ENVIRONMENT. Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited. Lewisham Gateway Phase 1B SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

Transcription

1 ENVIRONMENT Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited Lewisham Gateway Phase 1B SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

2 ENVIRONMENT Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited Lewisham Gateway Phase 1B SUPPLEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Birmingham Livery Place, 35 Livery Street, Colmore Business District, Birmingham, B3 2PB T: Leeds Whitehall Waterfront, 2 Riverside Way, Leeds LS1 4EH T: London Providian House, Monument Street, London, EC3R 8AJ T: Manchester 4th Floor Carvers Warehouse, 77 Dale Street Manchester, M1 2HG T: Nottingham Waterfront House, Station Street, Nottingham NG2 3DQ T: SEPTEMBER 2014 B W B C o n s u l t i n g L t d : R e g i s t e r e d i n E n g l a n d

3 LEWISHAM GATEWAY, PHASE 1B ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD Revision Date of Issue Status Author: Checked: Approved: 1 September 2014 Draft Jenny Chapman Ben Fleming Iqbal Rassool 2 September 2014 Final Jenny Chapman Ben Fleming Iqbal Rassool Limitations All comments and proposals contained in this report, including any conclusions, are based on information available to BWB Consulting during investigations. The conclusions drawn by BWB Consulting could therefore differ if the information is found to be inaccurate or misleading. BWB Consulting accepts no liability should this be the case, nor if additional information exists or becomes available with respect to this scheme. Except as otherwise requested by the client, BWB Consulting is not obliged to and disclaims any obligation to update the report for events taking place after:- (i) (ii) The date on which this assessment was undertaken, and The date on which the final report is delivered BWB Consulting makes no representation whatsoever concerning the legal significance of its findings or the legal matters referred to in the following report. The information presented and conclusions drawn are based on statistical data and are for guidance purposes only. i

4 LEWISHAM GATEWAY, PHASE 1B ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT CONTENTS PAGE DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 Previous Submissions 1 Structure of the Environmental Statement 2 Purpose of the Supplementary Environmental Statement 2 THE PLANNING PERMISSION SITE 3 RESERVED MATTERS DEVELOPMENT 5 Approved Outline Parameters 5 Detailed Proposals for Phase 1B 6 Construction 10 Consideration of Alternatives 10 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS 12 Significance Criteria 12 Socio-Economic 13 Air Quality 14 Noise and Vibration 15 Water Resources and Flood Risk 15 Ecology and Nature Conservation 16 Townscape and Visual Impact 16 Wind 17 Daylight and Sunlight Availability 17 Other Issues Considered 18 Summary and Impact Interactions 19 i ii TABLES Table 4.1 Significance Criteria FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Plan Figure 2 Proposed Layout Ground Level Parameter Plan Figure 3 Block B Ground Flood Plan Figure 4 Illustrative View of Block B (left) viewed from the east Figure 5 Rendered Landscape Masterplan ii

5 INTRODUCTION This Environmental Statement (ES) has been prepared to accompany a reserved matters planning application on behalf of 2009 Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited (LGDL) for the proposed Phase 1B of the Lewisham Gateway development. Previous Submissions In May 2009 Lewisham Gateway Developments Limited (LGDL) received planning permission for the development, Lewisham Gateway (reference DC/06/62375). Outline planning permission was received for the proposed buildings and public realm, with full planning permission granted for the highway and infrastructure works (plus Building F). The proposed development which was the subject of the 2006 application comprised comprehensive mixed use redevelopment of the Lewisham Gateway site comprising up to 100,000 sq m of retail (A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5), offices (B1), hotel (C1), residential (C3), education (D1), health (D1) and leisure (D2) with new road layout, parking, servicing, associated infrastructure and improvements to the public transport interchange, as well as open space, rivers and water features. The approved maximum development comprised (by use, in m 2 gross external area): Retail (A1, A2): 12,000m 2 Retail (A3, A4): 4,000m 2 Retail (A5): 1,000m 2 Offices (B1) / Education (D1): 17,500m 2 Hotel (C1): 3,000m 2 Residential (C3): 57,000m 2 Health (D1): 500m 2 Leisure (D2): 5,000m 2 TOTAL 100,000m An Environmental Statement was produced to accompany the planning application, (produced in 2006) and in response to a request for further information, an Addendum report was produced in In February 2013 a Supplementary Environmental Statement (ES) was voluntarily produced to accompany a reserved matters application for Phase 1A; Building A and Confluence Place (reference DC/13/82493). This application was approved during May 2013 and is referred to as the Phase 1A Supplementary ES. Construction of Phase 1A and the Infrastructure Phase of the development commenced on site in Spring

