DRAFT FOR COMMENT

Rotherhithe to Canary Wharf Crossing

Notes of meeting with the Authority.

10-00 am – 12-00 noon 22 December 2016 at London River House Royal Pier Road Gravesend Kent DA12 2BG.

Those present

Name Role Contact Andrew Tunnicliffe Development Delivery 07850 237311 Engineer Stephen Jones Principal Engineer Strategy 0784 1223658 and Development Tony Wilson Transport Planning Manager 0203 054 7158 James (Jim) Trimmer Director of Planning and 0771 365 4595 Development Mark Towens PLA Harbour Master Thomas Southall Deputy VTS Manager 0147 456 2200

Copy to

Name Role Contact Roozbeh Shirandami Lead Engineer - Bridges & (020) 7918 4259 Structures Malcolm Payne Principal Engineer 07802 657485 Infrastructure Protection Helen Jones Transport Planner (020) 3054 6737 Andrew Lunt Technical Requirements (020) 3054 6686 Manager Surface Transport Asset Management

The purpose of the meeting was:

1. To discuss the alignment of the proposed bridge.

2. To ask the PLA about the numbers of vessels of different air draughts that may need to navigate through the bridge.

3. To understand the operational process for and how this might translate to a moving bridge at this location.

4. To discuss the impact of the weather and any special events.

Notes of meeting

Navigation rights

Jim explained the legal context to the rights of navigation for river users.

DRAFT FOR COMMENT

River Users have a right to navigate the river and this can only be impeded by Act of Parliament or the powers delegated to the PLA. The PLA can grant a reverse licence of these rights subject to the approval of its Governing Committee.

In the case of the QE2 bridge, an Act of Parliament was required for the structure which included the changes to the navigation rights.

The policy of the PLA as set out in the Thames Vision and the London Plan of the previous Mayor is to increase the use of the River. A severing of the river or curtailment of navigation rights would not be supported in principle.

Jim offered to set out the PLA,s legal position for the record in response to a written request from TfL.

Fixed Crossing Option

The air draft of a bridge structure is quoted as measured from mean high water at spring tides. However, there are some tide conditions that are higher than this and will have to be taken into account when determining the requirement to move the bridge for a vessel.

A fixed crossing would have to be at least as high as the fixed crossing at Tower Bridge which is around 42M. The QE2 bridge is 54M. The Cable car is around 60M at the bottom of its catenary.

The use of a swing bridge was discussed. The PLA would prefer the opening span to open more than 90 degrees on the northern bank to reduce the impedance to navigation.

A swing bridge will require a design that provides a safe locked state in the open position. 4 piers in the river would be acceptable for a 2 span swing bridge including 2 piers for the open and locked position. The PLA would expect the spans between the bank and the piers to be navigable.

Alignment

The alignment of the crossing was discussed at length with Sustrans and a provisional assumption is provided in their navigation report. The PLA would require that a navigational operability simulation test is conducted of any proposed bridge design. This would be undertaken on their navigation simulator. A series of simulation tests with vessels of different sizes and under a range of tide and wind conditions would be run to create confidence that the configuration of the bridge structure would not impede navigation. This will require drawings of the bridge to be provided to the PLA and digitised. The digitised drawings would be sent to the simulator supplier in Holland. The supplier will then provide a software update for the PLA. The PLA simulator team would then run a series of tests using their pilots to navigate the bridge. This will be used to identify scenarios where navigation is impaired or unsafe. The whole process should take less than 3 months. The PLA would charge TfL for this work and will provide a quote if asked formally.

If a range of design options was presented to them, the PLA could model a number of different bridge design and alignment options and check them for their impact on navigation.

DRAFT FOR COMMENT

A straighter alignment based on a swing bridge concept was discussed. The PLA would prefer an alignment orthogonal to the river because that reduces the vessel transit time and moves the structure away from the bend on the river. This might allow the vertical alignment – span and height suggested in the Sustrans report to be relaxed slightly subject to simulation tests.

The PLA are not keen to have bridge ramps on the foreshore. Vessel collisions with the bank are a risk and do occur from time to time. These collisions are more likely on the outside of a bend in the river. However, if the use of ramps on the foreshore improved the alignment of the main structure and the design provided mitigations to the risk of collisions with the ramps, it could be considered. S Jones suggested that a swing bridge could park the spans in an open position to protect the ramps and this was thought to be an idea worthy of consideration.

The PLA are happy to consider piers in the river but they must be resilient to an impact from a large vessel.

Navigational traffic

Navigation is particularly difficult for the large cruise ships and warships that visit the pool of London. There are about 40 transits per annum of these vessels and they are towed in and out by tugs. Draught is a key consideration. There is a ‘hole’ dredged into the pool of London next to HMS Belfast. These large vessels can berth in this hole without risk of grounding at low tide. They can only move at high tide within 30 minutes of high water. Typically, they will be towed in by Tugs and then towed out in reverse through Tower Bridge to before the ship is turned in a deeper and wider part of the river before the bend at Westferry. The next berth of safety is Convoys Wharf just before Deptford Creek and Greenwich.

