DOCSLIB.ORG

7.1 Case for the Scheme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
7.1 Case for the Scheme 7 Volume 7.1 Case for the Scheme TR010021 APFP Regulation 5(2)(q) Revision 0 Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 April 2016 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 THIS PAGE HAS INTENTIONALLY BEEN LEFT BLANK Page 2 of 205 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme 7.1 Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Document Reference: 7.1 Internal Code: ST150030-PLN-ZZZ-ZZ-DSD-ZZ-0081 Regulation Number: 5(2)(q) Author: Transport for London Rev. Date Approved By Signature Description 0 29/04/2016 David Rowe (TfL For DCO Lead Sponsor) Application Page 3 of 205 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................. 11 Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................. 16 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 29 1.1 Overview of the Silvertown Tunnel scheme ................................................. 29 1.2 The application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) .......................... 30 1.3 Structure of this document ........................................................................... 32 1.4 Next steps .................................................................................................... 33 2. THE NEED FOR THE SCHEME ................................................................. 35 2.1 Overview...................................................................................................... 35 2.2 River crossings reflect the development of London ..................................... 35 2.3 The Blackwall Tunnel is east London’s strategic highway crossing ............. 43 2.4 Transport problems at the Blackwall Tunnel ................................................ 47 2.5 Transport problem 1 – congestion ............................................................... 47 2.6 Transport problem 2 – closures and incidents ............................................. 55 2.7 Transport problem 3 – lack of network resilience ........................................ 57 2.8 Transport problems at the Blackwall Tunnel have significant adverse impacts .................................................................................................................... 60 2.9 Economic effects ......................................................................................... 61 2.10 Public transport effects ................................................................................ 67 2.11 Environmental effects .................................................................................. 72 2.12 The problems now and in the future ............................................................ 73 3. STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS ............................................... 81 3.1 Overview...................................................................................................... 81 3.2 Summary of option development process.................................................... 82 3.3 Summary of options considered and findings .............................................. 96 3.4 The East London River Crossings Programme ......................................... 116 4. USER CHARGING ELEMENT OF THE SCHEME .................................... 121 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 121 4.2 The reasons for charging ........................................................................... 121 Page 4 of 205 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 4.3 Comments made about user charging in consultations ............................. 123 4.4 Silvertown Tunnel without a user charge ................................................... 124 4.5 Charging scope ......................................................................................... 126 4.6 The design of the user charge in the Scheme ........................................... 127 4.7 Setting the initial user charges and varying the user charges ................... 130 5. DETAILED SCHEME DEVELOPMENT .................................................... 133 5.1 Development of the Silvertown Tunnel scheme ......................................... 133 5.2 Starting point of the assessment ............................................................... 134 5.3 River Crossings Programme – first non-statutory consultation .................. 134 5.4 Early tunnel optioneering ........................................................................... 135 5.5 River Crossings Programme – second non-statutory consultation (Oct 2012- Feb 2013) ........................................................................................................... 137 5.6 Detailed tunnel optioneering ...................................................................... 138 5.7 First non-statutory consultation solely on the Silvertown Tunnel scheme (October to December 2014) ............................................................................. 140 5.8 Silvertown Tunnel scheme – statutory consultation (October to November 2015) .................................................................................................................. 142 5.9 Changes made to the Scheme following the statutory consultation ........... 143 5.10 The proposed Silvertown Tunnel scheme.................................................. 143 6. SCHEME BENEFITS ................................................................................ 146 6.1 Overview.................................................................................................... 146 6.2 PO1: Improve resilience of river crossings in the highway network in east and south east London to cope with planned and unplanned events and incidents 147 6.3 PO2: Improve road network performance of Blackwall Tunnel and approach roads .................................................................................................................. 147 6.4 PO3: Support economic and population growth in east and southeast London by providing improved cross-river road transport links .......................... 152 6.5 PO4: To integrate with local and strategic land use policies ...................... 