ASHLEY GARDENS AND EOL YARD - IEMA - Home · Ashley Gardens and Berol House : Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary (June 2017) Pg 1 1.0 Introduction & Methodology 1.1 This

Ashley Road South

ASHLEY GARDENS AND BEROL YARD

JUNE 2017

Environmental Statement Detailed and Hybrid Planning ApplicationsVolume 1: Non Technical Summary prepared by Lichfields

Ashley Gardens and Berol House : Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary (June 2017)

Pg 1

1.0 Introduction & Methodology 1.1 This document is a summary in non-technical language of an Environmental Statement (‘ES’)

prepared on behalf of Berkeley Square Developments Tottenham Hale Limited (‘BSD’)(‘the applicant’). It accompanies two separate but adjacent development proposals, the ‘Ashley Gardens’ and the ‘Berol Yard’ developments.

1.2 The proposed developments (both in their own right and together) fall within part 10(b) (Infrastructure Projects) of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’)) Regulations 2011 (the ‘2011 Regulations’) (as amended). Part 10(b) relates to ‘urban development projects’ where the development includes more than 150 dwellings. For such developments, EIA is required in situations where the development could give rise to significant environmental effects. The scope of the EIA has been agreed with London Borough of Haringey (‘LBH’).

1.3 The document includes the following information: -

• Section 1.0 – background to the assessment process and the scheme;

• Sections 2.0 to 3.0 – description of the site and the current development;

• Sections 4.0 to 14.0 – a topic by topic review of the findings of the EIA;

• Section 15.0 – a review of whether other direct or indirect effects may arise when the scheme is considered with other schemes in the area;

• Section 16.0 – details of how to obtain a full copy of the ES;

• Section 17.0 – scheme plans

The EIA Process

1.4 The ES sets out the findings of an Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’) of the development.

1.5 The EIA process aims to ensure that any significant effects arising from a development are systematically identified, assessed and presented to help a local planning authority, statutory consultees and other key stakeholders in their understanding of impacts arising from development. If measures are required to minimise or reduce effects then these are clearly identified.

1.6 For this development, EIA has been carried out to consider the likely significant effects that may arise during its construction and operation and due to its potential relationship to future developments in the area. It has been completed with regard to best practice and relevant legislation and has addressed the following matters agreed with LBH as being required to assess the impacts of the development:- 1. Townscape and Visual Effects 7. Air Quality 2. Transportation 8. Noise and Vibration 3. Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing 9. Ground Conditions and Contamination 4. Socio-Economics 10. Water Environment 5. Built Heritage 11. Ecology and Nature Conservation 6. Environmental Wind


Pg 2

1.7 The assessment has been carried out with reference to the 2011 EIA Regulations because the process of agreeing the scope of the assessment commenced in 2016. This is notwithstanding the publication of new EIA Regulations in May 2017.

1.8 Likely effects are identified based on current knowledge of the site and surroundings, desktop assessment, survey and fieldwork and information available to the EIA team. All those matters that could be reasonably required to assess the effects of the development are set out in the ES; this includes effects arising from the scheme itself as well as those temporary effects arising during the construction of the proposed development.

1.9 The EIA team has worked with the design team to ensure that the scheme for which planning permission is sought incorporates those revisions or modifications that are necessary or appropriate to avoid or reduce significant adverse effects on the environment.

1.10 Consultation has also informed the EIA process in relation to the methods by which the EIA has been carried out, as a means to seek environmental data, to review the effectiveness of any identified mitigation measures and as a means to keep interested bodies informed on the process of EIA undertaken.

Background to the Scheme

1.11 The development site falls within the wider ‘Ashley Road South Masterplan’ area which encompasses over 2.67 hectares of land and consisting of four main development parcels – Cannon Factory; Ashley House, Berol House; and Cannon Jersey Factory:-

Existing Buildings within the Ashley Road Masterplan Area

Source: John McAslan and Partners

1.12 The developers are collaborating in bringing forward the redevelopment of the masterplan area as part of a comprehensive regeneration project. The development will, in its entirety, comprise the following uses:-

1 A new campus for the National College for Digital Studies;

2 Up to 12,000 sq m of non-residential floorspace (shops and services);

3 The retention and refurbishment of the locally listed Berol House for employment workspace;

Key

01 - Cannon Factory;

02 - Berol House;

03 - Keep Out Limited;

04 - Ice World;

05 - Ashley House;

06 - Cannon Street Jersey


Pg 3

4 The provision of up to 850 residential units including affordable and family housing and wheelchair units; and

5 New social facilities and high quality amenity

Proposed Ashley Road South Masterplan (June 2017)

Source: Cannon Factory and Ashley House Design and Access Statement (December 2016), John McAslan and Partners Key A - Down Lane Park; B - Building 1 (Berkeley Square Developments); C - Communal Courtyard; D - Central Link; E - Building 1A (Berkeley Square Developments); F - Building 2 (Notting Hill Housing); G - Building 2A (Notting Hill Housing); H - Ashley Link; I - Building 3 (Notting Hill Housing); J - The Yard; K - Building 4 (Berkeley Square Developments); L - Berol House (Berkeley Square Developments); M - National College for Digital Skills

1.13 The masterplan is being brought forward under three separate planning applications and this ES accompanies the second and third applications which comprise:-

1 A detailed scheme for the Ashley Gardens Residential Development; and

2 A ‘hybrid’ (part detailed and part outline scheme) for the Berol Yard development (comprising residential, commercial and educational floorspace).

1.14 The first application relevant to the masterplan area was submitted on behalf of Notting Hill Home Ownership Ltd in late 2016 and relates to the Ashley House and Cannon Factory sites. The application, which was accompanied by the Ashley House and Cannon Factory ES (December 2016) is under consideration by LBH.

1.15 The masterplan area is located in Tottenham Hale, an area which was subject to rapid growth during the late 1800s to transform it from a hamlet and areas of empty marshland to an area of dense industrial and residential development connected to a rapidly growing London. When the


Pg 4

manufacturing industry went into decline in the late 1960s, some of the industrial areas were redeveloped for housing whilst the rest remained as light industry.

1.16 In the last decade regeneration initiatives have been promoted by LBH and the GLA to revitalise this part of London. The GLA has identified Tottenham as a priority area for regeneration in order to meet London’s growing housing demand. At a local level, LBH has identified Tottenham as an ‘Action Area’ and Tottenham Hale as a new District Centre. The wider Ashley Road South site lies in a highly prominent and important location within Tottenham Hale and within the opportunity and action areas and housing zone. It is against this context that the current developments have been brought forward.

