Supp Report on P2 Consultation - Chapter 18 Black Friars Bridge Foreshore

7/31/2019 Supp Report on P2 Consultation - Chapter 18 Black Friars Bridge Foreshore

1/53


2/53

18 Blackfriars Bridge

Thames Tunnel

Supplementary report on phase two consultation

List of contents

Page number

18 Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore ..................................................................... 18-1 18.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 18-1

18.2 Number of respondents ...................................................................... 18-2

18.3 Site selection ...................................................................................... 18-2

18.4 Alternative sites .................................................................................. 18-5

18.5 Management of construction works .................................................... 18-6

18.6 Permanent design and appearance .................................................. 18-28

18.7 Management of operational effects .................................................. 18-34

18.8 Our view of the way forward ............................................................. 18-47


3/53


4/53


Table 18.5.14 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address the effects on the natural environment (aquatic) duringconstruction .................................................................................. 18-13

Table 18.5.15 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the natural environment(terrestrial) during construction ..................................................... 18-14

Table 18.5.16 Objections, issues and concerns for to address the effects on thenatural environment (terrestrial) during construction .................... 18-14

Table 18.5.17 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to noise and vibration

during construction ....................................................................... 18-15 Table 18.5.18 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed

to address the effects of noise and vibration during construction . 18-16

Table 18.5.19 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to open space andrecreation during construction ...................................................... 18-17

Table 18.5.20 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to planning anddevelopment during construction .................................................. 18-18

Table 18.5.21 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to socio-economic effects during construction ........................................... 18-18

Table 18.5.22 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to socio-economic effectsduring construction ....................................................................... 18-18

Table 18.5.23 Objections, issues and concerns to address socio-economic effectsduring construction ....................................................................... 18-19


5/53


Table 18.6.1 Do you agree that we have identified the right issues that haveinfluenced our permanent design for this site? (Q5) ..................... 18-28

Table 18.6.2 Please give us your views about our proposals for the permanentdesign and appearance of the site (Q6) ....................................... 18-29

Table 18.6.3 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to thepermanent design and appearance of the site ............................. 18-29

Table 18.6.4 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the permanent designand appearance of the site ........................................................... 18-30

Table 18.6.5 Design suggestions ...................................................................... 18-32 Table 18.7.1 Do you agree that we have identified the right key issues in the site

information paper? (Q7a) ............................................................. 18-35

Table 18.7.2 Do you agree that we have identified the right way to address the keyissues? (Q7b) ............................................................................... 18-35

Table 18.7.3 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the key

issues during operation ................................................................ 18-36 Table 18.7.4 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the

measures proposed to address the key issues during operation .. 18-36

Table 18.7.5 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address the key issues during operation .................................. 18-36

Table 18.7.6 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to air quality

d d d i i 18 36


6/53


Table 18.7.16 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address socio-economic effects during operation .................... 18-43

Table 18.7.17 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to townscape and visualeffects during operation ................................................................ 18-43

Table 18.7.18 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address the effects on townscape and visual during operation 18-43

Table 18.7.19 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to transport and accessduring operation ........................................................................... 18-44

Table 18.7.20 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address the effects of transport and access during operation .. 18-45

Table 18.7.21 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to water and flood riskduring operation ........................................................................... 18-45

Table 18.7.22 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposedto address the effects on water and flood risk during operation ... 18-46


7/53


Supplementary report on phase two consultation 18-1

18 Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore

18.1 Introduction18.1.1 This chapter covers the feedback comments received during phase two consultation regarding our preferred site Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore. The site would be used to intercept the

existing local combined sewer overflow (CSO), known as the Fleet Main CSO, and connect to the Northern Low Level Sewer No.1 in order to divert flows to the main tunnel. BlackfriarsBridge Foreshore was also our preferred site to intercept the Fleet Main CSO at phase one consultation. However, in response to stakeholder engagement, phase one consultationresponses and scheme development, the e xtent and construction layout of the site was altered a t phase two consultation to minimise impact on the local community and the environment.

For further information regarding the proposals for this site at phase two consultation, refer to the Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore site information paper .Structure of this chapter

18.1.2 This chapter is organised as listed below, which reflects the structure of the phase two consultation feedback form:

section 18.2 Number of respondents

section 18.3 Site selection

section 18.4 Alternative sites

section 18.5 Management of construction works

section 18.6 Permanent design and appearance

section 18.7 Management of operational effects.

18.1.3 In sections 4.3 to 4.7 we present details of the feedback comments raised, the types and total number of respondents, and our response to feedback comments. Where specificobjections, issues or concerns have been raised, the final column of the tables indicates whether, in response to the feedback received:

C we are considering or proposing change or additional mitigation 1 to that set out in our phase two consultation material

N we do not propose to amend our proposals.

18.1.4 A full list of the phase two consultation material is set out in Annex A to this report.

18.1.5 Where a response contains a reference to our website, go to www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk for further information, or to access the documents r eferenced.

1 Mitigation here refers to a wide range of measures set out in our phase two consultation proposals including for example, the Air management plan and other documents as well as those mitigation measures set out in the PEIR .
http://www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk/http://www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk/http://www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk/http://www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk/


8/53



18.2 Number of respondents18.2.1 A total of 27 respondents provided feedback comments on Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore, of which eight were received after the close of phase two consultation. Table 18.2.1 sets out the

different groups who provided feedback for this site.

Table 18.2.1 Number of respondents who provided feedback on Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore

Statutory consultees Local authorities Landowners Community consultees Petitions

6 respondents

- Design Council CABE (CABE)- Consumer Council for Water (CCW)- English Heritage (EH)- Environment Agency (EA)- Greater London Authority (GLA)- Port of London Authority (PLA)

1 respondent

- City of London Corporation (CoL)

1 respondent 19 respondents 0 petitions

18.2.2 Feedback was received in a number of forms, including feedback forms and correspondence (emails and letters).

18.3 Site selection18.3.1 A series of sites is required in order to build and operate the Thames Tunnel project. To determine our preferred scheme, we are undertaking a site selection process using a methodology

that was adopted after consultation with the relevant local authorities and statutory consultees. For further information on our methodology and process, refer to:

Site selection project information paper, which sets out the process we followed to find and select our preferred sites

Site selection methodology paper, which details the methodology used to select construction sites along the route of the main tunnel

Site selection background technical paper, which provides supporting technical information to the Site selection methodology paper such as the engineering requirements for the sizeof construction sites.

18.3.2 The results of the site selection process up to phase two consultation are set out in:

Site information papers, which provide summary information on each of our preferred sites, including the reasons for selecting them

Phase two scheme development report, which describes how our proposals for the Thames Tunnel project have evolved and provides a detailed account of the site selection processfor each of the preferred sites .

