Sustainability Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Hampton Court to Berrylands / Oct 2015
Crossrail 2 factsheet: Services between Berrylands and Hampton Court New Crossrail 2 services are proposed to serve all stations between Berrylands and Hampton Court, with 4 trains per hour in each direction operating directly to, and across central London. What is Crossrail 2? Crossrail 2 in this area Crossrail 2 is a proposed new railway serving London and the wider South East that could be open by 2030. It would connect the existing National Rail networks in Surrey and Hertfordshire with trains running through a new tunnel from Wimbledon to Tottenham Hale and New Southgate. Crossrail 2 will connect directly with National Rail, London Underground, London Overground, Crossrail 1, High Speed 1 international and domestic and High Speed 2 services, meaning passengers will be one change away from over 800 destinations nationwide. Why do we need Crossrail 2? The South West Main Line is one of the busiest and most congested routes in the country. It already faces capacity constraints and demand for National Rail services into Waterloo is forecast to increase by at least 40% by 2043. This means the severe crowding on the network will nearly double, and would likely lead to passengers being unable to board trains at some stations. Crossrail 2 provides a solution. It would free up space on the railway helping to reduce congestion, and would enable us to run more local services to central London that bypass the most congested stations. Transport improvements already underway will help offset the pressure in the short term. But we need Crossrail 2 to cope with longer term growth. -
Silvertown Crossrail Station
Challenges Lessons Learned Policy. Ensuring that the message, delivery of the The project is still at an early stage and stakeholder station post Crossrail and demonstrating that the support and momentum will be the key. The impacts on the operational railway line, is clear stakeholder support will come in the form of to ensure that the support of the policy makers placing the station in the upcoming policy docu- and provide the project with a strong supporting ments, the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, London position. Plan and London Borough of Newham’s local plans Silvertown crossrail and polies update. To ensure that the station can Design. Incorporating the station into the local be supported in policy the momentum of dialogue area and demonstrating how it enables it to thrive and supporting technical work is essential. station and create an interchange for passengers to ensure the local residential and business can see the To become a Major East London transport hub London City Airport needs to create an interchange for benefits the station could bring. international, national and local travel for people in London and the South-East. The Silvertown Crossrail station supports the airport travellers through the creation of new Mayor’s vision for strategic growth by maximising visitor destinations, providing retail and leisure the regeneration potential of the Royal Docks Area opportunities, particularly at Royal Victoria and as well as providing faster links to key London at Silvertown Quays. The introduction of a station employment areas, and unlocking more land for close to the airport would achieve similar results homes and businesses. -
Delivering High Speed 2 Major Project Report
DELIVERING HIGH SPEED 2 MAJOR PROJECT REPORT New rail reality Developing a £33bn rail network to transform Uk’s north-soUth 03|2012 CONNECTIONS Special report | High Speed 2 03 | 2012 Foreword 04 infrastructure specialists who supply the rail Introduction industry. Many of them are already helping HS2 Ltd chief executive Alison Munro us deliver Crossrail, Thameslink, electrifica- updates on the project’s progress tion, and upgrades to major stations like Reading and Birmingham. But even the 08 largest of these schemes will be dwarfed in Technical challenge size by HS2. So the challenge is for British Why the current London to West firms to develop the expertise to compete Midlands route is the best for key high speed contracts, and help deliver Britain’s Victorian engineering HS2 on time and on budget. 12 pioneers built a railway that was the The government’s National Infrastructure Euston envy of the world. Such was their Plan makes clear the importance of a predict- vision and singular focus that able and transparent pipeline of infrastruc- Expanding the station presents a ❝ following the opening of the first intercity line regeneration opportunity ture projects that will help the private sector between Manchester and Liverpool in 1830, it invest and plan for the future. HS2 will form 14 took just a little over two decades to construct a a key element of that long-term pipeline, Euston masterplan national rail network which linked all our major providing certainty about future contracting cities, and transformed our economy. Designs for Euston station opportunities following the Yet the modern reality is that since the terminus are vital to the project completion of Crossrail in 2017. -