2.0 Site & Surroundings 2.1 The masterplan area is located in Tottenham Hale within the LBH and is bounded:

1 To the north by Down Lane Park with the Harris Academy (providing primary and secondary education) adjacent to the Park. Harris Academy provides secondary education for 11-18 year olds and is due to increase in capacity soon to up to 1,500 students;

2 To the south by a petrol filling station, a row of terraced housing facing Hale Road, and Stratford College London (located at Sentinel House);

3 To the east by Watermead Way (A1055) and beyond this by a number of Unite Student accommodation buildings and residential blocks within Hale Village (up to 12 storeys in height). Beyond this is the River Lea and Tottenham Marshes (a series of reservoirs); and

4 To the west is Down Lane Park which contains the Pavilion pre-school. Beyond this lies the residential area of Bruce Grove. This residential area falls within Brice Grove Conservation area (“BGCA”) which also contains several Grade II listed building.

Ashley Road South Masterplan ("ARSM") area

Source: John McAslan & Partners


Pg 5

Ashley Gardens Site

2.2 Ashley Gardens is located in the north western part of the ARSM area. The site consists of two existing buildings which are predominately one or two storeys, and which occupy the majority of the footprint of the site (the ‘Cannon Street Jersey Fabrics’ unit and 18 Ashley Road, referred to as the ‘ReStore’ unit. The site currently provides 7,325 sqm (GEA) floorspace. The Cannon Street Jersey Fabrics unit provides manufacturing and retail facilities and attached to the south of the unit is a warehouse housing a steel fabrication company. The ReStore unit provides community facilities. All buildings are accessed from Ashley Road.

Ashley Gardens Site (view looking south)

Source: John McAslan and Partners

Berol Yard Site

2.3 The Berol House site is located to the south east of the ARSM area. The site consists of the existing Berol House which provides 4,285sqm (GEA) / 3,857sqm (GIA) floorspace. Berol House comprises of a three storey brick building, and forms the western boundary of the site. It is locally listed and contains a number of serviced offices. The remainder of the site is taken up by low, single storey industrial and warehouse units (currently occupied by Keep Out Limited and Ice World which together comprise approximately 1,198 sqm GEA of floorspace) and a single café unit to the far south of the site. Vehicular Access is from Ashley Road.


Pg 6

Aerial Photograph of the site, looking north

Source: Google Earth

3.0 Description of Development 3.1 The description of the Ashley Gardens development is as follows:

“Demolition of the existing buildings and erection of two buildings to provide 1,211 sqm (GEA) (Class A1/A3/B1/D1), 377 residential units (Class C3), new public realm, landscaped amenity space, car and cycle parking and all associated works.

3.2 The description of the Berol Yard development is as follows:

“Hybrid planning application comprised of:

Application for full planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings within the Berol Yard site and retention of Berol House. Erection of two buildings between 8 and 14 storeys providing 156 residential units, 891sqm (GEA) of commercial floorspace (Class A1/A3/B1), 7,275sqm of (GEA) of educational floorspace (Class D1), car and cycle parking, open space, landscaping and other associated works.

Application for outline permission (all matters reserved) for the alteration/conversion of ground, first and second floor of Berol House with up to 3,685 sqm of commercial floorspace (Class A1/A3/B1) and the introduction of a two storey roof level extension introducing up to 18 residential units, cycle parking and other associated works”.

3.3 The developments comprise the following buildings:

• Buildings 1 and 1A 2 which will be located within the Ashley House site; and

• Building 4, the National College for Digital Studies (‘NCDS’) and the retention of the Berol House building.

3.4 The following is proposed as part of the two developments.


Pg 7

Building Details

Building Residential Units Non-residential Floorspace (GEA) Maximum Building Heights Building 1 276 units (26,502sqm

GIA / 28,928sqm GEA) 680sqm / 710sqm 10 storeys (46.47m AOD)

Building 1A

101 units (9,100sqm GIA / 9,605sqm GEA) including 90 affordable units

455sqm / 501sqm 8 storeys (40.13m AOD)

Building 4 156 units including 15 affordable units

819sqm / 891sqm (A1/A3) 14 storeys (57.12m AOD)

NCDS n/a 6,000sqm / 7,275 sqm (D1) 7 storeys plus roof top multi-use games area (37.15m AOD)

Berol House

Up to 18 including 6 units of intermediate tenure

556sqm GEA (A Class uses) and 3,128sqm GEA (B Class Uses)

5 storeys (28.51m AOD)

3.5 Plans of the development are provided at Section 17.0 of this Non-Technical Summary.

Construction Methodology

3.6 For the purposes of assessment it is assumed that construction will comprise the following:-

Anticipated Programme of Works

Start (inc. demolition)

Completion Date est. demolition period

est. build period

Building 1A August 2018 June 2020 16 weeks 78 weeks Building 1 September 2017 February 2022 16 weeks 112 weeks NCDS January 2018 July 2019 10 weeks 70 weeks Building 4 January 2019 December 2020 12 weeks 84 weeks Berol House January 2022 December 2022 4 weeks 48 weeks

3.7 The contractor will be required to produce and agree a ‘Construction Environmental Management Plan’ (‘CEMP’) to describe how construction will be managed to avoid, minimise and mitigate any construction effects on the environment and existing surrounding communities. The information assessed in the EIA will form part of the tender documentation to be issued to potential contractors and they will be required to comply with the outline methodology described, as well as any relevant planning conditions.

Alternatives Considered

3.8 It is good practice to consider alternatives for the proposed development. This helps in clarifying the main advantages for taking forward the current scheme, taking account of the environmental effects.

3.9 Consideration of a scenario where the development does not proceed and the site remains in its current use has also been considered. In this ‘no development scenario’, it is expected that the existing uses would continue. The site is occupied by a number of industrial activities which includes storage and limited office space. As such, there is little investment into the facilities at present and it may be that buildings may become derelict and less attractive for any other uses. The significant housing, social and economic benefits from the Ashley Gardens and the Berol House developments would not come forward at the site.


Pg 8

3.10 Alternative sites for the proposed development have not been considered due to it being a primary objective to deliver a residential-led development at the sites.

4.0 Townscape and Visual Effects 4.1 An assessment has been carried out of the effect of the development on existing townscape

character and on views towards the site. The assessment methodology draws upon key guidance from the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. This chapter comprises two separate but interrelated assessments: an assessment of the likely significant effects on the character and quality of the townscape together with an assessment of the effect of development on views (including protected views), viewers and their visual amenity.