Thames Barges typically have an air draught of up to 30M as do the larger Yachts. Between Easter and October, there can be 15-20 Thames Barges moored in St Katharine’s dock. These are commercial operations and typically will carry up to 12 passengers on recreational trips either up to Tower Bridge and back or down river.

St Katharine’s dock is entered through a lock and this is only open within 2 hours of high water, so vessels transiting to the dock have to travel around this time or wait on the river until the dock gate is open. The smaller vessels that use these berths are not constrained by draught.

The PLA offered to ask St Katharine’s dock for more information about usage, air draughts and other data in response to a formal request from TfL.

The Dixie Queen is the largest commercial recreational vessel and this has an air draught of 18M. In this case, the PLA would expect a bridge lift if the air draught of the bridge was less than 19M. A bridge lift may also be required for this vessel in extreme tide scenarios.

Tower Bridge Operations

The operational process for Tower Bridge was established by Act of Parliament. Any licensed river user can ask for the bascules to be opened on 24 hour notice. In practice, the large cruise ships will plan their itineraries 12 months in advance. Warships plan their

DRAFT FOR COMMENT passages with about 3 months notice. Thames sailing barges will plan their passages based on advance bookings but some can be as short as 24 hours.

A ship will be in VHF contact with the bridge control room around 30 minutes before their booked time and will confirm their ETA. For vessels travelling upstream, Tower Bridge control room can see the vessel as it rounds Wapping Ness and will start to open the bridge. If the air draught is just over 9M, the Tower Bridge control room will only partially open the bridge – but to provide sufficient clearance.

Fro a downstream transit, the bridge control room has good visibility of the ship in the Pool of London. Large vessels will cast off from HMS Belfast and then wait for the bridge to open. Then the vessel will start it’s transit. Large ships will be towed in reverse. At Wapping the ship will be turned. The ship must move down to Convoys Wharf on the full tide because there is limited depth in the upper reaches and nowhere to berth the ship at low water.

This constraint means that the transit from the ‘hole’ in the Pool needs confirmation that the bridge is open before setting off. This could take an hour.

One option to reduce this time could be to dredge a second hole with 7.5M depth in the Wapping reach. This would provide a safe berth between the Pool and Convoys Wharf. There is not a lot of space and there are many constraints but it could be looked at to mitigate this constraint. This hole would need to be around 200M long and 30M wide with a depth of 6-7M. This could save 20-30 minutes wait on the outbound transit.

The PLA would expect triple redundancy on the bridge opening mechanism. Tower Bridge is very reliable. The Harbour Master cannot remember an instance when the opening mechanism has failed.

Large Yachts and Thames barges are not limited by depth of water and so the commit time can be shorter.

The Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) and Bridge Control Room

The PLA expect that the bridge structure would include a Control Room. The Creek Road Bridge is a good example of the type of facility they would expect. Control of the Bridge would be TfL’s safety, performance and cost responsibility. The Rotherhithe control room would have CCTV and VHF facilities and these would be linked to the Woolwich Control Room of the Thames Vessel Traffic Service. (VTS). The VTS monitors all traffic on the river. Unlike a railway control room, the VTS does not route vessels. Vessels submit their transit plans, these are accepted by the VTS and the vessels are autonomous but under the control of a PLA pilot or a Thames qualified master. However, the VTS has the power to instruct a pilot or master in the event of the risk of an incident. Failure to respond to an instruction can result in a prosecution of the master.

The PLA suggest that the Rotherhithe control room should be on the north bank to give good sighting upriver.

The PLA would prefer Bridge openings to be on a similar 24 hour notice period to Tower Bridge. Large ships must travel on the tide but they are prepared to consider restrictions for smaller and/or leisure vessels.

DRAFT FOR COMMENT

Weather

Large vessels are prohibited from transiting the Thames barrier when wind speeds exceed 15 knots.

The PLA will consider whether a maximum wind speed should apply for transits through this structure. The span is greater than the Thames barrier, 30 knots is a guess.

Fog at the Thames barrier will prohibit transits.

Special events.

Tall ship events happen a couple of times a year. There is one this Easter and one in September. The September 1 will have 20 vessels. Typically, they will make a transit from Woolwich to Wapping swing and return down river. This would require 2 transits through the R2CW bridge. The ships tend to travel in groups of 4 that could make a single transit through the bridge together. This could require 10 openings in the day.

VTS visit.

We visited the VTS control centre at Gravesend. This covers the area from Ramsgate to Harwich up to the Thames Barrier. A similar but slightly smaller control room at Woolwich covers the reaches between the Thames Barrier and Teddington.

There are 2 desks monitoring vessel movements. 1 Desk is responsible for planning and is manned by a senior pilot and VTS manager. There are 3 desks that communicate with vessels and accept bookings and transit plans.