Greenwich Millennium Village - Phases 3, 4 and 5 · 2018-07-20 · Environmental Statement Volume...

Environmental Statement Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary

Phases 3, 4 + 5

A joint venture development between Countryside PropertiesPlc and Taylor Wimpey in association with the Homes and Communities Agency.

Greenwich Millennium Village - Phases 3, 4 and 5Local Exhibition - 19th, 21st and 25th May 2011

Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd (GMVL)

invite you to attend a local exhibition of the

current proposals for the future phases of

Greenwich Millennium Village (GMV):

• We have a new design team selected

by representatives from GMVL, the

Homes and Communities Agency and

CABE

• We are proposing around 1,800 homes,

together with commercial and

community buildings

• We believe that the new masterplan

reinforces the principles of an inclusive

and sustainable community - and will

create an exemplar scheme on a

‘human-scale’

The local exhibition will be held at the

GMV Visitors’ Centre located in Maurer

Court (along Teal Street - near the northern

end of John Harrison Way) on the

following dates:

• Thursday 19th May between

5:00pm and 9:00pm

• Saturday 21st May between

10:00am and 1:00pm

• Wednesday 25th May between

5:00pm and 9:00pm

This will provide an opportunity for you to

let us have your views on the emerging

design prior to the formal submission of a

planning application to Greenwich Council

later this year. We hope that you will be

able to attend and we look forward to

discussing our proposal with you.

GMV Job Ref: CP/GMV/AJ01 Publication: Architects’ Journal Size: 120 x 186mm Insertion Date: w/c 15/03/10

Expressions of interest are invited from suitably qualified architect-led design teams wishing to be involved in the development of the masterplan and the design of the future phases of the award-winning Greenwich Millennium Village. The masterplan and some of the early phase buildings were designed by the late Ralph Erskine during the 1990s and, as a result of a technical constraint that affects the previous planning application, it has become necessary to revisit the original masterplan for the development.

Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd, in partnership with the Homes and Communities Agency, wishes to identify a small number of practices to be shortlisted to take part in a two-stage competition that is to be held during the summer of 2010. The objective is to create an exemplar of urban design that is an effective response to the immediate context and completes the community, while acknowledging the Erskine masterplan design legacy.

The new phases of the development are expected to comprise around 1,850 homes, together with commercial and community buildings, new public realm and associated landscaping. The successful team will be expected to develop a masterplan for the whole of the remaining phases and work with GMVL, the HCA and their advisors to achieve planning consent for the masterplan.

Teams should therefore be able to demonstrate a track record of award-winning and innovative urban design, masterplanning and architecture and will be required to co-operate closely with engineers experienced in noise abatement and mitigation.

Submissions of a maximum of six pages of A4 should include an initial page setting out details of practice or team member, skills and resource capability. The remaining pages should include examples of recent relevant works and projects that demonstrate the suitability and design-led approach of the applicant.

Following the expressions of interest, the practices selected to go forward to the next stage will receive a design brief and supporting documentation. A judging panel including representatives from GMVL, the HCA and CABE will select the successful team.

Interested applicants should include four bound copies of their submission and these should be sent to the following address no later than 16.00 hrs on Thursday 1 April 2010:

GMV Design Competition, Countryside House, The Drive, Brentwood, Essex CM13 3AT

Enquiries should be directed to Peter Willis, Development Director, Greenwich Millennium Village Limited on 01277 260000

A joint venture development between Countryside Properties Plc and Taylor Wimpey in association with the Homes and Communities Agency.

Request for expressions of interest

GMV Job Ref: CP/GMV/AJ01 Publication: Architects’ Journal Size: 120 x 186mm Insertion Date: w/c 15/03/10

Expressions of interest are invited from suitably qualified architect-led design teams wishing to be involved in the development of the masterplan and the design of the future phases of the award-winning Greenwich Millennium Village. The masterplan and some of the early phase buildings were designed by the late Ralph Erskine during the 1990s and, as a result of a technical constraint that affects the previous planning application, it has become necessary to revisit the original masterplan for the development.

Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd, in partnership with the Homes and Communities Agency, wishes to identify a small number of practices to be shortlisted to take part in a two-stage competition that is to be held during the summer of 2010. The objective is to create an exemplar of urban design that is an effective response to the immediate context and completes the community, while acknowledging the Erskine masterplan design legacy.

The new phases of the development are expected to comprise around 1,850 homes, together with commercial and community buildings, new public realm and associated landscaping. The successful team will be expected to develop a masterplan for the whole of the remaining phases and work with GMVL, the HCA and their advisors to achieve planning consent for the masterplan.

Teams should therefore be able to demonstrate a track record of award-winning and innovative urban design, masterplanning and architecture and will be required to co-operate closely with engineers experienced in noise abatement and mitigation.

Submissions of a maximum of six pages of A4 should include an initial page setting out details of practice or team member, skills and resource capability. The remaining pages should include examples of recent relevant works and projects that demonstrate the suitability and design-led approach of the applicant.

Following the expressions of interest, the practices selected to go forward to the next stage will receive a design brief and supporting documentation. A judging panel including representatives from GMVL, the HCA and CABE will select the successful team.

Interested applicants should include four bound copies of their submission and these should be sent to the following address no later than 16.00 hrs on Thursday 1 April 2010:

GMV Design Competition, Countryside House, The Drive, Brentwood, Essex CM13 3AT

Enquiries should be directed to Peter Willis, Development Director, Greenwich Millennium Village Limited on 01277 260000

A joint venture development between Countryside Properties Plc and Taylor Wimpey in association with the Homes and Communities Agency.