4.2 The extent of the study area has been established through a combination of desk-based study and fieldwork to define the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) (i.e. where views of the proposed development would be obtained).

4.3 Fieldwork was undertaken in May and August 2016 to review available views of the site, the townscape character, and sensitive receptors.

4.4 A total of 11 representative views have been selected and agreed with LBH officers. The representative views were selected due to the range of visual receptors over short, medium and long distances.

Representative Viewpoints for TVIA Assessment

4.5 The assessment also provides an understanding of the effect of the proposed development on the townscape character of the site and those townscape character areas closest to the site which have the greatest potential for significant effects to arise. Townscape character areas are areas that on the whole have similar characteristics.


Pg 9

4.6 The assessment has established that the construction effects on townscape will be moderate to negligible adverse and the construction effect on views will range between nil and moderate adverse. Construction sites are considered to be an expected and characteristic scene within an evolving urban townscape. The demolition of the Cannon Street Jersey Fabric Works would contribute to moderate adverse effects on the Tottenham Hale Character Area during construction and as a permanent effect, but this would be mitigated through the provision of a photographic record, to be lodged with the Historic Environment Record. The environmental effects are therefore not significant.

4.7 During operation, the assessment has shown that the effects of the completed development on townscape character areas will be nil, negligible neutral, negligible beneficial or moderate beneficial; there will be no adverse effects on townscape character as a result of the proposed development.

4.8 This is because the site is currently occupied by low quality industrial buildings, excepting Berol House, and the proposed development will replace this with a large scale, high quality mixed use development as well as the refurbishment and extension of locally listed Berol House. The proposed development will enliven the surrounding Character Areas by contributing to a change of urban scale at Tottenham Hale, and transforming its stature as an emerging district centre. It will introduce new residents, adding impetus to the area’s regeneration and improving the area’s security through natural surveillance. The scale and heights of the buildings denote Tottenham Hale’s importance as a district centre and sub-regional transport hub. The only significant environmental effects will be beneficial.

4.9 The visual assessment has shown that the completed scheme will have either nil or negligible neutral to moderate beneficial effects on representative viewpoints; there will be no adverse effects. Any significant environmental effects will be neutral or beneficial. This is the result of the introduction of taller development to the Ashley Road sites which will bring a landmark quality to Tottenham Hale.

4.10 As there will be no adverse effects as a result of the completed development it complies with national, regional and local planning policy and guidance. The development will produce townscape benefits through the change of use and intensification of a currently under-utilised industrial site and, through its architectural prominence, will produce an improved sense of place to Tottenham as an emerging district centre. It will also comply with Policies 7.4, 7.6 and 7.7 of the London Plan as the development will be of high architectural quality which is complementary to the local character and therefore, will not have an adverse impact on local or strategic views.

4.11 Overall, the Ashley Gardens and Berol Yard planning application will have a positive effect on the townscape and visual amenity of Tottenham Hale. The scale, form and character of the outline development proposals are a direct response to the opportunity for a high quality mixed use development at Ashley Road Area and Tottenham Hale. The development will have a beneficial environmental effect in terms of townscape and visual impacts.

5.0 Transport 5.1 An assessment has been carried out of the likely environmental effects of the proposed

development with respect to traffic and transport. It should be read in conjunction with separate Transport Assessments (‘TA’) relating to each development. The methodology for preparation of the TA has followed current best practice and has been agreed with LBH and TfL. The chapter assesses the effects of vehicular trips attributable to major highways schemes such as new roads, and provides a quantitative assessment of the increase in users of public transport


Pg 10

compared to available capacity and a qualitative assessment of the effects on accessibility and amenity on identified receptors. The assessment in the ES has had regard to likely receptors such as pedestrians, cyclists, rail passengers, bus passengers and bus drivers.

5.2 Management of transport during the construction period via a Management Plan will ensure that effects are negligible.

5.3 Demolition and construction traffic associated with the Proposed Development has the potential to affect pedestrians and cyclists using the highway network in the vicinity of the Site with limited effects on public transport. Pedestrian and cycle routes around the Site will be maintained where possible throughout the construction and demolition programme. However footpath widths may be reduced to provide working space for construction activities to take place potentially creating pinch points. Overall, it is considered that there would be a negligible impact on local people using the pedestrian and cyclist facilities surrounding the Proposed Development.

5.4 During operation the proposed developments will introduce improvements to the local transport network and provide an improved public realm and pedestrian environment. The proposed developments will include significant cycle parking and supporting cycle related facilities to encourage cycling. This will result in a minor to moderate beneficial impact on the pedestrian and cycle network; a minor beneficial impact on the road network and a negligible impact on the bus, underground and rail network.

6.0 Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing 6.1 An assessment has been carried out of the effect of the development on daylight, sunlight and

shadow levels experienced at residential dwellings and gardens/amenity space surrounding the site. It also reviews the levels of natural light that will be experienced within all of the proposed residential units and open spaces within the development. The assessment has been carried out in accordance with guidelines prepared by the Building Research Establishment (‘BRE’).

6.2 The assessment demonstrates that the developments will have a negligible effect on almost all neighbouring receptors in the context of the BRE guide. Of the 302 residential windows assessed in terms of ambient daylight, 285 will achieve the guide levels (94%) and 17 will experience a minor adverse effect owing to the recessed position of these windows.

6.3 The developments will similarly have a negligible effect on the Harris Academy in terms of interior daylight and sunlight availability.

6.4 They will also comply fully with the BRE guide levels for both sunlight and overshadowing of all neighbouring receptors.

6.5 It is therefore concluded that the Ashley Gardens and Berol Yard developments will not give rise to any materially unacceptable environmental impacts in terms of the daylight, sunlight and overshadowing experienced by neighbouring properties and open spaces in the context of the BRE guidelines and relevant planning policy.

7.0 Socio-Economic Effects 7.1 This chapter assesses how the proposed development at Brunel Street Works is likely to affect

socio-economic aspects of the local area during its construction and operation. It primarily examines the impacts of the development on population, housing supply, education, health and other community facilities and also considers the impacts the scheme will have upon employment and the local labour market.


Pg 11

7.2 The assessment begins by setting out the baseline position for the LBH (i.e. defined as the ‘wider impact area’ for the Development) in terms of its economic and labour market conditions, before reviewing the existing provision of schools, healthcare facilities, sports and community facilities, open and amenity spaces in the ‘local impact area’ (i.e. the local area surrounding the development site). The local impact area for the development is defined as the Tottenham and Seven Sisters Neighbourhood area. The Tottenham and Seven Sisters neighbourhood has been defined by the Council due to the area sharing a number of similar socio-economic characteristics such as population diversity and pockets of deprivation.

