Hill Partnerships Ltd

Piling Risk Assessment

Proposed Housing development,

Chobham Farm Zone I Development, Leyton Road, Stratford

Project no. 26640-03 (01)

FEBRUARY 2014
RSK GENERAL NOTES
Project No.: 26640-03 (01)

Title: Piling Risk Assessment for Proposed Housing Development Chobham Farm
Zone I, Leyton Road, Stratford.

Client: Hill Partnerships

Date: February 2014

Office: RSK, 18 Frogmore Road, Hemel Hempstead, Herts, HP3 9RT

Status: Final

Author Sophie Penney Technical reviewer Vivien Dent

Signature Signature
Date: February 2014 Date: February 2014

Project manager Andrew Tranter Quality reviewer Linda York

Signature Signature
Date: February 2014 Date: February 2014

RSK Environment Limited (RSK) has prepared this report for the sole use of the client, showing reasonable skill and care, for
the intended purposes as stated in the agreement under which this work was completed. The report may not be relied upon
by any other party without the express agreement of the client and RSK. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as
to the professional advice included in this report.
Where any data supplied by the client or from other sources have been used, it has been assumed that the information is
correct. No responsibility can be accepted by RSK for inaccuracies in the data supplied by any other party. The conclusions
and recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that all relevant information has been supplied by those
bodies from whom it was requested.
No part of this report may be copied or duplicated without the express permission of RSK and the party for whom it was
prepared.
Where field investigations have been carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to achieve the stated
objectives of the work.
This work has been undertaken in accordance with the quality management system of RSK Environment Ltd.
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 
1.1 Instructions and project brief .................................................................................................... 1 
1.2 Standards ................................................................................................................................. 1 
1.3 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 2 
2 SITE DETAILS ................................................................................................................................. 3 
2.1 Description and geographic setting ......................................................................................... 3 
2.2 Previous site investigation reports ........................................................................................... 3 
2.3 Site specific soil and groundwater contamination .................................................................... 3 
2.4 Pertinent information relating to remedial works...................................................................... 4 
2.4.1 General information ..................................................................................................... 4 
2.4.2 Geo-environmental and geotechnical site assessment. Chobham Farm Zone I
Development, Leyton Road, Stratford. ........................................................................ 4 
2.4.3 Remediation Method Statement. February 2014, Ref 26640 – 01 (00) ...................... 5 
3 GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY..................................................................... 6 
3.1 Geology .................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.1.1 General characteristics ................................................................................................ 6 
3.2 Hydrogeology ........................................................................................................................... 7 
3.2.1 General characteristics ................................................................................................ 7 
3.2.2 Vulnerability of groundwater resources ....................................................................... 8 
3.2.3 Licensed groundwater abstraction ............................................................................... 8 
3.3 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................. 8 
4 PILING DESIGN .............................................................................................................................. 9 
4.1 Proposed development ............................................................................................................ 9 
4.2 Building design ......................................................................................................................... 9 
4.3 Foundation selection ................................................................................................................ 9 
4.4 Piling mat ............................................................................................................................... 10 
4.5 Conceptual site model ........................................................................................................... 10 
5 PILING RISK ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................ 11 
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 11 
5.2 Hazard identification and assessment ................................................................................... 11 
5.3 Justification of selected methodology .................................................................................... 13 

Hill Partnership Ltd i

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
TABLES
Table 3-1: Conjectural geological succession beneath the site ............................................................. 7 
Table 4-1: Details of proposed piled foundations ................................................................................... 9 
Table 5-1: Hazard identification and assessment ................................................................................ 11 

FIGURES
Figure 1 Site location plan
Figure 2 Foundation plan
Figure 3 Conceptual site model

APPENDICES
Appendix A Pertinent plans and site data

Hill Partnership Ltd ii

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Instructions and project brief
On the instructions of Hill Partnerships Ltd (the ‘Client’), RSK Environment (RSK) has
carried out a Piling Risk Assessment for the Chobham Farm Zone I Site at the Leyton
Road, Stratford.
The proposed development is to comprise five residential apartment blocks ranging from
two to ten stories in height. Commercial premises are to be located on the ground floor.
Furthermore, a basement car park and plant room will be situated beneath the
apartment blocks across the (lower) western area of the site. The development will also
comprise areas of communal soft landscaping and private gardens. The project was
commissioned in order to address the following issues:
• Assess the risk to controlled waters from the proposed method of piling for the site.
Guidance issued by the Environment Agency indicates that
• ‘for permanent and temporary piles, a Piling Risk Assessment (PRA) is required to
demonstrate that the chosen piling method does not result in deformation of the
ground that may lead to an increase in the risk of near-surface pollutants migrating
to underlying aquifers. Additionally for temporary piles, it needs to be demonstrated
that the removal of piles will not result in ground deformation that may create new
pollutant pathways. The risk assessment must investigate the water environment
source-pathway-receptor linkages’.
• Determine compliance with the following planning condition:
• ‘Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be
permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning
Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been
demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason:
Piling activities have the ability of causing contaminated soil from upper levels to
migrate to lower levels where vulnerable groundwater may exist. A Piling Risk
Assessment is required to demonstrate that the piling type and methodology will
mitigate against these risks. In addition, the methodology needs to demonstrate that
the integrity of any remediation works will be protected. This is to prevent pollution
of the sensitive groundwater aquifers in this location given the historical industrial
and commercial activities on site and confirmed contamination of the soil and
groundwater and is supported by Policy SC1 Climate Change of Newham’s Core
Strategy adopted 2012. Reference – Chobham Farm Draft Planning Conditions
(currently being agreed with the LLDC) – received by e mail dated 11/11/13.’