Capacity on North-South Main Lines
Capacity on North-South Main Lines Technical Report Report October 2013 Prepared for: Prepared by: Department for Transport Steer Davies Gleave Click here to enter text. 28-32 Upper Ground London SE1 9PD +44 (0)20 7910 5000 www.steerdaviesgleave.com Technical Report CONTENTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... I 1 CREATING THE TIMETABLES THAT DETERMINE CAPACITY PROVISION IS A COMPLEX ISSUE .................................................................................................. 1 2 EUROPEAN COMPARISONS ........................................................................ 5 3 HOW CAPACITY CAN BE MEASURED ............................................................ 7 4 TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES ..................................................................... 9 5 CAPACITY AND THE NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES ................................................ 11 West Coast Main Line .............................................................................. 11 Midland Main Line .................................................................................. 13 East Coast Main Line ............................................................................... 14 Route section categorisation: green/orange/red ............................................ 15 FIGURES Figure 5.1 Assessed post-2019 Capacity Pressures on North-South Main Lines 19 Contents Technical Report Summary 1. This note assesses the capacity of the North-South Rail Lines in the UK from the perspective -
Hsuk London Terminal Strategy
HSUK LONDON TERMINAL STRATEGY In the development of high speed rail systems, the issue of terminal location and onward distribution of passengers assumes almost as much importance as the more obvious question of route. The new lines are designed to carry large volumes of passengers on trains operating at high frequencies, and these factors combine to create major flows arriving at city terminals which must then be efficiently dispersed onto the local public transport networks. This demands full integration of high speed and local systems, with optimised transfer at dedicated and fit-for- purpose terminals. These issues apply at all UK cities where high speed lines are planned, but are most acute in London, where passenger flows are greatest, and congestion in the existing public transport system is most critical. The following diagrams review existing central London connectivity issues, and compare and contrast the London terminal solutions proposed for HS2, and for the alternative High Speed UK proposals. For precise details of the core High Speed UK proposals (as included in the cost estimates), see the ‘200k’ series of plans. LTS1 : LONDON MAIN LINE NETWORK CIRCA 1963 LTS2 : EXISTING CENTRAL LONDON RAIL NETWORK INCLUDING CROSSRAIL SCHEME These diagrams show the rail network of central London, dominated by the classic terminus stations of the Victorian era. These are mostly reliant for onward connectivity upon the Tube network, which tended to form ‘nodes’ around the busier/more important termini. However, the change from main line to Tube is inherently inefficient, with passengers forced to detrain en masse, and with massive congestion occurring especially at rush hours. -
The Midland Main Line and the Influence of HS2 a Short Report for North West Leicestershire District Council