7.3 The local impact area is expected to be the area most strongly affected by the scheme in terms of increased demand for services and facilities, while the economic and labour market impacts is captured more widely at the local authority level (i.e. the wider impact area).

7.4 The resident population in Haringey in 2015 amounted to 272,900 and has risen by 19% over the decade 2005 to 20151. Over the same period population growth in London was 15.4%. The number of people of working age (16-64 years) in Haringey grew by 20% between 2005 and 2015 and in 2015 people of working age accounted for 70.7% of the population. This is higher than both the London (68.1%) national average (63.3%).

7.5 In 2015, Haringey had some 67,000 employee jobs. Between 2009 and 2015, approximately 7,000 employee jobs (11.7%) were gained in Haringey. This was approximately a third less than the equivalent scale of employment growth recorded in London (18%) but exceeded national job growth over the period significantly (7.2%)2.

7.6 Overall, available data point to a local economy that is performing less well than many other parts of London. Unemployment is higher than most of the rest of London, the Borough is characterised by a strong public sector jobs base which is susceptible to budget and spending cuts but the pace of new job growth is slowly catching up with the London-wide average.

7.7 In overall terms, Haringey ranks 21st out of 326 local authorities in England on the IMD 2015 which means that the Borough was the 21st most deprived local authority in the country in 2015.

7.8 In 2011 there were 101,900 households in Haringey, a 10.6% increase on 20013. Between 2001 and 2011, owner occupation declined from 44.6% to 38.8% of households. This is consistent with the trend across London and England and Wales. However, owner-occupation remains less prevalent in Haringey than across London as a whole where the average in 2011 was 48.3%4.

7.9 The development will have a beneficial effect on the local economy by creating new construction jobs during the development phase and new operational jobs once the scheme has been fully built-out. Increases in resident expenditure and supply chain expenditure will also support additional employment. The proposed development represents significant new capital investment within the local area, and will help to raise the overall levels of economic activity and expenditure within the local economy.

7.10 The Ashley Gardens development will deliver up to 551 new residential dwellings. This will help provide 36.7% of Haringey’s annual housing target (albeit over the construction period of the proposed developments) for its Local Plan period. This will also contribute 2.7% to the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Area’s housing target of 20,100 homes by 2031. This is also equivalent to 7.2% over the 3.5 year construction period towards Haringey’s Local Plan target.

1 ONS Mid-year Population Estimates Series (various years) 2 ONS Business Register and Employment Survey 2015 3 Haringey Business Intelligence Team, Haringey: Census 2011 Population and Household Estimates (16th July 2012) 4 Haringey Strategy and Business Intelligence Team, Census 2011 Key Statistics Analysis and Fact Sheets


Pg 12

7.11 Alongside these economic effects, the proposed development will meet local housing needs, provide employment opportunities and enhance local amenities and the public realm. The NCDS facilities included as part of the Berol Yard site is also expected to have a beneficial effect on education in the wider impact area and beyond through the provision of further education in digital skills for over 6,000 students. It will also help to deliver local and regional, Local Plan and Opportunity Area objectives.

7.12 The proposed developments will result in some disruption to on-site activities and will place more demand on existing social and community infrastructure and this could lead to some adverse effects that require mitigating. On balance, overall, from a socio-economic perspective, the proposed development is assessed as having a permanent, moderate beneficial effect.

8.0 Built Heritage 8.1 A thorough review of mapping, fieldwork and correspondence with LBH confirmed those

heritage assets within the study area which would have a visual relationship with the development. A study area of 1km from the centre point of the development site has been established for this assessment.

Heritage Assets Considered in Assessment

8.2 The assessment has shown that, during the construction phase the scheme would result in minor adverse effects on the Cannon Street Jersey Fabric Works, which would be mitigated through the creation of a photographic record prior to demolition. The record would be deposited with the Local Planning Authority to be made available on the Historic Environment Record. On completion of the record the residual effect would be negligible adverse (permanent). In planning terms this minor adverse effect would be significantly offset and mitigated by the public benefits enabled by the redevelopment of the site, including the use of a sustainable site to contribute to local and strategic housing need, and the creation of a new high quality neighbourhood.


Pg 13

8.3 With regard to the setting of the surrounding heritage asset the completed scheme would result in nil, neutral or beneficial effects and in all cases, the significance of heritage assets would be preserved.

8.4 The proposed development complies with local planning policy and guidance. In particular, the assessment has shown that the development would comply with the heritage policies within the London Borough of Haringey’s statutory development plan, including London Plan Policies 7.7 and 7.8 and Haringey’s strategic policies SP11 and SP12, since the development would protect the significance and setting of the Borough’s affected heritage assets. In some cases their significance and setting would be enhanced.

8.5 Paragraphs 131 of the NPPF are met, that is, the significance of heritage assets is sustained, or in the case of the Cannon Avent Former Futon Factory, its loss of significance would be appropriately managed in accordance with paragraph 135 of the Framework. Furthermore, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of Sec 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which requires special regard to be given to the conservation or enhancement of listed buildings in the planning balance.

8.6 Overall, the developments are not situated in an area which exhibits sensitivity in heritage terms. With the exception of the Cannon Street Jersey Fabric Works, the minor effects of which are balanced by the development’s material benefits, the proposals will have a neutral or beneficial effect on the area’s heritage assets. This includes locally listed Berol House, which will be protected and enhanced by the developments.

9.0 Environmental Wind 9.1 Wind environment for purposes of this assessment is defined as the wind flow experienced by

pedestrians and the subsequent influence it has on their activities.

9.2 The analysis used Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) modelling to predict what effect the new building will have on wind conditions and relates the findings to industry standards on pedestrian comfort. CFD modelling uses computer software to evaluate fluid motion within a set environment. The assessment also used wind data from the nearest suitable meteorological station and the recommended comfort and safety standards (the Lawson Criteria).

9.3 A 3D model of the Proposed Development and surroundings was constructed for the assessment. The 3D model includes the built area within a radius of approximately 750 metres around the site.

9.4 The results of the baseline assessment indicated that the existing wind environment of the site is generally suitable for the intended pedestrian activities. The assessment identified some areas where wind speeds tend to accelerate and exceed sitting criteria, particularly in the winter months. However all areas are suitable for standing and leisure walking which, in most cases, is the primary intended pedestrian activity. In addition to the comfort assessment, an assessment of wind effects during strong wind events has been carried out. The results of the pedestrian safety assessment for the baseline scenario show that most of the Site and surrounding areas remain within the criteria.

