Committee: Date: Classification: Report No: Agenda Item: Cabinet 6 September Unrestricted 2006

Report of: Title:

Corporate Director Development & (Capacity Enhancement) Renewal Phase 2, TWA Order Application

Originating officer(s) Wards Affected: Joanna Wu, Strategic Transport Planner Blackwall and , , , Bromley-by-Bow, East

1. SUMMARY

1.1 The Draft Docklands Light Railway (DLR) (capacity enhancement and 2012 Games preparation) Transport & Works Act (TWA) Order 2006 was submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport by the Docklands Light Railways Limited in August 2006 for consideration.

1.2 The TWA Order, if confirmed, will allow the DLR to extend the length of the station platforms between Poplar and Beckton (“East Route”); and Poplar and Stratford (“North Route”) to accommodate 3-car trains on this part of the DLR network.

1.3 The Draft DLR (Capacity Enhancement and 2012 Games Preparation) Order was published on 31st July, 2006 and submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport on 2nd August 2006. The strict deadline for receipt of objections to the proposed Order expires on 13th September 2006.

1.4 The submission of this TWA Order follows the previous DLR 3-car Capacity Enhancement (Phase 1) TWA Order, which was submitted in June 2004 for the enhancement works on the Bank/Tower Gateway to Lewisham DLR branch. Objections from Tower Hamlets were made in relation to the adverse environmental impacts upon local amenity during construction and operation. Subsequent negotiation between the Council and the DLR secured significant improvements to the scheme and additional controls for the Council. This allowed us to withdraw our objections. A Public Inquiry was held in February and the TWA Order was approved in October 2005. It is envisaged that the construction of Phase 1 will start in early 2007 with 3-car trains operating by autumn 2009 on that section of the railway.

1.5 This report sets out the background of the proposed DLR upgrade scheme and summarises the necessary infrastructure works and anticipated impacts within this Borough. It also recommends a formal position for adoption by the Council which will become the Council’s response to the DLR’s TWA Order application to the Secretary of State for Transport.

1 2. RECOMMENDATIONS

That cabinet is recommended to:-

2.1 Endorse the actions taken to date by the Corporate Directors of Development & Renewal and Environment & Culture, as set out in paragraphs 6.0 to 6.4 of this report, and confirm the basis of the LBTH Objection Letter, regarding the DLR (Capacity Enhancement and 2012 Games Preparation) Order Application, attached at Appendix “A” to this report;

2.2 Authorise the Director of Development & Renewal to continue negotiations and deal with any issues that may arise with the DLR, in respect of the DLR 3 Car Enhancement Project, with a view to withdrawing the LBTH Objection Letter, referred to in the 2.1 above, in the event of an outcome which the Corporate Director of Development & Renewal considers to be acceptable following such negotiations;

2.3 In the event of an acceptable outcome to the negotiations between LBTH and the DLR, referred to in 2.2 above, authorise the Corporate Director of Development & Renewal (in consultation with the Lead Member Housing and Development) to either withdraw the LBTH Objection letter, attached at Appendix “A” to this report, in full or in part; and

2.4 In the event of an unsuccessful outcome to the negotiations, referred to in 2.2 above, and subject to legal advice, authorise the representation of the Council at any Public Inquiry in respect of the DLR (Capacity Enhancement and 2012 Games preparation) Order.

2.5 Agree that Cabinet is satisfied that this matter is urgent, as defined in The Constitution Part 4 “Rules of Procedure”, Section 4.5 “Overview and Scrutiny Rules of Procedure” Paragraph 17 “Call in and Urgency” sub paragraph 17.1, as any delay to implementation of all the resolutions above would seriously prejudice the Authority’s and the Public’s interest; and therefore this matter should not be subject to “Call in”.

______

Local Government Act, 2000 (Section 97) List of “Background Papers” used in the preparation of this report

Brief description of “back ground papers” Name and telephone number of holder and address where open to inspection.

DLR (Capacity Enhancement and 2012 Tower Hamlets Town Hall, Mulberry Games Preparation) Order Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London E14 2BG – Joanna Wu (tel: 020 7364 2542)

2 3. BACKGROUND

3.1 The Dockland Light Railways (DLR) currently carries 55 million passengers a year. With the new developments in Docklands and the preparation of 2012 Olympic and Para- Olympic Games, it is envisaged that the DLR patronage will rise to 80 million by 2009.

