Section 48 Transport strategy

Summer 2012

S48-DT-000-XXXXX-000004 | Summer 2012

Section 48: Transport strategy

Thames Tideway Tunnel Section 48: Transport strategy
List of contents
Page number

1

Transport strategy ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 River transport ......................................................................................... 1 Other measures ....................................................................................... 2 Need for flexibility .................................................................................... 2 Areas where river usage is not proposed ................................................ 2 Flexibility to do more by river ................................................................... 4 Benefits of the revised strategy ............................................................... 4

Appendix A................................................................................................................ 7 List of tables
Page number

Table 1.1 Benefits of the updated transport strategy .................................................. 4 Table 1.2 Reduced overall predicted HGV numbers .................................................. 5

Section 48: Transport strategy

1
1.1
1.1.1

Transport strategy
Introduction
We have reviewed the options for the transport of construction materials including excavated material to and from our construction sites. Our aim was to examine the feasibility of increasing the quantities of construction materials to be moved by river. Our work has included: • • • • policy review analysis of key issues and opportunities options development and testing stakeholder discussions with the Greater London Authority, Transport for London, the Port of London Authority, and the London Boroughs.

1.2
1.2.1

River transport
We propose to transport the following materials by river: a. main tunnel excavated material from the main tunnel drive sites (Carnwath Road Riverside, Kirtling Street, and Chambers Wharf) b. import and export of cofferdam fill material at all foreshore sites c. shaft excavated material at ten sites in the foreshore or with direct river access at Putney Embankment Foreshore, Carnwath Road Riverside, Cremorne Wharf Depot, Chelsea Embankment Foreshore, Heathwall Pumping Station, Albert Embankment Foreshore, Victoria Embankment Foreshore, Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore, Chambers Wharf and King Edward Memorial Park Foreshore

d. excavated material for connection tunnels, interceptions and associated structures at eight sites at Putney Embankment Foreshore, Cremorne Wharf Depot, Chelsea Embankment Foreshore, Albert Embankment Foreshore, Victoria Embankment Foreshore, Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore, Chambers Wharf and King Edward Memorial Park Foreshore e. import of sand and aggregates for main tunnel secondary lining for main tunnel sites at Carnwath Road Riverside, Kirtling Street and Chambers Wharf. 1.2.2 We would like to move all of the above materials by river, but for our transport assessment we have assumed that a minimum of 90 per cent of these materials would be transported by river. We have done this to allow some flexibility to use road transport for periods where river transport may be unavailable and for material that is unsuitable for river transport, such as excessively wet spoil or any contaminated materials. Our intention is to incentivise the construction contractors to move as much of the above

Section 48: Transport strategy

1

Section 48: Transport strategy material by river as practical in order to achieve an amount closer to 100 per cent of materials by river.

1.3
1.3.1

Other measures
In addition, in the construction contracts we would require: a. the main tunnel secondary concrete lining to be batched on site b. ready-mix suppliers for all sites to source sand and aggregates by river or rail c. best practice measures for road transport, such as adoption of EURO 5 vehicles as a minimum heavy goods vehicle (HGV) standard.

1.3.2

These measures will help to further reduce the volume and impact of road transport during construction.

1.4
1.4.1

Need for flexibility
Our transport strategy will be subject to suitable provisions in the DCO and in agreements with key stakeholders, such as the Greater London Authority, the Port of London Authority, Transport for London and the relevant London borough to ensure flexibility to use other transport modes in order to: a. re-use or dispose of material locally by road where this would have less overall impact and/or allow sustainable re-use of materials b. use road transport in exceptional circumstances if river transport is unavailable c. use other means of transport in the event that river transport costs escalate prohibitively.

1.4.2

A summary of overall barge and lorry numbers at each proposed site is contained in Appendix A.

1.5
1.5.1

Areas where river usage is not proposed
The project has considered all options where river transport is possible in practice, but at this stage we do not propose to commit to using river transport for the following: a. main tunnel precast concrete lining segments b. materials to/from Greenwich Pumping Station, Beckton Sewage Treatment Works and Abbey Mills Pumping Station c. excavated shaft material from Kirtling Street.

1.5.2

A major concern is the associated risks of using the river on the scale currently proposed, particularly in the west. Some of the challenges that we face include the requirement to establish infrastructure, acquire additional barge and tug capacity, and ensure additional trained and

Section 48: Transport strategy

2

Section 48: Transport strategy experienced crew are available. We would also need transport capacity to support major continuous tunnelling operations 24 hours a day, seven days a week, over two to three years, simultaneously at multiple sites. We also do not propose to commit to using river transport where the volumes of material concerned would be so small or so erratic as to render river use impractical.

