DOCSLIB.ORG

UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) - 1 - This report was compiled by the OMEGA Centre, University College London. Please Note: This Project Profile has been prepared as part of the ongoing OMEGA Centre of Excellence work on Mega Urban Transport Projects. The information presented in the Profile is essentially a 'work in progress' and will be updated/amended as necessary as work proceeds. Readers are therefore advised to periodically check for any updates or revisions. The Centre and its collaborators/partners have obtained data from sources believed to be reliable and have made every reasonable effort to ensure its accuracy. However, the Centre and its collaborators/partners cannot assume responsibility for errors and omissions in the data nor in the documentation accompanying them. - 2 - CONTENTS A INTRODUCTION Type of Project Location Major Associated Developments Current Status B BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Principal Project Objectives Key Enabling Mechanisms and Timeline of Key Decisions Principal Organisations Involved • Central Government Bodies/Departments • Local Government • London Underground Limited • Olympia & York • The coordinating group • Contractors Planning and Environmental Regime • The JLE Planning Regime • The Environmental Statement • Project Environmental Policy & the Environmental Management System (EMS) • Archaeological Impact Assessment • Public Consultation • Ecological Mitigation • Regeneration Land Acquisition C PRINCIPAL PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS Route Description Main Termini and Intermediate Stations • Westminster Station – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • Waterloo Station – Introduction – Planning Context – Key Features • Southwark Station – Introduction – Planning Context – Key Features • London Bridge Station – Introduction – Planning Context - 3 - – Proposed Development – Key Features • Bermondsey Station – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • Canada Water Station – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • Canary Wharf Station Hub – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • North Greenwich Station Hub – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • Canning Town Station Hub – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features • West Ham Station Hub – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development • Stratford Station Hub – Introduction – Planning Context – Proposed Development – Key Features Project Costs Project Delivery Main Engineering Features • Overview of Main Engineering Features • Main Contracts and Contractors D PROJECT TIMELINE E PROJECT FUNDING/FINANCING F OPERATIONS - TRAFFIC VOLUME G BIBLIOGRAPHY - 4 - List of Figures Figure 1: Map showing route of JLE and the London boroughs through which it passes ..... 10 Figure 3: Interchanges on the JLE ...................................................................................... 11 Figure 2: JLE in relation to other major rail transport links in central London ....................... 11 Figure 4: Route of JLE superimposed on aerial photo of central London ............................ 12 Figure 5: JLE management structure for design and construction phase implemented by LUL ........................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 6: JLE management structure for design & construction phase advised by Arup ...... 19 Figure 7: Arup’s view of how the delivery of the JLE appeared to work at project delivery .. 20 Figure 8: Arup’s view of how the delivery of the JLE should be implemented at late construction/delivery stage .................................................................................................. 20 Figure 9: The JLE Route Map ............................................................................................. 31 Figure 10: The Fleet Line Proposal ..................................................................................... 32 Figure 11: The Travers Morgan Docklands Study - Jubilee Fleet Line ................................ 33 Figure 12: Long Term Government Spending – Total Spending as percentage of GDP ...... 34 Figure 13: The London Rail Study/London Docklands Strategic Plan .................................. 34 Figure 14: GLC Jubilee Line Extension Proposal ................................................................ 35 Figure 15: Olympia and York Bakerloo Line Extension ........................................................ 35 Figure 16: Olympia and York: Docklands Second Rail Line................................................. 36 Figure 17: Central London Rail Study: Jubilee Line Extension ............................................ 37 Figure 18: The East London Rail Study: Jubilee Line Extension ......................................... 38 Figure 19: Jubilee Line Route Extension Options 1990 ....................................................... 39 Figure 20: History of the Jubilee Line Extension .................................................................. 39 Figure 21: Cumulative Passenger Journeys – Light Rail, London Underground and National Rail ..................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 22: Aerial view of Westminster site looking south east ............................................. 41 Figure 23: The area around the Palace of Westminster ...................................................... 42 Figure 24: The Bridge Street site before redevelopment ..................................................... 43 Figure 25: The construction of portcullis house ................................................................... 43 Figure 26: Potential Westminster Alignments (from Parliamentary Exhibits) ....................... 45 - 5 - Figure 27: Location of Waterloo station ............................................................................... 47 Figure 28: Waterloo station from the air, showing terminal for Channel Tunnel services and local commuter trains .......................................................................................................... 48 Figure 29: Proposed NATM platform design at Waterloo station ......................................... 48 Figure 30: Location of Southwark station ............................................................................ 50 Figure 31: Entrance to Southwark Station ........................................................................... 51 Figure 32: Interior of Southwark station ............................................................................... 52 Figure 33: Location of London Bridge station ...................................................................... 