6 1.7 Since the planning permission for the wider scheme was approved in 2009 and since the reserved matters application for Phase 1A was submitted, a number of S96A applications relating to the development have been submitted. These are for nonmaterial amendments to the scheme permitted in 2009 and by their nature, they would not be expected to generate any significant effects. Structure of the Environmental Statement 1.8 This ES comprises two volumes and this separate non-technical summary (NTS) document. Volume 1 is the main assessment report whilst Volume 2 comprises the technical appendices containing the supporting technical information referred to. Purpose of the Supplementary Environmental Statement This Supplementary Environmental Statement (Supplementary ES) has been prepared to be submitted with the reserved matters application for Phase 1B. The Original ES documented the likely significant effects of the Lewisham Gateway development, including Block B1 and B2. The assessment of the effects of Block B1 and B2, along with the other blocks within the development, was based on parameter plans, submitted as part of the planning application. This Supplementary ES has been prepared to update the assessments provided in the Original ES to identify any likely new or different significant environmental effects of the detailed proposals for Phase 1B. The Phase 1B Supplementary ES has been completed in accordance with the EIA Regulations, this ES considers the likely environmental impacts of Phase 1B during construction and during its subsequent operation. Where likely significant adverse impacts on the environment are identified, the ES sets out ways to prevent, reduce and, where possible, offset these impacts. These are known as mitigation measures. 2

7 THE PLANNING PERMISSION SITE The location of the site is shown in Figure 1 below. Blocks B1 and B2 are within the Lewisham Gateway development which was granted outline planning approval in Figure 1- Site Location Plan The existing Lewisham Gateway site is dominated by a roundabout, known as Lewisham Northern Roundabout and associated approach roads. The northern end of Lewisham Gateway includes Lewisham Bus Station and Lewisham Docklands Light Railway (DLR) station. The northern and western boundaries of Lewisham Gateway are delineated by railway lines which are elevated above the surrounding land. The southern boundary runs along Rennell Street beyond which lie the Riverdale Centre and the Citibank Tower. The eastern boundary runs along Granville Grove Street Lewisham High Street. 3

8 The River Ravensbourne flows across Lewisham Gateway and is partially culverted. The River Quaggy flows through the development from the east, and flows south of Blocks B1 and B2, and meets the River Ravensbourne adjacent to the existing bus station. The River Ravensbourne and River Quaggy have been subject to some improvement and realignment in the course of the overall development which has been covered in a separate application. Phase 1A has also started on site to include the construction of Blocks A1 and A2, as well as a new public open space Confluence Park to the south of the River Quaggy. Building B lies to the east of Block A2 and north of the new Confluence Park. Phase 1B also includes landscaping of the area around Blocks B1 and B2 including the area which is terraced down towards the River Quaggy. 4

9 3.0 RESERVED MATTERS DEVELOPMENT Approved Outline Parameters 3.1 The approved parameters for the Lewisham Gateway development are defined in the Development Specification submitted with the 2006 planning application. Figure 2 below indicates the layout of the proposed development, as defined by the approved Proposed Layout: Ground Level parameter plan. Figure 2 Proposed Layout Ground Level Parameter Plan 5

10 3.2 The full set of parameter plans (copies of the approved versions of which are included in Appendix A.2) are approved and set the parameters for subsequent reserved matters applications: 1 Existing Layout; 2 Proposed Layout: Ground Level; 3 Proposed Layout: Basement; 4 Building Blocks Plan; 5 Public Realm Plan: Ground Level; 6 Open Space Plan: Roof Levels; 7 Vehicular Circulation/Public Transport Plan; and 8 Building Heights Plan. 3.3 Where appropriate, the parameter plans include limits of deviation. The relevant plans for Building B have been summarised: Parameter plan 4 indicates the position of Block B1 and B2, with the limit of deviation for the block s location being 5m in any direction (except where limited by fixed road alignments and minimum pavement requirements). Parameter plan 8 indicates that the western part (B1) is in the mid zone and the eastern part (B2) is in within the high zone. As a result the western part (B1)should be 34m-47m high and the eastern part (B2) be 54m-77m high. The difference in height between the two parts of the block should be at least 20m. All heights indicate the main roof level, excluding plant rooms and vent shafts (assumed to extend above roofs heights by an average of 4m). The maximum height of Block B2 is limited to 70m. Parameter plan 6 identifies that the roof of Building B can accommodate communal roof gardens, private roof terraces, ecological roof zones and mechanical plant. Parameter plan 3 identifies that Building B can accommodate a basement. 3.4 All other details regarding the design, appearance, etc. of Building B were reserved to be approved through a subsequent reserved matters application of which this report forms part. Detailed Proposals for Phase 1B 3.5 The following description of the detailed Block B proposals should be read in conjunction with the ground floor plan and illustrative view provided as Figure 3 and Figure 4 respectively. 6

