the maintenance activity for the

sewage treatment plant and generally by personnel based at Beckton STW. Should a major blockage occur, a crane or jetting lorry would be brought to the site to clear the blockage. 5.

Relevant History Application History Abbey Mills

5.1

Abbey Mills Pumping Station (AMPS) has been subject to a series of incremental developments associated with its operational infrastructure, the most significant of which was the approval of a new pumping station building (Station F) in 1995 (94/0742), which became operational in 1997.

5.2

The next significant planning permission was in January 2005 for a facilities building associated with Thames Water’s CSO fine screening project (P/04/1934). There have also been a series of minor applications for temporary portable offices and operational plant, as well as developments implemented under Thames Water’s permitted development rights.

5.3

In December 2009 planning permission was granted for the Lee Tunnel and Beckton STW Extension scheme. The scheme is intended to improve water quality in both the Thames Tideway and the River Lee by capturing CSO discharges from Abbey Mills PS within the proposed Lee Tunnel and providing additional sewage treatment capacity at Beckton STW. Development at Abbey Mills PS includes works to enable interception of the storm sewage for transfer into the Lee Tunnel including shafts, transfer tunnels, connecting culverts, connection chambers and associated odour control units (Planning permission 08/01159/LTGDC).

5.4

In October 2010, planning permission (10/01854/LTGDC) was granted for the construction and operation of a culvert and associated infrastructure to intercept storm flows and transfer to the Station F shaft associated with the Lee Tunnel scheme (Planning Permission 08/01159/LTGDC).

5.5

On the 24th January 2013, planning permission was granted (12/00180/FUL) by the London Legacy Development Corporation for the construction and operation of Shaft G to the west of Shaft F (currently under construction as part of the Lee Tunnel development), short connection tunnel between the two shafts and associated works. Beckton

5.6

Beckton STW is at the end of the Northern Outfall Sewer, which was constructed in the second half of the 19th century. Initially, sewage was discharged untreated into the River Thames. Most of the current STW infrastructure was constructed in the mid 20th century. Over the years a number of different planning permissions have been granted in association with the sewage treatment works at this site.

5.7

Outline planning approval was granted in August 1993 for the construction of a sewage sludge powered generator (SPG) (Application Ref. P/91/0934). It was completed and commissioned in 1998 and incinerates sewage sludge to generate energy that is sent to the grid.

5.8

Planning approval was granted in October 2005 for the construction of a distribution pipeline (Application Ref. P/05/0291) designed to transfer water treated in the

Thames Gateway Water Treatment Plant to Woodford Reservoir in the London Borough of Waltham Forest. A planning application (Application Ref. P/04/1002) for the construction of the Thames Gateway Water Treatment Plant (TGWTP) incorporating desalination technology with an intake from the River Thames was allowed on appeal on 16 July 2007. 5.9

Planning approval was granted on the 3rd of September 2009 (Application Ref. 09/01002/FUL) for the erection of a storage building on an area of hardstanding to the east of the existing Sludge Powered Generator (SPG) building.

5.10

Planning approval was granted on the 1st of December 2009 following the completion of a Section 106 (Application Refs. 08/01162/FUL, 08/01159/LTGDC and 08/01158/ODA) for construction of a sewage storage and transfer tunnel (known as the Lee Tunnel) between Abbey Mills Pumping Station and Beckton Sewage Treatment Works, and construction of an extension to the Beckton Sewage Treatment Works. Works on this development are underway. This consent was varied on the 2nd March 2011 by permission reference 10/02061/LTGVAR/LBNM, to which the development is now being implemented. A number of non material amendments have also been made to the development. These are not listed in this report.

5.11

Planning permission was granted on the 23rd March 2011 reference 10/01713/LTGDC/LBNM for the development of an Enhanced Sludge Digestion Facility. Enforcement History

512

There is no previous enforcement history for either Abbey Mills Pumping Station or Beckton Sewerage Treatment Works.

6.

Consultation

6.1

Adjoining Properties

Number of Letters Sent Number of responses Received Number in support Number of objections

Letters sent 475 0 0 0

6.1.1

With DCO applications, there is no requirement upon the Local Authority to consult adjoining occupiers. The Planning Inspectorate have undertaken their own consultation and it is expected that comments from adjoining occupiers and other interested parties will be sent directly to them. However, in order to properly represent the views of the Local Planning Authority in this LIR, it has been considered appropriate to consult adjoining occupiers ourselves and to include their views.

6.1.2

A total of 475 letters were issued (410 addresses in around Abbey Mills and 65 in the Beckton area). There have been no responses received.

6.1.3

Internal Consultation

6.1.4

Environmental Health Abbey Mills The comments are based purely on Thames Water’s decision to use Abbey Mills as a reception shaft and not a drive shaft. Was this to change then the comments will need to be revisited. Since the production of the content for the EIA, the plans have changed at Abbey Mills Pumping Station and the construction of Shaft G is now being undertaken as part of the Lee Tunnel Project. This has already been conditioned under planning application 12/00180/FUL and the works are due to commence shortly. A Code of Construction Practice is already in place which will adequately control the construction of Shaft G, therefore there is no objection to the construction phase of this DCO in relation to this site. The operational phase poses the problem of odour from the shaft. The odour control plant for the Thames Tideway Tunnel is the same as that used for the Lee Tunnel Project, which Thames Water have assured is more than capable of coping with this extra demand. The Lee Tunnel Project odour control plant already has a condition attached to it relating to its efficacy and as the two tunnels are sharing the same plant, then this condition will be enforceable during the operational phase. As odour control is already therefore covered it is not proposed that any additional odour control are conditions are included in determining this DCO. In summary, there are no objections or concerns over the environmental impacts arising at Abbey Mills. The major part of the proposals – Shaft G, is already separately consented by the LLDC, and mitigation of impacts arising is covered by conditions on separate consents. Beckton The works to be undertaken at Beckton Sewage Treatment Works are considered to be fairly minor when compared to work already being undertaken on the site and the work is situated in the middle of the site, well away from any receptors. The draft Code of Construction Practice produced as part of this application has been through several stages of consultation and is considered enough to mitigate any potential problems during the construction phase of the project. The controls already in place within the operational Beckton Sewage Treatment Works will be sufficient to control any effects brought about by the operational phase of this project, so there is no concern or recommendation of any conditions.