53 Figure 34: Principal Contractors on Contract 104 ................................................................ 53 Figure 35 :Layout of works at London Bridge station ........................................................... 54 Figure 36: The extended main Underground ticket hall was carved out of the brick arch undercroft beneath the mainline station .............................................................................. 55 Figure 37: Interchange at Canada Water Station ................................................................ 56 Figure 38: Entrance to Canary Wharf Station ...................................................................... 59 Figure 39: Canary Wharf Station Ticket Office .................................................................... 59 Figure 40: Platform with Safety Barriers at Canary Wharf Station ....................................... 60 Figure 41: Relationship Between the Route of the JLE and the LDDC Area ........................ 61 Figure 42: Graph Showing Docklands Employed from 1950 to 1985 (thousands) ............... 62 Figure 43: Development in Canary Wharf - 1992 ................................................................ 65 Figure 44: Development in Canary Wharf - 2003 ................................................................ 66 Figure 45: Construction of North Greenwich JLE Station .................................................... 67 Figure 46: The Greenwich Peninsula in Relation to the Thames Gateway .......................... 68 Figure 47: The Millennium Dome and Associated Land ...................................................... 69 Figure 48: Development Phases for the Greenwich Peninsula ............................................ 70 Figure 49: West Ham Station .............................................................................................. 73 Figure 50: Platform at Westham Station .............................................................................. 73 Figure 51: Stratford Station ................................................................................................. 75 Figure 52: Gantry at Stratford Station .................................................................................. 76 Figure 53: The NATM Technique ........................................................................................ 79 - 6 - Figure 54: UK Employment in Construction 1984 to 2004 ................................................... 80 Figure 55: The JLE’s original 53-month project programme, showing individual contracts .. 84 Figure 56: Route plan of the JLE showing civil engineering contracts ................................. 85 Figure 57: JLE Progress
Load more

Recommended publications
  • History of the East London Line
    HISTORY OF THE EAST LONDON LINE – FROM BRUNEL’S THAMES TUNNEL TO THE LONDON OVERGROUND by Oliver Green A report of the LURS meeting at All Souls Club House on 11 October 2011 Oliver worked at the London Transport Museum for many years and was one of the team who set up the Covent Garden museum in 1980. He left in 1989 to continue his museum career in Colchester, Poole and Buckinghamshire before returning to LTM in 2001 to work on its recent major refurbishment and redisplay in the role of Head Curator. He retired from this post in 2009 but has been granted an honorary Research Fellowship and continues to assist the museum in various projects. He is currently working with LTM colleagues on a new history of the Underground which will be published by Penguin in October 2012 as part of LU’s 150th anniversary celebrations for the opening of the Met [Bishops Road to Farringdon Street 10 January 1863.] The early 1800s saw various schemes to tunnel under the River Thames, including one begun in 1807 by Richard Trevithick which was abandoned two years later when the workings were flooded. This was started at Rotherhithe, close to the site later chosen by Marc Isambard Brunel for his Thames Tunnel. In 1818, inspired by the boring technique of shipworms he had studied while working at Chatham Dockyard, Brunel patented a revolutionary method of digging through soft ground using a rectangular shield. His giant iron shield was divided into 12 independently moveable protective frames, each large enough for a miner to work in.
    [Show full text]
  • The Operator's Story Appendix
    Railway and Transport Strategy Centre The Operator’s Story Appendix: London’s Story © World Bank / Imperial College London Property of the World Bank and the RTSC at Imperial College London Community of Metros CoMET The Operator’s Story: Notes from London Case Study Interviews February 2017 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a permanent record for the researchers of what was said by people interviewed for ‘The Operator’s Story’ in London. These notes are based upon 14 meetings between 6th-9th October 2015, plus one further meeting in January 2016. This document will ultimately form an appendix to the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’ piece Although the findings have been arranged and structured by Imperial College London, they remain a collation of thoughts and statements from interviewees, and continue to be the opinions of those interviewed, rather than of Imperial College London. Prefacing the notes is a summary of Imperial College’s key findings based on comments made, which will be drawn out further in the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’. Method This content is a collation in note form of views expressed in the interviews that were conducted for this study. Comments are not attributed to specific individuals, as agreed with the interviewees and TfL. However, in some cases it is noted that a comment was made by an individual external not employed by TfL (‘external commentator’), where it is appropriate to draw a distinction between views expressed by TfL themselves and those expressed about their organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--History History 2016 Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945 Danielle K. Dodson University of Kentucky, [email protected] Digital Object Identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.13023/ETD.2016.339 Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Dodson, Danielle K., "Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945" (2016). Theses and Dissertations--History. 40. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/history_etds/40 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the History at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--History by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known.