18.3.3 In this section, we set out the feedback comments received in relation to the selection of Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore as our preferred site, together with our responses. Our responsesprovide relevant details of the site selection process and its findings up to phase two consultation. Where appropriate, we have also identified further work that we have undertaken inrelation to our preferred site, such as the preparation of our Preliminary environmental information report (PEIR ). As part of the project design development process, we continue to assesshow the effects arising from the proposed development can be addressed. The output of our assessment up to phase two consultation is contained in appendix Q of the Design development report and our PEIR (volume 21).

18.3.4 Where respondents commented on matters relating to management of construction works, permanent design and appearance or the management of operational effects at BlackfriarsBridge Foreshore, these comments are reported in sections 18.5 to 18.7.

Number of respondents18.3.5 During phase two consultation, respondents were asked to comment on the decision to select Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore as our preferred site to intercept the Fleet Main CSO (see

question 2 of the phase two consultation feedback form, provided in appendix M of the Main report on phase two consultation ). Table 18.2 sets out details of the different groups whoresponded and were asked to select supportive , opposed/concerned or do nt know/unsure . Tables 18.3 and 18.4 then detail the feedback comments received in relation to this site. Itshould be noted that not all respondents who provided feedback comments selected supportive , opposed/concerned or do nt know/unsure .


9/53


10/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our responseHowever, we recognise the environmentalbenefits the Thames Tunnel project willdeliver and there is a need to develop asnear to the river as possible.

significant transport effects can be mitigated and propose to continue towork with the Mayor of London and Transport for London (TfL) toimplement a satisfactory solution.For further details on the results of the site selection process, includingour assessment of shortlisted sites, refer to a ppendix Q of the Phase two scheme development report.Since selecting Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore as our preferred site, wehave begun carrying out fluvial modelling of the temporary foreshoreworks to establish the likely significant effects of the development on theriver and will discuss the findings with the PLA and the EnvironmentAgency. We are also undertaking scour modelling. Our design wouldincorporate mitigation measures to manage the temporary effects of ourconstruction on the river. If appropriate, we will consider whether thereare alternative options to avoid temporary structures in the river as partof our design development. Where significant scour is predicted, wewould carry out preventative measures (such as placing riprap on theriver bed), and in all locations the riverbed would be monitored andremedial works carried out if/as required.

18.3.2 Should use/consider an alternative site. 9401LO 1

18.3.3 This preferred site is generally unsuitable;fundamental concerns on the implications

for navigational safety.

PLA, LC 2

18.3.4 Query why shortlisted sites have not beenidentified?

EH 1 Following the approach set out in our Site selection methodology paper ,no other shortlisted sites were identified to intercept the Fleet CSO andconnect to the northern Low Level Sewer No.1. Other sites that wereidentified through the site selection process were discounted for a range

of reasons including engineering constraints, unacceptable effects onthe road network and the effect on sensitive receptors. For furtherdetails, refer to appendix Q of the Phase two scheme development report.

18.3.5 Site selection should avoid greenfield sitesand open space.

9055 1 We took brownfield versus greenfield/open space into account alongwith other considerations, as set out in the Site selection methodology paper .

18.3.6 Site selection should not use sites in theRiver Thames foreshore.

EA 1 CSOs need to be intercepted along the line of the existing sewer thatflows into the River Thames. CSO interception sites ne ed to be as closeto the line of the sewer as practicable so there are few options and amore localised approach is required. In the case of the Fleet Main CSO,the overflow point is located under Blackfriars Bridge and our proposedsite is the only location a t which we can intercept the Fleet Main CSOand connect the northern Low Level Sewer No.1 to the main tunnel.

18.3.7 Existing uses on the site presentdevelopment constraints. CoL 1 We took the existing uses of a site into account along with otherconsiderations, as set out in the Site selection methodology paper . Aspart of the assessment of this site, we recognised that it would requirethe relocation of Blackfriars Millennium Pie r, as it is likely that the loss o fthis facility would be unacceptable.

18.3.8 Site selection should avoid sites adjacent toor containing heritage assets; the Grade IIlisted Carmelite is located directly oppositethe proposed site, and it is in the WhitefriarsConservation Area.

9401LO 1 The location of CSO sites is constrained by the location of the existingcombined sewers, because the interception chambers have to be builton the existing sewers. The search area for the CSO sites is thereforelocalised around the vicinity of the existing CSO. As set out in the Site selection methodology paper , we did not identify sites located in


11/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our responseLondon's World Heritage Sites (WHS) is in recognition of the historicimportance of these sites. Given that we had a li mited search area inwhich to identify a suitable CSO site, we did not consider it appropriateto exclude sites included in or adjacent to other designated heritageassets when compiling our longlist of sites. We considered the effect ofour proposals of heritage designations as part of the assessment.

Shortlisted sites18.3.9 No feedback comments were received in relation to the shortlisted sites.

18.4 Alternative sites18.4.1 During phase two consultation, respondents were invited to suggest alternative sites that they thought should be used to intercept the Fleet Main CSO and receive the main tunnel from

Carnwath Road Riverside instead of Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore (see question 3 of the phase two consultation feedback form, provided in appendix M of the Main report on phase two consultation ). The following sites were put forward as possible alternatives:

Table 18.4.1 Suggested alternative sites to Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore

Ref Alternative site suggestion Reasons Respondent ID No. Our response

Other sites

18.4.2 Site 50-00m west of thepreferred site, in front of InnerTemple Garden.

Minimise visual and amenity impactsduring construction and operationaland maintenance phase since there

are no buildings that would overlookthe works.

9401LO 1 Sites have been selected on the basis of needing to intercept existingCSOs. CSOs are in fixed locations and the site to intercept the CSOneeds to be on the line of, or in close proximity to, the sewer. The

suggested site is further away from the Fleet CSO, which runs underBlackfriars Bridge, than our preferred site and is therefore consideredless suitable.

18.4.3 Respondents also made the following comments in relation to the availability and identification of alternative sites:

Supportive and neutral feedback comments

Table 18.4.2 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the availability and identification of alternative sites

Ref Supportive and neutral comments Respondent ID No. Our response

18.4.4 No alternative site is available; ThamesWater has done its best to survey alternativesites.

7404 1 Your support is welcomed and noted.

Objections, issues and concerns

Table 18.4.3 Objections, issues and concerns in relation the availability and identification of alternative sites

Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response

18.4.5 Not qualified to comment/do not have thetime to research alternatives.

8686 1 The purpose of consultation is to explore as fully as possible what thosewith an interest in the project think about our proposals. We will haveregard to comments received from both technical and non-technicalconsultees.


12/53



18.5 Management of construction works18.5.1 This section sets out feedback comments received during phase two consultation in relation to the management of construction works at Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore. This includes the

identification of site specific issues arising from con struction activities and proposals for addressing these issues.