Request for expressions of interest

A joint venture development between Countryside PropertiesPlc and Taylor Wimpey in association with the Homes and Communities Agency.

Greenwich Millennium Village - Phases 3, 4 and 5Local Exhibition - 19th, 21st and 25th May 2011

Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd (GMVL)

invite you to attend a local exhibition of the

current proposals for the future phases of

Greenwich Millennium Village (GMV):

• We have a new design team selected

by representatives from GMVL, the

Homes and Communities Agency and

CABE

• We are proposing around 1,800 homes,

together with commercial and

community buildings

• We believe that the new masterplan

reinforces the principles of an inclusive

and sustainable community - and will

create an exemplar scheme on a

‘human-scale’

The local exhibition will be held at the

GMV Visitors’ Centre located in Maurer

Court (along Teal Street - near the northern

end of John Harrison Way) on the

following dates:

• Thursday 19th May between

5:00pm and 9:00pm

• Saturday 21st May between

10:00am and 1:00pm

• Wednesday 25th May between

5:00pm and 9:00pm

This will provide an opportunity for you to

let us have your views on the emerging

design prior to the formal submission of a

planning application to Greenwich Council

later this year. We hope that you will be

able to attend and we look forward to

discussing our proposal with you.

Greenwich Millennium Village ES Volume 1:

Non-Technical Summary

Prepared for: Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd

Prepared by: ENVIRON

London, UK

Date: November 2011

Project or Issue Number: UK12-16799

Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd. Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary

UK12-16799 Issue: Final

Table of Contents

Preface i

1 Introduction 1

2 The Planning Application 2

3 EIA Process and Methods 3

3.1 Scoping 3

3.2 Consultation 4

3.3 The Approach to the EIA 4

3.4 Planning Policy 5

4 The Site 5

5 The Baseline Environment 7

6 Alternatives and Design Evolution 8

6.1 „Do Nothing‟ Alternative 8

6.2 Site and Land Use Alternatives 9

6.3 Site Layout and Built Form Alternatives 9

7 The Proposed Development 10

7.1 Proposed Land Uses and Spatial Arrangement 10

7.2 Building Appearance 11

7.3 Public Spaces and Landscaping 12

7.4 Access and Parking Arrangements 13

7.5 Resource Use, Emissions, Residues & Sustainability 13

8 Summary of Residual Environmental Effects 14

8.1 Positive Effects 14

8.2 Adverse Effects 15

8.3 Minor Effects 16

8.4 Negligible Effects 16

8.5 Temporary Effects 17

8.6 Cumulative Effects 17

9 Next Steps 18


UK12-16799 Issue: Final i

Preface

This Environmental Statement („ES‟) has been prepared on behalf of Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd („the Applicant‟) in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (SI 2011/1824) („the EIA

Regulations‟). The 2011 EIA Regulations which came into force on 24th August 2011 consolidate and replace the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 and subsequent amending legislation.

The ES relates to a Hybrid Planning Application (part detailed and part outline) in respect of development proposals for a residential led, mixed use development on land on the south-east of the Greenwich Peninsula, in the London Borough of Greenwich (LBG).

The ES comprises three volumes:

Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary (NTS); Volume 2: Main ES Report; Volume 3A: Technical Appendices; and Volume 3B: Technical Appendices (containing the Transport Assessment and

Travel Plan).

This document comprises Volume 1 of the ES.

Additional documentation accompanying the Application includes the:

Parameters Report (including Parameter Plans, Statements and Schedules); Planning Application Drawings; Design and Access Statement; Planning Statement; Sustainability Statement - Outline; Sustainability Statement – Detailed; Energy Statement – Outline; Energy Statement – Detailed; Transport Assessment; Travel Plan Statement of Community Consultation; Acoustic Design Report; and Assessment of Economic Viability and Affordable Housing Provision.

The ES, together with the Application and associated documents will be available

for viewing at: London Borough of Greenwich Planning Division The Woolwich Centre 35 Wellington Street


UK12-16799 Issue: Final ii

London SE18 6HQ Copies of the 4 ES Volumes can be purchased at £250/ paper copy and £10/ CD copy from: ENVIRON UK Ltd 5 Stratford Place London W1C 1AX Copies of the Non-Technical Summary will be available free of charge. Copies can also be downloaded from the Council‟s Planning Portal (http://onlineplanning.greenwich.gov.uk/acolnet/planningonline/acolnetcgi.gov#ApplicationQuickSearch)


UK12-16799 Issue: Final 1

1 Introduction

This document is the Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the Environmental Statement (ES) prepared to accompany a “Hybrid Planning Application” („the Application‟) by Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd. (the „Applicant‟), a joint venture between Countryside Properties plc and Taylor Wimpey Ltd. The Application is for the development of Greenwich Millennium Village (GMV) Phases 3, 4 and 5 („the Proposed Development‟) in the London Borough of

Greenwich (LBG).

The ES reports on an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Application carried out in accordance with the statutory procedures set out in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (SI 2011/1824) („the EIA

Regulations‟). The 2011 EIA Regulations, which came into force on 24th August 2011, consolidate and replace the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 and subsequent amending legislation.

The Application site boundary is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Application Boundary

The aim of the NTS is to explain clearly what the environmental effects of the Proposed Development are likely to be.