6.1.5

Regeneration There is a strong recommendation that as many local jobs and goods and services are secured through the S106, and that there is quarterly reporting and monitoring on employment and business activity.

6.1.5

Lighting Engineer No objection.

6.1.6

Highways No objection.

6.1.7

Design Officer Abbey Mills Due to the location of proposed works at the Abbey Mills site, the proposed development will have a very limited impact on the listed at Abbey Mills. The modern station F pumping station stands between the site of the proposed works and the listed buildings limiting the impact of the works. In addition, the above ground construction consists of a single vent shaft so again the impact will be extremely limited. The appearance of the shaft relates satisfactorily to the other modern industrial/pumping station equipment on the site and is acceptable. For the reasons above, there is no objection to the design/appearance of the proposed works, or their impact on the heritage assets in this area. Beckton The works are contained within the site and are consistent with the type and appearance of other structures on the site. The impact beyond the site itself will be extremely limited. For this reason there is no objection to the proposed works.

6.1.8

Transportation Verbal comments that there are no objections. All the issues relate to the construction period, and the CoCP can mitigate any impacts on the highway.

7.

Planning Policies and Guidance

7.1

The Development Plan comprises of the London Borough of Newham Core Strategy (adopted 26th January 2012) and London Borough of Newham Unitary Development Plan (saved by the Secretary of State in 2007 and not deleted on adoption of the Core Strategy on 26th January 2012), and The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London dated July 2011. National Policy

7.2

Water for Life – Government’s White Paper on Water

7.3

This White Paper published in December 2011 is the Government’s response to the issues raised in the three recently concluded major reviews1 of the water sector. The White Paper sets out how the Government will work with others to drive change, support growth and protect the environment. A draft Water Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny on the basis of the White Paper’s recommendations was published on 10th July 2012. In addition, White Paper also states the Government will produce a new strategic policy statement and social and environmental guidance for Ofwat during 2012.

7.4

The White Paper specifically states that the:

“Thames Tunnel, in combination with other improvements to London’s sewerage system, would reduce the current unacceptable level of sewage overflowing into the tidal Thames, bring the water quality up to a standard that meet international benchmarks, and help ensure that the system has the capacity to meet the future needs of a growing population and changing rainfall patterns caused by climate change”. 7.5

Future Water – The Government’s Water Strategy for England

7.6

The Government’s National Water Strategy is set out in Future Water published in February 2008. The Strategy aims to improve, by 2030, the quality and ecology of the water environment and ensure sustainable use of water resources. The Strategy specifically supports the Thames Tideway development and the improvements to treatment works that will address the pollution that currently affects the tidal River Thames.

7.7

Circular 17/91 – Water Industry Investment: Planning Considerations

7.8

Circular 17/91 provides guidance to planning authorities on the need to plan for the long-term requirements and the implications of the investment programme being undertaken by the water industry. The Circular highlights the need to avoid delays in obtaining planning consent and the need to expedite works that meet water companies’ obligations.

7.9

National Policy Statement for Waste Water, March 2012

7.10

The National Policy Statement (NPS) for Waste Water, designated in March 2012, identifies the importance of providing adequate wastewater infrastructure to meet current and future needs. The NPS provides guidance on the consideration of wastewater treatment proposals through the planning system.

7.11

The NPS acknowledges the problems associated with the combined sewer system often becoming overloaded with excess diluted sewage discharging from CSOs into the Rivers Lee and Thames affecting biodiversity, health and the attractiveness of the environment.

7.12

National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012

7.13

The Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012, replacing the previous planning policy guidance notes and planning policy statements. The NPPF sets out the Government’s fundamental principles for the planning system, including the presumption in favour of sustainable development; approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay.

7.14

The NPPF sets out national guidance on development, and identifies core land use policy principles that should under pin both plan-making and decision-taking. It sets out Government policy relating to infrastructure, flood risk, nature conservation, protection of the historic environment, good design and other issues relevant to the development proposed in this application. The key policies in relation to the proposals are set out below;

7.15

National Planning Policy Framework - Adopted March 2012:

Achieving sustainable development: 7 9

Sustainable development Pursuing sustainable development

The presumption in favour of sustainable development: 11 14

Accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise Pursuing sustainable development Presumption in favour of sustainable development

Core planning principles: 17

Core land-use planning principles

Building a strong, competitive economy: 19

Planning to support sustainable economic growth

Promoting sustainable transport: 30 35 36 39

Facilitating sustainable modes of transport Protect and exploit opportunities Travel Plans Local parking standards

Requiring good design: 56 57 58 59 61 62 63 64 65

Good design High quality and inclusive design Setting out the quality of development Design codes Addressing connections between people and places Local design review Outstanding or innovative design Preventing Poor Design Sustainability and Compatibility with the townscape

Promoting healthy communities: 69 70

Facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities Provision and use of shared space

Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change 93 94 95 96

Resilience to the impacts of climate change Climate change – strategies and mitigation Low carbon future Decentralised energy supply and minimising energy consumption

97 99 100 103

Use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy Climate change over the long term Inappropriate development in areas of flood risk Flood risk assessment

Conserving and enhancing the natural environment: 109 120 121 123 124 125

Enhancing the natural and local environment Prevention of unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability Contamination Noise, health and quality of life Air quality Light pollution

Decision-taking: 196 197

Determination in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise Presumption in favour of sustainable development

Planning conditions and obligations: 203 204 205 206

Use of conditions and obligations Planning obligations – tests Planning obligations – sufficient flexibility Planning conditions – tests