Main tunnel lining segments
1.5.3 The movement of tunnel segments by river to Carnwath Road Riverside, Kirtling Street, Chambers Wharf and Greenwich Pumping Station would increase risk to the successful construction of the main tunnel. Any delays or complications associated with the movement of tunnel segments could have serious effects on the programme and significant cost implications. There are also issues associated with segment manufacturing and handling: if a contractor proposes to utilise a segment manufacturing site that does not have river access, segments would first need to be transferred to the river by road, which would require double handling and negate the potential benefits of river transport. The tunnel segments may also be prone to damage during loading and unloading, which would further delay construction. It is essential that handling is kept to a minimum. The benefits of moving tunnel segments by river in terms of HGV movements would be relatively small (four per cent of all construction materials), and would not achieve significant environmental benefits. For example, at Carnwath Road Riverside over 65 per cent of materials would be removed by river. If tunnel segments were transported by river, average peak vehicle numbers during the tunnelling phase would be reduced from 30 to 16 HGVs per day. We are undertaking further review of the implications of transporting tunnel segments by river, however, we do not currently propose to commit to this in our proposed DCO application.

1.5.4

Materials to/from Greenwich Pumping Station, Beckton Sewage Treatment Works, Abbey Mills Pumping Station, and Kirtling Street
1.5.5 We considered using Deptford Creek to move materials to and from Greenwich Pumping Station. However, as it is a narrow, tidal creek, it would only support restricted barge sizes and would possibly require dredging before works could commence. In addition there are issues related to handling and transport of the excavated Chalk. The movement of materials at Beckton Sewage Treatment Works would be relatively expensive due to the limited volumes and the need to establish conveyors on the existing jetty. River transport would not result in significant benefits, as the impacts of road transport at this location are not considered significant.

1.5.6

Section 48: Transport strategy

3

Section 48: Transport strategy 1.5.7 1.5.8 At Abbey Mills PS, we will not commit to river transport until we have fully evaluated the lessons learned from how the Lee Tunnel project made use of the river. The river frontage at Kirtling Street is very restricted and establishing river transport facilities for the project would be difficult due to existing river users and infrastructure. We are committed to providing river transport for main tunnel excavated materials at Kirtling Street but the excavation of the shaft itself should not be constrained by a requirement for river transport while the required infrastructure is constructed.

1.6
1.6.1

Flexibility to do more by river
Our strategy does not preclude any appointed contractors from increasing the use of river transport, if practical and economic to do so. We will engage with contractors to identify opportunities for greater river use or an appropriate incentive to encourage greater river use.

1.7
1.7.1

Benefits of the revised strategy
We have increased our commitment to river use since phase two consultation. We believe that this would have considerable benefits in terms of reducing total vehicle numbers and the associated impacts, particularly at the CSO shaft sites. The project’s updated transport strategy would have the following overall benefits: Table 1.1 Benefits of the updated transport strategy Benefit Total lorries taken off the road Reduction in lorry movements since phase two consultation Total tonnes moved by river Per cent change in river transport since phase two consultation Increase in number of tonnes moved by river since phase two consultation Notes 262,000 lorries taken off the road due to the use of the river Lorry numbers reduced from 285,000 to 265,000 – a reduction of 20,000 lorries or 40,000 lorry movements 4,235,000 tonnes moved by river River usage increased from 48 to 53 per cent of all materials River usage increased from 3,810,000 tonnes to 4,235,000 tonnes (an increase of 425,000 tonnes or 11%)

1.7.2

There would be significant local benefits as a result of the amendments in terms of reduced overall predicted HGV numbers:

Section 48: Transport strategy

4

Section 48: Transport strategy Table 1.2 Reduced overall predicted HGV numbers
Site name Putney Embankment Foreshore Carnwath Road Riverside Phase two total lorry numbers 4,650 Updated strategy lorry numbers 3,350 Change in lorry numbers - 1,300 Per cent change -28.0% Notes

26,750

25,850

- 900

-3.4%

Benefit from imported secondary lining, sand and aggregates

Cremorne Wharf Depot Chelsea Embankment Foreshore Kirtling Street

4,300 8,350

3,350 5,600

- 950 - 2,750

-22.1% -32.9%

50,800

51,500

700

1.4%

Amended quantities and change in diaphragm wall arisings balance import of secondary lining, sand and aggregates.

Heathwall Pumping Station Albert Embankment Foreshore Victoria Embankment Foreshore Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore Chambers Wharf

5,900 8,750

4,250 6,600

- 1,650 - 2,150

-28.0% -24.6%

8,000

5,750

- 2,250

-28.1%

18,350 38,650

13,350 32,350

- 5,000 - 6,300

-27.2% -16.3% Removal of shaft excavated material and import of secondary lining aggregates. Change in diaphragm wall arisings by road

King Edward Memorial Park Foreshore

10,150

10,600

450

4.4%

Section 48: Transport strategy

5

Section 48: Transport strategy
Phase two total lorry numbers Updated strategy lorry numbers Change in lorry numbers

Site name

Per cent change

Notes and increased detail of design of interception structures.