The following sections provide:

an outline of the content of the Application; an overview of the EIA process that has been followed; a summary of the application site and the current baseline; an outline of alternatives considered by the Applicant and of the evolution of the

Proposed Development; a summary of the main aspects of the Proposed Development, and

a summary of the main environmental effects that might arise if the Proposed Development goes ahead

The full ES (Volume 2: Main Report and Volumes 3A and 3B: Technical Appendices) provides a more detailed description of the Site, Proposed Development and of the findings of the EIA.

2 The Planning Application

The masterplan for the wider Greenwich Peninsula area was developed in the late 1990s and was granted planning permission by LBG in 1999. It provides the general framework for the redevelopment and regeneration of the wider Greenwich Peninsula. It comprised five development phases.

GMV was originally granted outline planning permission in 1999, with a number of detailed full planning permissions for Phases 1 and 2 (granted between 2002 – 2006), which have now been built and with the exception of a small number of retail / commercial units, is now fully occupied. The Application considered here is for the development of the remaining parts of the Peninsula area, referred to as Phases 3, 4 and 5.

The Application being submitted to LBG will complete the wider regeneration of the Peninsula by providing new homes, shops, space for business, and community space. The specific content of the Application is as follows:

“The development of the site (Phases 3, 4 and 5) of the Greenwich Millennium Village

consisting of the following:

Class C3 (dwellinghouses) – up to a total of 1,746 dwellinghouses;

Flexible Class A1 (shops), A2 (financial and professional services), A3 (restaurants and

cafes) and/or A4 (Drinking establishments) – up to a total of 1,190 m2 (GEA);

Class B1 (business) (a – offices), (b – research and development) and (c – light industry)

– up to a total of 4,462 m2 (GEA);

Class D1 (non-residential institutions) for a children’s nursery – up to 500 m² (GEA);

Class D2 (assembly and leisure) for community space and management facility – up to a

total of 750 m² (GEA);

two energy centres – up to a total of 992 m² (GEA);

open space for amenity purposes;

hard and soft landscaping;

associated car parking and servicing – up to a total of 881 spaces;

highways and transport works; and

associated and ancillary works.



with all matters reserved for future approval except for access and except in relation to the

first sub-phase, being Parcel 1, located to the north and east of the site – with full details

provided for Parcel 1 and, more particularly, for:

459 of the dwellinghouses (comprising 135 one-bedroom, 216 two-bedroom units; 93

three-bedroom; and 15 four-bedroom units);

an energy centre – 365 m²;

open space for amenity purposes;

hard and soft landscaping;

associated car parking and servicing – 178 spaces;

highways and transport works; and

associated and ancillary works.

The proposed buildings range from 2- to 11- storeys in height and a 20-storey tall building.”

The existing highways of Horn Link Way (adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Site), Peartree Way (on the eastern section of the Site) and West Parkside (in the central portion of the Site) would be retained as part of the Proposed Development.

3 EIA Process and Methods

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process that may be undertaken for certain types of development to provide information about the possible environmental effects of the development, so that the information can be taken into account by the planning authority before they take a decision on whether planning permission should be granted. Recognising the likely interest in the Proposed Development by organisations such as the Environment Agency, Natural England, Port of London Authority, and local communities, the Applicant decided to carry out an EIA on a voluntary basis, and to submit an Environmental Statement (ES) which reports on the EIA, to LBG to help in its assessment of the planning application.

3.1 Scoping

Scoping is a process used to agree the terms of reference of an EIA. The Regulations allow an applicant to ask the planning authority for its opinion on the information to be provided in an ES in any particular case. This is called a “Scoping Opinion”. Planning authorities will

usually ask other organisations and agencies for their input in formulating an opinion. Often, this is helped by a Scoping Report, prepared by the Applicant, setting out its view on the suggested content, which the planning authorities and other agencies will consider before providing their response and finalizing an opinion.

In this case, the Applicant submitted a Scoping Report to LBG on 9th June 2011, together with a request for a Scoping Opinion. The Report set out a description of the development proposals, the likely significant environmental impacts and effects proposed to be considered as part of the EIA, the proposed scope of and methodology to be followed within each technical assessment of the EIA, as well as the content of the ES.

LBG consulted with both statutory and non-statutory consultees during the course of the scoping process including the Environment Agency, Natural England, the Port of London Authority, English Heritage, Transport for London (TfL), Thames Water, Sport England and Southern Gas Networks.



A Formal EIA Scoping Opinion was provided by LBG on 15 July 2011 which advised that the EIA should address the following matters:

Design Evolution and Alternatives; Planning and Land Use; Construction Environmental

Management; Socio Economics; Archaeology; Ground Conditions; Townscape and Visual Amenity; Water Resources and Flood Risk;

Ecology; Transport and Accessibility; Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; Daylight, Sunlight and

Overshadowing; Wind; Light Pollution; and Cumulative Impacts

LBG agreed that Built Heritage (listed buildings and monuments), Solar Glare and Waste did not need to be covered in the EIA as the Proposed Development was considered unlikely to give rise to significant effects in any of these respects.

3.2 Consultation

In addition to the scoping process above, the Applicant has carried out a series of pre-application consultation events with local residents and groups to discuss and collect feedback on the Proposed Development. Where this has highlighted matters relevant to the EIA, this feedback has been used to refine the scope of the assessment and of the eventual content of the ES.

Full details of the consultation process and of its outcomes are provided in the Statement of Community Consultation Report which has been submitted alongside the Planning Application.