11 Figure 3 Block B Ground Floor Plan 7

12 Figure 4 Illustrative View of Block B (right) viewed from the east Building B comprises two buildings connected by a single storey section. The western block (referred to as Block B1) will comprise 15 storeys and the eastern block (referred to as Block B2) is taller at 22 storeys. In total Block B will provide 169 flats. 68 flats are to be provided in Block B1 (40 one bedroom units and 28 two bedroom units). Block B2 s 101 flats comprise of 43 one bedroom units, 54 two bedroom units and 4 three bedroom units. Block B1 will typically provide 5 flats per floor (4 of which will be dual aspect and the other facing south west). Block B2 will typically provide 5 flats per floor (4 of which will be dual aspects, with the other facing south west). As an exemplar new-build housing scheme, the proposals are compliant with regulatory and design standards including, London Housing Design Guide, Lifetime Homes 2010, Code for Sustainable Homes 2010, and Secure by Design. 8

13 In addition to residential accommodation, the buildings propose ground floor retail (A1 and/or A3) uses, which will help to redefine the proposed public realm immediately adjacent to the site. Phase 1B will address Confluence Place, completed as part of Phase 1. The park will be an attractive and unique amenity space at the heart of the scheme. It will be centred around the confluence of the Quaggy and Ravensbourne Rivers and will provide a focus for community activities. All flats have full height windows to take advantage of views and sunlight. Some of these windows will include Juliet balconies. Shared garden spaces have been proposed at roof level of Blocks B1 and B2 to supplement private amenity space. The rendered landscape masterplan is provided as Figure 5. Figure 5 Rendered Landscape Masterplan Large ventilated refuse stores are located at ground floor, with direct access off the main shared foyer space from both cores. In accordance with the Section 106 agreement all dwellings within Block B, without dedicated basement storage, will be provided with a folding bicycle, which can be stored within the dwelling. Due to the excellent public transport connections at the site, no private car parking is to be provided. Dwellings within Block B will achieve a minimum of Level 3 under the Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) and a Very Good rating under BREEAM. 9

14 Construction The Original ES provided a summary of construction activities and phasing. It is anticipated that Lewisham Gateway will be delivered over a number of phases and over a number of years. The first phase (Phase 1A and the Infrastructure Phase) entails the implementation of the reserved matters development (i.e. Block A and Confluence Place) and the approved highway and infrastructure works. Construction of Phase 1A and the Infrastructure Phase of the development commenced on site in Spring Phase 1B including Building B is anticipated to be implemented over a subsequent 2 year period. The Original ES identified that a Construction Management Plan would be prepared to ensure that the construction phase mitigation measures identified in the Original ES are implemented and the environmental effects of the construction works are minimised. As part of the Original ES a draft Code of Construction Practice was prepared. Condition 32 of the planning permission requires a Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method Statement to be approved by LBL prior to the commencement of construction. Condition 32 therefore secures the delivery of the required construction management measures to minimise the environmental effects of construction. Further controls are secured through other planning conditions and through legal obligations included in the Section 106 agreement. A Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method Statement for Phase 1B will be submitted to the London Borough of Lewisham (LBL) for approval prior to the commencement of Phase 1B. Consideration of Alternatives The EIA Regulations require an ES to include an outline of the main alternatives considered by the applicant, indicating the main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects. This requirement is expressed in very general and high-level terms, requiring only the inclusion of an "outline" of "main" alternatives and an "indication" of "main" reasons. Alternatives were considered in detail in the Original ES during the earlier stage of the design and planning process. Alternatives at the reserved matters stage are limited, as the development needs to be in accordance with the approved development parameters and controls imposed by the planning permission granted. Building B comprises two blocks (B1 and B2) connected by a single storey section. The western block (referred to as Block B1) will comprise 15 storeys and the eastern block (referred to as Block B2) is taller at 22 storeys. The strategy for the massing of buildings in Phase 1B attempts to improve the proportions of massing proposed in the Illustrative Masterplan. Proposals have been developed around the idea of two separate buildings which decreases the apparent width of the block and provides a more elegant massing. 10