18.5.2 During phase two consultation, respondents were asked whether the site information paper had identified the right key issues associated with Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore and the ways toaddress these issues (see questions 4a and 4b of the phase two consultation feedback form, provided in appendix M of the Main report on phase two consultation ). The first part ofquestion 4a and 4b asked respondents to select agree , disagree or do nt know/unsure . Where respondents completed this part of the question, the results are set out in tables 18.5.1and 18.5.2. Tables 18.5.3 to 1 8.5.32 detail the feedback comments received in r elation to this site. It should be noted that not all respondents who provided feedback comments confirmedwhether the right issues and the ways to address those issues had been identified

Table 18.5.1 Do you agree that we have identified the right key issues in the site information paper? (Q4a)Respondent type Number of respondents

Total Yes No Dont know /unsure

Statutory consultees 0

Local authorities 0

Landowners 0

Community consultees 9 4 4 1

Petitions 0

Total 9 4 4 1

Table 18.5.2 Do you agree that we have identified the right way to address the key issues? (Q4b)

Respondent type Number of respondents



Local authorities 0

Landowners 0


Petitions 0

Total 7 3 3 1

18.5.3 The following sections set out the feedback comments received from respondents in connection with the identification of key issues associated with Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore during

construction and proposals to address these issues. Feedback comments are organised under common themes. The themes are:General themes:

General feedback comments on key issues

General feedback comments on measures to addr ess the key issues


13/53



Topic-based themes

Air quality and odour

Construction working hours andprogramme

Construction site design and layout

Historic environment

Land quality and contamination

Lighting

Natural environment (aquatic)

Natural environment (terrestrial)

Noise and vibration

Open space and recreation

Planning and development

Socio-economic

Structures and utilities

Townscape and visualTransport and access

Water and flood risk

General feedback comments on the identified key issuesSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the identified key issues

18.5.4 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to general comments on the identified key issues during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the identified key issues

18.5.5 No objections, issues or concerns were received in relation to general comments on the identified key issues during construction.

General feedback comments on measures to address the key issues

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the key issuesTable 18.5.3 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the key issues during construction


18.5.6 Measures to address potential issues aresatisfactory.

8018 1 Your comment is noted and welcomed.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the key issues

Table 18.5.4 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the key issues during construction

Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcome

18.5.7 Construction impacts must be minimised atevery stage of construction.

LC We are developing a Code of construction practice (CoCP )that will set out how we would manage our construction sitesto minimise disruption to nearby communities. Measures

proposed to address potential likely significant effects arebeing further developed and considered as part of theenvironmental impact assessment. The findings of theassessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.

N


14/53



Air quality and odourSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to air quality and odour

Table 18.5.5 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to air quality and odour during construction


18.5.8 Use river transport to reduce carbonemissions and avoid exacerbating the poorair quality on main road routes.

CoL 1 Your comments are noted and welcomed.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to air quality and odourTable 18.5.6 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to air quality and odour during construction


18.5.9 Effect of construction traffic emissions on airquality; PM 10 and NO 2 levels.

9401LO 1 We have set out measures in our draft CoCP that would beadopted to limit vehicle and plant emissions, including usinglow emission vehicles, turning off engines when not neededand minimising vehicle movements around the site. Ourpreliminary assessment, which was outlined in our PEIR(volume 21, section 4), stated that with these measures inplace, we do not expect any significant local air qualityeffects arising from vehicle and plant emissions at this site.We are preparing a full assessment for submission with the Environmental statement as part of our DCO application,

which will include dispersion modelling. Dispersionmodelling will assess the potential impacts of theconstruction phase at all proposed sites for the relevantshort- and long-term NO 2 and PM 10 air quality objectives.

N

18.5.10 Effect of reduced air quality on othersensitive receptors, including the Carmelitebuilding.

9401LO 1 Our preliminary assessment of likely significant air qualityeffects was reported in our PEIR (volume 21, section 4) anddid not identify any significant effects site on residential or atthe other sensitive receptors that have been identified nearthis, including commercial/offices (such as CarmeliteHouse), Crowne Plaza Hotel and 1 Puddle Dock. We willundertake further assessment of nearby properties as part ofour on-going environmental impact assessment work andthis will be reported in the Environmental statement that willbe submitted with our DCO application. If significant effectsare identified, we will propose appropriate mitigation. Our

draft CoCP confirms that Air management plans would beprepared and implemented for each site, and proposedtechniques would be in line with best practice guidelines.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of air quality and odour

18.5.11 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of air quality and odour during construction.


15/53



Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of air quality and odour

Table 18.5.7 Objections, issues and concerns to address the effects of air quality and odour during construction


18.5.12 The GLA and London Council's BestPractice Guidance (BPG) The control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition should be implemented.

LC 1 We can confirm that the Best Practice Guidance has beentaken into account in developing our proposals for this site.Our draft CoCP sets out measures for managing our worksas well as details of the various regulatory regimes andguidance that we would need to comply with, such as the

Control of Pollution Act 1974, the Environmental ProtectionAct 1990, the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, theMayor of London's Ambient Noise Strategy 2004 and The control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition - Best Practice Guidance 2008, as well asvarious British Standards.

N

Construction working hours and programmeSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to construction working hours and programme

18.5.13 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to construction working hours and programme.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to construction working hours a nd programme

Table 18.5.8 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to construction working hours and programme


18.5.14 Construction programme issues included:- clash with works required to Blackfriars

bridgehead structure

LC, 8018 2 Unfortunately, for health and safety reasons we would haveto close the Thames Path during our works, which wouldmean that access to the sports club would be unavailableduring our works. We are currently discussing whetherother facilities would be available in the local area with theCoL.

C

- please phase the work so that we canhave access for most of the time and onlynot have access for approximately threemonths.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of construction working hours and programme

18.5.15 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of construction working hours and programme.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of construction working hours and programme

18.5.16 No objective, issues, concerns or suggestions were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of construction working hours and programme.

Construction site design and layoutSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to construction site design and layout

18.5.17 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to construction site design and layout.


16/53



Objections, issues and concerns in relation to construction site design and layout

Table 18.5.9 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to construction site design and layout


18.5.18 Site layout is unsuitable; closure of thewestbound slip road is unacceptable.

LC 1 The closure of the westbound slip road is necessary toconstruct the connection to the low level sewer. We considerthis preferable to the alternative location for the connectionto the low level sewer, which would require diverting a largenumber of utilities, including two gas mains and multiple

fibre optic cables into Victoria Embankment. This wouldrequire the Blackfriars underpass to be reduced to one laneduring construction. However, we will continue to work withTfL and the CoL to develop these proposals.

N

18.5.19 Existence and/or size of structure(s) in theforeshore of the River Thames, including:- shape of the cofferdam and its effects on

the foreshore

8809, 8853 2 We are conscious that the structure in the foreshore is largeand have worked to minimise the impact on the river and thenavigational channel. However, we also need to meet thefunctional requirements of the site, which are to intercept theFleet CSO, (one of the largest CSOs on the project), andconnect to the low level sewer. Large volumes ofwastewater need to be diverted to the tunnel in a safe andcontrolled way, requiring large hydraulic structures in thepermanent works. We will continue to work with the PLA aswe develop our navigational risk assessment for the site,and will implement appropriate mitigation measures.