Regional Policy 7.16

The London Plan –Adopted 2011 2.3

Growth Areas and Co-ordination Corridors

2.9 2.13 2.14 2.18 3.2 4A.14 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.12 5.14 5.18 5.21 6.3 6.9 6.10 6.13 6.14 7.4 7.5

Inner London Opportunity Areas and Intensification Areas Areas for Regeneration Green Infrastructure: the network of open and green spaces Improving Health and Addressing Health Inequalities Sustainable design and construction Climate Change Mitigation Minimising Carbon Dioxide Emissions Sustainable Design and Construction Flood Risk Management Water quality and wastewater infrastructure Construction, excavation and demolition waste Contaminated land Assessing Effects of Development on Transport Capacity Cycling Walking Parking Freight Local Character Public Realm

7.6 7.8 7.14 7.15 7.18 7.19 7.21 7.24 7.26

7.28

Architecture Heritage Assets and Archaeology Improving Air Quality Reducing noise and enhancing soundscapes Protecting Local Open Space and addressing local deficiency Biodiversity and Access to Nature Trees and woodlands Blue Ribbon Network Increasing the use of the Blue Ribbon Network for freight transport Blue Ribbon Network: Supporting Infrastructure and Recreational Use Restoration of the Blue Ribbon Network

7.29 7.30

The River Thames London’s Canals and other Rivers and Water Spaces

7.27

Local Policies 7.17

Newham Core Strategy – Adopted 2012 S1 S2 S3 S5 S7 S10 SP1 SP2 SP3 SP5 SP7 SC3 SC4 INF1 INF2 INF3 INF6 INF7 INF9

Spatial Strategy Stratford and West Ham Royal Docks (Part 9) Beckton Sugar House Lane and Three Mills Abbey Mills Borough Wide Place Making Healthy Neighbourhoods Quality Urban Design within Places Heritage and other Successful Place-making Assets Quality Movement Corridors and Linear Gateways Flood Risk Biodiversity Strategic Transport Sustainable Transport Waste and Recycling Green Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Network Infrastructure Delivery

7.18

Unitary Development Plan

7.19

The Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (saved by the Secretary of State in 2007 and not deleted on adoption of the Core Strategy on 26th January 2012): EQ2 EQ10 EQ14 EQ15 EQ33 EQ43 EQ45 EQ47

Waterside Access Development on Sites of Nature Tree Loss and Retention Inclusion of Tree Planting in New Development Protection of Trees Archaeology: Investigation, Excavation and Protection Pollution Noise

EQ49 EQ54 EQ56 T10 T14 T23 OS7

Contaminated Land: Assessment, Remediation and Monitoring Promoting Sustainable Waste Management Criteria for Assessing Waste Management Facilities Road Hierarchy: Relation to Development Proposals Design to Minimise Road Accidents in New Development Cycling Green Space: Protection

7.20

Joint Waste Development Plan Document

7.21

The Joint Waste Development Plan Document for the East London Waste Authority Boroughs (February 2012) also includes a number of policies that are relevant to the DCO proposals, and which have informed the preparation of the development proposals, include: • Policy W1: Sustainable Waste Management • Policy W2: Waste Management Capacity, Apportionment & Site Allocation • Policy W5: General Considerations with regard to Waste Proposals

8.

Analysis of Environmental Statement

8.1

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been prepared to assess the significant environmental effects that are likely to arise from the proposed development. The Environmental Statement (ES) comprises of 28 Volumes; Volume 1 – Code of Construction Practice, Design Principles Volume 2 – Appendices Volume 3 – Project Wide Effects Volume 4 – Appendices and Figures Volume 5 - Appendices and Figures Volumes 6- 26 (Individual site assessments; Abbey Mills is Vol. 25 and Beckton is Vo. 26) Volume 27 – Appendices Volume 28 – Glossary and abbreviations There is also a non technical summary.

8.2

The ES covers the following chapters; “Air Quality”, “Ecology”, “Historic Environment”, “Noise and Vibration”, “Socio-Economic”, “Transport”, “Water Resources- Ground water”, Water Rescources – Surface Water”, “Flood Risk”. Of these chapters, the Council has internal expertise to comment on the following; •

Air Quality



Historic Environment



Noise and Vibration



Socio-Economic



Transport

8.3

The ES has been assessed by officers to ensure it meets the EIA Regulations 2011 and whether it contains sufficient information to determine whether or not planning permission should be granted, and the planning conditions/obligations that need to be attached to the permission.

8.4

The application is considered to meet the EIA Regulations 2011 and provide satisfactory levels of information in order for a proper assessment to have been undertaken of the development proposals. The details in the ES are considered to be sufficiently comprehensive to provide a robust EIA and allow for a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed development.

9.

Assessment

9.1

The main issues for consideration in relation to this LIP are: • • • • • • •

Principle of development and local policies Amenity Impacts (noise and vibration) Air Quality Transportation Employment Townscape and Visual (including landscape) Cultural Heritage

Under each topic heading issues that are relevant to both Abbey Mills and Beckton will be considered together where appropriate and separated out between the two sites where appropriate. 9.2.1

Principle of Development and Local Policies Overview

9.2.2

The White Paper published in December 2011 “Water for Life” is Central Government’s response to the issues raised in the three recently concluded major reviews of the water sector. The White Paper sets out how the Government will work with others to drive change, support growth and protect the environment. A draft Water Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny on the basis of the White Paper’s recommendations was published on 10th July 2012. In addition, White Paper also states the Government will produce a new strategic policy statement and social and environmental guidance for Ofwat during 2012.

9.2.3

The White Paper specifically states that the: “Thames Tunnel, in combination with other improvements to London’s sewerage system, would reduce the current unacceptable level of sewage overflowing into the tidal Thames, bring the water quality up to a standard that meet international benchmarks, and help ensure that the system has the capacity to meet the future needs of a growing population and changing rainfall patterns caused by climate change”.

