A7 Transportation and Access: Application 2 - LBHF

Transcription

1 A7 Transportation and Access: Application 2 - LBHF Addendum to the Environmental Statement Volume I January 2012

2 Introduction A7.1 This Chapter of the Addendum to the June 2011 Environmental Statement (ES) (Volume I), hereafter referred to as the ES Addendum, considers the amendments that have been made to the Earls Court Development Proposals in the context of transport and access. Consideration is given to the changes that have been made to the outline elements of the Earls Court Development Proposals in addition to the details submitted on development plots WV01, WV02 and WV05 and their subsequent potential affect on the impacts to transport and access as defined within the June 2011 ES. A7.2 In addition, as appropriate, additional environmental information and clarifications are provided within this ES Addendum Chapter as a result of consultation responses received to date on this technical aspect of the ES. A7.3 This Chapter of the Addendum has been prepared by WSP who, have used revised traffic modelling and professional judgment to determine whether the alternations to the Earls Court Development Proposals will result in any changes to the potential residual impacts of the Proposals on the transport networks. Summary of the Conclusions of the June 2011 Environmental Statement A7.4 Chapter 7: Transportation & Access of the June 2011 ES (Volume I) includes a full assessment of the impact of the June 2011 Earls Court Development Proposals on the surrounding road network, the local bus network, underground and rail networks and walk and cycle networks. The assessment has included traffic surveys, the use of Transport for London s (TfL s) transport models for forecasting future traffic on the highway network (in 2031, the anticipated year of completion of the Development Proposals), analysis of cycle, bus and pedestrian routes and station capacity assessments. Consideration has been given to the potential impacts to the surrounding road network, the local bus network, underground and rail networks and walk and cycle networks during both the demolition and construction phases and on completion and occupation of the Earls Court Development Proposals. A7.5 Demolition and construction will generate short-term increases in vehicle movements and passenger trips on the highway and the public transport network in vicinity of the Earls Court Site, however, these increases are not expected to cause any impact on highway, bus, underground or rail services. The residual impacts to these modes of transport are considered to be of negligible significance. A7.6 Minor impacts will be experienced on the walk and cycle networks as a result of Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGVs) entering and exiting the Earls Court Site. Temporary accesses and crossings of pedestrian and cycle routes will result in some localised reduced pedestrian and cyclist amenity. In order to mitigate impacts, the phase specific Construction Environmental Management Plans (CEMP) will set out details of the management of vehicle movements and the routes to be used by construction traffic and the site access/egress arrangement will be agreed with the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (LBHF), the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (RBKC) and TfL. The residual impacts to the local walk and cycle network in relation to the change in level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists and the change in pedestrian and cyclist amenity are assessed as being of minor adverse significance. A7.7 A review of the road traffic associated with the Earls Court Development Proposals has been undertaken. In addition, the future forecast growth in road traffic across the Earls Court area in the absence of the Earls Court Development Proposals has been considered in consultation with TfL. When considering the future forecast growth in road traffic, the increased road traffic associated with the Earls Court Development Proposals is insignificant. The analysis indicates that the road traffic associated with the Earls Court Development Proposals can be accommodated on the highway A7.8 A number of mitigation measures are proposed to improve the coordination and performance of the local highway network and to smooth traffic flows. Measures include the optimisation of road signal timings and proposals for the North End Road / Lillie Road junction to be converted from its double mini-roundabout layout into a four-arm signal controlled junction with direct pedestrian crossings and improved cyclist facilities. As a result of these measures in addition to the main of making the Earls Court Site a highly accessible place where people move around freely and efficiently and supporting transport strategies will help to ensure that residents and employees can undertake journeys in a sustainable yet viable way, the residual impact to the highway network is assessed as being of negligible significance. A7.9 In terms of public transport, the assessment has considered anticipated bus demand, plus changes in underground and overground line loadings, and station capacities. A7.10 With regard bus demand, the results for the morning peak period show that overall bus demand is forecast to fall from existing levels due to TfL s committed District Line, Piccadilly Line and West