3.2 The upgrade of the routes between Bank/Tower Gateway to Lewisham for 3-car operation was approved by the Department for Transport (DfT) in 2005 and the construction will be commenced in early 2007 and by autumn 2009, the 3-car trains will be operating in this section. The Bank/Tower Gateway to Lewisham capacity enhancement works are known as Phase 1. The Council originally objected to this TWA Order. However, the Council was able to withdraw its objections before the Public Inquiry following successful negotiations with the DLR to minimise any potential environmental impacts.

3.3 This report focuses on the proposed 3-car DLR Capacity Enhancement works in Phase 2. It includes all DLR stations between the services from Poplar to Stratford and Poplar to Beckton.

3.4 If approved, this DLR (Capacity Enhancement) TWA Order (Phase 2) will cover the remaining parts of the network and will allow longer trains to be operated between Poplar and Stratford (north-route), and between Poplar and Beckton (east-route). These proposed upgrade works will enable the entire DLR network to operate using 3-car trains, thereby, increasing passenger capacity by 50%.

3.5 These Capacity Enhancement Works will also help the DLR to: • maintain frequent and reliable services; • increase passenger capacity; • provide better levels of passenger comfort; • maintain passenger safety at stations; • enable sustainable growth; • accelerate regeneration in the surrounding area; and • meet the passenger demand anticipated during the 2012 Olympic Games and provide a lasting legacy for the future.

3.6 The Council has recognised, in principle, the need for the increase in capacity to support future growth, including the 2012 Olympic Games, and to overcome current congestion on DLR trains. However, there is concern about potential disruption (noise, vibration, dust, light intrusion and traffic diversions) during construction and about the longer-term impact of noise levels from running longer trains.

3.7 Members should be aware that this recently deposited Phase 2 TWA replicates almost entirely the original Phase 1 Order and does not reflect the improvements secured by the Council over many months of negotiation with the DLR and ultimately formally embodied in a legal agreement which allowed the Council to withdraw its objections. This has proved somewhat frustrating and may necessitate further negotiations which could perhaps have been avoided.

3.8 Details of the station works and Delta Junction improvements are summarised below.

3 Table 1: Summary Table of LBTH Station Works Station Extension Access Changes Canopy Track Direction Changes Changes East Route East East New stairs added for the Canopies to be India extended platform extended to 3 car -- length Blackwall East -- As above -- North Route All Saints South Northbound platform stairs As above Crossover to be replaced with wider to be stairs and new walkway; relocated southbound platform to have a new emergency escape ramp off the south end of the platform Devons South New wider stairs to be As above Road installed replacing existing on both sides, new walkway -- to be constructed on the northbound platform Bow South Northbound platform stairs As above Crossover Church to be replaced with new to be wider stairs; southbound relocated platform to have new station access and walkway from Rainhill Way Delta A new viaduct structure will be constructed on the east side of the existing Junction viaduct, as shown below.

Figure 1: Delta Junction Improvement

4 4. THE TWA ORDER APPLICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS

4.1 On 27 June 2006 the Chief Executive received a Rule 5 notice (TWA Applications & Objections Procedures England & Wales Rules 2000) from the Docklands Light Railway of their intention to make an application within 28 days for an Order under the Transport and Works Act 1992 for the construction of the proposed upgrade of the line between Poplar and Beckton Stations (“East Route”) and between Poplar and Stratford Stations (“North Route”).

4.2 The draft Order (and supporting documents) was deposited by the DLR on 2 August 2006 and the Council had a period of 42 days (six weeks) in which to respond. The closing date of the consultation period is 13 September 2006 and the Corporate Director Development & Renewal will exercise her delegated authority to make an objection to protect the Council's position. A copy of the objection is reproduced at Appendix 'A'.

Table 2: Proposed Timetable Project Process Completion Date Public consultation and detailed scheme development March – May 2006 Application for an Order under Transport and Works 2 August 2006 Act 1992 (TWA) to authorise works submitted to the DfT Statutory Public Consultation (closing date) 13 September 2006 Public Inquiry (if required) Early 2007 Expected TWA Powers approved (subject to Summer 2007 Secretary of State for Transport approval) Expected signed contract for upgrade works Spring 2008 Expected start of construction Mid-2008 Expected completion of upgrade works Mid-2010

5. PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Residents and business 5.1 Approximately 65,000 leaflets, including a questionnaire form attached to each leaflet, were distributed to residents and businesses along the line of route to Stratford and Beckton.