3.3 The Approach to the EIA

The EIA has followed best practice and Government guidance and has followed the following steps:

Baseline - The purpose of EIA is to predict how environmental conditions may change as a result of the Proposed Development. This requires that the environmental conditions before the Proposed Development is built and in the future, are established. This is referred to as the “baseline”. This is usually undertaken through a combination

of desk-based research, site survey and focuses on the parts of the natural, physical and built environmental which are considered most sensitive to change. The baseline for this EIA is described later in Section 5.

Mitigation – Mitigation is the term used to describe how the significant negative effects of a development are either avoided, reduced, controlled or offset (i.e. compensated for). The first and best approach is to avoid negative effects by changing the design of a development so that they will not occur in the first place. Other measures involve developing management plans, for example, to control effects during construction, or new planting to encourage new wildlife. A variety of measures have been committed throughout the EIA, and the main ones are summarized in section 6 below.

Assessing Environmental Effects - As a general rule, the EIA assesses the effects considered likely to arise as a result of a proposed development. A range of impacts are considered including direct, indirect and cumulative. Direct impacts are those



which arise as a direct result of a development, e.g. building on a wildlife habitat. An example of an indirect impact might be the damage to a wildlife habitat from pollution. A cumulative effect might occur where two developments in the same area combine to have an overall effect, for example, on local air quality . How a proposed development might affect the environment relies on making predictions about what impact a certain action will have. Some predictions can be made using mathematical or simulation models, particularly where there are well known relationships between cause and effect. For example, the degree to which noise levels may increase as a result of additional traffic flows can be predicted using a mathematical equation. The level of air pollution from a known traffic flow can also be predicted from a computer-based simulation model. The visibility of a building can be predicted by accurately superimposing its outline and position over a photograph. Other impacts are less easy to predict; for example, whilst the loss of a habitat can be measured, the effect on individual species is more difficult to predict. In such cases, the EIA attempts to qualify the anticipated scale of impact using expert professional judgment.

3.4 Planning Policy

Any development proposal anywhere in the country must be determined in accordance with national and local planning policies, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. At the national level, planning policy is contained within a series of Circulars and Planning Policy Guidance (PPG), which are being replaced by Planning Policy Statements (PPS). Of particular relevance here are those relating to the delivery of sustainable development; the use of previously developed land; biodiversity; transport; archaeology; pollution; noise; and flood risk.

At the local level, planning policy is contained in the relevant local development plans. In this case these are the London Plan (2011), and the Greenwich Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2006. Whilst there are other plans and policies which are being formulated and are in draft at the moment, the London Plan and the Greenwich UDP are the main documents relevant here and which guide development at the Site.

4 The Site

The Site is situated to the south-east of the Greenwich Peninsula within the administrative area of the London Borough of Greenwich. It is currently what is described as “brownfield land” which is a term used to refer to land that was previously developed but is now vacant

or derelict. The Site is undeveloped, mostly un-surfaced with some semi-improved vegetation, and extends to some 11.5 hectares. It contains the former project offices of GMVL, currently sub-let to a third party in the central eastern section of the Site.

It is generally flat, although slopes gently down to the south, and ranges between approximately 2.0 – 7.0 m Ordnance Datum.

There are a number of roads which pass through the Site;

Horn Link Way parallel to the eastern boundary running in a north to south orientation; Peartree Way in the eastern section runs along a north to south orientation (parallel

with Horn Link Way); and West Parkside runs through the centre in a east to west orientation.



It is within a short walk (12 – 15 minutes) of both North Greenwich London Underground Station and Westcombe Park / Maze Hill Stations, where mainline rail services are available. Bus stops are located on Southern Way and in the Village Square located between GMV Phases 1 and 2, and are less than a 5 minute walk.

The location of the Site is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Site Location

The Site‟s immediate surroundings are of mixed character, although are most notably

dominated by the industrial led uses immediately east of the Site and commercial uses to the south. The Site context and surrounding land uses are set out in Table 1.

Table 1: Site Context and Surrounding Land Uses

Direction Aspect

North The River Thames, which is designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and the foreshore is a feeding habitat for the nationally rare black redstart (London Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species). The riverside walk is designated as an established river walk and cycle route.

Greenwich Yacht Club



Table 1: Site Context and Surrounding Land Uses

Direction Aspect

East Angerstein Wharf and Murphy‟s Wharf are both safeguarded wharves, Aggregates Zone1. Neighbouring Angerstein Wharf along Horn Link Way. To the south is Murphy‟s Waste transfer station, which is outside of the boundary of the safeguarded wharves.

Beyond the aggregates works to the east and south-east are industrial and business park zones.

South Bugsby‟s Way is designated as a London Distributor Road which provides for the linking of strategic centres and acts as main bus routes.

Beyond this is Greenwich Peninsula Retail Park comprising retail land uses.

West Southern Park and the Ecology Park, both zoned as an area of Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). Southern Park is amenity grassland, which contains extensive plantings of native trees and wildflower meadows around the edges. The Ecology Park is a recent habitat creation scheme containing a range of habitats, managed for environmental education.

GMV Phases 1 and 2 are constructed and include a range of apartments, streets, squares, commercial facilities and a Primary School and Health Centre.

5 The Baseline Environment

The following summarises the environmental character of the Site.