    [Show full text]
  • Brunel Street Works Silvertown Way, in the Borough of Newham Planning Application No
    planning report D&P/3640/01 9 January 2017 Brunel Street Works Silvertown Way, in the Borough of Newham planning application no. 16/03428/FUL Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal Detailed planning permission for mixed use development to provide 975 residential units (Use Class C3), A 152-bedroom hotel (Use Class C1), A 3,000 sq.m. (GIA) of flexible commercial floor space (Use Classes B1 (a, b & c), A1-A5, D2 and a nursery within Use Class D1) including a food store of up to 550 sq.m. An enhanced public realm with cycle ways, tree planting and public squares, amenity space, car parking, cycle parking, refuse stores and servicing arrangements and all associated works. Relocation of existing electricity substation. The applicant The applicant is Opal Silvertown (LLP), the agent is Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners and the architects are GRID, JTP and Cartwright Pickard. Strategic issues summary Principle of development: The redevelopment of the site to provide a residential-led mixed-use development is strongly supported (paragraphs 16-20). Affordable housing: 35% by units/37% by habitable rooms. The applicant should review the proposal against the Mayor’s Draft Affordable Housing and Viability SPG. Further discussion is also required regarding affordable rent and intermediate split, and details on affordable rent levels and the intermediate offer (paragraphs 23-25). Urban design: Broadly supported but the massing and form of the Castalia building should be refined to integrate with the overall scheme and public realm (paragraphs 30-40).
    [Show full text]
  • Greenwich Waterfront Transit
    Greenwich Waterfront Transit Summary Report This report has been produced by TfL Integration Further copies may be obtained from: Tf L Integration, Windsor House, 42–50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Telephone 020 7941 4094 July 2001 GREENWICH WATERFRONT TRANSIT • SUMMARY REPORT Foreword In 1997, following a series of strategic studies into the potential for intermediate modes in different parts of outer London, London Transport (LT) commenced a detailed assessment under the title “Greenwich Waterfront Transit” of a potential scheme along the south bank of the Thames between Greenwich Town Centre and Thamesmead then on to Abbey Wood. In July 2000, LT’s planning functions were incorporated into Transport for London (TfL). A major factor in deciding to carry out a detailed feasibility study for Waterfront Transit has been the commitment shown by Greenwich and Bexley Councils to assist in the development of the project and their willingness to consider the principle of road space re-allocation in favour of public transport. This support, as well as that of other bodies such as SELTRANS, Greenwich Development Agency,Woolwich Development Agency and the Thames Gateway London Partnership, is acknowledged by TfL. The ongoing support of these bodies will be crucial if the proposals are to proceed. A major objective of this exercise has been to identify the traffic management measures required to achieve segregation and high priority over other traffic to encourage modal shift towards public transport, particularly from the private car. It is TfL’s view,supported by the studies undertaken, that the securing of this segregation and priority would be critical in determining the success of Waterfront Transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Abercrombie's Green-Wedge Vision for London: the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944
    Abercrombie’s green-wedge vision for London: the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944 Abstract This paper analyses the role that the green wedges idea played in the main official reconstruction plans for London, namely the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944. Green wedges were theorised in the first decade of the twentieth century and discussed in multifaceted ways up to the end of the Second World War. Despite having been prominent in many plans for London, they have been largely overlooked in planning history. This paper argues that green wedges were instrumental in these plans to the formulation of a more modern, sociable, healthier and greener peacetime London. Keywords: Green wedges, green belt, reconstruction, London, planning Introduction Green wedges have been theorised as an essential part of planning debates since the beginning of the twentieth century. Their prominent position in texts and plans rivalled that of the green belt, despite the comparatively disproportionate attention given to the latter by planning historians (see, for example, Purdom, 1945, 151; Freestone, 2003, 67–98; Ward, 2002, 172; Sutcliffe, 1981a; Amati and Yokohari, 1997, 311–37). From the mid-nineteenth century, the provision of green spaces became a fundamental aspect of modern town planning (Dümpelmann, 2005, 75; Dal Co, 1980, 141–293). In this context, the green wedges idea emerged as a solution to the need to provide open spaces for growing urban areas, as well as to establish a direct 1 connection to the countryside for inner city dwellers. Green wedges would also funnel fresh air, greenery and sunlight into the urban core.