N

- possible effects on navigational risk. N

Suggestions for construction site design and layout

Table 18.5.10 Suggestions for construction site design and layout

Ref Suggestions for construction site designand layout

Respondent ID No. Our response

18.5.20 Specific construction design amendmentsincluded:- lifts to provide access from walkway level

to street level- alternative working arrangements

regarding the westbound slip road in termsof construction and logistics.

CoL, LC 2 Our proposals include a lift to provide step-free access from the walkwayto street level during the construction period. It is necessary to close thewestbound slip road in order to construct the connection to the low levelsewer. We consider this preferable to the alternative location for theconnection to the low level sewer, which would require diverting a largenumber of utilities, including two gas mains and multiple fibre opticcables into Victoria Embankment. This would require the Blackfriarsunderpass to be reduced to one lane during construction. However, wewill continue to work with TfL and the CoL to develop these proposals.

Historic environmentSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the historic environment

18.5.21 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the historic environment during construction.


17/53



Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the historic environment

Table 18.5.11 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the historic environment during construction


18.5.22 Effect of construction activities onWhitefriars and Temple conservation areas.

CoL, LC 2 The site is located in the Whitefriars Conservation Area andthere are a number of listed buildings and structures nearby.We recognise the historic character of this area and indeveloping our design proposals for the site since phaseone, we have further considered the historic context of this

site and developed our proposals to respect this character.We are completing an assessment of the likely significant effects on the historic environment as part of ourenvironmental impact assessment. We are consulting withEnglish Heritage as part of this process. The findings of theassessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.Our CoCP (provided at phase two consultation) identifiesthat works to or in the vicinity of listed buildings would beundertaken in accordance with all required consents andlicences and that protection measures would be put in placeat the start of the works. We would also notify EnglishHeritage and the local planning authority prior to undertakingworks.

N

18.5.23 Effect of construction activities on listedbuildings or structures, including VictoriaEmbankment Wall, the cast iron lampstandards, listed buildings in Inner andMiddle Temple.

CoL, LC 2 N

18.5.24 Effect on the setting of multiple highlydesignated assets.

EH 1 N

18.5.25 Effect of construction activities onarchaeology.

CoL, 9445 2 We recognise that the site lies in the locally designated Cityof London Archaeological Priority Area. Our phase twoconsultation material included a preliminary assessment oflikely significant archaeological effects as detailed in ourPEIR (volume 21, section 7). Our preliminary assessmentidentified high potential for post-medieval 18th and 19thcentury industrial and riverside remains. The desk-basedstudy of the site suggests that no buried heritage assets ofvery high significance are anticipated that might merit amitigation strategy of permanent preservation in situ . Anassessment of the likely significant effects on the historicenvironment is being completed as part of our environmentalimpact assessment. We are consulting with English Heritageas part of this process.

Our draft CoCP sets out a range of measures that would beadopted by our contractor in respect of archaeology. Anassessment of the likely significant effects on the historicenvironment is being completed as part of our environmentalimpact assessment. We are consulting with English Heritageas part of this process. The findings of the assessment,together with any recommendations for mitigation, will beavailable as part of the Environmental statement that will besubmitted with our DCO application. As set out in our CoCP we would put in place procedures for ensuring construction

N


18/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomeworks are appropriately monitored to identify and record anyarchaeological finds.

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the historic environment

18.5.26 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the historic environment.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the historic environment

Table 18.5.12 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effec ts on the historic environment during construction

Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcome18.5.27 More information is needed on historic

environment mitigation.EH 1 We are completing an assessment of the likely significant

effects on the historic environment as part of ourenvironmental impact assessment. We are consulting withEnglish Heritage as part of this process. The findings of theassessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.Additionally, our draft CoCP (provided at phase twoconsultation) sets out a range of measures to safeguard thehistoric environment during construction. Such measuresinclude confirmation that works close to listed buildingswould be undertaken in accordance with all requirements setout in the Development Consent Order and that protection

measures, as required, would be put in place at the start ofthe works. We would also notify English Heritage and theLBS prior to undertaking works and would continue toengage with them closely on the planning of the works.

N

18.5.28 Provide suitable protection for listedstructures during construction.

EH 1 Our CoCP (provided at phase two consultation) sets out ourapproach to protecting the historic environment, includinglisted structures, during construction. Measures includepreparation of a Heritage Management Plan; protectivemeasures, such as temporary support, hoardings andbarriers around heritage assets; careful choice of plant;condition surveys; and procedures for the emergency repairof any damage to listed buildings.

N

18.5.29 Undertake a heritage impact assessment(environmental impact assessment).

CoL 1 We are completing an assessment of the likely significant effects on the historic environment as part of ourenvironmental impact assessment. We are consulting withEnglish Heritage as part of this process. The findings of theassessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.

N

Land quality and contamination18.5.30 No feedback comments were received in relation to land quality and contamination during construction.


19/53



Lighting18.5.31 No feedback comments were received in relation to lighting during construction.

Natural environment (aquatic)Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the natural environment (aquatic)

18.5.32 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the natural environment (aquatic) during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the natural environment (aquatic)

Table 18.5.13 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the natural environment (aquatic) during construction


18.5.33 Effect on foreshore habitat(s), although ofpoor species diversity, including the effectsof relocation of the President, constructionof a new passenger jetty, and any dredgingrequirements.

EA, LC, CoL, LR9491 4 As part of our PEIR (volume 21, section 5) we assessed thelikely significant construction effects of the proposeddevelopment on aquatic ecosystems, including the foreshorehabitat. The PEIR considers the likely significant effects onthe foreshore and River Thames and recognises a numberof impacts, including those associated with a ne w mooringand any necessary channel reshaping or dredging. Many ofthe effects would be controlled through measures set out inour CoCP . We also noted that many effects would betemporary and the habitat would recover following removalof the temporary structures. W e acknowledge that this is apreliminary assessment. We are preparing a full aquaticecology assessment for submission in the Environmental statement as part of our DCO application.

C

18.5.34 Effect on river habitat(s), and therequirement for geotechnical work toexamine the effects on the stability of theforeshore due to the dredging associatedwith the relocated pier and river service.

EA 1

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (aquatic)

18.5.35 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (aquatic) during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (aquatic)

Table 18.5.14 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (aquatic) during construction


18.5.36 More information is needed on the naturalenvironment (aquatic) mitigation, includingdetails of suitable local mitigation measuresand a comprehensive monitoringprogramme.

CoL 1 Our PEIR (volume 21, section 5) sets out our proposedmitigation, including the CoCP , which proposes a range ofmeasures to control the effects of the development.