The socio-economic character of the Site is not significantly different from the character of the Borough and London, as a whole. Unemployment in the Borough is higher than the average for England, as is to be expected in a city location, but it is in line with the average for London. Unemployment in the Borough is estimated to be around 10% of the working age population, compared to an average of 9.3% across London. Crime is considered to be prevalent at the Site and surrounding area, with large parts of Greenwich in the top 10% most deprived areas in England. The Greenwich Peninsula (which includes the Site) is identified in relevant planning policy as an area of regeneration which can make a significant contribution to the housing needs and employment expansion of the Borough, and London as a whole.

The southern half of the Site falls within the Environment Agency‟s Flood Zones 3 (high probability of flooding) and 2 (medium probability). The northern half of the Site is within Flood Zone 1 (low probability). However, the entire area is protected by flood defences which means that the Site would flood only in the unlikely event that the defences were to fail or be overtopped.

Contamination has been identified at the Site resulting from a variety of industrial activities that took place on the site in past times. The Site has been subject to some degree of “clean up” of contamination, however, further site investigations will take place to ensure the Site is suitable for its proposed end use..

“Semi-improved” grassland forms the main land cover across the Site. Avenues of young trees are present along the pavements of West Parkside, Horn Link Way and Peartree Way, as well as the northern side of Bugsby‟s Way. No rare habitats have

1 Angerstein and Murphy‟s Wharves are both safeguarded wharves which „Policy 4C.9 – Safeguarded Wharves on the Blue

Ribbon Network‟ of the London Plan 2011 protects for cargo handling uses. The Greenwich UDP designates this area as an Aggregates Zone.



been identified on the Site and the area is not designated for ecological conservation purposes.

The River Thames is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). TheSouthern Park to the west of the Site and the Ecology Park to the north-west, are both Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINCs).

The Thames Path, which is a national trail, forms the north-eastern boundary of the Site and runs along the Thames riverside around the Greenwich Peninsula.

The entire London Borough of Greenwich has been declared as an Air Quality Management Zone. Greenwich Peninsula sits within the London Wide Low Emission Zone.

Land uses and properties that may be vulnerable to impacts as a result of the Proposed Development are as follows:

Existing residential communities in proximity of the Site, and in particular those occupying Phases 1 and 2 of the Greenwich Millennium Village;

Existing occupants at the Site (the former project offices of GMV on-site are currently sub-let to a third party);

Existing community facilities in proximity to the Site; New residential properties provided as a result of the Proposed Development; Potential buried heritage (archaeological) assets; Local public (bus, underground and rail) and private (highway network) transport

infrastructure capacity; Pedestrians, and users of existing and proposed amenity areas; and Existing workers at the adjacent aggregates wharves to the east. In addition, the following environmental features might be vulnerable to impacts from the Proposed Development: Local air quality; Ground water, surface water and potable water supplies; Short, medium and long distance views to and from the Site; Habitats and species in the Ecology Park and Southern Park to the west of the Site.

6 Alternatives and Design Evolution

The Proposed Development forms a key part of the redevelopment and regeneration of the Greenwich Peninsula. The overarching aim of the development proposals for the Site is to provide a residential led mixed-use development supported by commercial and retail land uses, community space, and associated landscaping and public open space.

In accordance with EIA Regulations and guidance, the ES includes a discussion of the alternative development options and various constraints and opportunities which influenced the ultimate design of the Proposed Development.

6.1 ‘Do Nothing’ Alternative

Guidance on the preparation of an EIA suggests that the evolution of a site in the absence of specific proposals should be addressed. This can be described as the „Do Nothing‟

alternative. The „Do Nothing‟ alternative is a hypothetical contruct conventionally



considered, albeit briefly, in EIA as a basis for comparing the development proposals under consideration.

„Doing nothing‟ with the Site is not a realistic alternative. If the Proposed Development were to not go ahead, the regeneration opportunities for the Site as part of the wider aspirations of the Greenwich Peninsula Opportunity Area would not be realised and the Site would not contribute to the regeneration of the Greenwich Peninsula.

However, given that the Site is located within the Greenwich Peninsula, is partly zoned for redevelopment in the UDP and has a history of development schemes being approved for a mix of residential and commercial uses (1999 and 2007 outline permissions; 2008 detailed permission for part of the Site), it is likely to be subject to some form of redevelopment proposals at some point in the future. This would bring significant levels of development, as well as large new communities and numbers of employees to the area.

6.2 Site and Land Use Alternatives

No alternative sites have been considered by the Applicant for the following reasons:

the Site is owned by the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) and GMVL will be developing the Site by way of a long term 999 year lease from the Freeholder (the HCA). As such, the Applicant did not consider alternative sites which are the property of a third party;

the Site forms part of the wider masterplan for the Greenwich Millennium Village, where Phases 1 and 2 have already been completed. As such, the Site aims to complement and provide the connectivity to the existing GMV development. Furthermore, the Site forms part of the wider masterplan for the Greenwich Peninsula as a whole;

the Applicant is seeking to realise the Site‟s potential in line with current national planning policy, specifically Planning Policy Statement 12: and

the Site is located within the Greenwich Peninsula Opportunity Area which is identified in the London Plan 2011 as a strategic regeneration area.

6.3 Site Layout and Built Form Alternatives

A number of alternative development options have been considered throughout the design process and tested to consider how each best addresses the constraints of the Site and surroundings (particularly the wharves to the east of the Site), how they balance different environmental effects and create a development which satisfies the requirements of LBG. The Proposed Development represents the optimal balance of a broad range of factors.