15 The two buildings, while maintaining the idea of enclosure around the principal public space in Confluence Place, also allow for permeability through the space as well as glimpses of sky, views and improved sunlight The internal layout of Block B has been based around typologies and floorplates that can be replicated from one building to the next, while still providing the necessary variety and flexibility required in terms of flat types and mix within each building. In total there are 17 unit types - including 6 wheelchair adapted layouts. Floorplates and flat types can be substituted to allow different mix while plans and standardised core arrangements can be easily mirrored across the floorplate to respond to orientation, aspect and views. Flats are arranged in clusters of 3-5 units per floor. Corridor distances are kept to a minimum and fire strategy is simplified with natural light and ventilation to lift lobbies at each level. The reserved matters application seeks approval for the maximum build out of the approved Block B parameters. This, rather than smaller development within the approved parameters, is proposed to maximise the use of accessible previously used land within Lewisham Town Centre; to create landmark buildings at this gateway location; and in response to commercial requirements in order to provide a viable development. The maximum build out of the approved Block B parameters also ensures that the socio-economic benefits of the proposed development (housing provision, jobs, etc.) are maximised. While the potential for alternatives is limited by the reserved matters nature of the application, design decisions on the above main alternatives have sought to minimise the adverse environmental effects of the proposed development. 11

16 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS The reserved matters application relates only to Phase 1B, for which details are provided for approval in accordance with the approved parameters. This Supplementary ES therefore assesses any likely new or different significant environmental effects as a result of the detailed proposals for Phase 1B only. This Supplementary ES therefore updates the baseline conditions as appropriate and assesses whether any likely new or different significant environmental effects will result from the proposed development, based on updated baseline conditions at the site. Changes to planning policy have occurred since the Original ES (including the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), London Plan and Lewisham Core Strategy), which have been considered to determine whether likely new or different significant environmental effects could occur as a result of the proposed development. Each topic chapter also identifies as appropriate updates to guidance, standards, etc., which are used as the basis for the assessment. Any significant implications as a result of such changes are identified as appropriate. On the basis of the above each topic chapter of the Supplementary ES provides an updated assessment of any likely new or different significant effects as a result of the proposed development. The approach adopted has been tailored to the requirements of each chapter. As with the Original ES, effects have been considered during both construction and operation of the proposed development. Significance Criteria 4.4 The Significance Criteria utilised in the Original ES have also been utilised in this Supplementary ES to ensure a consistent and continuous approach to the assessment. Table 4.1 Significance Criteria Significance Level Severe Major Moderate Criteria Only adverse effects are assigned this level of importance as they represent key factors in the decision-making process. These effects are generally, but not exclusively associated with sites and features of national or regional importance. A change at a regional or district scale site or feature may also enter this category. Typically, mitigation measures are unlikely to remove such effects. These effects are likely to be important considerations at a local or district scale but, if adverse, are potential concerns to the project and may become key factors in the decision-making process. Mitigation measures and detailed design work are unlikely to remove all of the effects upon the affected communities or interests. These effects, if adverse, while important at a local scale, are not likely to be key decision-making issues. Nevertheless, the cumulative effect of such issues may lead to an increase in the overall effects on a particular area or on a particular resource. They represent issues where effects will be experienced but mitigation measures and detailed design work may ameliorate or enhance some of the consequences upon affected communities or interests. Some residual effects will still arise. 12