5.2 The questionnaire form was returnable via freepost. Staffed displays were provided at four locations such as Tower Hamlets Town Hall, the Teviot Neighbourhood Centre and Shopping Mall, with these displays advertised two weeks in advance in local newspapers such as: Newham Recorder, East London Advertiser, Stratford and Newham Express, and Hackney Gazette.

DLR Passengers 5.3 An additional 5,000 leaflets were distributed to passengers at key interchange stations on both the Stratford and Beckton routes to ensure passengers not necessarily living

5 close to a DLR station, but using DLR, were consulted. The content of this leaflet contained the same information as the leaflet distributed to the residents.

Results from Public Consultation 5.4 440 leaflets (0.67% of total post-out) were returned from residents and 53 leaflets (or 1.06%) from DLR passengers. In addition, a petition was received from the residents of Discovery House, which is situated to the south of All Saints DLR station. The residents’ concerns were potential noise, light and visual impacts generated from the schemes. The DLR has been in dialogue with the resident who co-ordinated the petition during the design and development stage of scheme and they also suggested noise and visual mitigation measures to overcome the residents’ concerns.

5.5 Consultation with residents indicates 89% of respondents are in favour of the proposed capacity enhancement, with less than 10% opposing it. In general, residents expressed support for the capacity enhancement as they will provide better services and contribute towards wider regeneration in the area. Also, they are looking for the work to be completed as quickly as possible with minimal disruption of the service.

5.6 In the meantime, consultation with DLR passengers indicated 90% of respondents believe providing more capacity will improve their journeys. Over half reported the DLR to be crowded or very crowded when they used the railway and most of the respondents support the 3-car scheme to improve capacity for the DLR.

6. ISSUES FOR TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL

Overview 6.1 An Officer Working Group has been set up to co-ordinate the Council’s response from Development and Renewal; and Environment and Culture. An initial meeting between DLR and the Officer Steering Group was held on 17 August 2006. This provided a basis for the ongoing negotiations and expressed officers’ concerns on environmental, highways, planning and legal matters. DLR response that some information will not be available until the contractor has been appointed as the contractor will be expected the propose methods of working etc. However, officers are, in general, disappointed with the lack of details and information in the Environmental Statement.

6.2 Compared with the approved DLR Phase 1 TWA, Phase 2 as currently proposed does not address the officers’ concerns which were ultimately addressed following negotiation in the Phase 1 proposal. Examples such as the Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) and highway issues in this TWA do not comply with the Council’s standards, and do not reflect the level of agreement reached in the final Phase 1 proposals, rather they reflect the pre-negotiation position of the Phase 1 Proposals.

6.3 The time between the publication of this TWA Order and Public Inquiry is being used by officers to negotiate with the DLR with a view to resolving outstanding issues, at which point an objection may be withdrawn or contested only in part. It would be preferable to resolve any contentious issues prior to Public Inquiry which would be in the interests of both the Council and DLR.

6 6.4 The Corporate Director (Development & Renewal) will exercise her delegated authority to make an objection pending the outcome of detailed negotiations with the DLR as shown at Appendix “A”.

7. EMERGING ISSUES

General 7.1 The Council, in general, supports this DLR 3-car scheme in principle. However, the most contentious issues are likely to be concerned with whether or not the DLR would carry out the works in a satisfactory manner with minimum disruption and appropriate levels of mitigation.

7.2 Hours of work, consequent noise, vibration, dust and light pollution as well as any residue impacts will be the main issues to consider, as will the failure of DLR to take into account future development which will impact on the availability of proposed work sites/compounds.

7.3 Environmental Protection has also commented that the lack of detail in supporting documents makes them potentially unreliable as a source of information and may lead to noise impacts and the need for mitigation measures being underestimated. Therefore the DLR will need to provide further (and in some cases more recent) data for a full and meaningful evaluation to take place.

Construction Work Sites 7.4 The number of construction work sites will be required along the route to cater for station and the Delta Junction improvement works. The length of the route and the intermediate nature of the station alterations mean that a relatively large number of small sites are required for varying lengths of time. The DLR will work with the owners and users of any buildings/sites affected and agree the layout and timetable of works to ensure minimum disruption during construction. In order to minimise the impacts of construction, the DLR will be expected to observe the Council's Code of Construction Practice.