1.2 Standards
The study was designed generally to meet the requirements of the Environment Agency
and reference has been made to the Environment Agency’s guidance ‘Piling and
Penetrative Ground Improvement Methods on Land Affected by Contamination: Guidance

Hill Partnership Ltd 1

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 on Pollution Prevention (2001) and Piling in Layered Ground: risks to groundwater and
archaeology – Science Report SC020074/SR.
This Piling Risk Assessment has been prepared in accordance with current legislation.
The Water Resources Act 1991 and the Groundwater Regulations 1998 (amended
January 2009) make particular reference for the protection of Controlled Waters. This
document also acknowledges the responsibilities of the developer as stated in Planning
Policy Statement 23 (PPS23).
The requirements relating to proposed remediation at the site contained in the following
document have been considered in this report:
Remediation Method Statement 26640 R02 (00), dated February 2014.

1.3 Limitations
This report should be considered in the light of any changes to the remediation method
statement above, in legislation, statutory requirement or industry practices that may
have occurred subsequent to the date of issue.
The data presented in this report is based on the ground conditions encountered during
site work, fieldwork and laboratory testing conducted by others and as such, RSK cannot
be held responsible for the veracity of this data.

Hill Partnership Ltd 2

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
2 SITE DETAILS
2.1 Description and geographic setting
The site is located approximately 0.5km north east of Stratford Railway Station at
National Grid reference 538515, 185157 as shown in Figure 1. The site is approximately
0.87 ha in size split over two levels. The higher level is located to the east, and is
currently undeveloped with the exception of a derelict pub (The Wheelers) situated in the
northeast corner. The remainder of the eastern areas is covered in tarmac and
partitioned into several smaller areas with metal fencing, concrete blocks and wooded
hoarding. It is believed that this area was used for parking and security checks during
the Olympic Games.
It is understood ground levels will remain at much the same as they are presently, which
is variable across the site.

2.2 Previous site investigation reports

RSK have carried out the following reports in relation to this site. The reports are as
follows:

1. RSK Environment Ltd

Geo-environmental and geotechnical site assessment
Chobham Farm Zone I development, Leyton Road, Stratford
Project ID 26640 R01 (00)
October 2013

2. RSK Environment Ltd

Remediation Method Statement,
Chobham Farm Zone I development, Leyton Road, Stratford
Project ID 26640 R02 (00)
February 2014

2.3 Site specific soil and groundwater contamination

Historically the site is indicated to be housing followed by railway lines and some
associated buildings on the site. 1920s maps indicate a tank on the northern boundary
of the site and one approximately 20m to the southwest of the site. By the 1960s the
railway lines and housing on the site have been removed with only the pub in the
northern corner remaining. It is known that the site has been used as a car dealership
and the site was redeveloped as part of the 2012 Olympic games. The site was
resurfaced with tarmac and a bridge constructed to the north of the site (where one of
the former tanks was located). It is understood the site was used for coach parking.

Hill Partnership Ltd 3

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 RSK constructed five boreholes and three trial pits at the site in September 2013. As
part of this investigation soil and groundwater samples were taken and chemical
analysis undertaken.
Elevated concentrations of benzo (a) pyrene and lead were recorded within the made
ground in excess of the relevant GAC (Generic Assessment Criteria) for residential
development with respect to Human Health. Lead and zinc were also found to be above
GAC values for uptake of contaminants by vegetation potentially inhibiting plant growth.
No samples were scheduled for leachate analysis.
Two groundwater samples were taken from borehole BH1, which had a dual installation
with one installation within the Kempton Park Gravel and one within the Thanet
Sand/Chalk aquifer. Analysis indicated some TPH (Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons)
within the shallow groundwater, these were predominantly long chain hydrocarbons with
no BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene) present. Results from the deep
groundwater indicated only one long chain hydrocarbon (C21-C28) of 81ug/l.
Gas monitoring was undertaken at the site and a subsequent assessment of the data.
The site is to be redeveloped with residential apartment blocks and would fall under
situation A – appropriate to all development excluding traditional low-rise construction.
Results from the assessment indicated the site to be characterised CS1 for which no
gas protection measures are required.
Subsequent to the intrusive investigation conducted at the site, a remediation method
statement was derived for Chobham farm zone I. These are discussed in Section 2.4
below.