156 6.6 PO5: To minimise any adverse impacts of any proposals on communities, health, safety and the environment .................................................................... 157 Page 5 of 205 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 6.7 PO6: To ensure where possible that any proposals are acceptable in principle to key stakeholders, including affected boroughs ................................ 159 6.8 PO7: To achieve value for money and, through road user charging, to manage congestion ............................................................................................ 160 7. THE SCHEME IN CONTEXT .................................................................... 163 7.1 TfL’s approach to managing London’s growth ........................................... 163 7.2 River Crossings in east London ................................................................. 164 7.3 Getting the most out of London’s road network ......................................... 166 7.4 The environmental impact of transport ...................................................... 168 7.5 Maintaining London’s strong public transport mode share ........................ 170 Appendix A STRATEGIC OPTIONS BACK CHECK ...................................... 173 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 201 Page 6 of 205 Silvertown Tunnel Case for the Scheme Document Reference: 7.1 List of Figures Figure 2-1: Vehicle crossings in east and west London ........................................... 37 Figure 2-2: Cross-river bus services in east and west London ................................. 38 Figure 2-3: Cross-river rail services in east and west London .................................. 39 Figure 2-4: Increase in rail capacity east of Tower Bridge........................................ 40 Figure 2-5: AM peak hour (08:00-09:00) cross-river road and public transport person trips in east London (2012-13) ................................................................................. 41 Figure 2-6: Vehicle flows at the Blackwall Tunnel, 1986-2014 ................................. 42 Figure 2-7: Weekday AM peak hour northbound traffic on GLA river crossings (2012) ................................................................................................................................. 44 Figure 2-8: Origins and destinations of AM Peak period Blackwall Tunnel trips (Behavioural Survey 2012) ....................................................................................... 46 Figure 2-9: Two-way Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) on the strategic road network in east London ............................................................................................ 48 Figure 2-10: AM peak average delay (September 2013 to August 2014) and AADT traffic flows (2012) ...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tfl RIVER CROSSINGS CONSULTATION EXERCISE and the REDBRIDGE RESPONSE: BRIEFING PAPER
    TfL RIVER CROSSINGS CONSULTATION EXERCISE AND THE REDBRIDGE RESPONSE: BRIEFING PAPER 1. Overview Building upon previous consultations, Transport for London is presently undertaking a public consultation exercise seeking views upon a revised set of options for new crossings of the River Thames east of Silvertown. (A proposed new tunnel under the Thames linking Silvertown with the North Greenwich peninsular has already attracted support and will be the subject of separate consultation later this year). The four options upon which views are now sought comprise: A new modern ferry at Woolwich A ferry service at Gallions Reach A bridge at Gallions Reach A bridge at Belvedere. The location of these options is shown in Appendix A in a separate document accompanying this one. For each separate proposal, views are invited whether respondents Strongly Support/Support/Neither/ Oppose/ Strongly Oppose. The public consultation deadline is 12th September, but Boroughs have been given until 30th September to respond. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to this consultation, summarise broadly the features of the emerging options and to seek a steer on the stance to be followed in LB Redbridge’s formal reply. 2. Background It is important to be aware of previous formal LB Redbridge positions conveyed to TfL in respect of new river crossings proposals. Those stances are summarised in Appendix B to this paper. The salient context surrounding the options now being considered is summarised below: TfL consultation in recent years has yielded support from a majority of respondents to provision of new Thames crossings, with businesses in east and south-east London very supportive.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding Peace and Nature in the City Lunch at Maureen's Pie & Mash
    ISSUE 01 SEPTEMBER 2018 C CLIPPERWALK EAT THINK Innovative communities in Finding peace and Lunch at Maureen's What drives Poplar and Canning Town nature in the city Pie & Mash creative migration? C Welcome to the first issue of Clipper, a magazine that champions the creative and innovative communities of London’s East End. Running across East India Docks and Poplar to Canning Town, Clipper tells the unique stories of the people and businesses who increasingly call this area home. London’s strength lies in its diversity, its adaptability, and its creativity. In this issue, we explore the eastward migration of London’s creative industries, and meet the personalities behind this shift. On pg 6 our guest columnist David Michon tackles the question: how are creative neighbourhoods born? From the local institution that is Maureen’s pie shop on pg 13 to a perfume maker reshaping the traditions of his trade on pg 16, it is this combination of the old and the new, entrepreneurial heritage and contemporary innovation, that makes this corner of East London such an inspiring destination for creative minds to both live and work. CONTRIBUTORS WORDS PHOTOGRAPHY ILLUSTRATION ON THE COVER Megan Carnegie, Ellie Harrison, Sophia Spring Abbey Lossing, Andrew Joyce, Jean Kern, head baker, E5 Roasthouse at Poplar Union Ella Braidwood, Charlotte Irwin, Ilya Milstein, Tom Woolley, David Michon Martina Paukova Printed and bound in London by Park Communications Ltd. Copyright © 2018 Courier Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved. CLIPPER 4 p.16 p.13 CONTENTS Agenda: Creative migration 06 The merchants: Maureen’s pie and mash 13 Headspace: Gallivant perfumes 16 Landmark: London’s only lighthouse 24 Creating space: Republic’s Import and Export buildings 26 Meet the team: Creative agency Threepipe 30 Map 34 Directory 35 p.30 p.26 p.24 5 CONTENTS CLIPPER 6 AGENDA WHAT ATTRACTS CREATIVE TALENT TO A NEIGHBOURHOOD? David Michon, former editor of architecture and design magazine Icon, explores how creative neighbourhoods are born.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Cards Contents