7.5 Construction traffic bringing materials to the construction compounds will cause impacts on the local traffic network by increasing congestion and affecting access. The use of traffic management measures will mitigate these problems to some extent, but some residual impacts will remain even after mitigation. Members are referred to Section 9 on the Highways and Traffic impacts and to Appendix 'C' for details.

Construction Noise/Working Hours 7.6 Any noise impact and/or localised disruption is likely to be greatest during construction. DLR specify working hours of 8am to 6pm in the Environmental Statement and it complies with the Council's normal requirements for such construction projects. However, the DLR have warned that some overnight construction for essential works (which could not be safely undertaken while the railway is in operation) are likely to be unavoidable and therefore, they have to provide additional information and this should be agreed between the Contractor, DLR and the Local Authority.

7.7 The local authority will be consulted before the works begin on the methods to be used to control noise and vibration through the Section 61 Agreements under the Control of Pollution Act 1974. Section 60 of the same Act gives the local authority powers of enforcement if such an agreement is not reached, and there has been some concern

7 that the TWA Order process (Article 42) may seek to provide the DLR with an additional statutory defence against any actions that the Council may wish to take in this regard.

Air Quality/ Dust 7.8 Air Quality Assessment has not been undertaken in this TWA and officers require this assessment to be provided separately by DLR. Dust will be created by demolition and construction. It is not possible to stop all the emissions of dust from the construction sites. However, the construction programme incorporates certain measures that will assist in minimising particle emissions and the DLR have concluded that impacts from construction dust may only very occasionally cause nuisance at surrounding properties. Measures to control dust emissions will be controlled by the Code of Construction Practice (CoCP).

3-Car Operational Noise 7.9 The impact of an additional car, ranging from +1.8 dB to +2.4dB in the daytime, on running noise is considered minimal, and Environmental Health has confirmed that an increase in noise would have to be in the order of 3dB before there is a discernible difference. However, the duration of such noise will be longer because of the increased length of the trains. Therefore, where "hotspots" are identified (where the overall levels of noise are already at the higher limits) mitigation will be sought. Any changes to instances of wheel squeal may also be an issue for mitigation. In addition platform extensions will move noise sources from platform announcements and door alarms on trains nearer to properties resulting in potential noise impacts being identified by the DLR at Bow Church, All Saints and Delta Junction Improvement.

7.10 DLR concede that beyond the introduction of 3-car operations, noise levels may increase if passenger demand increases and additional service intensification is required. It is envisaged that this would be tackled through the DLR's Noise Policy aimed at driving ongoing mitigation projects. The DLR's present agreement with the Council will need to be reworked and updated to reflect current circumstances if this policy is to be meaningfully applied to address the impacts of the 3-Car Project.

Land Take 7.11 In addition to the issue of temporary land take for construction work sites, there will be one permanent land take at Bow Church where a strip of private-owned land, which is approximately 1m wide and next to the track, will be required.

7.12 Where land is lost as a result of the project, compensation for any loss will be negotiated by the DLR with the landowners under the terms of the Statutory Compensation Code.

8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

8.1 Draft Code of Construction Practice: This document formed Annex D to the Main Environmental Statement of the TWA Order Application. The document needs to be finalised by DLR and should give attention to working hours and acceptable noise and vibration levels, in line with current Council Policy. Additionally explanations of the policies adopted by DLR regarding Noise Insulation and the absence of Noise and Vibration monitoring proposal need also to be given.

8 8.2 Control of Pollution Act 1974 – Section 61 Agreement: Officers will press for DLR to be required to enter into such an agreement, and appoint a person solely to ensure that the constraints are complied with, especially at night.

8.3 Environmental Statement: Officers felt that the Environmental Statement submitted in this TWA does not provide sufficient information or certainty on the above issues. Since environmental issues are the main concerns for the local residents, officers recommend that the Council should object to this TWA Order application unless adequate mitigation measures, such as noise screenings and construction working hours, are agreed and the revised CoCP in the DLR Phase 1, is formally substituted.

8.4 LBTH is deemed a 'competent authority' with a statutory duty to review all Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Environmental Statements (ES) under the EIA Regulations (1999). The ES for the DLR application has been provided so that LBTH can ascertain whether the development is acceptable in terms of its effects on the environment. The Environmental Statement has been submitted as a requirement of the TWA (1992) Order application and has been assessed by the Council in the same way as any other ES is assessed that has been submitted as part of an EIA. It will be the Secretary of State that will either undertake or task others to do the formal assessment. Subsequent information will need to be provided by DLR to complete the ES to the satisfaction of the Council and so allow the full environmental impact of this project to be assessed. There are, however, several environmental issues have been unclear and they summarise in “Appendix 'B” which provides details of the environmental impacts and concerns from the officers.