2 Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development



7 The Proposed Development

7.1 Proposed Land Uses and Spatial Arrangement

As discussed in Section 2, the Planning Application is for a Hybrid Planning Application with Parcel 1 comprising the detailed element and Parcels 2 – 5 the outline element, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Proposed Development Land Parcels

The Proposed Development provides for a residential-led development supported by community, retail and commercial land uses within a network of public spaces, hard and soft landscaped streets, squares and green spaces.

Parcel 1 comprises residential land uses and Energy Centre (referred to as EC1).

Parcels 2 - 5 comprise the following:

residential uses in Blocks 201 – 210, Blocks 301 – 304, Blocks 401 – 405 and Blocks 501 – 503;

nursery, community centre and management facility, and residential uses in Blocks 202 and 203 (Parkside Blocks) which are located adjacent to the Ecology Park and Southern Park in the north-west of the Site;

commercial land uses in Blocks 403 – 405 and 501 – 503 along Bugsby‟s Way to the

south; and



retail land uses in Blocks 204 -205, Blocks 302 – 304, Blocks 403 – 405 and 501 – 503 in the central and southern sections (and along Bugsby‟s Way) .

A second Energy Centre (known as EC2) in Block 504. This would eventually replace the EC1 as Parcels 2-5 are built out and once EC2 is fully commissioned.

Block heights would vary across the Site, generally between 2 and 11 storeys, with a tower of up to 20 storeys proposed in the north-west corner of the Site. A three dimensional representation of the proposed maximum heights and massing of the Proposed Development is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Aerial 3D Massing of Proposed Development Blocks

7.2 Building Appearance

The Design and Access Statement which accompanies the Application proposes the following Design Guidelines:

a mix of inset and projecting balconies and terraces; projecting bays and oriel windows; buildings articulated by setbacks from the building massing provided in the parameter

plans; a predominantly brick finish in a controlled range of colours and textures; contrast/accent materials such as coloured and etched glass, natural and coloured

metal roofing and cladding, coloured/glazed ceramic and terra cotta infill panels;



clear double/triple-glazed windows and doors with coloured metal finished frames; and a varied roofline.

7.3 Public Spaces and Landscaping

The public spaces strategy for the Proposed Development focuses on the creation of a network of streets and spaces, including:

a network of footpaths and cycleways with „traffic calmed‟ access for vehicles. A

series of boulevards, streets and mews would be provided throughout the Proposed Development;

„car free‟ streets through the use of narrow vehicular routes; play space at key locations; and „urban squares‟ to accommodate a range of informal social activities, play spaces and

managed or informal community events.

In addition, the landscaping proposals at the Site include the following:

street tree and hedge planting; rain gardens, which will also form part of the Sustainable Urban Drainage System

(SUDS) of the Proposed Development; swale landscaping along the north-western section of the Site (adjacent to the Ecology

Park and Southern Park), which will also form part of the SUDS strategy; and semi-private and private amenity space.

In addition, rooftop terraces at the Proposed Development would include green and brown roofs, which would increase the Site‟s biodiversity and provide habitat for invertebrates and ground nesting birds.

The landscape masterplan for the Proposed Development is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Landscape Masterplan (November 2011)



7.4 Access and Parking Arrangements

All existing highways across the Site will be retained within the Proposed Development. Access to the Site would be via vehicle access in the northern arm of the Bugsby‟s Way /

Peartree Way roundabout and off West Parkside to the west of the Site.

A series of new primary estate roads would be provided throughout the Proposed Development to enable vehicular access to each of the parcels. In addition, a series of new „pedestrian priority‟ internal streets (secondary estate roads) would provide vehicular access

to each of the blocks.

The Parking Strategy for the Site aims to reduce the visual impact of parking and reduce car usage by providing podium parking, undercroft parking, as well as courtyards and on-street parking. The Proposed Development aims to provide a parking provision of approximately 45%, although the scheme has the capability of providing 50% at the wider Masterplan level.

The internal street environment has been designed as pedestrianised streets to provide a pedestrian-friendly and pedestrian-priority environment and to encourage walking connections to the wider Peninsula walking pathways.

7.5 Resource Use, Emissions, Residues & Sustainability

Precise details of materials to be used in the construction are not yet known and will be determined at the detailed design stage, but the Proposed Development is anticipated to be constructed of steel columns and reinforced concrete.

The Energy Strategy for the Proposed Development proposes to reduce the energy consumption and carbon emissions associated with the Proposed Development. This will be achieved by improving the energy efficiency of the structure and the fabric by ensuring high levels of air tightness, maximising the potential for passive solar gain (through the appropriate orientation of the development blocks, use of large windows and appropriate building orientation to maximise daylight provision), heat recovery ventilation, low energy light fittings and outdoor lighting which would be low energy and incorporate daylight or timer controls. Additionally, it is proposed to generate electricity on-site through the installation of Photo-voltaics (PV) panels.

The Proposed Development would initially be heated through a gas-fired community heating system from Energy Centre 1 (housed in the north-eastern section of Parcel 1). It is anticipated that Energy Centre 2 will come online during the construction of Parcel 3 as the heat demand of Parcel 3 (as well as that of Parcels 1 and 2) will be too great to be met by Energy Centre 1 alone. Energy Centre 1 would subsequently be decommissioned.

Detailed information of the measures to be implemented in order to help minimise the water demand for the Proposed Development are not available at this stage, however the Applicant has committed to achieving a water consumption rate of 105 litres per person per day and provide rain water collection for watering the communal and private planting areas.