2.4 Pertinent information relating to remedial works

2.4.1 General information

The proposed residential blocks are located in zone I, Chobham Farm, Leyton Road,
Stratford. A site location plan is presented as Figure 1. Borehole and trial pit locations
are included in Appendix A along with the proposed development plan (extracts from
RSK report).

2.4.2 Geo-environmental and geotechnical site assessment. Chobham Farm Zone I

Development, Leyton Road, Stratford.
This document details site investigation works undertaken at the site in September 2013
comprising the construction of five boreholes and four trial pits across the site. It should
be noted that the site is variable in site levels.
The site history indicates the site to be occupied by housing and part railway
land/sidings. Former tanks are indicated on the northern boundary of the site
(redeveloped during the Olympics as a bridge) and to the south of the site. No potential
historical sources of contamination are indicated on the site.
Results from the site investigation indicated a number of soil samples to exceed human
health generic assessment criteria (GAC) within the made ground. Exceedances of lead
and benzo (a) pyrene were found. Exceedances of zinc and lead were found in the

Hill Partnership Ltd 4

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 made ground above the assessment criteria for uptake of contaminants by vegetation
potentially inhibiting plant growth.
The results indicate that concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons have exceeded the
assessment criterion (500mg/kg) for polyethylene pipes within the Kempton Park Gravel
at BH1 and TP2 located to the west of the site. Consideration should be given to the
selection of water supply pipes if located within the impacted material. No other
exceedances were recorded elsewhere on the site.
Two groundwater bodies were identified beneath the site. Shallow groundwater was
identified within the Kempton Park Gravel at approximately 6m below ground level (BGL)
and another groundwater body at approximately 20 bgl within the Thanet Sand/Chalk.
The gas assessment indicated that no gas protection measures were necessary for the
proposed development.
A summary of recommended remedial actions is given below:
• Placement of a clean cover system comprising the encapsulation and/or removal of
made ground within 600mm of clean (certified suitable for use) material in the
private gardens and 300mm in areas of communal soft landscaping.
Remedial action is required in the proposed private gardens between Blocks B and C
and communal soft landscaping adjacent to Thornham Grove.

2.4.3 Remediation Method Statement. February 2014, Ref 26640 – 01 (00)

This report details remediation of the site to address the potential risks to human health
identified in the previous report. Mitigation measures would also address the
exceedances of GAC to flora.
The following remedial measures were recommended in the proposed private gardens
between Blocks B and C and communal soft landscaping adjacent to Thornham Grove:
• Removal of Made Ground to 600mm and 300mm below finished level within private
garden and soft landscaped respectively (or to the base of the made ground if
shallower) to remove the bulk of the contamination identified within the shallow
made ground;
• Installation of a coloured (not black or white) geotextile membrane across the
formation layer to act as an indicator membrane for future residents and prevent
intermixing with remaining made ground;
• Import 600mm of clean topsoil / subsoil in provide gardens and 300mm in area of
communal soft landscaped areas;
• The off-site disposal of arisings to a suitably licensed waste management facility;
and
• Off site disposal of Made Ground excavated from service trenches as contaminated
soil and the backfilling of trenches with suitable, uncontaminated backfill material.

Hill Partnership Ltd 5

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
3 GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY AND
HYDROLOGY
3.1 Geology

3.1.1 General characteristics

The geological map for the area (British Geological Survey, 1994) indicates that the
eastern half of the site is underlain by Kempton Park Gravel and the western half by
Alluvium. However, published borehole logs from the British Geological Survey show
that the Kempton Park Gravel is also likely to extend across the whole of the site. The
superficial deposits are underlain by the Lambeth Group, which consists the Reading,
Woolwich and Upnor Formations. The Lambeth Group is further underlain by the
Thanet Sand Formation, with White Chalk at depth.
Site investigations carried out by RSK indicate Kempton Park Gravel to extend across
the whole of the site. With underlying deposits indicated as the Woolwich formation over
Upnor formation over Thanet Sands over Chalk.
On the basis of the published geological maps of the area and RSK investigation details
the full succession of strata beneath the site is likely to comprise:

Hill Partnership Ltd 6

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 Table 3-1: Conjectural geological succession beneath the site

Geological Brief Description Depth to Top of Anticipated

Unit Stratum (m) Thickness (m)
Superficial Soils/Drift

Made Mainly described in the logs as dark brown/brown GL 0.5 to 2.5

Ground clayey gravely sand. Gravel being flint, brick,
concrete and occasional ash.
Kempton Generally comprising medium dense orange 0.5 to 2.5 3.4 to 6.7
Park brown clayey sandy gravel. Gravel being flint.
Gravel
Solid Geology Deposits
Woolwich Formation – stiff to very stiff grey silty 3.9 to 7.4 4.2 to 5.1
CLAY with thinly laminated grey silt lenses and
shell fragments.
Lambeth Upnor Formation – variable generally described 8.5 to 11.7 4.5 to 5.4
Group – as green grey clayey sand with gravel. Gravel is
with flint and fine shell fragments. Occasionally
subgroups described as stiff clay – generally at depth
given
below
Thanet Sand-very dense light grey SAND 13.0 to 17.1 15.5 (BH1
other
boreholes
terminated
in Thanet
Sand)
Chalk Structureless Chalk, white gravely clayey silt with 28.5 unproven
occasional flint gravels.