    Smart cards Contents 1 Smart card 1 1.1 History ................................................ 1 1.1.1 Invention ........................................... 1 1.1.2 Carte Bleue .......................................... 2 1.1.3 EMV ............................................. 2 1.1.4 Development of contactless systems ............................. 2 1.2 Design ................................................ 2 1.2.1 Contact smart cards ..................................... 3 1.2.2 Contactless smart cards .................................... 3 1.2.3 Hybrids ............................................ 4 1.3 Applications .............................................. 4 1.3.1 Financial ........................................... 4 1.3.2 SIM .............................................. 4 1.3.3 Identification ......................................... 4 1.3.4 Public transit ......................................... 5 1.3.5 Computer security ...................................... 6 1.3.6 Schools ............................................ 6 1.3.7 Healthcare .......................................... 6 1.3.8 Other uses .......................................... 6 1.3.9 Multiple-use systems ..................................... 6 1.4 Security ................................................ 6 1.5 Benefits ................................................ 6 1.6 Problems ............................................... 7 1.7 See also ................................................ 7 1.8 Further reading ...........................................
    [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]
  • London City Airport Master Plan 2006
    Master Plan November 2006 Master Plan November 2006 At a more local level, the Airport is a force restrictions we impose will continue. Foreword for regeneration which has not only created Alongside this the opening of the extension jobs and prosperity in the immediate area, of the DLR to the Airport in December but has also helped to spearhead the 2005 means we now have significantly success of landmarks like Canary Wharf improved public transport links with a and ExCel London and drive recent and higher proportion of passengers (49%) future extensions to the Docklands Light accessing the Airport by rail than any other Railway (DLR). UK airport. These links will be strengthened further by the operation of Crossrail in the We are also very well placed to continue future, and LCA is a key supporter of this to drive the economic prosperity flowing project. from the London Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. Through co-operating with a wide variety of interested bodies, we will seek to further But to do all this, we need to grow. In improve our already good environmental 2003 the Government published its Aviation record concentrating on reducing our White Paper which required all UK airports contribution to climate change and man- to set out master plans to grow through to aging all emissions, particularly waste. In 2030 to meet the increase in passenger addition, we support the aviation industry’s demand. One of the key objectives of this inclusion in the EU Emissions Trading paper was to maximise the use of existing Scheme, which will allow the issue of runways and infrastructure to delay, aviation greenhouse gas emissions to be reduce and in some cases eliminate the effectively and responsibly addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Camilla Ween Lessons from London
    Camilla Ween Lessons from London Harvard Loeb Fellow February 2008 1 Developing a World City 2 Better integration of the River Thames 3 Planning for growth 4 Balancing new and old 5 2000 London changed! Greater London Authority Mayor Ken Livingstone 6 Greater London Authority: • Mayor’s Office • Transport for London • London Development Agency • Fire and Emergency Planning • Metropolitan Police 7 What helped change London • Greater London Authority established in 2000 • Spatial Development Strategy - London Plan • Transport for London • Congestion Charge Scheme • Major transport schemes • Role of Land Use Planning • Sustainable travel and ‘soft’ measures 8 Spatial Development Strategy 9 London Plan A coherent set of policies • Climate Change Action Plan • Waste • Noise • Biodiversity • Children’s play space • Flood • Access etc etc 10 11 Transport for London • Overground rail • Underground • Buses • Trams • Taxis • River Services • Cycling • Walking 12 Transport for London • Budget ca $15 Bn • Carries 3 billion passengers pa 13 Transport for London Steady increase in journeys (2007): • Bus up 3.6% • Underground up 4.5% • Docklands Light Rail 16% 14 Transport Strategy 15 Congestion Charge Scheme • First zone introduced 2003 • Area doubled 2007 16 16 Congestion Charging 17 17 Congestion Charge Scheme • Number-plate recognition • Central call-centre billing • Many options for paying: - Buy on the day - Text messaging - Internet 18 Congestion Charging • $16 per day (multiple re-entry) • 7.00 am to 6.00 pm • Monday to Friday • Weekends free 19 Congestion Charging Benefits: • 21 % Traffic reduction • 30% Congestion reduction in first year • 43 % increase in cycling within zone • Reduction in Accidents • Reduction in key traffic pollutants • $250m raised for improving transport 20 Congestion Charging • Public transport accommodating displaced car users • Retail footfall higher than rest of UK • No effect on property prices 21 Major Transport Schemes Being developed: • Crossrail • New tram systems • Major interchanges - e.g.