A Flood Risk Assessment of the Proposed Development was undertaken, the results of which were used to inform the Development Proposals and ensure measures for managing surface water runoff are integrated in to the design to achieve Environment Agency standards and comply with planning policy in the form of the Mayor‟s essential standard.

The Proposed Development has been assessed against the London Plan‟s Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Guidance (SDC SPG) (May 2006) and The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy 2011. All of the Mayor‟s essential



standards that can be addressed at this stage of design have been or will be met or exceeded.

The detailed element of the Proposed Development aims to achieve a Level 4 rating under the Code for Sustainable Homes for the residential units, as more fully set out in the Sustainability Statement for Parcel 1 of the Proposed Development. The outline element of the Proposed Development will also aim to meet these targets and also the future targets set out by LBG and the Greater London Authority (GLA). These targets and future policy requirements will be reviewed and confirmed through the submission of reserved matters applications for parcels 2 - 5.

8 Summary of Residual Environmental Effects

Overall the Proposed Development will bring a number of benefits to the local and wider area and community. Specifically, it responds positively to London and Greenwich planning policy in regenerating a brownfield site in the Greenwich Peninsula Opportunity Area, creating opportunities for new employment and for the creation of new homes. At the same time, however, it may give rise to a number of adverse or negative effects which are inevitable consequences of development.

In addition, there may be a number of temporary effects associated with construction activities, although these would be localised, short term and occasional.

8.1 Positive Effects

The Proposed Development is considered likely to result in a number of positive or „beneficial‟ community and economic effects, which arise because of the regeneration that it will help bring about, and because of improvements to the amenity of the wider area. These include:

job creation during construction and following completion of the Proposed Development;

increased local spending by new residents and employees; provision of new housing, both private and affordable, which will contribute towards

meeting housing targets at the local and district level; and the provision of new shops, commercial services and community facilities, as well as

new areas of public space.

Positive impacts will also arise as a result of the improvement to the appearance of the Site, including the improvement to the quality and character of the townscape and to the near and distant views. In particular, beneficial effects are expected to arise because:

the vacant character of the Site detracts from existing views and the settings of Local Character Areas (LCAs)3;

unattractive features such as the aggregates plant to the east of the Proposed Development would be screened;

3 For the purposes of the Townscape and Visual Amenity Impact Assessment (Chapter 9), the surrounding area has been divided into a number of local character areas (LCAs) based on street and block pattern, scale and density of buildings, enclosure and street proportions, boundaries, road hierarchy, land use, space and landmarks.



the Proposed Development would contribute towards creating a “sense of place” and would contribute to ease of movement through the area by introducing new streets, new public spaces or new landmark features; and

the replacement of what is currently vacant, unattractive and largely unusable land with a new high quality neighbourhood.

The Proposed Development involves the redevelopment of a brownfield site. Although the Site has been subject to some degree of “clean up” of contamination, development would result in further investigation with further clean up being carried out if required to remove risks to new residents. The physical presence of buildings, open spaces new roads, cycleways and paths, and landscaping would also serve to reduce possible risks. The landscaping proposals, and the inclusion of green and brown roofs would increase habitat diversity, leading to opportunities for an increase in the range of animal and plant communities at the Site. A new swale will be provided in Southern Park increasing the potential for wetland habitat. The microclimate at the Site would be improved. Currently, areas to the west of the Site generally tend to be windier due to the direction of the prevailing wind from the south to south-west. Wind speeds at the Site would be reduced through the introduction of the Proposed Development.

The Proposed Development will introduce a number of sustainability features, thereby contributing positively to LBG‟s sustainable development ambitions. It will include the means to generate a proportion of its energy needs through renewable technologies on-site. It will ensure high standards of energy efficiency. It will reduce surface drainage from the Site, in turn reducing the volumes of surface water entering the drainage system.

8.2 Adverse Effects

In the course of the design process, various development options have been tested so that major adverse effects have been avoided. One direct impact has been classed as „major‟

(„substantial‟, using the definitions provided in the assessment) in relation to the reduction in

the level of sunlight experienced by properties along Southern Way. In practice however, the impact is localized and limited to only 3 out of the 37 windows. Moreover, depending on the final form of development brought forward under the parameter plans in the future, this impact may well be reduced.

Only one direct impact has been predicted which is in relation to the effect of the Proposed Development on the character and setting of the Ecology Park and Southern Park Landscape Character Area. This has been classed as “minor to moderate”. In practice however, any development which the current Greenwich Development Plan provides for, would have the same outcome, and so the relevance of this conclusion should be seen in the context of the wider aims and ambitions of LBG in completing the already consented Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan.

A number of cumulative adverse impacts have been identified, resulting from the Proposed Development in combination with other committed developments in the area. One „major‟ and one „moderate‟ impact have been identified at four road locations in the surrounding area as a result of increased road traffic noise from increased traffic in the surrounding area. However, out of these impacts, only two are located on roads with residential properties. Furthermore, this increase in road traffic noise is unavoidable given the wider development aspirations of the Greenwich Peninsula Masterplan.



8.3 Minor Effects

A number of minor effects have been predicted.

The Proposed Development would lead to an increase in mains water use at the Site. The increase in water consumption would be mitigated, to a degree, through the inclusion of water minimisation and efficiency techniques. In achieving code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH) Level 4 the development proposals include a range of water minimization and efficiency techniques to help minimise water demand. These measures include the specification of low water consumption taps, showers and cisterns as well as the use of rainwater recycling to collect rainwater for external and internal irrigation use.