London Line service frequency improvements. The addition of the Earls Court Development Proposals see some increases in demand above the future (2031) baseline (without the Development Proposals), but overall passenger numbers are still less than the current situation. The residual impact on the bus network is therefore considered to be of negligible significance. A7.11 In terms of the number of people using the underground network (specifically in terms of the number of available seats or the number of people standing per m2), the level of crowding during the morning peak hour would be similar to the current situation despite a projected increase in demand of 26% (without the Earls court Development Proposals). This is due to the increases in capacity provided by the District and Piccadilly Line upgrades. In the afternoon rush hour, the level of crowding is lower than in the morning peak hour. Overall the residual impact of the Earls Court Development Proposals on the underground network is considered to be of negligible significance. A7.12 In relation to the West London Line (overground services), taking into consideration the planned capacity improvements, the Earls Court Development Proposals will lead to a small change in the number of people using the West London Line overground rail services in the morning peak hour, equivalent to 6 additional passengers per carriage. In the afternoon rush hour, standing densities are higher, however, when the demand associated with the Earls Court Development Proposals is compared against the 2031 baseline position, the largest increase equates to 0.15 passengers /m2. Overall the residual impact of the Earls Court Development Proposals on the West London Line / overground network is considered to be of negligible significance. A7.13 With regards to walking and cycling, the Earls Court Development Proposals will also provide pedestrian routes across the Earls Court Site resulting in a highly accessible place where people move around freely and efficiently, and its scale, diversity and quality will enable it to be a self-contained highly walkable neighbourhood where daily needs are easily met via a short walk on a safe and attractive street and therefore with regard to these modes of transport, the Earls Court Development Proposals are considered to deliver major beneficial impacts. A7.14 Additional links through the Earls Court Site allow for significantly improved pedestrian and cyclist accessibility within area whilst improved crossings allow for enhanced access to stations. The overall residual impact in terms of the level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists is assessed as being of major beneficial significance. Mitigation Measures A7.15 The mitigation measures applicable to the highway network have been briefly discussed in the preceding section. In addition, a number of other transportation and access mitigation measures are proposed. The full mitigation measures package can be found within Chapter 7: Transportation & Access of the June 2011 ES (Volume I). A selection of these mitigation measures are outlined below: Residential car parking at a ratio of 0.6 spaces per residential dwelling; A hierarchy of transport strategies and street typologies to ensure the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users have priority over the needs of private motor vehicles; Provision of a comprehensive pedestrian and cycle network with high quality cycle lanes and pavements to create a wide choice of routes within the development and integrate with existing walking and cycling routes (including connections to the proposed cycle superhighway), providing attractive and easy connections to and from the area; Off site improvements such as widening and resurfacing of existing cycle lanes, improved road junction and pedestrian crossing points and opportunities to improve pedestrian and cycle access to public transport; Electric car charging points (20% active with further 20% passive) will be provided throughout the Earls Court Development Proposals with the car club being largely made up of electric vehicles when feasible; A7-1

3 Widening of footways, financial contributions to improve pedestrian and cyclist facilities, delivery of a pedestrian crossing in conjunction with new highway access to / from the A4 / West Cromwell Road; A financial contribution towards the implementation of a wayfinding strategy by TfL, LBHF, and RBKC with enhanced signage and information provision in accordance with the Legible London guidelines; Financial contribution to the improvement of existing bus stops along North End Road, Old Brompton Road, Warwick Road and Earls Court Road. Provision of a financial contribution to London Buses to support the delivery of new or extended services; On-site bus standing areas to replace and enhance existing facilities; Improvements to West Kensington and Brompton Stations and a new entrance to Earls Court Station; and A range of hard and soft measures such as the provision of space for London Cycle Hire Hubs and the presence of on site management to operate concierge and delivery management strategy. Transportation & Access Residual Impacts A7.16 The residual impacts of the demolition and construction transportation and access impact assessment are assessed as follows: Negligible in terms of the change in traffic flows on the highway network; Negligible