N

18.5.37 Mitigation proposed to address the issues isinadequate/insufficient. CoL 1 N

18.5.38 Provide compensation habitat, includingrefuges for fish and other species.

LR9491 1 Many of the likely significant effects during the constructionphase would be temporary and we anticipate that the habitatwould recover following removal of the temporary structures.We do not believe that it is necessary to provide anycompensation habitat for the construction phase.

N

18.5.39 Deliver environmental enhancementsthrough permanent design and landscaping.

CoL 1 N


20/53



Natural environment (terrestrial)Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the natural environment (terrestrial)

18.5.40 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the natural environment (terrestrial) during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the natural environment (terrestrial)

Table 18.5.15 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the natural environment (terrestrial) during construction


18.5.41 Loss of trees arising from constructionactivities.

LC 1 Our proposals for this site would require the removal of onesemi-mature London plane tree to enable access to the site.This tree is considered to have a low intrinsic biodiversityvalue and is unlikely to support any notable species, but werecognise that it possesses amenity and townscape value.We have sought to locate our site to minimise the loss oftrees in this location and our plans for landscaping includeplanting new trees to replace those that would be lost. Allother trees in or close to the site would be subject to treeprotection measures, as detailed in our CoCP . Ourcontractor would implement the identified measures wherepracticable in consultation with the CoL tree officer.

N

18.5.42 More information is needed on the effect ofconstruction activities on the naturalenvironment.

LR9491 1 We consider that we have undertaken a thorough andcomprehensive consultation exercise. As part of this, wecarefully considered the information we made available at

our phase two consultation to ensure that consultees hadsufficient information to respond to the consultation. Thisincluded our draft CoCP and PEIR (volume 21, section 6).We are confident, therefore, that the information we haveprovided is sufficient.We are undertaking an environmental impact assessmentthat will include a comprehensive assessment of the likelysignificant effects arising from the proposals. The findings ofthe assessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.

N

18.5.43 Thames Water should consider the potentialimportance of any existing buildings forprotected species.

LR9447 1 There are no existing buildings on the site but the likelysignificant effects of the development on all potentialhabitats will be assessed and reported in the Environmental statement that will be submitted with the application.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (terrestrial)

No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (terrestrial) during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on the natural environment (terrestrial)

Table 18.5.16 Objections, issues and concerns for to address the effects on the natural environment (terrestrial) during construction


18.5.44 Trees must be retained/protected duringconstruction.

LC 1 Our proposals for this site would require the removal of onesemi-mature London plane tree to enable access to the site.

C


21/53




18.5.45 Any other vegetation/habitat lost duringconstruction must be replaced.

LC 1 This tree is considered to have a low intrinsic biodiversityvalue and is unlikely to support any notable species, but werecognise that it possesses amenity and townscape value.We have sought to locate our site to minimise the loss oftrees in this location and our plans for landscaping includeplanting new trees to replace those that would be lost. Allother trees in or close to the site would be subject to treeprotection measures, as detailed in our CoCP . Our

contractor would implement the identified measures wherepracticable in consultation with the CoL tree officer.

18.5.46 Locate construction activities within the siteto avoid sensitive and designated areas.

LR9491 1 All construction activities would be contained within ourproposed construction site.

N

18.5.47 Other natural environment mitigation,including:- maximise opportunities to enhance

biodiversity through an effectivemitigation package

- take steps to secure the long-termprotection of any protected species whichmay be impacted.

LR9447, LR9491 2 The scheme has been designed to minimise effects onwildlife and habitats where possible and, where likelysignificant effects have been identified, mitigation has beenbuilt into the design. The likely significant effects of thedevelopment on habitats will be assessed and reported inthe Environmental statement that will be submitted as part ofthe application.The CoCP that will be submitted with the application willensure that works are undertaken in compliance withapplicable legislation and with relevant nature conservation

policies and guidance, including the Mayor of London sBiodiversity strategy and local biodiversity action plans.Where species are protected by specific legislation,approved guidance would be followed, appropriatemitigation proposed and any necessary licences or consentsobtained.We have not identified the need to provide compensatoryland-based habitat at this site as set out in our preliminaryenvironmental assessment set out in our PEIR (volume 21,section 6).

N

Noise and vibrationSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to noise and vibration

18.5.48 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to noise and vibration during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to noise and vibrationTable 18.5.17 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to noise and vibration during construction


18.5.49 Noise and vibration from above-groundconstruction activity will affect users of theCarmelite property.

9401LO 1 Our PEIR (volume 21, section 9) sets out our preliminaryassessment of likely significant noise and vibration effectsfrom construction site activities, noise from constructiontraffic on roads outside the site, and noise and vibration fromoperation of the site. The proposals set out in our draft

N


22/53


23/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomeappropriate attenuation.As set out in our Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore site information paper , our contractor would be required toimplement noise and vibration control measures at the site.As required in the CoCP, our contractors would discussspecific working methods and the measures to minimisenoise and vibration as well as any appropriate monitoringmeasures with the CoL. This would ensure that the noise

levels are reasonable and best practical means are applied.The measures would be agreed with local authorityenvironmental health officers.Additionally, we would implement best practice measures tominimise noise and vibration from plant and works includingthe selection of appropriate plant and equipment, siting ofequipment, and use of enclosures to provide acousticscreens. Full details of the measures that will be adopted forthe construction will be set out in the CoCP submitted withour DCO application.

Open space and recreationSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to open space and recreation

18.5.52 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to open space and recreation during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to open space and recreationTable 18.5.19 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to open space and recreation during construction


18.5.53 Disruption to sports groups and other localclubs.

8018 1 Our works would require the temporary closure of the sportsclub located under the slip road, as it would be necessary toclose access via the Thames Path. We are currently liaisingwith the CoL, which is the freeholder of the sports club, inorder to find a suitable alternative location for the specialistsports facility.

N

18.5.54 There are no alternative sports facilities inthe local area.

8018 1 N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on open space and recreation

18.5.55 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on open space and recreation issues during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on open space and recreation

18.5.56 No Objections, issues or concerns were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on open space and recreation issues during construction.

Planning and developmentSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to planning and development

18.5.57 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to planning and development during constructive.


24/53


25/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response OutcomeCruises regarding property issues. We have published aGuide to the Thames Tunnel compensation programme thatsets out details of compensation that would be availableduring construction for damage or loss, required protectionmeasures and compulsory purchase.Our proposals for the relocation of Blackfriars MillenniumPier envisage that the new pier would be established prior toclosure of the existing pier to allow for a seamless transfer of

operations. We will continue to liaise with the operators andPLA regarding the proposed new pier.