3.2 Hydrogeology

3.2.1 General characteristics

Based on the geology of the site referred to above, the hydrogeology of the site is likely
to be characterised by the presence of a shallow aquifer comprising the River Terrace
Deposits and Lambeth Group overlying a semi-confined aquifer comprising the Thanet
Sands and Chalk at depth. The basal beds of the Lambeth Group, the Thanet Sand and
the Chalk are expected to be in hydraulic continuity.
The shallow groundwater within the Kempton Park Gravel was recorded at depths of
3.50-3.65m AOD the depth to the groundwater within the Lambeth Group, Thanet Sand
and Chalk was recorded as 20.35m AOD.
Shallow groundwater in the site area is anticipated to flow westerly/south-westerly
direction towards the river Lea and Thames River.

Hill Partnership Ltd 7

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
3.2.2 Vulnerability of groundwater resources
The Kempton Park Gravel and Lambeth Group (Woolwich, and Upnor Formations) are
classified by the Environment Agency (EA) as Secondary aquifers. The Thanet
Sands/White Chalk are classified by the EA as Principal Aquifers.

3.2.3 Licensed groundwater abstraction

In terms of aquifer protection, the EA generally adopts a three-fold classification of
Source Protection Zones for public supply abstraction wells.
• Zone I - or ‘Inner Protection Zone’ is located immediately adjacent to the
groundwater source and is based on a 50-day travel time. It is designed to protect
against the effects of human activity and biological/chemical contaminants that may
have an immediate effect on the source.
• Zone II - or ‘Outer Protection Zone’ is defined by a 400-day travel time to the source.
The travel time is designed to provide delay and attenuation of slowly degrading
pollutants.
• Zone III - or ‘Total Catchment’ is the total area needed to support removal of water
from the borehole, and to support any discharge from the borehole.

Information available on the EA website indicates that the site lies within zone II of the
groundwater SPZ for public supply boreholes located 422m to the south and 492m to
the southeast of the site.

3.3 Hydrology
There are no ponds, streams or drainage ditches on or adjacent to the site. The nearest
identified surface watercourse to the site is Hennikers Ditch approximately 420m to the
northwest of the site.

Hill Partnership Ltd 8

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
4 PILING DESIGN
4.1 Proposed development
The proposed development is to comprise five residential apartment blocks ranging from
two to ten stories in height. Commercial premises are to be located on the ground floor.
Furthermore, a basement car park and plant room will be situated beneath the
apartment blocks across the (lower) western area of the site. The development will also
comprise areas of communal soft landscaping and private gardens.

4.2 Building design

The substructure of the building will be of concrete frame construction. The
superstructure of all the blocks will comprise of reinforced concrete framed construction.
A number of the blocks will be connected together with blocks A and B connected by a
common commercial space at ground floor level.
There will be services that puncture the floor which are normally sealed for purposes of
insect and rodent intrusion.

4.3 Foundation selection

Given the ground conditions encountered, the use of shallow foundations is not
considered a suitable design approach for the site. Continuous flight auger (CFA) piles
and segmented flight augers (close to network rail land) represent the preferred
technique for piling at this site. To support the required loads for the building, piles are
required to 20m bgl.
Details of the proposed piled foundations are given in Table 4.1 below.

Table 4-1: Details of proposed piled foundations

Design/construction Design/construction details

considerations
Pile type A plan of the locations of the proposed foundations is given in Figure 2.
The piles comprise continuous flight augers (CFA) with diameters of
350mm, 450mm and 600mm as indicated in Figure 2. All piles are to be
sleeved to 2.5m below ground level and cast 1m bgl.
Location See Figure 2
Strata in which piles In the Lower Beds of the Lambeth Group within the Thanet Sand.
will terminate
Contaminated Strata The data collated for the site indicates that the Made Ground is mildly
passed through by contaminated with respect to benzo (a) pyrene and lead. These were
piles found to be above human health criteria in some areas of the site. Zinc
and lead were also found to be above generic assessment criteria
(GAC) for plant uptake. Areas of soft landscaping and private gardens
require striping of material prior to import of clean material. This is

Hill Partnership Ltd 9

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 Design/construction Design/construction details
considerations
detailed in the RMS report.
Groundwater within the Kempton Park Gravel was reported to be slightly
impacted with predominately long chain hydrocarbons. Results from the
deep groundwater indicated only one long chain hydrocarbon (C21-
C28) of 81ug/l. No source of the contamination has been identified on
site from the site history. A former tank was identified on the northern
boundary of the site where a bridge is now present. It is likely if this was
the source of impact, impacted material would have been removed on
construction of the bridge.

4.4 Piling mat

Any material imported onto the site for use as a piling mat will comply with the
requirements given in Section 5.5.

4.5 Conceptual site model

A Conceptual Site model indicating the geology, hydrogeology and details of piling is
presented in Figure 3. This presents a block cross section identifying details of the
proposed piles, vertical variations in ground conditions, pathway linkages and off site
Controlled Waters targets. This diagrammatic representation is not to scale and should
be treated as representative only.