    [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]
  • Letter July 2011.4Docx
    BEETLEY PARISH COUNCIL Dawn Meadow Fakenham Road East Bilney Dereham NR20 4HT 01362 861112 Dear Parishioner PROPOSED MINERAL EXTRACTION AND WASTE DISPOSAL SITES IN BEETLEY, EAST BILNEY, OLD BEETLEY AND GRESSENHALL – THE LATEST NEW PLANS You may remember being contacted by a Committee of the Parish Council during 2008-09 regarding plans by Norfolk County Council to site a number of mineral extraction and waste disposal pits between the villages within the Parish of Beetley. A public meeting and several leaflet distributions were organised to discuss the plans. Due to changes in local government policy, and the timing of the 2010 General Election, the proposals were delayed and temporarily put on hold. Norfolk County Council has recently reopened the consultation process, and there are now advanced proposals to locate two new sand and gravel extraction pits and two new waste disposal sites in the area between the four villages of Beetley, East Bilney, Gressenhall and Old Beetley. Please note that the sites include some new areas not previously identified for potential development. The deadline for local villagers to raise objections to the plans is 15th August 2011, so it is important that you make your views known to Norfolk County Council as soon as possible. The four sites now under consideration: • MIN 10a – Mineral extraction is proposed on a large area of land bordering the B1146, between Beetley and East Bilney, on the Old Beetley side of the main Dereham - Fakenham Road. (In the original proposals MIN 10a was listed as three separate sites: MIN 10, MIN 11 and MIN 12, with revised boundaries.) It is proposed that minerals are extracted from this site and transported under School Lane, via an extension to the existing conveyor belt, to the current quarry at East Bilney.
    [Show full text]
  • Travel in London, Report 3 I
    Transport for London Transport for London for Transport Travel in London Report 3 Travel in London Report 3 MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London ©Transport for London 2010 All rights reserved. Reproduction permitted for research, private study and internal circulation within an organisation. Extracts may be reproduced provided the source is acknowledged. Disclaimer This publication is intended to provide accurate information. However, TfL and the authors accept no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions or for any damage or loss arising from use of the information provided. Overview .......................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 27 1.1 Travel in London report 3 ............................................................................ 27 1.2 The Mayor of London’s transport strategy .................................................. 27 1.3 The monitoring regime for the Mayor’s Transport Strategy ......................... 28 1.4 The MTS Strategic Outcome Indicators ....................................................... 28 1.5 Treatment of MTS Strategic Outcome Indicators in this report ................... 31 1.6 Relationship to other Transport for London (TfL) and Greater London Authority (GLA) Group publications ............................................................ 32 1.7 Contents of this report ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Current and Future Cruise Ship Requirements in London
    London Development Agency June 2009 AN ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT AND FUTURE CRUISE SHIP REQUIREMENTS IN LONDON In conjunction with: 5 Market Yard Mews 194 Bermondsey Street London SE1 3TQ Tel: 020 7642 5111 Email: [email protected] CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. Current cruise facilities in central London 4 3. The organisational and planning context 8 4. The cruise market and future demand 11 5. Views of cruise operators 19 6. Potential for growing cruise calls to London 22 7. Assessment of potential sites 24 8. Lessons from elsewhere 37 9. Conclusions 51 Appendices: Appendix 1: List of consultees Appendix 2: Seatrade cruise market report Appendix 3: Location plan of potential sites Appendix 4: Economic impact study Appendix 5: Overview of costs The Tourism Company – Assessment of current and future cruise ship requirements 2 1. INTRODUCTION This report was commissioned by the London Development Agency (LDA) and Greater London Authority (GLA), with support from the Port of London Authority (PLA) in response to a need for a better understanding of London’s future cruise facility requirements. This need is identified in the London Tourism Vision for 2006-2016, and associated Action Plan 2006-2009, under the theme ‘A Sustainable and Inclusive City’, one of whose objectives is to ‘Increase the profile and usage of services along the Thames’. London currently hosts a relatively small number of cruise ships each year, making use of the informal and basic mooring and passenger facilities at Tower Bridge and Greenwich. The aim of this research is to assess the extent to which the lack of a dedicated, more efficient cruise facility is discouraging operators from bringing cruise ships to London, and if there is latent demand, how might this be accommodated.