17 Significance Level Minor Not significant Criteria These effects may be raised as local issues but are unlikely to be of importance in the decision-making process. Nevertheless they are of relevance in enhancing the subsequent design of the project and consideration of mitigation or compensation measures. No effect or effect which is beneath the level of perception, within normal bounds of variation or within the margin of forecasting error. Such effects should not be considered by the decision maker. Socio-Economic The proposed development, Phase 1B, is expected to deliver 169 residential units along with ground floor retail. The residential units and the employment generating retail floor space are both expected to generate socio-economic effects. The quantum of the development proposed as part of Phase 1B does not exceed that assessed as part of the 2006 ES. Therefore, the overall range and significance of effects are in line with those assessed previously. Phase 1B does not result in the overall quantum of development being exceeded, the construction cost assessed previously remains valid and, consequently, so too do the effects assessed. These effects include: direct employment opportunities, leakage, deadweight, displacement, and indirect and multiplier effects. As with the construction phase effects, the Phase 1B development results in no change to the overall quantum of employment generating floorspace expected to be delivered as a result of the overall scheme. The impact of the development in employment terms remains unchanged from the assessment undertaken in 2006 and again in 2013 as a beneficial effect. Phase 1B is expected to bring forward 169 residential units. This is a proportion of the units expected to be delivered by the Lewisham Gateway scheme as a whole. The overall contribution of the development to housing targets in Lewisham remains unchanged from the previous assessment. Similarly, the new population expected to be accommodated by those units remains unchanged. The significance of both of these effects is, therefore, in line with the 2006 assessment. The population expected to be accommodated by the proposed residential units remains unchanged at between c.900 and 1,260 residents (minimum and maximum scenarios, respectively). In terms of the impact on other types of social infrastructure including cultural, leisure, recreation and open space, the 2006 assessment highlighted that the local area provides a range of these facilities and the proposals for the Lewisham Gateway development as a whole provides potential for the delivery of additional cultural and recreational facilities should the market demand it. The development as a whole makes provision for public open spaces to contribute to place-making and meet the needs of the new resident population and employees and visitors brought to the site as a result of the scheme. 13

18 The residual effects of the proposed development in the context of the overall scheme remain unchanged from those set out in the Original ES and reiterated in the Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No additional or different (in terms of significance) effects have been identified. The proposals for Phase 1B do not change the type or magnitude of socio-economic effects arising from the overall scheme. As such, the mitigation measures identified in the Original ES and reiterated in the Phase 1A Supplementary ES remain valid and appropriate for the purposes of this assessment. Air Quality The potential effects of Building B have been described and assessed by comparing estimated pollutant concentrations with the Air Quality Strategy (AQS) objectives and established criteria used to determine significance. Road traffic can be considered a primary source of emissions to air. The combustion of fuel in vehicles leads to a number of harmful by-products which can affect air quality in the vicinity of roads. Areas with high traffic volumes or near to major roads can often experience elevated pollutant levels, particularly in the form of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulates (PM10). The ADMS-Roads detailed dispersion model was used to assess direct effects from the additional traffic on the local road network when the proposed development is complete and operational. Two operational scenarios have been modelled: one without the development in 2011 and one with the development in The ADMS- Roads Gaussian dispersion model has been used to assess direct effects from the combined heat and power (CHP) and the boiler plants. This is a worst case approach, since it does not take into account reductions in vehicle emissions that are likely to have come about by the time the proposed development is in place, particularly the introduction of Euro VI/6 vehicle emissions standards for new vehicles from 2013 onwards. Dust emissions during demolition and construction activities have the potential to give rise to effects on sensitive locations such as residential properties. Under best practice guidance, the proposed site in Lewisham would constitute a medium-risk site and has potential for emissions and dust to have occasional and minor impacts on nearby receptors. The primary impacts associated with the proposed development are likely to be in the form of dust generated during earthworks, construction and track-out from the site. The primary impacts associated with the proposed development are likely to be in the form of dust generated during earthworks, construction and track-out from the site. Use of appropriate mitigation measures throughout the construction period will ensure that impacts to sensitive receptors are minimised or avoided. No additional cumulative effects on air quality are anticipated as a result of additional committed development combined with the proposed development. The proposals for Phase 1B do not change the type or magnitude of air quality effects arising from the overall scheme. As such, the mitigation measures identified in the Original ES and reiterated in the Phase 1A Supplementary ES remain valid and appropriate for the purposes of this assessment. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. 14