9.2.4

In addition, the Government’s National Water Strategy is set out in Future Water published in February 2008. The Strategy aims to improve, by 2030, the quality and

ecology of the water environment and ensure sustainable use of water resources. The Strategy specifically supports the Thames Tideway development and the improvements to treatment works that will address the pollution that currently affects the tidal River Thames. 9.2.5

The National Policy Statement (NPS) for Waste Water, designated in March 2012, identifies the importance of providing adequate wastewater infrastructure to meet current and future needs. The NPS provides guidance on the consideration of wastewater treatment proposals through the planning system.

9.2.6

The NPS acknowledges the problems associated with the combined sewer system often becoming overloaded with excess diluted sewage discharging from CSOs into the Rivers Lee and Thames affecting biodiversity, health and the attractiveness of the environment.

9.2.7

Policy 5.14 of the London Plan gives general support to the principle of ensuring London has adequate and appropriate wastewater infrastructure to meet the requirements placed upon it by population growth and climate change and protect and improve water quality. In general, planning decisions are expected to ensure that adequate wastewater infrastructure is available in tandem with development and benefit water quality; support upgrades to London’s sewage treatment capacity provided they utilise best available techniques and energy capture; and support the principle of developing the Thames Tideway Sewer Tunnels to address London’s combined sewer overflows.

9.2.8

The project would also be in accordance with Newham Core Strategy Policy INF3, which provide explicit support for the project. The project is designated under Core Strategy spatial designation U2. Abbey Mills

9.2.9

The application site is located within Abbey Mills Pumping Station. The site plays a strategically important role within London’s sewerage infrastructure. The principle of utilising the site to improve this infrastructure is supported by strategic and local planning policies and has been established through previous planning permissions.

9.2.10 The Mayor of London’s Olympic Park Supplementary Planning Guidance locates the site within the Southern Olympic Fringe and references it playing a vital role in London’s strategic sewerage infrastructure. The site is not identified as a Strategic Site where land use change is promoted within the London Borough of Newham Core Strategy. Policy INF3 of the Core Strategy states that the Council will work with Thames Water and other stakeholders to reduce or eliminate sewer flooding and supports proposals for additional storage and pipeline capacity in the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel and Lea Tunnel that will reduce incidences of stormwater overflow into the Thames and Lea river system. 9.2.11 The Abbey Mills Pumping Station is located within a network of green space designated by saved UDP Policy OS7. Three Mills Green to the west of the site is also within this green space network and is identified as a local park. The site is within the wider Lee Valley Regional Park boundary. The Greenway, to the north of the site, is designated Metropolitan Open Land and Abbey Mills Pumping Station falls within an area of search for a new area of Metropolitan Open Land although this has not yet been defined further or adopted.

9.2.12 Despite falling within this green space designation, the site’s location within the operational Abbey Mills Pumping Station complex means it is not publicly accessible, for safety and security reasons and does not provide any open space amenity function. It is therefore not proposed to remove any open space from public use, or provide public access to designated areas within the pumping station compound. The open space assessment undertaken by the Council in preparation of its Core Strategy also did not identify or include any assessment of this site as public open space. The adjacent allotments and Three Mills Green were however included within the assessment. 9.2.13 The proposed works include the construction of a new shaft (Shaft G), connection tunnel to Shaft F and connections to odour control units consented as part of the Lee Tunnel development, and associated works including a electricity substation and a ventilation shaft. The project works at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would be largely constructed, and entirely operated, on land owned solely by Thames Water in operational wastewater use, which would be consistent with the existing use. Given the long established use of the site the proposed works would be consistent with its historic and current land use, and the use of this site is considered to be acceptable in principle. 9.2.14 The planning acceptability of the principle of creating a new shaft and associated works is also established by the planning permission for the Lee Tunnel and Beckton STW Extension project. Indeed, Shaft G, was also consented by a separate planning application to the LLDC (12/00180/FUL), which was consented on the 24th January 2013, where the development, as part of a larger infrastructure project, was deemed to be in accordance with the relevant national, regional and local planning policy. 9.2.15 The proposed works at Abbey Mills comprise the construction of new sewage infrastructure to store and transfer existing Combined Sewer Overflows in accordance with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive and relating to the Lee Tunnel and Beckton STW Extension planning permissions. 9.2.16 Surrounding land uses were reviewed and considered in the project site selection process and on-going design development. As a result of the design principles and parameters proposed, it is considered that the proposed works would not prevent the continuation of surrounding land uses during construction or operation. Similarly, it is considered that any extant planning permissions, committed developments, or policy allocations for future development would not be significantly impacted as a result of the works in this location. 9.2.17 The proposed development is considered to be in accordance with Policies 1.1 and 5.14 of the London Plan, Policy INF3 of the Core Strategy and is shown on the Key Diagram as designation U2. It also complies with Policies EQ54 and EQ55 of the Unitary Development Plan by providing wastewater infrastructure that improves water quality and reduces adverse impacts on the environment. Beckton 9.2.18 The project works at Beckton STW would be constructed and operated on land owned solely by Thames Water in operational wastewater use, which would be consistent with the existing use. Given the long established use of the site the proposed works would be consistent with its historic and current land use, and the use of this site is considered to be acceptable in principle.