Section 48: Transport strategy

6

Appendix

Appendix A
A.1.1 Figure A.1 summarises the overall barge and lorry numbers at each proposed site. During phase two consultation, we received representations not to undertake weekend working, which we have agreed to (although limited working may be allowed on Saturday mornings). We have therefore re-calculated the daily flows based on a five-day week rather than a seven-day week. Table A.1 Summary of HGV and barge numbers per site
Site name Total for duration of project HGV lorry numbers Average daily HGVs during construction period Peak monthly average HVG's Duration of peak lorry movements Barge numbers Total Peak monthly average Barge sizes Excavated material Imported cofferdam fill

Acton Storm Tanks Hammersmith Pumping Station Barn Elms Putney Embankment Foreshore Carnwath Road Riverside Dormay Street King George’s Park Falconbrook Pumping Station Cremorne Wharf Depot Chelsea Embankment Foreshore Kirtling Street Heathwall Pumping Station

5,922 5,271

7/day 8/day

23/day 21/day

5 months 3 months

3,358 3,332

6/day 5/day

22/day 21/day

1 month 1 month 167 2/day 350t 350t

25,847 4,871 2,024 3,742

19/day 7/day 4/day 5/day

45/day 22/day 8/day 18/day

17 months 4 months 4 months 2 months

1,067

2/day

800t

3,341 5,595

5/day 7/day

12/day 42/day

6 months 1 month

56 209

1/day 3/day

350t 800t 800t

51,518 4,234

36/day 6/day

96/day 18/day

14 months 1 month

1,620 137

4/day 2/day

1,000t 350t 350t

Section 48: Transport strategy

7

Appendix
Site name Total for duration of project HGV lorry numbers Average daily HGVs during construction period Peak monthly average HVG's Duration of peak lorry movements Barge numbers Total Peak monthly average Barge sizes Excavated material Imported cofferdam fill

Albert Embankment Foreshore Victoria Embankment Foreshore Blackfriars Bridge Foreshore Chambers Wharf King Edward Memorial Park Foreshore Earl Pumping Station Deptford Church Street Greenwich Pumping Station Abbey Mills Pumping Station Beckton Sewage Treatment Works Shad Thames Pumping Station Bekesbourne Street

6,629

8/day

23/day

1 month

586

8/day

350t

350t

5,757

5/day

14/day

3 months

144

2/day

800t

800t

13,354

11/day

46/day

3 months

369

3/day

800t

800t

32,231 10,706

20/day 12/day

55/day 41/day

3 months 5 months

834 201

3/day 2/day

1,500t 1,000t

1,000t 1,000t

9,105 8,696 32,316

9/day 9/day 25/day

34/day 32/day 77/day

4 months 7 months 12 months

17,349

17/day

70/day

4 months

8,594

10/day

25/day

5 months

1,020

3/day

7/day

1 month

344

2/day

5/day

1 month

Note 1: Lorry and barge numbers within this table constitute one vehicle/barge arriving and subsequently leaving site. For total vehicle movements, the values in this table must be multiplied by two. Note 2: HGV numbers were calculated on a monthly basis. The 'Peak monthly average' is the average daily HGVs during the peak month. This does not represent the maximum number of vehicles on any single day.

Section 48: Transport strategy

8

Appendix

Note 3: HGV lorry movements were assessed based on operating five days per week. HGV lorry movements might be permitted on Saturday mornings but the figures have been calculated on a five-day week. Note 4: Barge movements were assumed to be over five days per week with the exception of the main drive sites (Carnwath Road Riverside, Kirtling Street and Chambers Wharf), where barges operate seven days a week. Note 5: HGV numbers were based on the following assumptions: o excavated material would be removed from site by tipper wagons with a load capacity of 16 tonnes (equivalent to approximately 8m3 of un-bulked excavated material) o imported bulk fill material would be brought to site by tipper wagons with a load capacity of 16 tonnes (equivalent to approximately 8m3 of compacted fill material) o ready mix concrete would be brought to site by mixer wagons with a capacity of 15 tonnes of concrete (equivalent to approximately 6m3) o HGV numbers for steel reinforcement were based on 15 tonnes per delivery o all other HGV numbers were based on 20 tonnes per delivery Note 6: Barge numbers were based on utilising 90 per cent of barge capacity. The size of barges used was assessed on a site-by-site basis in consultation with the Port of London Authority. The assessed barge sizes at some sites also vary depending on the material transported and location constraints.

Section 48: Transport strategy

9

S48-DT-000-XXXXX-000004

For further information or to comment on our proposals please see our website: www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk It is very important that you understand the information we have provided. If you need further information in another language, braille, large print or audio format please contact us on 0800 0721 086.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.