19 Noise and Vibration The noise and vibration impacts of the Phase 1B development have been updated through baseline noise surveys in 2014 and a review of the implication of changes to planning policy, guidance and standards since the 2006 ES and 2007 Addendum were prepared. It is considered that the effect of construction noise and vibration on existing off-site sensitive receptors remains unchanged to the 2007 ES Addendum, with appropriate mitigation being secured through condition 32 of the Lewisham Gateway planning permission which requires a Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method Statement to be agreed with LBL prior to the commencement of construction. An updated baseline noise survey has been carried out between May and June The 2014 noise survey results have confirmed that there is no significant change in noise levels compared to the baseline noise survey results in the 2012, 2006 and 2007 Addendum. It can be concluded that the mitigation measures proposed in the 2007 Addendum remain appropriate, and it is anticipated that the detailed acoustic specification will reduce noise for future occupiers in proposed Block B1 and B2 to acceptable levels. Overall, the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the 2006 ES and 2007 Addendum. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Water Resources and Flood Risk The flood modelling completed as part of the 2006 ES and the 2007 Addendum report showed that the site was not within the indicative floodplain and that the flows predicted for the 1 in 100 year flood event would not overtop the river banks. The modelling also demonstrated that the proposed permanent channel works would not affect flood levels. Flood risk to the site has not increased based on the most up to date Environment Agency flood maps. As such the impact on fluvial flood risk has not changed. The reserved matters development is consistent with the approved parameter plans which were assessed through the 2006 ES and 2007 Addendum. The current drainage strategy is in line with that previously proposed and assessed. The Proposed Phase 1B Development has taken into account potential effects on flood risk drainage and appropriate measures, including, surface water runoff interception, storage and treatment have been built into the Proposed Development design submitted and therefore effects from construction will be Not Significant. Construction will follow the Code of Construction Practice and Construction Method Statement. Overall, the water resources and flood risk impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. 15

20 Ecology and Nature Conservation The assessment of the site is based on the phase one and protected species survey undertaken on 27th August 2014, as well as desk study data. The main purpose of this chapter is to support the current reserved matters planning application for Phase 1B. The site consists of bare ground which was absent of any vegetation, this is because construction operations have commenced and habitats previously described during surveys in January 2013 have been removed as per the proposals for the overall development. The ground levels have been excavated level with the Ravensbourne and Quaggy Rivers, which pass along the western and southern boundary respectively. Due to all natural habitats being removed during the construction phase, the site lacks any biodiversity value. The London Plan and Lewisham Core Strategy both state the importance of maintaining, enhancing and creating corridors of movement for the purpose of increasing biodiversity. The river corridors will not be directly affected by the proposed development of Phase 1B, and indirect effects will be avoided via appropriate mitigation measures. The proposed development will be mainly residential dwellings and hard landscaping; however opportunities will be created to increase biodiversity. This will include the incorporation of bat boxes within Phase 1A, and if appropriate; the planting of native trees species and plants which provide nectars sources which would complement those natural habitats which are proposed along both Ravensbourne and Quaggy River. Phase 1B only forms a small part of the more extensive Lewisham Gateway project. The possible ecology and natural conservation enhancements are limited by the plots small size and development proposals, whereby there will be limited opportunities to increase biodiversity within this phase. There are only likely to be minor beneficial effects at a local level. The wider Lewisham Gateway scheme will have a more substantial beneficial effect, due to the removal of manmade river systems and creating a more natural river corridors and surroundings. Overall, the ecological and nature conservation impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Townscape and Visual Impact Visual analysis has been undertaken using the viewpoints referenced within both the Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES in order to identify changes in views and any consequential changes in effect on the receptors identified. It is considered that there are no new or different effects. The parameters for the Phase 1B development remain the same as those assessed in the Original ES, as no changes have been made to the proposals of relevance to townscape and visual matters. This assessment finds that, although changes to the townscape baseline have occurred since 2006 and 2013, these changes do not result in significant effects. New development has taken place on previously developed land and in an already urban environment with notable influence from tall buildings. 16