in terms of the change in passenger densities on the underground and overground rail networks; Minor adverse in terms of the change in level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle network; and Minor adverse in terms of the change in level of amenity for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle A7.17 The assessments of the potential transportation and access effects of the Earls Court Development Proposals have not raised any significant issues regarding the capacity of the transport network to cater for the Development s travel demand. A7.18 The residual transportation and access impacts of the completed and occupied Earls Court Development Proposals are assessed as follows: Negligible in terms of the change in traffic flows on the highway network; Negligible in terms of the change in passenger densities on the underground and overground rail networks; Major beneficial in terms of the change in level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle network; and Major beneficial in terms of the change in level of amenity for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle Review of the June 2011 Cumulative Impact Assessment A7.19 The Cumulative Impact Assessment presented within Chapter 7: Transportation & Access of the June 2011 ES (Volume I) considers the cumulative impacts associated with the Earls Court Development Proposals and the emerging Seagrave Road Development Proposals. The Seagrave Road Site is a key site for redevelopment within the Earls Court and West Kensington Opportunity Area (ECWKOA). In terms of other development schemes in the area, otherwise known as cumulative schemes, the travel demands across the different modes of transport have been included within the forecast future year of As such, they have inherently been taken into consideration within the Cumulative Impact Assessment. A7.20 The cumulative transportation and access residual impacts of the completed and occupied Earls Court and Seagrave Road Development Proposals (plus other cumulative schemes ) are assessed as follows: Minor adverse in terms of the change in traffic flows on the highway network; Negligible in terms of the change in passenger densities on the underground and overground rail networks; Major beneficial in terms of the change in level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle network; and Major beneficial in terms of the change in level of amenity for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle Further Information and Clarifications as a Result of Consultation A7.21 The following sections of this Chapter of the ES Addendum either provide further environmental information or present clarifications on the information presented within Chapter 7: Transportation & Access of the June 2011 ES (Volume I) as a result of consultation on the ES. All the consultation comments made on the ES and the Applicant s responses can be found within the Addendum to ES Volume III: Appendix B. The distinction between the provision of further environmental information or clarifications is made in the following sections of this Chapter. Clarification on Testing of the Maximum and Minimum Parameters A7.22 As described in Chapter A2: EIA Addendum Methodology of this ES Addendum, the likely significant effects of the Earls Court Development Proposals on transportation and access have been assessed, in both the June 2011 EIA and further, in relation to the revised Earls Court Development Proposals addressed in this ES Addendum, using the maximum areas proposed for each use class. This is the maximum amount of development by use class as described in the Development Specification. A7.23 As a greater amount of development leads to a higher trip generation which equates to a greater amount of road traffic, passenger numbers and pedestrians attributable to the Earls Court Development Proposals, this is considered to provide a robust assessment of the likely significant impacts. This scenario generates a greater likely impact on transportation and access aspects when considered in relation to a reduced amount of development. A7.24 In terms of deconstruction, demolition and construction impacts on transportation and access aspects, the principal consideration is the impacts of heavy good vehicle (HGV) movements on the road The number of HGV movements has been defined from the timeslices and the estimates of demolition and construction waste arisings and construction materials. The timeslices are based on the Illustrative Masterplan and present a realistic sequence of deconstruction / demolition and construction activities. The estimates of demolition and construction waste arisings and construction materials are also based on the Illustrative Masterplan and so generate a reasonable assessment of the number of HGV movements. The sequence of deconstruction / demolition and construction activities is not dependent on the scale of the development. Whist the estimates of demolition and construction waste arisings and construction materials are dependent on the scale of development, the likely effects of the Earls Court Development Proposals on the road network arising during the deconstruction, demolition and construction stages are unlikely to alter as a result of variations within the outline parameters for scale or quantum of development. A7.25 The scale of development presented by the Illustrative