    [Show full text]
  • An Auction of London Bus, Tram, Trolleybus & Underground
    £5 when sold in paper format Available free by email upon application to: [email protected] An auction of London Bus, Tram, Trolleybus & Underground Collectables Enamel signs & plates, maps, posters, badges, destination blinds, timetables, tickets & other relics th Saturday 29 October 2016 at 11.00 am (viewing from 9am) to be held at THE CROYDON PARK HOTEL (Windsor Suite) 7 Altyre Road, Croydon CR9 5AA (close to East Croydon rail and tram station) Live bidding online at www.the-saleroom.com (additional fee applies) TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE Transport Auctions of London Ltd is hereinafter referred to as the Auctioneer and includes any person acting upon the Auctioneer's authority. 1. General Conditions of Sale a. All persons on the premises of, or at a venue hired or borrowed by, the Auctioneer are there at their own risk. b. Such persons shall have no claim against the Auctioneer in respect of any accident, injury or damage howsoever caused nor in respect of cancellation or postponement of the sale. c. The Auctioneer reserves the right of admission which will be by registration at the front desk. d. For security reasons, bags are not allowed in the viewing area and must be left at the front desk or cloakroom. e. Persons handling lots do so at their own risk and shall make good all loss or damage howsoever sustained, such estimate of cost to be assessed by the Auctioneer whose decision shall be final. 2. Catalogue a. The Auctioneer acts as agent only and shall not be responsible for any default on the part of a vendor or buyer.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultimate Spectators Guide to the London Marathon
    ULTIMATE SPECTATORS GUIDE TO THE LONDON MARATHON We recommend you purchase a Travelcard to travel around London on the day as this will allow access to Rail, Tube and Bus at no extra charge. Zones 1-2 should be adequate for the travelling around the route, however if you need to go further afield, please check which zones you’ll be travelling in. Buses no longer accept cash payments. You’ll need to use a Travelcard, Oyster card or pay with a contactless debit/credit card. Please note that whilst we do have cheering stations at Tower Bridge (mile 12) and along the Victoria Embankment (mile 24) these will be manned by volunteers and we do not recommend you go to those points on race day. This is because these areas are extremely busy and it can take a long time to move through the crowds. By skipping Tower Bridge, you have more chance of seeing your runner at multiple points on the route, and by going straight to mile 25 from 19 you’ll cheer them on from the end! START AREA Although it’s advised not to accompany your runner to the start due to the high volumes of people, if you decide to see them off, please be aware that spectators will not be allowed into the assembly areas of the start. Once you’ve said your farewells and good lucks, head down the Avenue out of Greenwich Park. Once out of the park, turn left onto Nevada Street and keep walking as it turns into Burney Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Options Investigated to Address the Issues at Blackwall Tunnel
    Alternative options considered to address the issues at the Blackwall Tunnel We have considered a wide range of options for schemes to help address the transport problems of congestion, closures and incidents, and resilience at the Blackwall Tunnel and believe that our proposed Silvertown Tunnel scheme is the best solution. This factsheet examines a number of potential alternative schemes, including some which were suggested by respondents to our previous consultation, and explains why we do not consider them to be feasible solutions to the problems at the Blackwall Tunnel. Further detail on each alternative as well as other alternatives is included in the Preliminary Case for the Scheme, which can be found at www.tfl.gov.uk/Silvertown-tunnel. Building a bridge between Silvertown and the Greenwich Peninsula, rather than a tunnel We have considered building a bridge at Silvertown, instead of a tunnel. However, any new bridge built in east London needs to provide at least 50m of clearance above the water level to allow tall sea-going shipping to pass beneath safely. A bridge with this level of clearance would require long, sloping approach ramps. Such ramps would create a barrier within the local area, as well as dramatically affecting the visual environment and going against local authorities’ development plans. A high-level bridge would also not be feasible in the current location due to it’s proximity to the Emirates Air Line cable car. We also considered the option of a lifting bridge (like Tower Bridge). This could be constructed at a lower level, with less impact on the local area.