9.5 In relation to the assessment of the developments, a total of 79 sensitive receptor points have been identified within and adjacent to the development site to gauge the overall wind speeds in each direction.


Pg 14

Sensitive Receptors

9.6 Any undesirable wind conditions during construction are temporary and only occur in areas within the immediate vicinity of the Site which will not be open to the public. As construction of the proposed development proceeds, the wind conditions at the Site would gradually vary, approaching those of the complete development. The effects on the local wind environment during construction are not considered to be significant.

9.7 Once the developments are operational, the Ashley Gardens assessment indicates localised areas of wind acceleration at building corners, such as, the western and southern corners of Buildings 1 and 1A. These areas however remain suitable for standing with the exception of the north-western corner of Building 1 (receptor 8) which exceeds standing criteria during colder months. Outside of the Site, areas of increased windiness are registered respectively on Watermead Way towards the railway; however, decreased windiness is registered to the west and north of the Site on the premises of the Pavilion Pre-School Community Nursery School. At terrace and rooftop level the results indicate that the podium and internal balconies are largely suitable for sitting throughout the year with the exception of top floor balconies that are not as sheltered from prevailing winds, such as, the western and south-western balconies of Buildings 1 and 1A.

9.8 The results of the assessment of the Berol Yard development indicate increases in wind speeds are registered around building corners, such as, the north-western corners the NCDS building and the corners of Berol House. These areas however remain suitable for standing throughout all seasons. Outside of the Site, increased windiness is registered to the east of the Site on the carpark and railway area while a slight decrease in windiness is registered in the lower portion of Watermead Way. These areas however remain within standing criteria and are therefore suitable for the expected pedestrian use. At terrace and rooftop levels, the results indicate that most areas are suitable for sitting and standing depending on the exposure to winds. Higher


Pg 15

wind speeds are however registered during all seasons on the roof level of the NCDS building, where the sports court is planned.

9.9 On the basis of the findings above, the assessment identifies the overall wind effects to be of negligible significance in the absence of any additional mitigation measures. Mitigation measures, such as screens to shelter from prevailing south-western winds, are recommended to ameliorate the wind environment at terrace and rooftop levels. Additional mitigation measures are not strictly considered necessary ground level, however it is recommended to take wind conditions into consideration when designing sitting areas and building entrances.

10.0 Air Quality 10.1 An assessment has been carried out of the potential air quality impacts associated with the

development. The potential impact of dust generated during site enabling, earthworks and construction works at the proposed development has been undertaken in accordance with the Mayor of London’s guidance for the control of dust and emissions during construction and demolition, which is closely aligned with the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) construction dust guidance.

10.2 The Development Site is located in an urban setting surrounded by heavily trafficked roads and in an Air Quality Management Area (‘AQMA’).

10.3 For the construction phase, a qualitative assessment of the potential impacts on local air quality from construction activities has been carried out. This identified that there is a High Risk of dust soiling impacts and a Medium Risk of significant increases in particulate matter concentrations due to construction activities. However, through good site practice and the implementation of suitable mitigation measures, the effect of dust and PM10 releases would be significantly reduced.

10.4 The residual effects of dust and PM10 generated by construction activities on air quality are therefore considered to be negligible generally. However, the residual effects on the parts of the proposed developments (NCDS and Building 1A), and the NHH development, that become occupied whilst other parts of the Sites are still under construction (i.e. Building 1and Berol House), are likely to be slight adverse due to their proximity to the areas in which construction activity will be undertaken. The residual effects of emissions to air from construction vehicles and plant on local air quality is considered to be negligible.

10.5 For the operational phase, a quantitative assessment of the impact of changes in road traffic volume and movement associated with the proposed developments on local air quality, both on their own and together, has been undertaken using the dispersion model ADMS Roads. The impact of emissions to air from the proposed energy centres on local air quality was also assessed using the dispersion model ADMS 5.2.

10.6 The assessment showed that the proposed developments would cause either no change or small increases in pollutant concentrations at the receptors considered. Based on the assessment significance criteria and the worst case approach taken to the generation of vehicle movements associated with the proposed developments, the residual effects of the proposed developments once operational are considered to be negligible. Pollutant concentrations predicted within the Sites were below the relevant objective levels at locations where the objective would apply.

10.7 The proposed developments have been assessed as being air quality neutral.


Pg 16

11.0 Noise and Vibration 11.1 Unattended noise measurements were undertaken at four positions around the site to establish

the noise climate on site. In addition, attended noise measurements were taken where there was no secure location to leave the equipment unattended.

Noise Measurement Locations

11.2 Construction noise has been predicted at representative noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity. Notwithstanding the adoption of the best practicable means for minimising noise, it is possible that there may be some periods when existing sensitive receptors surrounding the site will experience construction noise levels that would represent a moderate adverse effect. The construction noise predictions for the ‘average’ case demonstrate that for the majority of the construction programme, the effects at nearby noise sensitive properties will be negligible to minor adverse.

11.3 The effects of construction vibration are predicted to be significant particularly during the foundation works, but this will vary dependent upon the piling technique that is adopted. The levels of vibration will generally be below those at which cosmetic damage would be expected.

11.4 Road traffic noise changes arising as a consequence of the proposed development are predicted to be negligible and not significant.

11.5 Plant noise limits have been proposed based on best practice guidance and the measured background noise levels.

11.6 Appropriate specifications for glazing and ventilation on the new buildings that would achieve the adopted internal noise criteria have been identified. Indicative glazing constructions to achieve the required sound insulation performance have been provided and it is understood that mechanical ventilation with heat recovery will be adopted for the residential units.

11.7 Overall, the noise effects associated with the completed proposed development are predicted to be negligible.


Pg 17

12.0 Ground Conditions and Contamination 12.1 An assessment has been made of the impact of the development on ground conditions and

issues associated with contamination.

12.2 To mitigate impacts on ground conditions and contamination, a Remediation Strategy will be produced for the sites to specify protective measures for the construction phase of the development. Best practices measures will be incorporated to protect the site from contamination. A Piling Risk Assessment will be required in addition to a desk based unexploded ordnance (‘UXO’) threat assessment will be carried out to confirm areas of potential risk from UXO and provide recommendations for safe below ground works.