Masterplan sits within the maximum and minimum scale parameters. As noted in Chapter A2: EIA Addendum Methodology of this ES Addendum, the variation between the maximum and minimum parameters is minimal which together with the restrictions in the Design Guidelines and the requirements of the Development Specification (in terms of the amount of development) gives rise to very limited flexibility in the amount or scale of proposed development. As such, it is considered that HGV movements based on a masterplan built out to either the minimum or maximum scale parameter will not give rise to a material change in the significance of impacts on the road network during the deconstruction, demolition and construction stages of the Earls Court Development Proposals. A7.26 There is on-going consideration and consultation on the potential to bring demolition and construction waste and materials by rail. If this is concluded as being viable there will be a reduction in the forecast impacts associated with the short term demolition and construction phases of development. Review of Planning Policy Context A7.27 Chapter 7: Transport & Access of the June 2011 ES summarises the relevant planning policy context (as of June 2011). Consideration is given to national and regional planning policy; and local planning policy of relevance to the A7-2

4 LBHF. In addition, the Chapter considers the local policy context of the RBKC with respect to transportation and access. Whilst Planning Application 2 is for LBHF determination, the Earls Court Site straddles the borough boundary of the LBHF and the RBKC. National Planning Policy A7.28 The review of the national planning policy context (as presented in the June 2011 ES) remains valid and so applicable to the revised Planning Applications for the Earls Court Development Proposals. A7.29 In July 2011, a draft of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ref. A7-1) was issued for consultation. The key recurring themes include the importance of complimentary land uses being accessible by public transport, walking and cycling, and for car parking levels to promote sustainable transport policies. Regional Planning Policy A7.30 Since June 2011, the Draft Replacement London Plan has been adopted (Ref. A7-2). The overall strategic approach is summarised in Policy 6.1 as being the closer integration of transport and development. Paragraph 6.1 explains that the transport policies are primarily intended to support delivery of the Mayor s sixth objective - that London should be a city where it is easy, safe and convenient for everyone to access jobs, opportunities and facilities with an efficient and effective transport system which actively encourages more walking and cycling and makes better use of the Thames. A7.31 Policy 6.1 encourages closer integration of transport and development by: Encouraging patterns of development that reduce the need to travel, especially by car; Improving the capacity and accessibility of public transport, walking and cycling, particularly in areas of greatest demand; Supporting development that generates high levels of trips at locations with high levels of public transport accessibility; Improving interchange between different forms of transport, particularly around major rail and Underground stations; Facilitating the efficient distribution of freight whilst minimising its impacts on the transport network; Supporting measures that encourage shifts to more sustainable modes and appropriate demand management; Promoting greater use of low carbon technology so that CO2 and other contributors to global warming are reduced; and Promoting walking by ensuring an improved urban realm. Local Planning Policy A7.32 The LBHF Core Strategy (Ref A7-3) which was adopted on 19 October The Core Strategy is the overarching LDF document, and sets out strategic objectives for transport to ensure there is high quality transport infrastructure to support development, to improve transport accessibility, reduce congestion and the need to travel, reduce and mitigate local causes of climate change, and promote healthier lifestyles. A7.33 The Borough-Wide Strategic Policy T1 aims to improve transport provision and accessibility, especially on north-south routes and by seeking better connections to rail services. The development-related aspects of this policy seek: Access improvements for all, particularly people with disabilities, as part of planning permissions for new developments; To ensure appropriate parking is provided to meet the essential needs of development without impacting on the quality of the urban environment; and To relate the intensity of development to public transport accessibility and highway capacity. A7.34 The first draft ECWKOA SPD was published in March 2011 and a revised draft for consultation was published in November 2011 (Ref A7-4). The revised draft SPD provides supplementary detail to policies contained within LBHF s adopted Core Strategy (October 2011) and RBKC s adopted Core Strategy (December 2010) (Ref A7-5). It also provides supplementary detail to the adopted London Plan. A7.35 There are 26 transport Key Principles set out in the initial consultation draft: TRN1: Any development proposals should demonstrate by way of robust Transport Assessments that the impact of development on the transport networks is acceptable. TRN2: Development should be supported by robust