18.5.64 Effect of construction activities on the localcommunity.

8540 1 Our site selection process included a consideration ofproximity to sensitive receptors (including residents andschools), socio-economic, health and equalityconsiderations. Our Phase two scheme development report provides an overview of how each site was chosen.Our PEIR (volume 21, section 10) provides a preliminaryassessment of the likely significant effects of the scheme ona range of topics, including noise and vibration, air quality(including dust emissions) and odour, and transport, basedon a methodology that has been agreed with the CoL. Weare undertaking an environmental impact assessment whichwill include a comprehensive assessment of the likelysignificant effects arising from the proposals. The findings ofthe assessment, together with any recommendations formitigation, will be available as part of the Environmental statement that will be submitted with our DCO appli cation.We are also preparing a Health impact assessment that willexamine the likely significant effects of the proposeddevelopment on human health and wellbeing and possibleeffects in the population. The findings of this study willinform the design for this site as well as mitigation measuresto address any significant effects

N

18.5.65 Other socio-economic issue: cumulativeimpacts with other construction in the localarea.

9445 1 We will undertake and submit an environmental impactassessment with our DCO application, which will considerthe cumulative effects arising from developments in the localarea. The assessment will identify any mitigation required tominimise potential likely significant effects on the local area.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address socio-economic effects

18.5.66 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address socio-economic effects during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address socio-economic effects

Table 18.5.23 Objections, issues and concerns to address socio-economic effects during construction


18.5.67 Provide alternative business premises. LC 1 Landowners may have a statutory entitlement to claimcompensation for the diminution of the value of their

N


26/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomeproperty due to the construction of the tunnel. We havepublished a Guide to the Thames Tunnel compensation programme that sets out details of compensation that wouldbe available during construction for damage or loss, requiredprotection measures and compulsory purchase. We willcontinue to liaise with property owners and occupiers to findappropriate solutions to address the loss of existingpremises.

Structures and utilitiesSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to structures and utilities

18.5.68 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to structures and utilities during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to structures and utilities

Table 18.5.24 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to structures and utilities during construction


18.5.69 Effect on underground transportation linesincluding the Waterloo, City and District Linetunnels.

LC 1 The location of the Waterloo, City, and District Line tunnelsis a factor that has influenced our proposals for this site andwe have discussed our approach with TfL as part of ourdesign development process. We do not consider thepresence of the tunnels to be a factor that would precludedevelopment at this site and would take it into account inimplementing our construction works at this site.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on structures and utilities

18.5.70 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on structures and utilities during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on structures and utilities

Table 18.5.25 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on structures and utilities issues during construction


18.5.71 Undertake protection works. LC 1 Our Settlement project information paper providesinformation on our approach to protection against the likelysignificant effects of settlement associated with theconstruction of the tunnel. We would undertake studies toidentify any likely significant effects our construction workmay have on third party structures (such as buildings,bridges and tunnels). The studies may recommendparticular construction methods or, in a very limitedinstances, protection works. These measures are in line withbest practice guidelines and details will be set out in theCoCP that we will submit with our DCO application.

N


27/53



Townscape and visual effectsSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to townscape and visual effects

18.5.72 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to townscape and visual effects during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to townscape and visual effects

Table 18.5.26 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to townscape and visual effects during construction


18.5.73 Effect of construction activities, machineryand site hoarding on the local townscape.

9401LO 1 We recognise that the townscape value of this site is highand is subject to a number of policy designations. We haveundertaken a preliminary assessment of likely significanttownscape and visual effects which is pre sented in the PEIR (volume 21, section 11). We are developing this further witha townscape and visual impact assessment as part of ourenvironmental impact assessment that will be submitted withour DCO application. This assessment will identify any likelysignificant effects of our proposed construction activities andany mitigation required to address them. We have identifiedthat the site falls within the LVMF linea r view 9A.1 (KingHenry VII's Mound, Richmond to St Paul's Cathedral) and8A.1 (Westminster Pier to St Paul's Cathedral). Ourpreliminary assessment of these views indicates that theconstruction activities at this site would result in negligible tominor adverse effects on these views. LVMF river prospect

views north east from Gabriels Wharf viewing platformwould be unobstructed under our agreed viewpoint 2.6. Wewill also have regard to CoL planning policy CS13 regardingprotected views towards the Monument.Our draft CoCP also sets out measures to minimise thetownscape and visual effects of construction, for exampleprotection of existing trees to BS5837 Trees in Relation toConstruction Recommendations and the use of appropriate capped and directional lighting when required.

N

18.5.74 Effect on local views, including:- London View Management Framework

(LVMF) view 16B.1 and 16B.2 fromGabriels Wharf Hungerford bridgeupstream

- London View Management Frameworkview 17A.1 and 17A.2 from Hungerfordbridge upstream.

LC 1 N

18.5.75 Effect on river views (Monument). CoL, 9401LO 2 N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on townscape and visual

18.5.76 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on townscape and visual during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on townscape and visual

Table 18.5.27 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on townscape and visual during construction


18.5.77 Undertake a townscape and visual impactassessment (safeguarded views of theMonument).

CoL 1 We recognise that the townscape value of this site is highand is subject to a number of policy designations. Apreliminary assessment likely significant townscape andvisual effects has been undertaken and is presented in thePEIR (volume 21, section 11). We are developing thisfurther with a townscape and visual impact assessment aspart of our environmental impact assessment that will besubmitted with our DCO application. This will identify any

N


28/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomelikely significant effects of our proposed constructionactivities, and any mitigation required to address sucheffects.We have identified that the site falls within the LVMF linearview 9A.1 (King Henry VII's Mound, Richmond to St Paul'sCathedral) and 8A.1 (Westminster Pier to St Paul'sCathedral). Our preliminary assessment of these viewsindicates that the construction activities at this site would

result in negligible to minor adverse effects on these views.LVMF river prospect views north east from Gabriels Wharf viewing platform would be unobstructed under our agreedviewpoint 2.6. We will also have regard to CoL planningpolicy CS13 regarding protected views towards theMonument.

Transport and accessSupportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to transport and access

Table 18.5.28 Supportive and neutral comments in relation to transport and access during construction


18.5.78 Support proposed use of barges to transportmaterials.

PLA 1 Your support is noted and welcomed.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to transport and access

Table 18.5.29 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to transport and access during construction


18.5.79 It is not clear what the scale of the effect willbe/the assessment to date is very vague,particularly in respect of:- effects on users of the pier and on

pedestrian movements in the area,including step-free pedestrian accesswhich facilitates easy access to othermodes of transport

LC 1 As part of our PEIR (volume 21, section 12) we assessedthe construction transport effects on pedestrian and cycleroutes; bus and other public transport routes and patronage;parking; and highway layout, operation and capacity. As partof the assessment we have considered the effects of lorryand (where applicable) barge transport, based on amethodology that has been discussed and agreed with theCoL and TfL. The PEIR was available as part of our phasetwo consultation. We acknowledge that this is a preliminaryassessment. We are preparing a full Transport assessment

for submission as part of our DCO application. Our DCOapplication will include a full assessment of the likelysignificant effects of our works on pedestrian movements toand from the pier, including step-free access.The PEIR and the Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore site information paper (section 2, Construction transport andaccess) described the proposed construction traffic routes.As the site is adjacent to the major road network (A3211,Victoria Embankment) this was not illustrated on a plan.Details of construction traffic routes for this site will be set

N

18.5.80 - no construction routes have beenidentified for this site.