    [Show full text]
  • A Rail Manifesto for London
    A Rail Manifesto for London The new covered walkway linking Hackney Central and Hackney Downs stations creates an interchange which provides a better connection and more journey opportunities March 2016 A Rail Manifesto for London Railfuture1 seeks to inform and influence the development of transport policies and practices nationally and locally. We offer candidates for the 2016 London Mayoral and Assembly elections this manifesto2, which represents a distillation of the electorate’s aspirations for a developing railway for London, for delivery during the next four years or to be prepared for delivery during the following period of office. Executive Summary Recognising the importance of all rail-based transport to the economy of London and to its residents, commuters and visitors alike, Railfuture wishes to see holistic and coherent rail services across all of London, integrated with all other public transport, with common fares and conditions. Achieving this is covered by the following 10 policy themes: 1. Services in London the Mayor should take over. The 2007 transfer of some National Rail services to TfL has been a huge success, transforming some of the worst services in London into some of the best performing. Railfuture believes it is right that the Mayor should take over responsibility for more rail services in London, either by transferring service operation to TfL or by TfL specifying service levels to the operator, and that this must benefit all of London. 2. Improved Services. Frequencies play an important role in the success of metro and suburban train services. We believe that the Mayor should set out the minimum standards of service levels across London seven days per week for all rail services.
    [Show full text]
  • Tfl Interchange Signs Standard
    Transport for London Interchange signs standard Issue 5 MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London 1 Interchange signs standard Contents 1 Introduction 3 Directional signs and wayfinding principles 1.1 Types of interchange sign 3.1 Directional signing at Interchanges 1.2 Core network symbols 3.2 Directional signing to networks 1.3 Totem signs 3.3 Incorporating service information 1.3 Horizontal format 3.4 Wayfinding sequence 1.4 Network identification within interchanges 3.5 Accessible routes 1.5 Pictograms 3.6 Line diagrams – Priciples 3.7 Line diagrams – Line representation 3.8 Line diagrams – Symbology 3.9 Platform finders Specific networks : 2 3.10 Platform confirmation signs National Rail 2.1 3.11 Platform station names London Underground 2.2 3.12 Way out signs Docklands Light Railway 2.3 3.13 Multiple exits London Overground 2.4 3.14 Linking with Legible London London Buses 2.5 3.15 Exit guides 2.6 London Tramlink 3.16 Exit guides – Decision points 2.7 London Coach Stations 3.17 Exit guides on other networks 2.8 London River Services 3.18 Signing to bus services 2.9 Taxis 3.19 Signing to bus services – Route changes 2.10 Cycles 3.20 Viewing distances 3.21 Maintaining clear sightlines 4 References and contacts Interchange signing standard Issue 5 1 Introduction Contents Good signing and information ensure our customers can understand Londons extensive public transport system and can make journeys without undue difficulty and frustruation. At interchanges there may be several networks, operators and line identities which if displayed together without consideration may cause confusion for customers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Environmental Statement
    The Environmental Statement The Environmental Statement and this Non-Technical Summary have been prepared by Environmental Resources Management (ERM), on behalf of DLRL. ERM is an independent environmental consultancy with extensive experience of undertaking Environmental Impact Assessments of transport infrastructure schemes. Copies of the Environmental Statement are available for inspection at the following locations: Docklands Light Railway Ltd Canning Town Library PO Box 154, Castor Lane, Poplar, Barking Road, Canning Town, London E14 0DX London E16 4HQ (Opening Hours: 9.00am-5.00pm Mondays to Fridays) (Opening Hours: Monday 9.30am-5.30pm, Tuesday 9.30am- 5.30pm, Wednesday Closed, Thursday 1.00-8.00pm, Friday London Borough of Newham 9.30am-5.30pm, Saturday 9.30am-5.30pm, Sunday Closed) Environmental Department, 25 Nelson Street, East Ham, London E6 2RP Custom House Library (Opening Hours: 9.00am-5.00pm Mondays to Fridays) Prince Regent Lane, Custom House, London E16 3JJ Bircham Dyson Bell (Opening Hours: Monday 9.30am-5.30pm, Tuesday 9.30am- Solicitors and Parliamentary Agents, 5.30pm, Wednesday Closed, Thursday 1.00-8.00pm, Friday 50 Broadway, Westminster, London SW1H 0BL Closed, Saturday 9.30am-5.30pm, Sunday Closed) (Opening Hours: 9.30am-5.30pm Mondays to Fridays) North Woolwich Library Hackney Central Library Storey School, Woodman Street¸ Technology and Learning Centre, North Woolwich, London E16 2LS 1 Reading Lane, London E8 1GQ (Opening Hours: Monday 9.30am-1.30pm and 2.30pm-5.30pm, (Opening Hours: Monday 9.00am-8.00pm, Tuesday
    [Show full text]