The Midland Main Line and the influence of HS2 A short report for North West Leicestershire District Council 1. Introduction Concerns have been raised recently about the relationship between the Midland Main Line (MML) and HS2, and whether the high-speed line is likely to have adverse effects on the existing network. At first sight, these concerns do not appear unreasonable in the context of recent Network Rail/Department for Transport decisions: There will be no electrification north of Kettering as this work has been halted in this and other locations. This raises a question about the viability of the Classic Connection with HS2 at Toton The new East Midlands contract will be 7+2, reducing the incentive for a new train operator to invest in new rolling stock; HSTs are scheduled to come out of service by 2019; possible replacements will not be able to attain the same speeds and this could adversely affect journey times. These points together make depressing reading, and it is understandable why there is a feeling that the MML is being sacrificed in favour of HS2 to make it a more attractive prospect for this part of England. The relationship between the MML and HS2 is an important one in the District, and currently it is finely balanced. The Council has been broadly supportive of the scheme because of the economic benefits that will follow on from the construction and operation of HS2, but there is a danger that this could change, particularly if continued opposition from residents and businesses alters the view of the elected members. -
Investigation Into the Department for Transport's Decision to Cancel Three
A picture of the National Audit Office logo Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Department for Transport Investigation into the Department for Transport’s decision to cancel three rail electrification projects HC 835 SESSION 2017–2019 29 MARCH 2018 4 What this investigation is about Investigation into the Department for Transport’s decision to cancel three rail electrification projects What this investigation is about 1 In July 2017 the Secretary of State for Transport announced the cancellation of three electrification projects serving different parts of the UK: the Midland Main Line north of Kettering (to Nottingham and Sheffield); the Great Western Main Line between Cardiff and Swansea; and the Lakes Line between Oxenholme and Windermere. Electrification of the Midland Main Line to Sheffield was a 2015 Conservative party manifesto commitment. The 2015 manifesto also stated that work was underway to electrify the railway in South Wales. These three projects are part of wider electrification projects for which works are either ongoing or already complete for large sections of these lines (Figure 1). 2 This investigation sets out the decision-making process, leading to the July 2017 announcement. It covers: • the original case for electrification; • why the Department for Transport (the Department) chose to cancel projects; • how it selected which projects to cancel; and • the Department’s assessment on the impact that cancelling the projects would have on promised benefits. 3 This investigation focuses on the three electrification projects the Secretary of State announced as cancelled in July 2017. Our investigation does not seek to evaluate the value for money of the projects or the decision to cancel. -
High Speed 2: Spring 2020 Update
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts High Speed 2: Spring 2020 update Third Report of Session 2019–21 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 6 May 2020 HC 84 Published on 17 May 2020 by authority of the House of Commons The Committee of Public Accounts The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine “the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit” (Standing Order No. 148). Current membership Meg Hillier MP (Labour (Co-op), Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Chair) Mr Gareth Bacon MP (Conservative, Orpington) Kemi Badenoch MP (Conservative, Saffron Walden) Olivia Blake MP (Labour, Sheffield, Hallam) Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP (Conservative, The Cotswolds) Dame Cheryl Gillan MP (Conservative, Chesham and Amersham) Peter Grant MP (Scottish National Party, Glenrothes) Mr Richard Holden MP (Conservative, North West Durham) Sir Bernard Jenkin MP (Conservative, Harwich and North Essex) Craig Mackinlay MP (Conservative, Thanet) Shabana Mahmood MP (Labour, Birmingham, Ladywood) Gagan Mohindra MP (Conservative, South West Hertfordshire) Sarah Olney MP (Liberal Democrat, Richmond Park) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Nick Smith MP (Labour, Blaenau Gwent) James Wild MP (Conservative, North West Norfolk) Powers Powers of the Committee of Public Accounts are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No. 148. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2020. -
Infrastructure Intelligence Tablet Edition |