9. HIGHWAYS & TRAFFIC IMPACTS

9.1 Similar to other environmental issues mentioned above, many of the work areas and site compounds in the Phase 2 TWA Order application are lacking detail or information on the programming, duration and temporary traffic restrictions. Further clarification and discussion will be required on the traffic management measures proposed in order to:

• Ensure local residential roads are protected from "rat-running" traffic avoiding delays on the main road network caused by DLR works; • Mitigate the effects of temporary traffic management on Borough roads to minimise delay for all road users and to ensure existing pedestrian and cycle facilities can continue to operate safely (or alternative facilities are provided as part of the works); and • Agree haul routes and site access arrangements to minimise noise, danger and inconvenience to local residents and businesses, and also to safeguard the safety of all road users and site operatives.

9.2 The interface between the works programmes at each site along the route is also a significant factor in assessing the impacts on the road network. Although the submission does provide information of the expected duration of the works at each site, it is not clear which will be “live” at the same time. If adjacent sites are under construction then the cumulative effects on traffic will be more severe and these problems could be further compounded by site access arrangements and haul routes.

9 9.3 Officers also confirm that the proposed headroom for the new viaduct does not comply with the current Highway safety standards and it could ultimately prejudice Hertsmere Road to be adopted as public highway.

9.4 Appendix 'C' to this report details issues identified by Officers with respect to the potential highway and traffic implications of the proposals including works on the viaducts and other structures along the route.

10. DELTA JUNCTION – IMPACT ON DLR PASSENGERS

10.1 In relation to the new Delta Junction arrangement, trains from Bank to Lewisham will not be able to stop at West India Quay station and therefore, passengers travelling from Bank will have to change at Poplar to board or alight at Canary Wharf and travel back to West India Quay station. Except this southbound service, all other southbound and northbound services will continue to stop at West India Quay. The table below summarises all the southbound services that operate at various times during a typical week (including weekends) if they stop at West India Quay.

Southbound Service Stops at West India Quay Stratford-Lewisham Yes Stratford-Crossharbour Yes Stratford-Canary Wharf Yes Bank-Canary Wharf Yes Bank-Lewisham No Tower Gateway-Lewisham Yes

10.2 Passengers that currently travel on trains from Bank to alight at West India Quay will be able to use Westferry, Poplar or Canary Wharf stations as alternatives to travel to the area around West India Quay station. All three of these stations are in close proximity to West India Quay, for example Poplar and Canary Wharf are only 250m away from West India Quay. It is noted that southbound services from Stratford would not be affected and continue to stop at West India Quay.

10.3 The DLR TWA Environmental Statement shows that 90% of Canary Wharf employees use DLR alighting at Canary Wharf and Heron Quays stations and only 1% at West India Quay. Therefore, it appears that the Delta Junction improvements would have a minor impact on Canary Wharf employees especially considering that not all employees come from the Bank direction.

10.4 In June, DLR conducted a 2-day passenger survey from 7am to midnight and learned that 13% of the total number of passengers that currently using West India Quay Station on a daily basis will be affected and have to use one of the 3 alternative stations as mentioned in paragraph 10.2. This represents 0.5% of the total number of passenger currently using DLR each day. Moreover, this does not take account of passengers travelling during the inter-peak when passengers can use Bank-Canary Wharf service which would still stop at West India Quay.

10.5 There are numerous advantages of the proposed change at Delta Junction. The major advantage is that the existing train frequencies along the whole network will be

10 maintained when the DLR Woolwich Arsenal extension is opened in 2009. Furthermore, Bank journey times will be reduced by approximately 90 seconds as a result of not stopping at West India Quay Station.

10.6 DLR has undertaken a full economic appraisal for the project as a whole and it is concluded that the dis-benefit to such a small proportion (0.5%) of DLR passengers is far outweighed by the benefits the project will bring for the vast majority of users of DLR.

11. EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.1 The platform extensions and the Delta Junction upgrade works will maintain the frequencies of DLR services and encourage more local people in the Borough to use public transport and minimise car use and related pollution. This will support the Council’s, GLA’s and Government’s promotion of sustainability objectives, including tackling climate change. These proposed DLR improvement works will also help to improve social inclusion by enhancing public transport accessibility levels in the Borough and beyond.