Hill Partnership Ltd 10

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
5 PILING RISK ASSESSMENT
5.1 Introduction
The Made Ground beneath the site within the proposed private gardens between Blocks
B and C, and communal soft landscaping adjacent to Thornham Grove were found to be
slightly impacted with lead and Benzo (a) pyrene, (recorded above human health GAC)
and zinc and lead (being above GAC for risk to flora). Proposed remedial measures
would break this pollutant linkage as out lined in the RSK RMS.
Shallow groundwater within the Kempton Park Gravels is slightly impacted by
predominately long chain hydrocarbons with one long chain hydrocarbon being identified
within the Thanet Sand/chalk.
From a review of historical data no potential source of contamination has been identified
at the site.
The conceptual site model indicates the site to be underlain by a semi-confined aquifer
comprising the Kempton Park Gravels over the Lambeth Group of Woolwich Formation,
Upnor Formation with Thanet Sands and Chalk aquifer at depth. This sequence of
deposits is expected to be in hydraulic continuity.
Shallow groundwater is likely to be encountered within the Kempton Park Gravel. The
underlying Woolwich formation of clays and silts may act as a barrier to migration of the
groundwater within the gravel to the underlying chalk aquifer.
The anticipated depth to the shallow groundwater is 3.50-3.65m AOD. The depth to
groundwater within the Thanet Sand and Chalk is recorded as 20.35m AOD.
The information presented in the conceptual site model and confirmed by the chemical
data, indicates that no pathway currently exists for the identified contamination to migrate
to the underlying Chalk Aquifer.
The purpose of the piling risk assessment is to ensure that the proposed piling method
will not have an adverse impact by creating new pathways for the migration of potential
contamination, primarily in relation to the protection of water resources.

5.2 Hazard identification and assessment

The six pollution scenarios outlined in the Environment Agency guidance noted above,
their applicability to the site and the proposed use of CFA piles and subsequent hazard
assessment is given in Table 5.1:

Table 5-1: Hazard identification and assessment

Pollution Description Site Applicability Hazard Assessment

Scenario
1 Creation of Applicable to this site. Low– Only localised elevated levels of B(a)P,
preferential pathways Piles will pass through Lead and zinc have been identified within the

Hill Partnership Ltd 11

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 Pollution Description Site Applicability Hazard Assessment
Scenario
through an aquitard Woolwich Formation (4.2 made ground. No on site potential sources of
to allow potential m to 5.1 thickness) contamination were identified from the site
contamination of an history, a historical tank indicated in the north
aquifer is now indicated to be a bridge. Earthworks
from the construction of the bridge would
have likely removed any source off site if
present in this area. Proposed remedial
measures on site will allow for mass removal
of impacted soils across the site from areas
of proposed soft standing. This will reduce
the contamination source with any residual
impacted soils lying beneath buildings and
hard-standing reducing the leaching pathway.
The piles will terminate in the Thanet Sand.
Any contaminated soils would not be
transported into the Thanet Sand, but would
be brought to the surface as arisings. The
concrete cast would be directly against the
soil thus sealing any potential flow path.

2 Creation of Applicable to this site Low – As above.

preferential pathways Elevated concentrations of land gas have not
through a low been detected at depth in the Lambeth group,
permeability surface therefore elevated concentrations will not
layer, allowing migrate upwards.
migration of landfill
The site has been classified as Characteristic
gas, soil gas or
Situation 1, requiring no special precautions for
contaminant vapours
the building design. A pathway for migration of
to the surface
any ground gas from the Made Ground to
atmosphere currently exists at the site since the
Made Ground is predominantly granular. The
piles will therefore not create an additional
pathway.
3 Direct contact of site Applicable to this site Low – where spoil is created appropriate
workers and others personal protective equipment (PPE) will be
with contaminated required to be worn on site and will therefore
soil arisings that mitigate the risk.
have been brought to
the surface
4 Direct contact of the Potentially applicable to Low – Remedial works are proposed at the
piles or engineered this site site, see also note in Scenario 1. Adequate
structures with concrete mix design is required.
contaminated soil or
leachate causing
degradation of
materials
5 The pushing of solid Not applicable Not applicable – all arisings are brought to the
contaminants down surface.
into an aquifer during

Hill Partnership Ltd 12

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 Pollution Description Site Applicability Hazard Assessment
Scenario
pile driving
6 Contamination of Potentially applicable to Low – Grout/cement only remains mobile until
groundwater and this site hardened.
subsequently surface
waters by wet
concrete, cement
paste or grout
7 Other – Potentially Potentially applicable to Negligible –The CFA piles will be concrete
contaminated this site filled to 1m bgl. This is within the made ground
groundwater sitting in in the majority of the site above groundwater
the tube. levels within the Kempton Gravel.
8 Other – Contact with Applicable to this site Negligible – Following redevelopment the site
potentially is unlikely to undergo further change.
contaminated soils
during legacy land
use