Transport Assessments that set out phase by phase what the cumulative impact of development will be and how it will be mitigated at each phase. TRN3: All streets within the Opportunity Area (OA) should be built to adoptable standards and offered to the Highway Authority for adoption. TRN4: All streets within the OA should be accessible to all with appropriate gradients where changes in level are experienced, generous footway widths and accessible crossing facilities. The streets should provide safe and direct north-south and east-west movement for pedestrians and cyclists and integrate well with the surrounding streets. TRN5: Development should provide a coherent pedestrian wayfinding strategy in and around the OA. TRN6: New development should fund environmental improvements and deliver wider, clearer and higher quality footways on the existing streets surrounding the OA and contribute towards the A4 improvement scheme. TRN7: New development should deliver new pedestrian crossings and improve existing crossings in order to meet the increase demand from development and significantly improve the pedestrian environment and access into and out of the OA. TRN8: New development should deliver improved onward connections for cyclists into the streets surrounding the OA. TRN9: New development should deliver increased levels of cycle parking to London Plan and Local Development Plan standards, particularly at key public transport interchanges, and the Mayor s Cycle Hire Scheme should be extended into the OA. TRN10: New development should deliver physical improvements to all three stations to accommodate the forecast increase in passenger numbers. TRN11: Development in the OA should not result in excessive crowding or delay on the London Underground or National Rail and Overground networks, compared to predicted levels in TRN12: New development should provide capacity and environmental improvements to Earl s Court Station, including the reopening of the existing pedestrian tunnel beneath Warwick Road, as part of ensuring the station can accommodate the forecast increase in passenger numbers. TRN13: New development should deliver extra capacity at the gate lines, ticket halls and circulation space at West Brompton and West Kensington stations in order to accommodate the development related trips. TRN14: Step-free access should be provided at West Brompton and West Kensington stations and any new entrance at Earl s Court Station. TRN15: New development should deliver platform lengthening to accommodate eight car trains on the West London Line platforms at West Brompton. TRN16: New development should deliver significantly enhanced interchange facilities at all three stations. TRN17: Additional bus services, routes and stops funded by development will be necessary within and around the OA to accommodate new development trips. TRN18: Development should include taxi rank and coach parking facilities within the OA. TRN19: Development traffic cannot be accommodated on the existing road network without significant capacity improvements, which should be clearly identified in development proposals along with appropriate funding mechanisms to ensure improvements are delivered before development demand is introduced. TRN20: Development proposals should include deliverable and funded road network improvements that reduce delays on the A4 to 2009 levels. TRN21: Development should not worsen traffic conditions to unacceptable levels on existing streets and a review of local traffic management arrangements should be undertaken to address this and provide funded mitigations where necessary. TRN22: New development should investigate improvements to the Earl s Court One Way System, including to the pedestrian environment, and should fund a package of measures as identified in the investigation. A7-3

5 TRN23: All junctions from the OA on to the existing road network and road links across the OA should be assessed to ensure they have no unacceptable impacts on the existing road network in terms of vehicle capacity, road safety and urban design. TRN24: Car parking levels should be minimised in order to restrain car trips, except for parking for car club vehicles, which are encouraged in order to provide an alternative to private car ownership and use. TRN25: Development proposals should be supported by an on-street parking strategy. TRN26: Development proposals should be supported by substantial measures to minimise the impact of freight, including during the construction period. A7.36 The LBHF Core Strategy was adopted on the 19th October As referred to above, within the Regional Planning Policy section of this ES Addendum Chapter, the revised draft ECWKOA SPD provides supplementary detail to policies contained within the LBHF s adopted Core Strategy. Review of the Baseline Conditions A7.37 The transportation and access baseline as presented within the June 2011 ES remains valid and so applicable to the revised Earls Court Development Proposals. There have been no changes to the surrounding highway network for known changes to the transport networks considered within the assessment of the Earls Court Development Proposals. Review of the Impact of the Design Changes A7.38 The design changes and amendments to the Planning Applications form and content are described in full in Chapter 4: The Design Changes. A7.39 The demolition and construction related road