N

18.5.81 Cumulative transport effects arising fromother developments in the local areaincluding works proposed at Blackfriars,Chelsea Embankment and VictoriaEmbankment.

LC 1 N


29/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomeout in our Environmental statement and the Transport Assessment that will be submitted with our DCO application.

18.5.82 Disruption to the use of the Thames Pathfrom construction works or diversion.

LC, 8686, 9055 3 The proposed construction site would require a temporarydiversion to the Thames Path (footway along VictoriaEmbankment) along the northern footway of VictoriaEmbankment, as indicated in the site information paper.This diversion would ensure that the Thames Path remainsopen during construction, and would maintain a safe route

and access to local amenities. The detailed route would beagreed with the CoL and TfL. The proposed diversion wouldremain in place for the duration of the works, after which thecurrent route would be reinstated.

N

18.5.83 Concerned by the diversion of ThamesPath.

8686 1 N

18.5.84 Construction traffic will cause trafficcongestion.

LC 1 At this site we propose to use barges to transport thematerials used to fill the cofferdam. We expect that thiswould reduce the number of lorry visits to/from this site byapproximately 45 per cent. Proposed road access to this siteis via the Victoria Embankment (A3211), as illustrated in theBlackfriars Bridge Foreshore site information paper . Weexpect that at the peak of construction (year two), anaverage of 35 lorries would visit (travelling to and from) thesite each working day, as indicated in the PEIR (volume 21,section 12).We are reviewing the proposed routes that constructiontraffic would use as part of our transport assessment, whichwill also assess cumulative transport effects and includetraffic from other developments in the local area in thetransport modelling. We would agree which developments toassess with TfL and local highways authorities. If thetransport assessment identifies any likely significant effectsarising from congestion, we would develop mitigationmeasures to minimise any disruption. We are alsodeveloping a CoCP (a draft was provided as part of ourphase two consultation), which will include requirements fora Traffic management plan to ensure that construction trafficis carefully controlled in order to minimise any potential likelysignificant effects on the road network, including access tothe local area, as well as setting out construction trafficroutes, site access/egress points, signage and monitoringprocedures.As part of our PEIR (volume 21, section 12) we assessedthe construction transport effects on pedestrian and cycleroutes; bus and other public transport routes and patronage;parking; and highway layout, operation and capacity. As partof the assessment we have considered the effects of lorryand (where applicable) barge transport, based on amethodology that has been discussed and agreed with theCoL and TfL. The PEIR was available as part of our phase

C

18.5.85 Effect of disruption, diversion or closure ofroads on access to local amenities.

8018 1 N


30/53


31/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomewest of Blackfriars Road Bridge willeffectively close the number 2 arches (ie thesecond arch from the north bank) of bothBlackfriars Rail and Road Bridges.Understanding this issue and its potentialimplications on safe navigation along thisstretch of the Thames is critical to thedesign of this site; will result in significantadditional operating costs for Cory duringthat time.

agreement with the PLA.We are also considering opportunities to further utilise theriver to remove materials from this site i n order to reduce thenumber of vehicles on the road network.

18.5.89 Effect of structures required for rivertransport (eg cofferdams) on river navigationand commercial river users.

PLA 1 N

18.5.90 More information is needed on transporteffects, for example, will the east side ofPaul's walk to be closed and if so for howlong?

8686 1 We carefully considered the information we made availableat our phase two consultation to ensure that consultees hadsufficient information to respond to the consultation. Theinformation was based on our preliminary transportassessment which is still being developed and we willdiscuss the details further with TfL and the CoL to ensurethat any significant transport effects are identified in the Environmental statement that will be submitted as part of ourDCO application.

N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of transport and access18.5.91 No supportive or neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of transport and access during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects of transport and access

Table 18.5.30 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on transport and access issues during construction


18.5.92 More information is needed on mitigation,including effects on safety for road users.

LC, 8686 2 We would design site accesses and operate all of ourconstruction sites to ensure that they meet design andhealth and safety standards. We are developing a CoCP (adraft of which was provided as part of our phase twoconsultation), which will include requirements for a Traffic management plan to ensure that construction traffic iscarefully controlled to minimise any potential likely significanteffects on the local road network, as well as setting outconstruction traffic routes, site access/egress points,signage and monitoring procedures.The transport assessment will also review data relating torecent accidents and will use this data to inform mitigationmeasures. The proposals will be subject to independentexternal review by TfL and the local highway authority toensure proposed highway layouts and vehicle movementarrangements are as safe as possible.

N

18.5.93 Provide a suitable and safe Thames Path LC, CoL 2 Our footpath diversions would be designed to meet all N


32/53



Ref Objections, issues and concerns Respondent ID No. Our response Outcomediversion with carefully designed pedestriancrossings and diversionary signage agreedwith TfL.

appropriate design and safety standards and would beagreed with TfL and the CoL.

18.5.94 Provide suitable safe footpath diversions. LC, CoL 2 N

18.5.95 Make provision for alternative car and coachparking.

LC 1 We will consider demand for the existing coach parking andpossible alternative locations for it as part of the Transport assessment that will be prepared for submission with ourDCO application. We will discuss any alternative provisionwith TfL and the CoL and will report our conclusions as partof the Transport assessment that will be submitted with ourDCO application.

N

18.5.96 Complete a transport assessment alongsidea construction logistics strategy and Environmental statement.

LC 1 We are preparing a Transport assessment that will besubmitted as part of our DCO application. This will include adetailed analysis of potential access routes and anassessment of the likely significant effects of constructiontraffic on local roads, together with mitigation that is requiredto minimise disruption resulting from our site traffic. We willwork closely with TfL, the CoL, local residents and otherinterested groups to minimise the effects of trafficmovements to and from the site.

N

18.5.97 Undertake fluvial modelling to identifypotential effects of river transport andassociated structures on river flows.

PLA 1 We are undertaking fluvial modelling and preliminaryfindings have informed the design of the site. Furthermodelling will be used to refine the designs whereappropriate, and will inform the Environmental statement, which will be part of our DCO application. The modellingstudies will also support agreements with owners of thirdparty assets, where relevant.

N

18.5.98 Undertake a navigational assessment toidentify potential effects of river transport onriver users and structures:- th e design of the Blackfriars structures will

need to be modified to mitigate the risks

PLA, 8853, LR9273 3 The impact on structures and river users is the subject of on-going studies and a navigational risk assessment. Wherethis is shown to have an adverse effect on navigationalsafety, we will amend our proposals or provide appropriatemitigation in agreement with the PLA and relevant riveroperators.