5.3 Justification of selected methodology

The use of shallow foundations is not an option for the site due to the nature of the
underlying ground conditions.
The hazard assessment has identified that a low environmental risk exists from the
potential for piling to create a preferential pathway for any contaminants to migrate
downwards to the underlying Secondary Aquifer and Principal Aquifer and a low risk or
for gases to migrate upwards. Appropriate QA/QC methods will also be incorporated
within the works to enable workmanship to be closely monitored.
The hazard assessment has identified a low risk of pile degradation due to the soil
environment provided, and appropriate concrete mix used for the site.
It is therefore considered that subject to an appropriate regime of quality control to
ensure workmanship, CFA piling techniques represent an applicable methodology to
protect the environment from the risk identified within the site specific hazard
assessment.

Hill Partnership Ltd 13

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
FIGURES

Hill Partnership Ltd

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (01)
 The Site

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey 1:50,000 Scale Landranger Map 177 East London,
with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Crown Copyright. Licence No. 100014807
RSK Group Limited, 18 Frogmore Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP3 9RT.

Client: Hill Partnerships Ltd Figure No: 1

SITE LOCATION Site: Chobham Farm Zone I

Job No: 26640 – Piling
PLAN Assessment

Scale: N.T.S Source: OS

P1 05.03.14 First Issue RS AT AT
Rev. Date Amendment Drawn Chkd. Appd.

18 Frogmore Road Tel: +44 (0) 1442 437500

Hemel Hempstead Fax: +44 (0) 1442 437550
Hertfordshire Email: info@rsk.co.uk
HP3 9RT Web: www.rsk.co.uk
United Kingdom

Client

HILL PARTNERSHIP LIMITED

Project Title

CHOBHAM FARM,
LEYTON ROAD,
STRATFORD
Drawing Title

FOUNDATION PLAN

Drawn Date Checked Date Approved Date

RS 05.03.14 SP 05.03.14 SP 05.03.14
Scale Orig Size Dimensions

NTS A3 m
Project No. Drawing File

26640-3 (00) 26640 (R03-00).dwg

Drawing No. Rev.

FIGURE 2 P1
 Proposed Building

Proposed BH2 Example of

BH3
Building depth of piles
mbgl
2

4
Example of Made Ground
BH1
depth of piles
6

8
Kempton Park Gravel

10

12 P1 05.03.14 First Issue RS AT AT

Woolwich Formation
Rev. Date Amendment Drawn Chkd. Appd.

14

16

18 Upnor Formation 18 Frogmore Road Tel: +44 (0) 1442 437500

Hemel Hempstead Fax: +44 (0) 1442 437550
Hertfordshire Email: info@rsk.co.uk
HP3 9RT Web: www.rsk.co.uk
United Kingdom
20

Client

22
HILL PARTNERSHIP LIMITED
Thanet Sand
24 20 20 Project Title

CHOBHAM FARM,
26
ZONE 1, STRATFORD,
28 LONDON
Drawing Title

30
Thanet Sand CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
32

Drawn Date Checked Date Approved Date

34 RS 05.03.14 SP 05.03.14 SP 05.03.14
Scale Orig Size Dimensions

36 NTS A3 m
Project No. Drawing File

26640-3 (00) 26640 (R03-00).dwg

38
Drawing No. Rev.

FIGURE 3 P1
40 Chalk

42
APPENDIX A
PERTINENT PLANS AND SITE DATA

Hill Partnership Ltd

Piling Risk Assessment: Chobham Farm Zone 1
26640-03 (00)
 Client: East Regen Ltd Figure No: 3

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN Site: Chobham Farm Zone I Job No: 26640

Scale: N.T.S Source: Client

 25 21 10 7 4 3 7 5 20 2 1 8 9

SITE BOUNDARY
SITE BOUNDARY

shop signs shop signs shop signs shop signs shop signs
MATERIALS KEY

VARIES
1. Facing Masonry: Brick, stretcher bond, weather struck joint. Bricks and mortar to be as details and
samples. Copings to be PPC aluminium to RAL tbc

2. Aluminium frame window, polyester powder coated, dark grey, matt, deep full brick reveal: windows set
9.150 back at least 195mm in brick elevations. See details. Generally windows to be full height inward opening
with no mullions, with restrictors. All windows on the elevation facing the railway line to be fixed. Cills to be
PPC aluminium RAL to match windows
3. Metal cladding: aluminium composite secret fixed tray panel, 300mm horizontal panel layout. Polyester
16 11 18 19 24 8 13 13 18 14 17 powder coated, RAL tbc. Cills to be PPC aluminium RAL to match windows

4. Windows as no.2, set flush in metal clad elevations. See details. Generally windows to be full height inward
opening with no mullions, with restrictors. All windows on the elevation facing the railway line to be fixed.
THORNHAM GROVE BLOCK C BLOCK B BLOCK A BRIDGE 2 5. Glazed curtain walling: slot including grey back painted glass spandrel panels at floor levels.