21 The Phase 1B development has been considered cumulatively alongside five committed or consented developments in the surrounding area. No significant cumulative effects are considered to arise as a result of any of these developments coming forward simultaneously with the Phase 1B proposals. Overall, the townscape and visual impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES and Phase 1A Supplementary ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Wind An updated assessment has been undertaken of the potential impact of the proposed Phase 1B development on the wind environment within the proposed development and in the surrounding area, with respect to comfort and distress within the pedestrian environment, amenity areas, rooftop gardens and balconies. Wind conditions were assessed using wind tunnel modelling. The predicted wind speeds have been compared with the Lawson Criteria, which provides a method for assessing the suitability of an area for different uses. There is considered to be no risk that unacceptable winds will occur across the site in the baseline conditions scenario. With the Phase 1B development, the wind tunnel assessment of a model of the completed development has shown that there is considered to be no risk of unacceptable winds occurring across the site at pedestrian level, within the site or surrounding areas. Overall, the wind impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Daylight and Sunlight Availability A previous assessment of daylight and sunlight availability was undertaken as part of the Original ES, issued as part of the outline planning proposal for the whole Lewisham Gateway development. The outline planning consent allows for Block B1 to have a maximum height of 47m and Block B2 to have a maximum height of 70m to the roof line, with an additional 4m allowance for plant space and vent shafts. The application drawings presented in Appendix A.3 shows Block B1 as having a height of 47m and Block B2 of 69m. Therefore both Block B1 and B2 are within the heights previously assessed and approved at outline planning. As a result of no material policy or guidance change within any of the listed documents in the section above, the results of the assessment remain valid and therefore there are no likely new or different significant effects when compared against the Original ES assessment of effects. Any residual effects on the planned development on the Premier Inn development on Lewisham High Street are considered to have been taken into account within the 17

22 planning submission for the Premier Inn, therefore it is considered they do not need to be reviewed Overall, the daylight and sunlight impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Other Issues Considered Introduction The Original ES dealt with public utilities and waste management in an Other Issues Considered chapter as it was identified that such disciplines will not lead to significant environmental effects. The original ES also provided an assessment on the Archaeological Resources and Cultural Heritage (ARCH) and there have been no changes since this assessment. The Phase 1A Supplementary ES provided an update on Public Utilities and Waste Management, Transport and Access and Land Quality. An update on these disciplines is provided below. Public Utilities and Waste Management 4.53 Utilities and Waste Management were assessed as part of a chapter within the Original ES called, Other Issues Considered. These two topics were also assessed as part of the 2013 supplementary ES. No additional or new environmental effects were identified. No further assessment of waste management has been completed as this issue has been addressed as part of the site wide waste strategy produced in accordance with condition 45 of the outline planning consent. Transport and Access 4.54 The Phase 1A Supplementary ES produced to accompany the reserved matters application for Building A and Confluence Place included revised traffic survey data that identified traffic levels had reduced since the Original ES. The mitigation proposed for the wider development was based on the more conservative traffic figures and as such provided a robust basis for assessment. As a result the development will not lead to any different significant effects to those previously identified. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. A travel plan for Phase 1B will be submitted with the Phase 1B application. Archaeological Resources and Cultural Heritage The Original ES included an assessment of Archaeological Resources and Cultural Heritage (ARCH) and the assessment concluded that the site contains a number of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental receptors of low-importance. The previous assessment concluded that, due to the moderate importance of the receptors within the site, preservation by record of the remains would be adequate to prevent residual impacts from occurring. The Phase 1a Supplementary ES confirmed that there were no significant changes to baseline conditions and that no significant new or different environmental effects will occur in relation to those described in the Original ES. 18

23 Mitigation of environmental effects has been secured through the inclusion of condition 28 of the planning permission, which requires preservation by record of any archaeological resources that may be encountered at the site. Overall, the archaeological resources and cultural heritage impacts of the proposed development, and the requirements for mitigation, are consistent with those identified in the Original ES. No likely new or different significant environmental effects have been identified. Land Quality A site wide phase 2 intrusive site investigation was undertaken to support the Phase 1A Supplementary ES which was used to discharge outline planning condition 42. The assessment completed as part of the Phase 1A Supplementary ES concluded that there was no evidence of any significant changes in the layout or use of the site since the previous assessment as port of the Original ES. Summary and Impact Interactions The Original ES included an assessment of the impact interactions of the proposed development, (Type 1) i.e. receptors being affected by more than one environmental effect and therefore potentially being subject to a more significant combined effect than the individual effects reported in each of the topic chapters because of potential synergies between different effects. This was updated through a revised assessment included in the 2007 Addendum based on the further assessment that was documented in the 2007 Addendum. The revised assessment identified that the impact interactions remained as reported in the Original ES. This Phase 1B Supplementary ES has identified that there have been changes to policy and guidance, baseline conditions and committed developments since the Original ES was prepared. The potential for likely new or different significant environmental effects as a result of such changes, and the reserved matters development, have then been identified. This assessment has identified very limited changes to the likely significant environmental effects identified in the Original ES. As a result, there are no likely new or different significant impact interactions in relation to those identified in the Original ES. 19

24 21