9.2.19 The site and the wider STW are within a designated employment hub and partially within a designated Strategic Industrial Location reflecting the strategic importance of this utility site. The continued use of the site for essential infrastructure represents a used recognised by policy as being consistent with the use of SIL. The application will also create some additional jobs on site further focussing the employment hub nature of the STW. The application is considered to be consistent with the Core Strategy in this respect. 9.2.20 Part of the proposed site is located within a network of designated green space but no longer forms part of a Metropolitan Open Land designation, which is afforded the same protection as Green Belt. The Greenway, which runs east to west immediately to the south of the site, also forms part of this green space network. None of the proposed buildings or structures will be located along the proposed routes and therefore the development would not prejudice the future development of footpaths or the green space network. 9.2.21 Despite falling within this designation, the site’s location within the operational Beckton STW means it is not publicly accessible, for safety and security reasons and does not provide any open space amenity function. The proposals do not propose to remove any open space from public use, or provide public access to designated areas within the pumping station compound. 9.2.22 A proposed bus corridor dissects the proposed site from north to south, beginning at Jenkins Lane in Barking and ending in the Royal Docks. This forms part of the proposed Barking to Royal Docks bus corridor (East London Transit), identified in the Core Strategy's Key Diagram as designation T4. While this is a currently unfunded strategic transport proposal, it has the support of the London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and Transport for London, and is intended to contribute towards Newham’s regeneration and economic and physical development, by increasing accessibility for local residents to new employment opportunities. However, the route is only indicative at this stage and no firm proposals are presented. 9.2.23 Owing to the site’s location within the operational Beckton STW, and the proposed design principles and parameters, it is not considered that the proposed works would negatively affect the surrounding land uses, during either construction or operation. Similarly, it is not considered that any extant planning permissions, committed developments, or policy allocations for future development would be adversely impacted as a result of the works in this location. Conclusion 9.2.24 The proposals are considered to be supported by National, Regional and local polices. The works are proposed on existing Thames Water operational land and there are no in principle policy conflicts with adopted policies and the DCO has correctly identified all the relevant policies to be considered, including those at local level. The proposals are therefore supported in principle. 9.3

Amenity Impacts (noise and vibration)

9.3.1

The main amenity impacts will occur during the construction period, which is considerably long - four years at Abbey Mills and four and a half years at Beckton. The impacts however be temporary in nature.

9.3.2

The impacts during the construction period can principally be dealt with by the Code of Construction Practice (CoCP), the final draft of which will need to be agreed as part of any Consent Order.

9.3.3

The draft CoCP submitted as part of the application sets out how the environmental effects resulting from the construction of the project would be managed. The Draft DCO includes requirements that the construction works are to be carried out in accordance with the CoCP.

9.3.4

It is considered that issues of noise and disturbance during the construction period can be addressed through agreement of the CoCP.

9.3.5

In relation to Abbey Mills, the nearest receptors that are sensitive to noise and vibration are residential dwellings on Gay Road, Abbey Lane, Riverside Road and Bisson Road to the north, Crows Road to the south and houseboats at Three Mills Water to the west. Three Mills Studios lies to the west of the site.

9.3.6

With Beckton, there are no receptors that are sensitive to noise and vibration within 500m of the site. No significant noise effects are predicted as a result of the construction or operation of the works at this site.

9.3.7

No significant noise or vibration effects are predicted as a result of the construction or operation of the works at either site.

9.3.8

Furthermore, a series of further measures are set out in the CoCP. The measures include operating in accordance with best practice, selecting the quietest costeffective plant available, and optimising plant layout to minimise noise emissions.

9.3.9

Overall, the Council are supportive of the DCO application in this respect, and do not consider that any adverse noise and vibration impacts will arise from the development. The critical period will be the construction phase, however with the use of an agreed CoCP these impacts can be minimised.

9.4

Air Quality Project wide

9.4.1

The project-wide air management plan which is submitted as part of the DCO application is designed to ensure that the air in the tunnels is kept fresh, that a low pressure is maintained within the tunnels to prevent unwanted releases and that when air is released it is treated. This would be achieved by a combination of forced or active ventilation and treatment and passive air treatment. In addition, at all sites there are to be ventilation structures which would allow air to enter and leave the tunnel system.

9.4.2

The strategy sets out that when the tunnels are empty, clean air would be drawn into the tunnels at specific sites by the extraction of air at other specific sites so as to keep the air in the tunnels fresh. This means that odours would not build up while the tunnels are empty. As the tunnels fill, air displaced from the tunnels would initially be extracted and treated at the active ventilation sites before being released and later, depending of the level of filling, would pass through the passive carbon filters. These filters clean the air and remove any odours before it is released.

Abbey Mills 9.4.3

As a result of previous exceedances of air quality objectives, the London Borough of Newham has declared an Air Quality Management Area along the main road corridors across the borough. The Abbey Mills Pumping Station site is not in the Air Quality Management Area, although the A11/A118 corridor to the north of the site is. Local monitoring data indicates that the air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide are regularly exceeded in the vicinity of the site.

9.4.4

The closest sensitive receptors to the development are occupiers of nearby residential dwellings, commercial and retail premises, and users of the allotments.

9.4.5

Through the measures included within the draft CoCP there is reasonable confidence that all reasonable steps have been taken, and would be taken, to minimise detrimental impact on amenity resulting from air quality, emissions and dust. With the implementation of the CoCP measures, the overall effect on local air quality from construction (i.e., effects from construction road traffic, and construction plant), is considered not to be significant at any of the closest sensitive receptors.

9.4.6

It is assumed that the majority of air management infrastructure required at Abbey Mills Pumping Station would already have been installed as part of the Lee Tunnel project, and there are separate planning conditions which make this a requirement. The application proposals confirm that at this site, an active ventilation system and air treatment plant would be utilised. Treated air would then be released through individual vents from each air treatment unit within one common ventilation column structure. An air flow greater than the total capacity of 30m3/s is expected to occur for about 12 hours in a typical year. This excess air from the project shaft would be released through an independent bypass ventilation column on the roof of the shaft, while the excess air from the Lee Tunnel shaft would be released through a separate ventilation column. The ventilation plant would operate continuously while the tunnel system is empty releasing treated air at a reduced rate of 15m3/s. At least 99 per cent of the time, all air released would be treated, which would avoid any effects on amenity from odour and meet the regulatory requirements. This is considered welcome by the Council.

9.4.7

The Council is satisfied that appropriate measures are proposed through this application to ensure that the proposals would not lead to a material deterioration of, or change in, air quality or a significant loss of amenity at this location. Beckton

9.4.8

The Beckton STW site is not in the Air Quality Management Area, although the A13 corridor to the north of the site is. Local monitoring data indicates that the air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide are regularly exceeded in the vicinity of the site.

9.4.9

The closest sensitive receptors to the development are nearby commercial and retail premises, and residential dwellings, schools and recreational users of the River Thames beyond.