6. Bay window to Block E railway elevation: Prefabricated insulated steel frame GRP clad and insulated,
external colour to match windows tbc.
7. White opaque glass screen with supports of steel flats to RAL tbc
8. Winter garden: full height single glazed sliding toughened laminated glass panels. Floor edge track dark
grey, matt. Render soffit. PPC aluminium cills and coping RAL tbc
1 LEYTON ROAD ELEVATION 9. Winter garden balustrade: Railing of steel flats to RAL tbc as detail.

10. Projecting and corner balconies with outer face of fritted glass balustrades, with supports of steel flats to
RAL tbc: See details.

11. Garden railings to Churchman Landscape Architect's design.

1 10 18 2 2 1 2 1 4 3 20 7 10 21 25 12. Entrance Canopy: Polyester powder coated (RAL to be confirmed) profiled aluminium box section to roof
and fascia, profile as drawings, concealed fixings. Soffit to be laser cut 4-5mm PPC aluminium to match
decorative metal screens no 25 & 26. Incorporating recessed down light. See details.

13. Metal frame PPC aluminium door, RAL to match windows.

14. Glazing to commercial units entrance foyers: curtain glazing, including black painted glass - reflective as
glass, capless (black gasket joints).

15. Garden wall. Brickwork as no. 1 except the bond to be English garden wall bond. Brick-on-end coping.
See Landscape Details
16. Fine metal work gates to match garden railing (no. 11) to Landscape Architect's details.

17. Brick planter. Brickwork as no. 15. See Landscape Details

18. Rainwater pipes - Square, aluminium to same dark grey RAL as window frames with bespoke rectangular
hopper head to co-ordinate with brick coursing.

19. Secured by Design approved front doors to be part of aluminium frame.

20. Juliet balconies: of steel flats to RAL tbc: See details.

21. Decorative metal cladding and aluminium windows and doors to access to private terrace. See details

22. Cladding system to railway elevation: Precast concrete panel with brick slip (same bricks as elsewhere).
Decorative brick panels with alternate projecting bricks shown with horizontal stripes on elevation. See
details.
23. Ventilation to car park formed by hit and miss brick wall. See details.

24. Stone surround to main entrances. See Details.

25. Decorative metal screens to balconies: full height laser cut PPC aluminium.
26. Decorative metal screens to roof terraces as no.25.
27. External bike stores for vertical storage of 2 bicycles to appear as a decorative box including: structure as

SITE BOUNDARY
SITE BOUNDARY

required, single ply roof, Secured by Design pair of doors and ironmongery and full height secure
decorative metal screen as wall extending to parapet and to face of door.

General Revision Note: Tender 1 to Tender 2:

12 10 18 2 1
GA's co-ordinated with structure, services and landscape
En-suites included as Accommodation Schedule
BRIDGE 2 BLOCK F BLOCK B BLOCK C THORNHAM GROVE Block E - moved away from Bridge 2 by 2m and GA's revised accordingly
BLOCK A Entrances to residential blocks
Commercial layout and areas
Basement area
Top set back floor/s in plan and elevation particularly Block E
Window openings rationalised considering the opening, barrier, cleaning strategy
NOTES: RWP's and vents shown
Detail shown
2 BLOCK A, B AND C WEST FACING ELEVATION Intake and extract vents on elevation not shown: refer to
M&E and architect's specifications and details.
Refer to details: D Series drawings, and specification for C 25.10.13 Issue for Tender and Planning TP LM
materials and construction of all elements of the external B 24.10.13 Issue for Comment TP HYT
A 18.10.13 Issue Tender 2. TP HYT
envelope.
- 11.10.13 Issue for comment. TP HYT
Refer to civil/ infrastructure, landscape and lighting drawings rev. description
date drn aud
and specifications for materials and construction of all
drawing status
elements of the landscape/ public realm.
Refer to structural engineer's drawings and specifications
TENDER & PLANNING

Diespeker Wharf
38 Graham Street
London N1 8JX

T: 020 7336 7777 URL: www.ptea.co.uk

0 1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 F: 020 7336 0770 E: forename.surname@ptea.co.uk
METRES
project drawn audited scale date
FEET CHOBHAM FARM ZONE 1
0 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 LONDON E15 TP HYT 1:200 @ A1 11/10/13
dwg title job no. drg.no. rev
PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
SCALE 1:200 SHEET 1 08 - 076 L(00)_300 C
 10 7 1 7 4 3 5 20 2 1 22 6

MATERIALS KEY
1. Facing Masonry: Brick, stretcher bond, weather struck joint. Bricks and mortar to be as details and
samples. Copings to be PPC aluminium to RAL tbc
shop signs shop signs shop signs shop signs shop signs shop signs 2. Aluminium frame window, polyester powder coated, dark grey, matt, deep full brick reveal: windows set
back at least 195mm in brick elevations. See details. Generally windows to be full height inward opening
VARIES

with no mullions, with restrictors. All windows on the elevation facing the railway line to be fixed. Cills to be
PPC aluminium RAL to match windows

3. Metal cladding: aluminium composite secret fixed tray panel, 300mm horizontal panel layout. Polyester
powder coated, RAL tbc. Cills to be PPC aluminium RAL to match windows

4. Windows as no.2, set flush in metal clad elevations. See details. Generally windows to be full height inward
opening with no mullions, with restrictors. All windows on the elevation facing the railway line to be fixed.