N

- also need to assess the risks created bythe increase in freight traffic on the riverthat the project will generate.

N

18.5.99 Use the river to transport more/allconstruction materials and excavatedmaterial.

LC, PLA, LR9236, CoL 4 It is our intention to use the river to bring in and take awaymaterials used to fill the cofferdam, as detailed in our siteinformation paper. However, it is not generally practical andcost-effective to transport all materials by barge so we wouldstill need to transport some materials by road. At this site,use of barges would remove approximately 14,500 lorriesfrom the road during the construction.We are also considering whether there are opportunities tofurther utilise the river to remove material s from this site toreduce the number of vehicles on the road network.

C


33/53




18.5.100 Other transport and access mitigationcomments including that it is imperative toprovide a new pier.

LC 1 Our proposals, as set out in the site information paper,include the provision of a new passenger pier, to replaceBlackfriars Millennium Pier, which needs to be removed inorder to construct the shaft. We are proposing to establishthe new pier prior to the closure of the existing pier to enableseamless transfer of operations.

N

Water and flood risk

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to water and flood risk18.5.101 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to water and flood risk during construction.

Objections, issues and concerns in relation to water and flood risk

Table 18.5.31 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to water and flood risk during construction


18.5.102 Effect of construction activities on flood risk. CoL 1 Our PEIR (volume 21, section 15) sets out a preliminaryassessment of likely significant effects on flood risk (le velone) in line with the requirements of Planning PolicyStatement 25 (PPS25) and considers flooding from the sea(and tidal sources), rivers, land and surface water runoff,and groundwater. As set out in our PEIR the site is in Floodzone 3b where there is a high probability of flood risk. Ourmodelling to date indicates that neither the temporary northe operational scheme would a ffect flood risk.A level two flood risk assessment will be presented in the Environmental statement as part of our DCO application andwill identify any appropriate mitigation. As our designsdevelop we will review the construction effects on flood riskto determine any requirements for compensation.

N

18.5.103 Proposals will result in river erosion andscour; the foreshore on both the north andsouth banks is of great archaeologicalimportance.

8809 1 We are carrying out fluvial modelling of the temporaryforeshore works to establish the likely significant effects ofthe development on the river, and will discuss the findingswith the PLA and Environment Agency. We are alsoundertaking scour modelling. Our design would incorporatemitigation measures to manage the temporary effects of ourconstruction on the river. Where significant scour ispredicted we would carry out preventative measures (such

as placing riprap on the river bed), and in all locations theriverbed would be monitored and remedial works carried outif/as required.

N

18.5.104 Effect of temporary structures in the RiverThames on river flows and currents(hydrology).

8809 1 N

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on water and flood risk

18.5.105 No supportive or neutral feedback comments were received in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on water and flood risk during construction.

18 Bl kf i B id


34/53



Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effects on water and flood risk

Table 18.5.32 Objections, issues and concerns in relation to the measures proposed to address the effec ts on water and flood risk during construction


18.5.106 Strengthen existing flood defences. CoL 1 The temporary cofferdam would be at or above flooddefence level and would provide flood defence to the worksand surrounding area. Our Environmental statement will alsoinclude a Flood risk assessment .

N

18.5.107 Other water mitigation included:- maintaining the integrity of flood defences

in this location- provide a flood risk assessment

CoL 1 N

18.5.108 Incorporate Sustainable Urban DrainageSystems (SuDS).

CoL 1 We will determine the feasibility of SuDS for this site oncewe have completed soak-away tests and a contaminationstudy as part of our scheme design development.

N

18.5.109 Undertake fluvial modelling. 8809 1 We are carrying out fluvial modelling of the temporaryforeshore works to establish the likely significant effects ofthe development on the river, and will discuss the findingswith the PLA and Environment Agency. We are alsoundertaking scour modelling. Our design would incorporatemitigation measures to manage the temporary effects of ourconstruction on the river. If appropriate as part of our designdevelopment we will consider whether there are alternativeoptions to avoid temporary structures in the river. Wheresignificant scour is predicted we would carry outpreventative measures (such as placing riprap on the riverbed), and in all locations the riverbed would be monitoredand remedial works carried out if/as required.

N

18.6 Permanent design and appearance18.6.1 This section sets out feedback comments received during phase two consultation relating to proposals for the permanent design and appearance of buildings and structures at Blackfriars

Bridge Foreshore that are required for the operation of the tunnel when it is in use (the operational phase).

18.6.2 During phase two consultation, respondents were asked to give their views on the identification of site specific issues that have influenced proposals for the permanent design ofBlackfriars Bridge Foreshore (see question 5 of the phase two consultation feedback form, provided in appendix M of the Main report on phase two consultation ). The first part of question5 asked respondents to select agree , disagree or do nt know/unsure . Where respondents completed this part of the question, the results are set out in the table below.

Table 18.6.1 Do you agree that we have identified the right issues that have influenced our permanent design for this site? (Q5)



Statutory consultees 0Local authorities 0

Landowners 0


Petitions 0

Total 0 3 4 2

18 Bl kf i B id


35/53



18.6.3 As part of the phase two consultation, respondents were also asked to comment on proposals for the permanent design and appearance of the buildings and structures at BlackfriarsBridge Foreshore (see question 6 of the phase two consultation feedback form, provided in appendix M of the Main report on phase two consultation ). The first part of question 6 askedrespondents to select supportive , opposed or do nt know/unsure . Where respondents completed this part of the question, the results are set out in the table below.

Table 18.6.2 Please give us your views about our proposals for the permanent design and appearance of the site (Q6)


Total Supportive Opposed Dont know /unsure


Local authorities 0

Landowners 0


Petitions 0

Total 10 4 5 1

18.6.4 The following sections set out the comments received from respondents in connection with proposals for the permanent design and appearance of the buildings and structures atCremorne Wharf Depot. It should be noted that not all respondents who provided feedback comments provided feedback to the first part of questions 5 and 6.

18.6.5 Feedback comments are organised under the following sub-headings:

supportive and neutral feedback comments

objections, issues and concerns

design suggestions.

18.6.6 Where respondents commented on matters arising during the operational phase and the management of these effects (whether through design or by other means), these comments arereported in section 18.7.

Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the permanent design and appearance of the site

Table 18.6.3 Supportive and neutral feedback comments in relation to the permanent design and appearance of the site


18.6.7 The design/proposals areOK/fine/acceptable and will produce a publicrealm that is simple, functional and elegant.

(LR)CABE 1 Your comments are noted and welcomed.

18.6.8 The design/proposals are good. 7404, 8018 2

18.6.9 The proposals will enhance the localarea/provide some public benefit.

8018 1

18.6.10 Support for design proposals: - selective use of trees in the space could

work well to reinforce its linearity andframe vistas of the River Tha

Documents

Supp Report on P2 Consultation - Chapter 18 Black Friars Bridge Foreshore