11.2 Social Inclusion will be improved by enhancing DLR capacity and train service. However, no reference of the Equality Impact Assessment has been made in the Environment Statement. The Council will urge that the DLR undertake an Equality Impact Assessment to ensure all relevant equality issues are addressed.

12. RENEWABLE ENERGY PROMOTION

12.1 Climate Change is one of the most pressing problems faced by the planet and the promotion of public transport and renewable energy in buildings can help to reduce its adverse impact on the environment.

12.2 This proposed 3-car capacity enhancement scheme presents an opportunity for the Council to work with the DLR to encourage the development of a station-based renewable energy (solar/wind) project as part of this proposed enhancement work.

13. COMMENTS OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

13.1 This report updates Members on the progress regarding the 3-car DLR upgrade project, following the deposit of the Transport and Works Order Application affecting all stations on the Poplar/Stratford and Poplar/Beckton routes.

13.2 The construction costs involved with this project will be funded by the DLR. The Authority will, however, have a regulatory role for the monitoring and control of various environmental issues, including ensuring that satisfactory noise levels are maintained. The Authority is currently seeking funding from the DLR to finance the staffing and related costs of these activities.

13.3 Consultation has already taken place on the upgrade plans. This was undertaken and funded by the DLR.

11 13.4 The Authority supports the improved capacity proposals in principle, but should there ultimately be a need for a public inquiry significant costs may arise for which budgetary provision would need to be identified.

13.5 There are no efficiency implications for the Authority arising from this report.

14. CONCURRENT REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT CHIEF EXECUTIVE (LEGAL)

14.1 Following publication of the Order, a strict 42 day consultation period follows during which time, the Corporate Director of Development & Renewal will reply to the detailed proposals on behalf of The London Borough of Tower Hamlets in accordance with the delegated power sought in paragraph 2.2 above.

14.2 Following the consultation period, the final Order will be submitted for approval to the Secretary of State. If any objections to the Order remain The Secretary of State will arrange for a Public Inquiry to investigate any objections.

15. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS

15.1 The DLR is one of the most accessible parts of London’s public transport system. These proposed improvements works will further enhance the capacity of the DLR network for the Borough’s diverse communities.

16. ANTI-POVERTY IMPLICATIONS

16.1 The DLR capacity enhancement works will allow better public transport access for local people in the Borough thereby further improving social inclusion.

17. SUSTAINABLE ACTION FOR A GREENER ENVIRONMENT

17.1 This scheme will further encourage and promote the use of public transport and will help to tackle climate change by providing an improved DLR network. Additional cycling parking facilities at the proposed upgraded DLR stations will further support sustainable action for a greener environment in the Borough.

18. RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

18.1 Without such improvements, the risks of overcrowding and delaying DLR passengers will be higher, especially after the introduction of the DLR Woolwich Arsenal extension in 2009.

19. SUMMARY

19.1 Following the DLR Phase 1 3-car scheme, this TWA will further enhance passenger capacity to the entire DLR network.

12 19.2 Members are asked to support this TWA in principle. However, officers have to ensure that no detrimental environmental impacts will be imposed to the local residents and people working in the Borough.

19.3 At the time of writing, we still have not received any formal Legal Agreement to substitute the CoCP in this TWA and other outstanding significant environmental issues have not been resolved between the DLR and the Council. As a result, it is recommended that the Council to endorse the objection as a basis of negotiation with the DLR during the period leading up to a possible Public Inquiry, most likely to take place in early 2007. Officers are mindful of the sensitivities of the process and will continue to work with the DLR to mitigate as far as practicable any negative impacts, while securing the increased capacity that the 3-car scheme will deliver. Any unresolved issues can be taken forward to be considered at Public Inquiry at which time costs of expert witnesses and legal representation will need to be considered.

19.4 It is proposed that the Corporate Director Development and Renewal, in discussion with the Lead Member Regeneration and Community Partnership, be given delegated powers to enter into negotiations with DLRL to secure adequate Legal Agreements to facilitate this scheme to the satisfaction of The London Borough of Tower Hamlets and resolve the significant environmental issues that remain outstanding.

List of Appendices

Appendix A Copy of Objection Letter

Appendix B Environmental Issues

Appendix C Highway & General Issues

Appendix D Station Plans and Sections

13