12.3 The mitigation measures for the Proposed Development will be set out in these documents. If these mitigation measures are followed there will be an overall minor beneficial effect on local groundwater as potential contaminant sources will be removed, and a negligible effect on human health as no negative effects will be caused by the construction or operation phases

13.0 Water Environment 13.1 The potential for impacts of the proposed development on the water environment and flood risk

have been identified and is supported by Flood Risk Assessments (‘FRA’) relating to each site. The FRA assesses flood risks from all potential sources and investigates the potential for the development to increase flood risk elsewhere taking into account the potential impact of climate change. The FRA includes an Outline Drainage Strategy; the Outline Drainage Strategy optimises the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS).

13.2 Significant effects of the proposed development have been assessed in relation to flood risk, water supply, public sewerage systems and groundwater. All significant effects are classed to be having either a moderate or minor significance before mitigation. If the mitigation measures and in-built mitigation measures specified are incorporated, all residual effects are assessed as having a negligible significance.

13.3 The assessment conducted has identified a number of beneficial significant effects as a result of the in-built mitigation measures proposed as part of the FRA and Outline Drainage Strategy.

14.0 Ecology and Nature Conservation 14.1 The ecology chapter assesses the effects of the proposed development on ecological receptors

identified to have potential to be significantly affected during the demolition, construction, and/or operational phase of the proposed development. In particular, it considers the potential effects upon:

1 The Lee Valley Special Protection Area (‘SPA’) and Ramsar, and nearest constituent Site of Special Scientific Interest (‘SSSI’) the Walthamstow Reservoirs;

2 The Down Lane Recreation Ground Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (‘SINC’) located immediately north of the Site; and

3 Nesting birds which may utilise habitat currently present on Site, including both common and widespread species and black redstart.

14.2 The site comprises predominantly hard standing and buildings, with some small areas of ephemeral/short perennial vegetation present and introduced shrub in association with existing buildings.


Pg 18

14.3 The habitats present within the Sites are of negligible intrinsic conservation value, however they provide suitable habitat for certain species of up to Borough conservation value (black redstart) and species for which associated legislation is relevant to the Proposed Development (nesting birds and Japanese knotweed).

14.4 To the immediate north of the AG Site lies the Down Lane Recreation Ground SLINC which is of conservation value at the Local scale. The Down Lane Recreation Ground comprises amenity grassland, shrubs and mature trees. It provides suitable foraging/commuting habitat for bats and potential effects upon this species group are assessed. A proportion of buildings on the sites have very low potential to support roosting bats; precautionary working methods are proposed to ensure compliance with legislation protecting this species group.

14.5 In the absence of mitigation, if construction on the Ashley Gardens Site generates pollution (such as dust deposition or run-off) the Proposed Development would have temporary, short term, negative effects upon the Down Lane Recreation Ground SLINC. Effects would be reversible, and of significance at the Site scale only. Pollution prevention measures will however be incorporated into Demolition and Construction Method Statements to avoid the risk of pollution events, and therefore residual effects upon the SLINC will be negligible.

14.6 Whilst on-site habitats are currently of limited intrinsic value, changes to on-site habitat are assessed because in the absence of control measures development of the Berol Yard Site could spread Japanese knotweed, and because the Proposed Development includes a substantial proportion of landscaping which will generate positive effects upon biodiversity. Control measures will be implemented to avoid the spread of Japanese knotweed during the construction phase on the Berol Yard Site. In combination the Proposed Development includes 1685m2 landscaping at ground level (including soft landscaping and predominately landscaped private areas) and 1741m2 green/brown roofs (total including accessible and non-accessible). This will generate permanent, long term, positive effects upon biodiversity significant at the Site scale. It may also contribute towards an effect of greater significance cumulatively with other developments locally.

14.7 The tree line to the north of the Ashley Gardens Site, within the Down Lane Recreation Ground will be retailed and protected as part of the Proposed Development. This will avoid effects upon the SLINC and upon foraging and commuting bats which may utilise this habitat. In addition, lighting will be controlled during construction and designs for the Proposed Development follow key principles to avoid light spill upon semi-natural habitats to avoid influencing bat behaviour. As a result, residual effects upon the local bat population during construction will be negligible, and habitat creation is likely to generate permanent, long term, positive effects upon the local bat population significant at the Site scale during the operational phase.

14.8 Habitat on Site is suitable for use by nesting birds, including black redstart. In the absence of mitigation, demolition and construction activities could disturb and damage active birds’ nests. If black redstart were to be nesting at the time of works damage to, or disturbance of the nest at levels reducing likely survival rates, in addition to the removal of suitable nesting locations would result in permanent, long term, negative effects significant at the Borough scale. To avoid direct effects upon nesting birds Demolition and Construction Method Statements will include seasonal restrictions to certain activities, and/or checks to ensure that no active birds’ nests are affected by the Proposed Development. In addition mitigation measures to replace and enhance habitat for nesting birds, with specific provisions for black redstart, have been incorporated into the Proposed Development. There will be a reduction in habitat available to nesting birds during the construction period (3 years) prior to new, enhanced habitat becoming fully available. The effect of a temporary reduction in nesting habitat could have effects of significance at the Borough scale if this displaces breeding black redstart. The effect would be reversible however,


Pg 19

and in the long term (during the operational phase) the residual effect of habitat creation and enhancement will generate permanent, long term, positive effects upon the local breeding bird population significant at the Site scale.

14.9 Though temporary effects during the construction period are anticipated with respect to nesting birds, the mitigation and enhancement measures proposed are considered sufficient to enable the Proposed Development to proceed in accordance with applicable legislation and planning policy. In the longer term the Proposed Development will generate permanent, long term, positive effects upon multiple ecological features significant at the Site scale.

15.0 Cumulative Assessment 15.1 The table below reviews whether the inter-relationship between effects arising from the

developments may give rise to additional impacts not previously identified. It also considers whether effects may arise when the development is considered alongside other schemes or proposals in the surrounding area, the likelihood of the other developments proceeding and the ability or necessity of the applicant to mitigate any such effects for those other sites.