17 24 18 14 5. Glazed curtain walling: slot including grey back painted glass spandrel panels at floor levels.

6. Bay window to Block E railway elevation: Prefabricated insulated steel frame GRP clad and insulated,
external colour to match windows tbc.

LEYTON ROAD BLOCK A BLOCK B BLOCK B RAILWAY 7. White opaque glass screen with supports of steel flats to RAL tbc

8. Winter garden: full height single glazed sliding toughened laminated glass panels. Floor edge track dark
grey, matt. Render soffit. PPC aluminium cills and coping RAL tbc

1 BRIDGE 2 ELEVATION (LIBERTY BRIDGE ROAD) 9. Winter garden balustrade: Railing of steel flats to RAL tbc as detail.
10. Projecting and corner balconies with outer face of fritted glass balustrades, with supports of steel flats to
RAL tbc: See details.

11. Garden railings to Churchman Landscape Architect's design.

12. Entrance Canopy: Polyester powder coated (RAL to be confirmed) profiled aluminium box section to roof
and fascia, profile as drawings, concealed fixings. Soffit to be laser cut 4-5mm PPC aluminium to match
decorative metal screens no 25 & 26. Incorporating recessed down light. See details.

13. Metal frame PPC aluminium door, RAL to match windows.

14. Glazing to commercial units entrance foyers: curtain glazing, including black painted glass - reflective as
glass, capless (black gasket joints).

15. Garden wall. Brickwork as no. 1 except the bond to be English garden wall bond. Brick-on-end coping.
See Landscape Details
3 BLOCK A 7TH FLOOR SIDE 4 BLOCK F 7TH FLOOR SIDE 16. Fine metal work gates to match garden railing (no. 11) to Landscape Architect's details.

ELEVATION ELEVATION 17. Brick planter. Brickwork as no. 15. See Landscape Details

18. Rainwater pipes - Square, aluminium to same dark grey RAL as window frames with bespoke rectangular
hopper head to co-ordinate with brick coursing.
10 1 2 5 2 1 2 1 4 3 7 20
19. Secured by Design approved front doors to be part of aluminium frame.

20. Juliet balconies: of steel flats to RAL tbc: See details.

21. Decorative metal cladding and aluminium windows and doors to access to private terrace. See details

22. Cladding system to railway elevation: Precast concrete panel with brick slip (same bricks as elsewhere).
Decorative brick panels with alternate projecting bricks shown with horizontal stripes on elevation. See
details.

23. Ventilation to car park formed by hit and miss brick wall. See details.

24. Stone surround to main entrances. See Details.

25. Decorative metal screens to balconies: full height laser cut PPC aluminium.
26. Decorative metal screens to roof terraces as no.25.
27. External bike stores for vertical storage of 2 bicycles to appear as a decorative box including: structure as
required, single ply roof, Secured by Design pair of doors and ironmongery and full height secure
decorative metal screen as wall extending to parapet and to face of door.

General Revision Note: Tender 1 to Tender 2:

GA's co-ordinated with structure, services and landscape

En-suites included as Accommodation Schedule
Block E - moved away from Bridge 2 by 2m and GA's revised accordingly
Entrances to residential blocks
Commercial layout and areas
Basement area
Top set back floor/s in plan and elevation particularly Block E
Commercial
NOTES: Window openings rationalised considering the opening, barrier, cleaning strategy
Refigeration
Internal Multi RWP's and vents shown
Compressor Pack
Detail shown
Intake and extract vents on elevation not shown: refer to

VARIES
M&E and architect's specifications and details. D 25.10.13 Issue for Tender & Planning TP LM
Refer to details: D Series drawings, and specification for C 24.10.13 Issue for Comment TP HYT

materials and construction of all elements of the external B 18.10.13 Issue for Tender 2 TP HYT
envelope. A 11.10.13 Issue for comment TP HYT
Refer to civil/ infrastructure, landscape and lighting drawings - 10.10.13 Issue for comment TP HYT
and specifications for materials and construction of all rev. date description drn aud

elements of the landscape/ public realm. drawing status

Refer to structural engineer's drawings and specifications TENDER & PLANNING

12 15 2 1 19
RAILWAY BLOCK B BLOCK A LEYTON ROAD Diespeker Wharf
38 Graham Street
BLOCK B London N1 8JX

T: 020 7336 7777 URL: www.ptea.co.uk

0 1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 F: 020 7336 0770 E: forename.surname@ptea.co.uk

2 BLOCK E, F AND A SOUTH FACING ELEVATION METRES

project drawn audited scale date
FEET CHOBHAM FARM ZONE 1
0 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 LONDON E15 TP HYT 1:200 @ A1 10/10/13
dwg title job no. drg.no. rev
PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
SCALE 1:200 SHEET 2 08-076 L(00)_301 D