vehicle movements per hour per construction sequence are estimated based on the estimates of key deconstruction, demolition and construction waste and material quantities (Chapter 5: Deconstruction, of the June 2011 ES (Volume I)). With the exception of the additional HGV trips associated with the slight increase (+2.5% or 5,000m 3 ) in the amount of excavation proposed (additional 610 trips each way (120 trips each way in Year 2 and 490 trips each way in Year 3 split 50:50 across Gates 1 and 2)) no alterations have been made to the estimates of key deconstruction, demolition and construction waste and material quantities, and so with the exception of the above, there are no other amendments to the anticipated number of demolition and construction related road vehicle movements. A7.40 In transportation and access impact terms the changes can be seen as beneficial as the amount of development (floorspace) has been reduced and therefore the associated transport demands reduced also. A7.41 The change in floorspace proposed by the revised Earls Court Development Proposals results in a reduction of peak hour transport demands across all modes by 10% in both the morning (AM) peak and in afternoon (PM) peaks when compared to the June 2011 Earls Court Development Proposals. January 2012 Potential Impacts & Mitigation Measures A7.42 The slight increase in HGV movements has been considered and it can be concluded that these additional trips have no additional impact on the surrounding road As such, the impacts on the highway network remain being of negligible significance. The impacts on the level of accessibility and amenity for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle network remain as minor adverse in significance. Generally, the flow of construction traffic would be spread evenly over the working day, with occasional peaks resulting from operational requirements for materials and stock-piling at the Earls Court Site. In practice, it is likely that the contractor will choose to limit traffic flows during the background peak hours. A7.43 In light of the changes made to the outline elements of the Planning Applications in addition to the details submitted in relation to development plots WV01, WV02 and WV05, the impacts to the transport networks remain largely unchanged or reduced slightly in scale and therefore the proposed mitigation strategy and so the resultant residual impacts remain as reported within Chapter 7: Transportation & Access of the June 2011 ES (Volume I) (see below for a summary). A7.44 The only significant change to the mitigation being promoted as part of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals is the improvements being made to each of the stations in the study area which include Earls Court, West Brompton and West Kensington. Although only minor works would be required to mitigate the impact of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals, significant further work is being proposed to ensure that each station has a level of operational performance better than is experienced today despite the increase in passenger numbers. The proposed works would also see all stations becoming full step free accessible. The details of the proposals can be found in the addendum to the TA prepared for and submitted in support of Planning Application 2 (Ref. A7-6). January 2012 Residual Impact Assessment A7.45 The residual impacts of the demolition and construction traffic remain as being assessed as follows: Negligible in terms of the change in traffic flows on the highway network; Negligible in terms of the change in passenger densities on the LUL and Network Rail modes; Minor Adverse in terms of the change in level of accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists across the walk and cycle network; Minor Adverse in terms of the change in level of amenity for pedestrians and cyclists across he walk and cycle A7.46 The assessments of the potential transportation and access effects of the June 2011 Earls Court Development Proposals have not raised any significant issues regarding the capacity of the transport network to cater for the Development s related travel demand. This is still valid particularly given the reduced Development demand of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals. A7.47 The revised Earls Court Development Proposal s demand has been found to be accommodated on the highway, public transport, pedestrian and cyclist networks with appropriate new junction and access arrangements, subject to the mitigation of local impacts as outlined in the section above. A7.48 Together with the Framework Travel Plan, the transportation and access impact on the highway network, bus network and LUL and Network Rail modes of transport remain as being assessed as impacts of negligible significance. A7.49 The Earls Court Development Proposals will also provide pedestrian and cycle linkages across the site and deliver an open and highly accessible place where people move around freely and efficiently, and its scale, diversity and quality will enable it to be a self-contained highly walkable neighbourhood where daily needs are easily met via a short walk on a safe and attractive street and therefore with regard to these modes, the development can be considered to be delivering beneficial impacts. It can therefore be considered that the Earls Court Development Proposals will have a major beneficial effect for pedestrians and cyclists in the local area, whereby both improved accessibility and amenity will be delivered. These benefits remain as part of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals. Review of the Cumulative Impact Assessment Combined Effects of Individual Impacts (Type 1) A7.50 A review of the combined effects of individual impacts on identified sensitive receptors has been undertaken. A7-4