Summary of Effects with Mitigation in Place

Environmental Topic

Summary of Residual Environmental Effect Cumulative Ashley Gardens Berol Yard

During Construction Townscape and Visual Impact

Negligible adverse or neutral (negligible-moderate) impact on townscape and nil to moderate adverse on views

Negligible adverse or neutral (negligible-moderate) impact on townscape and nil to moderate adverse on views

No additional cumulative effects

Transport Insignificant effect on the transport network

Insignificant effect on the transport network


Daylight, Sunlight and Over-shadowing

Not significant Not significant No additional cumulative effects

Socio-Economic Effects

Moderate beneficial Moderate beneficial No additional cumulative effects

Built Heritage Negligible adverse to nil Negligible adverse to nil No additional cumulative effects

Environmental Wind

Negligible Negligible No additional cumulative effects

Air Quality Negligible to slight adverse Negligible to slight adverse No additional cumulative effects

Noise and Vibration

Negligible/Minor to moderate adverse

Negligible/Minor to moderate adverse


Ground Conditions and Contamination

Negligible/ minor beneficial Negligible/minor beneficial No additional cumulative effects

Water Environment and Flood Risk


Ecology and Nature Conservation



Pg 20

Environmental Topic

Summary of Residual Environmental Effect Cumulative Ashley Gardens Berol Yard

During Operation Townscape and Visual Impact

No residual adverse effects; minor/moderate beneficial on townscape/views

No residual adverse effects; minor/moderate beneficial on townscape/views

Minor to moderate beneficial on local townscape

Transport Minor to moderate beneficial effects on the road network, pedestrian network and cycle network

Minor to moderate beneficial effects on the road network, pedestrian network and cycle network

Beneficial effect on local pedestrians/cycleways and highways

Daylight, Sunlight and Over-shadowing

Acceptable effects Acceptable effects No additional cumulative effects

Socio-Economic Effects

Minor to major beneficial effects in the local and wider impact area

Minor to moderate beneficial effects in the local and wider impact area

Minor beneficial impact on housing and employment

Built Heritage No residual effects No residual effects Negligible additional effects Environmental Wind

Negligible Negligible Negligible impacts

Air Quality Negligible Negligible Negligible impacts Noise and Vibration

No residual effects No residual effects Negligible impacts

Ground Conditions and Contamination Impact

Negligible and minor positive effect on controlled waters

Negligible and minor positive effect on controlled waters

Negligible impacts

Water Environment and Flood Risk

Minor beneficial effect on flooding and negligible on drainage

Minor beneficial effect on flooding and negligible on drainage

No impact

Ecology and Nature Conservation

Negligible/minor beneficial Negligible/minor beneficial Minor positive impact on nesting birds

15.2 A range of mitigation measures have been identified throughout the ES which are capable of being enforced through planning conditions or other contributions in relation to the development.

15.3 Based on information available, the above cumulative assessment shows that there are unlikely to be any additional adverse impacts on, or as a result of, the cumulative schemes, beyond those identified for the main assessment.

15.4 Beneficial effects have been identified on townscape receptors and surrounding townscape character types as well as from identified viewpoints, on the road, pedestrian and cycle networks, on socio-economic receptors such as housing and employment, and local breeding birds at a local level. Potential beneficial impacts may be found on contamination linkages.

15.5 Given the nature of the development, there are no additional mitigation measures required for cumulative impacts that have not been previously identified in this ES or already put forward as part of the development proposals for those schemes proposed.


Pg 21

16.0 Availability of the Environmental Statement

16.1 A paper or electronic (CD Rom) copy of the full ES can be obtained from:-

• Lichfields, 14 Regent’s Wharf, All Saints Street, London N1 9RL (Tel: +44(0)20 7837 4477)

16.2 Information on the planning application and the ES can also be viewed on the website of LBH at:-

• http://www.haringey.gov.uk/.

16.3 All comments on the ES (and planning application) should be issued to LBH directly.

17.0 Scheme Plans 17.1 [see overleaf]

86 m²3b5pB2A-00-03

52 m²1b2pB2A-00-02

52 m²1b2pB2A-00-01

26 m²plantB2A-00-1

74 m²plantB2A-00-

57 m²bikeB2A-00-NA

62 m²binsB2A-00-NA

20 m²plantB2A-00-1

86 m²3b5pB2A-00-04

86 m²3b5pB2A-00-05

52 m²bikeB2A-00-NA

24 m²plantB2A-00-NA

25 m²plant00-Substation

47 m²binsB2A-00-

248 m²commercialB2A-00-

23 m²residentialB2A-00-concierge

317 m²commercialB2-00-

37 m²plantB2-00-

22 m²bikeB2-00-

77 m²binsB3-00-



90 m²binsB3-00-

117 m²plantB3-00-plant

99 m²plantB3-00-

30 m²plantB3-00-Substation

134 m²bikeB3-00-bike

128 m²bikeB3-00-bike

302.2 m²commercialB04-00-01



69 m²

2b3pB1A-C1-00-01

50 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-00-02

54 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-00-03

51 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-00-05

102 m²

3b4pB1A-C1-00-04 W

312 m²

commercialB1A-C2-00-19 m²

residentialB1A-C1-00-Concierge

106 m²

commercialB1A-C2-00-

99 m²

binsB1A-C1-00-

121 m²

bikeB1A-C1-00-

28 m²

plantB1A-C1-00- 30 m²

plantB1A-C1-00-

37 m²

commercialB1A-C1-00-

Core 4

Car park entrance

107 m²

3b4pB01-C4-00-03 W

51 m²

1b2pB01-C4-00-02

68 m²

2b3pB01-C4-00-01

51 m²

1b2pB01-C1-00-03

Core 2

100 m²

3b4pB01-C4-00-05 W

28 Parking Spaces

199 m²

bikeB01-C4-00-

80 m²

2b3pB01-C4-00-04 W

80 m²

2b3pB01-C1-00-01 W

68 m²

2b3pB01-C4-00-01

51 m²

1b2pB01-C1-00-03

Core 3

100 m²

3b4pB01-C4-00-05 W

56 m²

1b2pB01-C1-00-02

52 b

ikes

+8

stan

ds

Core 1276 m²

plant

B01-C1-00-EnergyCentre

33 m²

duplexB01-C1-00-D1

33 m²

duplexB01-C1-00-D2

43 m²

duplexB01-C1-00-D3

43 m²

duplexB01-C2-00-D3

33 m²

duplexB01-C2-00-D2

34 m²

duplexB01-C2-00-D1

87 m²

bikeB01-C1-00-

29 m²

binsB01-C1-00-

25 m²

binsB01-C4-00-

118 m²

commercialB01-C3-00-

53 m²

binsB01-C3-00-

19 m²

residential00-concierge

224 m²


45 m²

plantB01-C3-00-ventilation

39 m²


65 m²

binsB01-C2-00-

5+3

12 + 2

16 + 5

6+3

146 bikes

338 m²


250 bikes

55 m²

1b2pB01-C1-00-04

FFL

+9.1

00FF

L +9

.100

127 m²

bikeB01-C1-00-

34 m²


14 m²

plantB01-c2-00-comms

14 m²

plantB01-C2-00-comms

4 st

ands

Key

1b2p2b3p3b4p3b5pcommercial

D1educationduplexresidential

Application BoundaryOwnership BoundaryMasterplan BoundaryMaximum Parameters of Outline Elements0m 5m 10m 20m 50m

1 - 500

Project Logo

Do not scale from this drawing.