In addition, there would be an increase in demand on the foul drainage infrastructure surrounding the Site. This would be offset through the proposed improved surface water management on-site. It is proposed that there would be separate storm and foul water drainage systems. The eventual design of the drainage strategy is subject to confirmation from the EA but will include measures such as porous pavements, rain gardens, dry swales and green roofs.

The Proposed Development would have the potential to indirectly affect the prospects for breeding birds at the Site. Whilst the net quantity of habitat at the Site would not change materially, there would be a change in the type of habitat from an open one to a more enclosed landscape. The proposed tower may increase this sense of enclosure. Some breeding species may be displaced, although more common species are likely to increase because of the new trees and shrubs planting proposed.

The Proposed Development may affect certain road junctions and increase queuing, although only to a small extent. Increased commuter numbers using North Greenwich and Westcombe Park stations may result in some congestion.

Localised impacts are anticipated where elevated ground level concentration of fine particles and nitrogen dioxide – two key pollutants from road traffic – have been predicted, albeit the concentrations predicted are only marginally above the recommended Air Quality thresholds. Likewise, the increase in road traffic as a result of the Proposed Development would result in a slight increase in noise levels in the vicinity of the Site, although the degree of increase is considered unlikely to be noticeable.

8.4 Negligible Effects

In terms of other aspects of amenity, or of the physical, natural and built environment, the Proposed Development is considered likely to give to only negligible effects, including:

there will be no significant adverse effect on healthcare provision, school places and or play space provisions in the vicinity of the Site;

the survival of archaeological deposits is considered unlikely given the past uses and remediation activities at the Site. Any potential for effect would be mitigated through appropriate archaeological safe working practices during construction;

distant views from the south-east and south-west will be unaffected; ground conditions and water resources will be unaffected; although there would be an increase in traffic on the roads in the vicinity of the Site,

there would be a negligible effect on air quality and the local noise environment;



the provision of a taller „buffer‟ terrace on the northern and eastern sections of the Site and appropriate glazing in the dwellings/units, would ensure that noise levels throughout the Proposed Development are appropriate for use;

there would be no impact on the amount of daylight received by off-site properties on Southern Way, as a result of the Proposed Development; there will be no permanent overshadowing of private or public spaces in the surrounding area; wind conditions across the Site will be improved; and

through the implementation of an appropriate lighting strategy, there is expected to be a negligible impact as a result of light from the Proposed Development on off-site sensitive receptors. The impact of lighting from the industrial site to the east has been mitigated through appropriate internal layouts in the blocks on the eastern section of the Site.

8.5 Temporary Effects

Construction activities will have a number of temporary effects which may be perceived as significant by those living and working in close proximity to the Site. Specific impacts would depend on the nature, location and duration of construction activities, individually and together, and on the controls that would be adopted. In general, construction effects would be intermittent and short term. The main effects are likely to be on residential amenity from construction traffic, noise and the potential for dust. Other effects may include pollution in the event of accidental release of soil and sediment to drains, or air pollution from construction traffic. There may also be temporary visual effects from hoardings, large equipment and cranes, as well as temporary loss of habitats in the Ecology Park, Southern Park and on-site in between site clearance and the creation of new habitats at the Proposed Development.

All effects can be reduced or controlled however, through the introduction of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), which contains site specific procedures, targets and monitoring arrangements to limit possible adverse effects, including community liaison and communication arrangements. LBG has the opportunity to impose such arrangements through planning conditions, if considered appropriate.

8.6 Cumulative Effects

Along with other committed schemes in the area, the Proposed Development would contribute positively to the local area and local economy, and the cumulative positive outcome would be larger than for the Proposed Development alone, representing likely major beneficial impacts at the local scale in terms of employment creation, spending, residential provision and choice, and the creation of new services and facilities through appropriate Section 106 agreements.

Similarly, the general improvement to the townscape would be positive. In some views, the Proposed Development would be obscured. In places, the committed schemes would replace unsightly undeveloped land with a distinctly urban environment and in long distance views introduce new features of interest.

Local improvements to water management due to surface water runoff attenuation measures incorporated into the design would be experienced on a wider scale and the Proposed Development, with other committed developments in the area, would return a larger proportion of under used, derelict and potentially contaminated land to productive use.



The traffic assessment has taken into account the effects of traffic generated from all consented schemes. Similarly, the air quality assessment has used the combined traffic flows for the Proposed Development in combination with the committed schemes. The impact on highway capacity has been predicted to be minor, given the increase in traffic flows. Similarly, only a minor effect in terms of air quality is anticipated. A number of the committed schemes (Lovell‟s Wharf Granite Badcock‟s and Piper‟s Wharf,

Enderby Wharf and the Heart of East Greenwich) comprise open sites with varying amounts of vegetation. All three developments are subject to planning permission for mixed use developments that would remove open habitats currently residing in these sites. Although there will be a combined net loss of habitat, the diversity of habitat and thus the species its supports is considered would increase.

9 Next Steps

The EIA process provides the opportunity for the public to make comments on the information contained in the Environmental Statement to the local planning authority. If you have comments you would like to make to the London Borough of Greenwich Council, please contact the Council at the address identified in the „Preface‟ section of this document.

Greenwich Millennium Village - Phases 3, 4 and 5 · 2018-07-20 · Environmental Statement Volume...

Documents

Transcript of Greenwich Millennium Village - Phases 3, 4 and 5 · 2018-07-20 · Environmental Statement Volume...