6 A7.51 An exercise which tabulates the residual impacts stated in the June 2011 ES (Volume I) and this ES Addendum against relevant receptors has been completed, and the potential for impact interactions and so cumulative effects has been identified. This is presented within Chapter A18: Cumulative Impact Assessment of this ES Addendum. Cumulative Impacts with Other Schemes (Type 2) A7.52 In addition to the assessment of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals alone, this ES Addendum Chapter considers the potential for cumulative impacts. The Cumulative Impact Assessment Scenario considered within the transportation and access impact assessment differs slightly to those Scenarios considered throughout the remainder of the ES. This is because the assessment of transportation and access impacts takes account of a future background transport demand (i.e. a future baseline scenario which account for natural growth, rather than growth attributed to the revised Earls Court Development Proposals). This future background transport demand takes account of the other cumulative schemes, as detailed within Chapter A2: EIA Addendum Methodology. A7.53 A review of the Cumulative Schemes that were considered within the June 2011 Cumulative Impact Assessment has been undertaken. The following amendment (change in planning status from pending consideration to resolution to grant planning consent ) and two additional schemes are acknowledged: Amendment: Hammersmith Embankment residential led scheme 2011/00407/COMB, resolution to grant 23 September 2011; Additional cumulative scheme: Fulham Wharf, 51 Townmead Road, SW6 2SY 2010/02481/FUL resolution to grant 5 July 2011; and Additional cumulative scheme: Westfield mixed use retail and residential led extension to the existing Westfield London shopping centre 2011/02940/OUT submitted for planning. A7.54 It is important that the cumulative schemes are taken into account without double-counting their traffic into the forecasts of background traffic growth. Therefore the TA for each of the cumulative schemes has been reviewed against TfL s London Transportation Study (LTS) growth forecasts, confirming that the additional travel demand associated with all of the cumulative schemes are already counted into the background growth forecasts for the 2021 and 2031 Future Baseline scenarios. The detail of this review is set out in Appendix F of the TA which was submitted in support of the June 2011 Planning Applications. A7.55 In addition to the cumulative schemes, the TA takes account of travel demand generated by other developments further afield. This has been achieved by using LTS forecasts, with LTS Version being provided by TfL for use as part of the Planning Applications. Discussions with TfL have confirmed that further cumulative assessments are being progressed by their consultants to clarify any strategic implications of the Western Arc developments. A7.56 As such, with regards to transportation and access impacts, the following Cumulative Impact Scenario has been considered: SCENARIO 2: The revised Earls Court Development Proposals PLUS the revised Seagrave Road Development Proposals (assessment year of 2031). A7.57 The conclusions of this assessment were that the potential transport effects of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals in combination with the revised Seagrave Road Development Proposals will not raise any significant issues regarding the capacity of the transport network to cater for the Development s related travel demand. This is still valid given the reduced development demand of the revised Earls Court Development Proposals and the negligible demand associated with the revised Seagrave Road Development Proposals. References Ref A7-1 Communities and Local Government, July 2011; Draft National Planning Policy Framework, July Ref A7-2 GLA, 2011; The London plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London, July Ref A7-3 London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, 2011; Core Strategy. Ref A7-4 Greater London Authority / LBHF / RBKC, November 2011; Revised Draft Earls Court and West Kensington Opportunity Area Supplementary Planning Document. Ref A7-5 Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, 2010; Core Strategy. Ref A7-6 WSP, on behalf of Earls Court Properties Limited, (January 2012); Earls Court Application 2 Addendum to the Transport Assessment. Conclusions A7.58 The key design changes made to the outline elements of the Planning Applications in addition to the submission of details on layout, scale and appearance of development plots WV01, WV02 and WV05 have no material impact on the significance of the impacts to transport networks in the area. The reduced floorspace would result in a reduced travel demand and therefore the June 2011 assessment of transportation and access impacts therefore remains applicable to the revised Earls Court Development Proposals. A7-5