9.4.10 Through the measures included within the draft CoCP the Council is satisfied that all reasonable steps have been taken, and would be taken, to minimise detrimental impacts on amenity resulting from air quality, emissions and dust. The Council is

satisfied that with the implementation of the CoCP measures, the overall effect on local air quality from construction (i.e., effects from construction road traffic, construction plant and construction dust), would not be significant at any of the closest sensitive receptors. 9.4.11 It is noted that there have been numerous complaints regarding odour from Beckton STW since 2005 however the Council recognises that a number of projects are underway at the site to reduce odour impacts, including the covering of the primary settlement tanks. The Council has confidence that these projects will be in place by the time the Thames Tideway Tunnel project is operational and will lead to a significant improvement in local air quality. The ventilation strategy for the project is designed to ensure that there would be no significant loss of amenity, and no nuisance, as a result of odour from the operation of the scheme at all locations. 9.4.12 Overall, the Council is satisfied that the construction and operational effects with regard to air quality and odour would minimise detrimental impacts on amenity and nuisance. Appropriate measures are proposed to ensure that the proposals would not lead to a material deterioration of, or change in, air quality or a significant loss of amenity at this location. 9.5

Transportation Abbey Mills

9.5.1

The Abbey Mills Pumping Station has moderate to good public transport accessibility. The site is located in proximity to a number of local bus services, West Ham Station (for London Underground, Docklands Light Rail, and National Rail services) and Abbey Road Station (for Docklands Light Rail services).

9.5.2

The site is located within the Pumping Station complex and the proposed construction and operational access is via, Stratford High Street (A118), Abbey Lane, Gay Road and the existing pumping station entrance.

9.5.3

The DCO application explains that during construction vehicle movements would generally take place on weekdays between 8am and 6pm and from 8am to 1pm on Saturdays. Up to one hour before and after these hours would be used for mobilisation and demobilisation. Mobilisation may include loading, unloading, and arrival and departure of staff and movement to and from the site. In exceptional circumstances HGV, on agreement with the local authority and abnormal load movements could occur up to 10pm or later for large concrete pours. The applicants advise, that they would require contractor(s) to produce a green travel plan to encourage the use of public transport by those working on the project.

9.5.4

The DCO explains that construction at this site may involve extended working hours (between 6pm and 10pm on weekdays and between 1pm and 5pm on Saturdays) and 24-hour working seven days a week, for a limited period. However, construction vehicle movements would be limited to the hours stated above other than in exceptional circumstances. A significant proportion of the construction waste would be reused on site in accordance with the London Plan Waste Management Hierarchy and the project-wide Waste Strategy. This would avoid the need for this material to be transported elsewhere by road.

9.5.5

On average a peak of 140 daily HGV movements (70 HGVs) is expected during shaft construction works, for approximately one year. At other times in the construction

period vehicle flows is expected to be considerably lower than this average peak figure. 9.5.6

Barges are not proposed to be used at the site due to difficulties in ensuring a reliable day-to-day operation at a location with a very limited tidal window for movements. However, provision is included in the application for the appointed contractor(s) to use barges if it proves practicable to do so.

9.5.7

Measures to reduce transport impacts included in the CoCP include heavy goods vehicle management and control measures such as designated routes to sites for construction vehicles. There is also provision for management plans for construction worker journeys to and from the site.

9.5.8

In addition to the general measures in the project wide CoCP (CoCP Part A), the following measures are incorporated into the site specific CoCP (CoCP Part B) in relation to the Abbey Mills Pumping Station site: a. The access to the project site would be through the Thames Water operational land. b. Access is from Abbey Lane/Gay Road only c. The site access is to be from Gay Road with only left turn into the site and right turn out. d. Sections of on-street parking along Abbey Lane would be suspended. e. Double yellow line parking restrictions would be used at some locations on Abbey Lane. f. Single yellow line parking restrictions would have extended hours, and additional single yellow line restrictions would be used on Abbey Lane g. Site vehicles would not be permitted to wait at any point along Abbey Lane. h. Special Types (General Order 2003) (STGO) vehicles and other long loads are required to have a suitable escort along Abbey Lane to forewarn other road users. i. The contractor(s) traffic management plan needs to take due consideration of the residents and other users of Abbey Lane from Stratford High Street (A118) to the existing Abbey Mills Pumping Station. The traffic management plan would include measures including requirements for all suppliers to be notified of risks and controls using Abbey Lane including no waiting constraint. This may include restrictions on delivery hours where practical and strict enforcement of speed limits. j. The footpath around the south of the site by Prescott Channel/ Channelsea to be maintained throughout works.

9.5.9

The proposals in respect of transportation impacts at Abbey Mills is considered acceptable. The construction works in this location are not likely to result in any significant impacts on pedestrian routes, cycle routes and facilities, public transport routes and patronage, parking or the highway network. There will be minimal impacts during the operational phase of the development. It is considered that the transport impacts would be successfully managed through committed CoCP measures, such that no significant transport impacts are anticipated. Beckton

9.5.9

Beckton STW has low public transport accessibility. It is located in proximity to three daytime local bus services. Gallions Reach Docklands Light Rail station lies approximately 1.3km to the south, and Barking Station (serving London Underground, London Overground and National Rail services) is some 2.4km to the north.