    [Show full text]
  • Appeal Under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
    Appeal under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 De Paul House, 628-634 Commercial Road, London E14 7HS Proof of evidence of Anthony Lee PhD MRTPI MRICS PINS Ref App/E5900/W/20/3250665 LPA Ref: PA/19/00804 15 December 2020 Contents 1 Qualifications and experience 3 2 Scope of evidence 5 3 The Appeal Site and the Appeal Scheme 7 4 Planning policy requirements 10 5 My approach to testing the viability of the Appeal Scheme 14 6 Appeal Scheme appraisal inputs 15 7 Development appraisals 24 8 Conclusions 27 Appendices (bound separately) Appendix 1 - Accommodation schedule Appendix 2 - Via Limehouse hostel current rates Appendix 3 - Comparable co-living rents Appendix 4 - Revised revenues Appendix 5 - CBRE approach to valuing co-living Appendix 6 - Rent schedules incorporating 35% affordable housing Appendix 7 - Development appraisal (35% aff hsg at 30% discount to market rents) Appendix 8 - Development appraisal (35% aff hsg at 40% discount to market rents) Appendix 9 - Development appraisal (35% aff hsg at 50% discount to market rents) Appendix 10 - Development appraisal (100% market rents) 2 1 Qualifications and experience 1.1 I, Anthony David Lee BSc (Hons) MSc (Econ) MA (TP) PhD MRTPI MRICS confirm that: 1.2 I am a Senior Director and Head of UK Development Consultancy at BNP Paribas Real Estate, one of the UK’s leading real estate consultancies with fifty regional offices in addition to its London offices. 1.3 I am also the Director in charge of the Development Viability Team in the London office with responsibility for the viability service across London, the South and the East of England.
    [Show full text]
  • What Light Rail Can Do for Cities
    WHAT LIGHT RAIL CAN DO FOR CITIES A Review of the Evidence Final Report: Appendices January 2005 Prepared for: Prepared by: Steer Davies Gleave 28-32 Upper Ground London SE1 9PD [t] +44 (0)20 7919 8500 [i] www.steerdaviesgleave.com Passenger Transport Executive Group Wellington House 40-50 Wellington Street Leeds LS1 2DE What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review of the Evidence Contents Page APPENDICES A Operation and Use of Light Rail Schemes in the UK B Overseas Experience C People Interviewed During the Study D Full Bibliography P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review Of The Evidence P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review of the Evidence APPENDIX A Operation and Use of Light Rail Schemes in the UK P:\projects\5700s\5748\Outputs\Reports\Final\What Light Rail Can Do for Cities - Appendices _ 01-05.doc Appendix What Light Rail Can Do For Cities: A Review Of The Evidence A1. TYNE & WEAR METRO A1.1 The Tyne and Wear Metro was the first modern light rail scheme opened in the UK, coming into service between 1980 and 1984. At a cost of £284 million, the scheme comprised the connection of former suburban rail alignments with new railway construction in tunnel under central Newcastle and over the Tyne. Further extensions to the system were opened to Newcastle Airport in 1991 and to Sunderland, sharing 14 km of existing Network Rail track, in March 2002.
    [Show full text]