All dimensions are to be checked on site and any discrepancies noted in writing to theProject Manager.

All dimensions are in millimeters unless noted otherwise.

Notes

Key Plan

7-9 William RoadLondon NW1 3ERT +44 (0)20 7313 6000F +44 (0)20 7313 6001www.mcaslan.co.ukLandscape

Architect

Drawing No: Revision:

Status: Checked:

Date: Drawing:

Scale At A1: Job Number:

- - - - -JMP

N

Berol Yard Site

2

1 : 500

FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY TD

25/05/17 JMP

1824

Masterplan Level 00 Plan (Emerging Context)

BY 00 DR-A 2500 1824

Rev Date Description Drawn Checked1 16/06/17 Change in College location LP JL2 04/07/17 Design Amendments to Building 1 following the change

in the energy strategyNG XA

91 m²3b5pB2A-03-05

73 m²2b4pB2A-03-04

86 m²3b5pB2A-03-03

53 m²1b2pB2A-03-02

61 m²2b3pB2A-03-01

74 m²2b4pB2A-03-06

89 m²3b5pB2A-03-07

129 m²3b6pB2A-03-08

73 m²2b4pB2A-03-09

60 m²2b3pB2A-03-13

52 m²1b2pB2A-03-12

86 m²3b5pB2A-03-11

87 m²3b5pB2A-03-10

71 m²2b4pB2-02-01

51 m²1b2pB2-02-02

63 m²2b3pB2-02-03

86 m²3b5pB2-02-04

88 m²3b5pB3-02-07

53 m²1b2pB3-02-06

53 m²1b2pB3-02-05

52 m²1b2pB3-02-04

71 m²2b4pB3-02-03

86 m²3b5pB3-02-02

50 m²1b2pB3-02-01

53 m²1b2pB3-02-10

51 m²1b2pB3-02-08

69 m²2b4pB3-02-09

71 m²2b4pB3-02-12

53 m²1b2pB3-02-13

54 m²1b2pB3-02-11

73 m²2b4pB3-02-14

52 m²1b2pB3-02-15

63 m²2b3pB3-02-20 52 m²

1b2pB3-02-16

66 m²2b3pB3-02-17

73 m²2b4pB3-02-19

64 m²2b3pB3-02-18

86.4 m²3b5pB04-B-02-13

92.0 m²3b5pB04-A-02-12

60.2 m²1b2pB04-A-02-15

74.1 m²2b3pB04-B-02-14

60.9 m²1b2pB04-A-02-01

66.6 m²2b3pB04-A-02-02

52.5 m²1b2pB04-A-02-03

87.1 m²2b4pB04-A-02-04

56.3 m²1b2pB04-B-02-05

52.8 m²1b2pB04-B-02-0766.6 m²

2b3pB04-B-02-06

52.0 m²1b2pB04-B-02-08

77.4 m²2b4pB04-B-02-10

75.3 m²2b3pB04-B-02-11

66.7 m²2b3pB04-B-02-09

86 m²

3b5pB1A-C1-02-01

54 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-02-02 70 m²

2b4pB1A-C1-02-03

50 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-02-04

51 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-02-05

68 m²

2b3pB1A-C1-02-06

75 m²

2b3pB1A-C1-02-07 W

57 m²

1b2pB1A-C1-02-08

61 m²

2b3pB1A-C2-02-01

67 m²

2b3pB1A-C2-02-07

55 m²

1b2pB1A-C2-02-02

76 m²

2b4pB1A-C2-02-03

58 m²

1b2pB1A-C2-02-04

62 m²

2b3pB1A-C2-02-05

52 m²

1b2pB1A-C2-02-06

90 m²

3b5pB01-C1-02-01

75 m²

2b4pB01-C1-02-09

51 m²

1b2pB01-C1-02-02

51 m²

1b2pB01-C1-02-04

83 m²

3b4pB01-C1-02-03

86 m²

3b4pB01-C2-02-10

52 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-11

91 m²

3b5pB01-C2-02-01

51 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-09

66 m²

2b3pB01-C2-02-08

54 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-02

52 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-03

66 m²

2b3pB01-C2-02-04

53 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-07

66 m²

2b3pB01-C2-02-05

51 m²

1b2pB01-C2-02-06

76 m²

2b4pB01-C3-02-01

87 m²

2b4pB01-C3-02-06 W

62 m²

2b3pB01-C3-02-02

71 m²

2b4pB01-C3-02-05

71 m²

2b4pB01-C3-02-04

94 m²

3b5pB01-C3-02-03

61 m²

2b3pB01-C4-02-02

78 m²

2b4pB01-C4-02-01

53 m²

1b2pB01-C4-02-03

52 m²

1b2pB01-C4-02-04

76 m²

2b4pB01-C4-02-05

52 m²

1b2pB01-C4-02-06

67 m²

1b2pB01-C4-02-07 W

72 m²

2b4pB01-C4-02-09

86 m²

3b5pB01-C4-02-08

89 m²

3b5pB01-C1-02-06

50 m²

1b2pB01-C1-02-07

51 m²

1b2pB01-C1-02-08

73 m²

2b4pB01-C1-02-05

Key

1b2p2b3p2b4p3b4p3b5p3b6p

commercialD1education


1 - 500

Project Logo




Notes

Key Plan


Architect


Status: Checked:

Date: Drawing:


- - - - -JMP

N

Berol Yard Site

1

1 : 500


25/05/17 JMP

1824

Masterplan Level 02 Plan (Emerging Context)

BY 02 DR-A 2501 1824

Rev Date Description Drawn Checked1 16/06/17 Change in College location LP JL


1 - 500

Project Logo




Notes

Key Plan


Architect


Status: Checked:

Date: Drawing:


- - - - -JMP

N

Berol Yard Site

1

1 : 500


25/05/17 JMP

1824

Masterplan Roof Level Plan (Emerging Context)

BY RF DR-A 2502 1824

Rev Date Description Drawn Checked1 16/06/17 Change in College location LP JL

Documents

ASHLEY GARDENS AND EOL YARD - IEMA - Home · Ashley Gardens and Berol House : Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary (June 2017) Pg 1 1.0 Introduction & Methodology 1.1 This