9.5.10 The site is located within the Beckton STW complex and benefits from good road access. The proposed access to the site during construction and operation would be from Alfred’s Way (A13), and through the existing STW entrance off Jenkins Lane. 9.5.11 The DCO sets out that during construction vehicle movements would take place on weekdays between 8am to 6pm. Up to one hour before and after these hours would be used for mobilisation and demobilisation. Mobilisation may include loading, unloading, and arrival and departure of staff and movement to and from the site. In exceptional circumstances HGV, on agreement with the local authority and abnormal load movements could occur up to 10pm or later for large concrete pours. The applicants have stated that they would require contractors to produce a green travel plan to encourage the use of public transport by those working on the project. 9.5.12 A significant proportion of the construction waste would be reused on site in accordance the London Plan Waste Management Hierarchy and the project-wide Waste Strategy. This would avoid the need for this material to be transported elsewhere by road. 9.5.13 The DCO sets out that, on average a peak of 50 daily HGV movements (25 HGVs) is expected during shaft and tunnel construction works (year two of construction). At other times in the construction period vehicle flows would be lower than this average peak figure. The site has good access to the strategic road network, through the existing operational site. 9.5.14 It is not considered that the works would not result in any significant construction impacts on pedestrian routes, cycle routes and facilities, public transport routes and patronage, parking or the highway network. 9.5.15 Measures to reduce transport impacts included in the CoCP cover heavy goods vehicle management and control measures such as designated routes to sites for construction vehicles. There is also provision for management plans for construction worker journeys to and from the site. In addition to the general measures in the CoCP Part A, the following measures are incorporated into the CoCP Part B in relation to the Beckton STW site: a. Access to the site would be through the Thames Water operational site. b. Access would be from the Alfred’s Way (A13) to the main Beckton STW entrance. 9.5.16 During the operational phase, all the functional elements of the development would be located within the operational STW site. Access for maintenance vehicles would be via the existing site entrance. It is not considered that there would be any significant transport effects during the operational phase given the nature of the site and the infrequent expected vehicle visits. 9.5.17 It is considered that the DCO offers sufficient assurances that the transport impacts would be successfully managed, through committed CoCP measures, such that no significant transport impacts are anticipated.

8.6

Employment Abbey Mills

9.6.1

There are no specific socio-economic issues associated with the proposed use of the site at Abbey Mills Pumping Station. This site is expected to require a maximum workforce of 45 workers at any one time. These jobs and training opportunities would provide a stimulus to the local economy. Beckton

9.6.2

There are no specific socio-economic issues associated with the proposed use of the site at Beckton STW. The site falls partially within a designated green space, but given its location within the operational Beckton STW complex, for safety and security reasons it is not publicly accessible. There are no users of the site therefore that would experience socio-economic effects. Conclusion

9.6.3

There is considered to be a net positive socio-economic impact arising from the proposals. The Council are keen that these benefits are secured and accentuated for the Borough to off-set some of negative impacts that would arise from the construction phase of the development. In this regard, the Council places a great deal of importance on securing S106 benefits for local people, through a Local labour Clause and Local Good and Services Clause. The Inspectorate is therefore respectfully urged to place significant weight and importance to this stipulation in this LIR.

9.7

Townscape and Visual (including landscape) Abbey Mills

9.7.1

The amount, layout and scale of the proposed structures are primarily dictated by the function they need to perform in transferring and directing flows from the Thames Tideway Tunnel into the Lee Tunnel, as well as the layout of the existing pumping station infrastructure and infrastructure that is currently under construction. The proposals are also a product of the function they need to perform in transferring and directing flows through the site, the need to carry out regular routine maintenance of plant, and the requirements of health and safety legislation.

9.7.2

In the DCO application Thames Water have sought to achieve an appropriate balance between certainty and flexibility. Approval is therefore sought through the application for a scheme framed within defined parameters and design principles. The design proposals at Abbey Mills Pumping Station require a high level of flexibility. The pumping station is undergoing considerable change and expansion as part of the Lee Tunnel scheme. In order to ensure that the project works are compatible with this scheme and any associated final design amendments, it is recognised that the design presented in this application is illustrative, except for the Site works parameter plans, which are for approval.

9.7.3

The Site works parameter plans define the zones within which certain elements of the project would be located, including vertical parameters which limit the height of the proposed structures. Illustrative designs are also submitted as part of the application to show how the site could look once construction works are complete, but these are

not submitted for approval. There is a Requirement to submit design details to the London Legacy Development Corporation, for approval, at a later date. Those elements to be submitted for detailed approval by the Corporation must be consistent with the general and site-specific design principles which are set out in the Design Principles document submitted for approval as part of the application. Beckton 9.7.4

The design proposals at Beckton STW require a high level of flexibility. The STW is undergoing considerable change and expansion as part of the Lee Tunnel and Beckton Sewage Treatment Works Extension scheme. In order to ensure that the project works are compatible with this scheme and any associated final design amendments the design presented in this application for development consent is illustrative, except for the site works parameter plans, which are for approval.

9.7.5

The scale of the proposed above-ground structures is also determined by the functional requirements. The appearance of the project structures would be in keeping with existing structures, plant and buildings at the site. The proposed structures would be modest in comparison to the belowground works and the existing and approved new structures at the STW. The appearance of the proposed aboveground structures would be appropriate and in keeping with existing structures, plant and buildings at the site. The project signature design would not be used for ventilation outlets as this would be out of keeping with the operational site. The proposed above-ground structures would be integrated around the existing vehicular and pedestrian routes.

9.7.6

The works are contained within the site and are consistent with the type and appearance of other structures on the site. The impact beyond the site itself will be extremely limited. The proposals are therefore considered acceptable.

9.8

Cultural Heritage Abbey Mills

9.8.1

There are a number of heritage assets within and in the vicinity of the Abbey Mills Pumping Station complex. The site itself does not contain any nationally designated (statutorily protected) heritage assets such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or registered parks and gardens. However, the site lies approximately 130m southwest of a group of Grade II listed industrial buildings surrounding the Grade II* listed Abbey Mills Pumping Station A but is physically and visually separated by more modern and utilitarian pumping station buildings and infrastructure.

9.8.2

A group of eight Grade II listed semi-detached cottages at 116 to 130 Abbey Lane, the Grade II listed Channelsea Bridge and the Engine House at West Ham Pumping Station are mainly screened from the site by the Abbey Mills Pumping Station buildings and therefore only form a minor part of the site’s setting. The site is around 100m north of the group of seven remaining Bromley gasholders, of which six are listed Grade II and one is Grade II*. There are also two locally listed buildings in the area.