ISSUE 09 | April 2015 INTERVIEW Davendra Dabasia of Mace talks leadership page 26 ANALYSIS ACE NEWS Crunch carbon Danny Alexander cut costs on infrastructure page 16 beyond the election page 28 Produced for the industry by the Association for Consultancy and Engineering And we’re off! Highways England’s £11bn five year plan page 12 MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR News roundup With the UK’s most unpredictable General Election in decades almost upon us, the question remains whether or not the increasingly rosy infrastructure and support infrastructure sector should start to worry? BUSINESS research and the development For on the one hand we continue to see unprecedented levels of of new manufacturing cross party support for the £466bn National Infrastructure Plan, major Austerity is set to end facilities and training. schemes such as HS2 and for devolved powers to drive investment into in 2019, a year earlier areas such as the “Northern Powerhouse”. than originally planned, Chief construction adviser And we see long term spending plans being rolled out across the Chancellor George Osborne Peter Hansford has called highways sector, the rail industry, power, water and communications as promised in his 2105 Budget for evidence on how to the clear link between investment and economic growth is driven home. speech. Infrastructure didn’t unlock demand, improve Yet on the other hand there is no question in anyone’s minds that get a big build up in Osborne’s affordability and increase the post-Election economy will be tough and getting tougher. Not least Commons speech which attractiveness of solid focused on economic successes wall insulation. -
Underground News Index 1994
UNDERGROUND NEWS ISSN 0306-8617 INDEX 1994 Issues 385-396 PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY THE LONDON UNDERGROUND RAILWAY SOCIETY 527 INDEX TO 1994 ISSUES OF UNDERGROUND NEWS Notes (i) Page entries witli * are photographs. (ii) Page entries for an individual station may include developments in the vicinity of the station. A ACCIDENTS - COLLISIONS Harrow & Weatdstone, 29.3.94, buffer stops & traction std., 213,304,377 Watford area, Bakerloo, 16.10.62, 181 ACCIDENTS - DERAILMENTS Aldersgate, 24.1.55, 179 British Museum, 15.10.94 , 481 Chancery Lane, battery loco., 20.4.94, 251,306 Edgware, 15.3.94, 230 Epping, 26.10.94, 11,18 Kennington, June 1994, 377 Loughton, 1.11.93. 11,18.38 Momington Crescent, 12.3.93, 20 NearHolbom, 16.10.94, 513 Northumberland Park depot, 26.1.94, 120,125 Piccadilly Circus. Bakerloo. 1943, 389 Piccadilly Circus, Bakerloo, 29.10.75, 389 Piccadilly Circus, Bakerioo, 22.4.94, 240,252,274,311,377,389 White City area, engineers' train, 25.3.94, 265 ACCIDENTS - FIRES Central Line, conductor rail, due to 1992 stock. 229 Debden (near), grass, August 1994, 458 Dollis Hill signal cables, 4.7.94, 379 King's Cross, compensation insufficient, 230 Train, High Street Kensington, July 1994 , 379 Wanstead, in container, 4.5.94, 308 ACCIDENTS - FORMATION FAILURES (See also under 'Bridges') Colindale/Burnt Oak, 1.1.94, 118,119,370 Queensbury area, 29.5.94, 284,397 Ravenscourt Park, wall, 27.4.93, 328 Sloane Square, roof beam crack. 311,375,376,377,429,465 ACCIDENTS - MISCELLANEOUS Jubilee Line train hits umbrella, 1.8.94. -
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 -
Matter M76 Further Suggested Changes to Be Made to Policy T3 Transport Capacity, Connectivity and Safeguarding and Policy T9 Fu
Matter M76 Further suggested changes to be made to Policy T3 Transport capacity, connectivity and safeguarding and Policy T9 Funding transport infrastructure through planning • Bold blue – new text • Blue strikethrough – deleted original plan text • Purple strikethrough – deleted minor suggested change text • Bold purple- reinstated original text • Red bold – Minor Suggested change • Red strike through – minor suggested change Change ref no Policy/para Further suggested change /table/map M76.1 Policy T3, table 10.1 Transformation of Oxford Street low 2017- 2022 M76.2 Policy T3, table 10.1 ULEZ in central and inner London medium 2017- 2021 0 ULEZ in inner London low 2020- 2030 ULEZ strengthening London-wide low 2020- for buses, coaches and HGVs 2030 M76.3 Policy T3, table 10.1 Walk and cycle bridge between low 2020- Nine Elms and Pimlico river 2030 crossing: Nine Elms Pimlico Bridge M76.4 Policy T3, table 10.1 Bus network: wheelchair accessible low 2017- bus stops 2020 2041 M76.5 Policy T3, table 10.1 Bus transit pilots in Opportunity low 2020- Areas 2041 M76.6 Policy T3, table 10.1 Coach hub(s) upgrade and/or medium 2020- reprovision 2023 30 30 M76.7 Policy T3, table 10.1 Elizabeth line high 2017- 2021 0 M76.8 Policy T3, table 10.1 Elizabeth line extension / rail medium 2020- enhancements east of Abbey Wood / high 2041 M76.9 Policy T3, table 10.1 Heathrow Airport Southern Rail medium 2020 Access (required for if airport high - expansion proceeds) 2041 Heathrow Airport Western Rail medium 2020 Access (required for if airport high - expansion