9.8.3

The site lies within the Three Mills Conservation Area which was designated to protect the character and appearance of the Three Mills complex of 18th century mills, the Abbey Mills Pumping Station complex, and the wider more open landscape between and around these two industrial sites. The Three Mills complex in the west of

the Conservation Area has no visual relationship with the site due to the intervening Three Mills Studios, although the open land to the north of the Studios has been landscaped as public realm offering views of the site and Abbey Mills Pumping Station beyond. 9.8.4

The site is also located within the Archaeological Priority Area covering the Lee Valley, which has potential to contain evidence of prehistoric and later activity. The Inspectorate will receive comments on these impacts directly from English Heritage. However, in relation to the listed buildings and the impact on the Conservation Area, comments have been received from the Council’s Design and Conservation Manager who does not raise any concerns or objections. There would be no significant effects, either direct or indirect, on any of the designated heritage assets during construction or operation.

9.8.5

While the majority of the proposed structures are underground, the design principles and parameters for the ventilation columns and kiosk were carefully chosen to ensure that they are sensitive to and would not adversely affect the setting of local heritage assets. The design principles were considered in the light of the heritage context and policies in place at the site.

9.8.6

Moreover, it is considered that through sensitive design and the provision of improved hardstanding and fencing within the site, the permanent works would have a minor beneficial effect upon the character and appearance of the Three Mills Conservation Area, and upon the settings of nearby heritage assets.

9.8.7

The proposals therefore considered to have been developed with the benefit of a thorough understanding of the significance of the site and heritage status and characteristics of its neighbours. The design will minimise adverse effects on the historic environment and to take opportunities to enhance the long term setting of heritage assets in the vicinity. Beckton

9.8.8

There is one designated heritage asset within and in the vicinity of the Beckton STW site. The site contains the site of a Grade II listed chimney constructed by Bazalgette as part of the sewage treatment works in 1887/1889. The chimney was dismantled as mitigation for the Lee Tunnel works and will be reinstated by that project. The proposals would have no impacts on the timing of this reinstatement or location of the chimney. The area does not contain any other nationally designated (statutorily protected) heritage assets, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or registered parks and gardens.

9.8.9

The site lies within an extensive Archaeological Priority Area which covers the Thames floodplain in recognition of its high potential for palaeoenvironmental and other archaeological remains. The site does not lie within a conservation area and contains no locally listed buildings. A number of the structures at the STW are historically important despite not being listed, including the northern outfall sewer.

9.8.10 It is not considered that the proposals will impact negatively upon heritage assets at Beckton.

10.

Conclusion Abbey Mills

10.1

There is a need to receive the main tunnel drive from Chambers Wharf and connect the project’s main tunnel to the Lee Tunnel, which would take flows to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works for treatment. The proposed works would make a fundamental contribution to meeting the wider need for the project identified in the NPS and by other relevant adopted planning policies.

10.2

Abbey Mills Pumping Station was selected by Thames Water after extensive consideration and engagement as the appropriate site on which to meet the need. The site is suitable and the application proposals would meet the identified need.

10.3

The permanent site is entirely within Thames Water’s operational pumping station and surrounded by plant, machinery, tanks and buildings. The pumping station is undergoing considerable change and expansion as part of the Lee Tunnel scheme.

10.4

Due to the site’s location within a large operational pumping station, and relatively remote from sensitive receptors no significant amenity effects are predicted to arise during the four year construction period. The Council is satisfied that Thames Water sought to minimise any potential disturbance through sensitive design and mitigation measures where required.

10.5

The acceptability of the proposals to the Council is entirely reliant upon the drive tunnel being towards Abbey Mills. If the drive tunnel is reversed, there would be considerable concerns that these impacts have not been considered as part of the ES accompanying this DCO application, and that the Council has not had an opportunity to consider, explore and assess all the issues and impacts. Notwithstanding the technical difficulties of using the Lee to transport away spoil should the drive tunnel be reserved, the Council therefore respectfully urges the Inspectorate to support the proposals as submitted.

.

Beckton

10.5

This site forms a vital component of the project as it would be used to transfer the flows from the tunnel for treatment at the existing Beckton STW. The selected site is suitable and the application proposals would meet the identified need.

10.6

The site is entirely within Thames Water’s operational STW and surrounded by plant, machinery, tanks and buildings. The STW is undergoing considerable change and expansion as part of the Lee Tunnel and Beckton Sewage Treatment Works Extension scheme.

10.7

Due to the site’s location within a large operational STW, remote from sensitive receptors, and with good access to the strategic road network, no significant negative effects are predicted to arise during the five and a half year construction period. Furthermore, Thames Water sought to minimise any potential disturbance through sensitive design and mitigation measures where required, in accordance with the NPS and relevant local policies.

10.8

The detailed design of the permanent infrastructure should be carefully considered in consultation with the Council at a later date so as to successfully integrate the works into the operational site and avoid any significant environmental effects.

Overall conclusion 10.9

The project is proposed to prevent large volumes of sewage discharging into the tidal Thames.

10.10 The proposed use of Abbey Mills Pumping Station and Beckton attracted a modest number of comments from stakeholders. There is broad consensus that the works are required and that these are appropriate sites, but concerns focused on the possible impacts of construction, the need for mitigation to ensure such impacts are not significant, and the importance of good design. 10.11 The Council has considered the implications of the local effects of the works at Abbey Mills Pumping Station and Beckton, and concludes that the overall balance between impacts and benefits associated with the project as a whole, against the guidance in the NPS. The Council concludes that the works at Abbey Mills Pumping Station, Beckton and the project as a whole, are compliant with the NPS and that development consent should be granted, subject to the following recommendations; • The Council are continued to be consulted on concluding and agreeing the draft CoCP. • That the S106 accompanying this DCO includes clauses that secure the following clauses; a) Local Labour b) Local Goods and Services • That the drive tunnel to Abbey Mills remains as proposed in this DCO application.

Appendix 1 London Wide

Appendix 2 Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Appendix 3 Beckton Sewerage Treatment Works