Changes to Waterloo (approaches and platforms)

[swt_passenger]

Mod Note: This thread has been split from another thread which can be found here.

SWT's latest press release on their web site claims that the bringing back into use of the former Eurostar platforms will be the first major change at Waterloo since the 1930s.

Is this going to be the best place to discuss the latest plans though? Perhaps an earlier thread should be reopened...

But in the meantime, this is quite a significant bit of news. The key thing is that they are going to rebuild all the separate bridges on the international platform lines, between Leake St and Upper Marsh into single structures to allow the tracks to be shifted.

Network Rail pdf fact sheet here: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/improv...e/documents/waterloo-approaches-factsheet.pdf

What it implies to me, looking at Google overhead view, is that there will be a new throat for the international terminal, which probably involves reducing the length of the 5 platforms P20-24. AIUI the international terminal didn't allow for parallel moves in and out, which they'll obviously have to enable for the proposed P19-24 Windsor side station.

With the (international side) approach tracks concentrated further towards the far west of the overall viaduct, they will make space available to re-arrange the throat of the existing mainline layout as well.

 

[nlogax]

Has anyone seen proposals for the actual track configurations? I'm not sure if they'd need to be submitted to LB of Lambeth as part of the proposal. As far as I can tell, no detailed planning documents have yet been provided.

http://planning.lambeth.gov.uk/onli...ils.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=NRT0Q2BOHRX00

 

[infobleep]

Is the reference to improving Clapham Junction; Wimbledon and Surbiton stations a reference to Crossrail 2?

Last year they did the wiring at Surbiton station and they have done works at Clapham Junction to in the last few years.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is the reference to improving Clapham Junction; Wimbledon and Surbiton stations a reference to Crossrail 2?

No it isn't. Works at various suburban stations has always been part of the Waterloo capacity improvements, certainly for the last three or four years of drip fed hints in NR publications. In any case, Crosrail 2 is unfunded.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Has anyone seen proposals for the actual track configurations? I'm not sure if they'd need to be submitted to LB of Lambeth as part of the proposal. As far as I can tell, no detailed planning documents have yet been provided.

http://planning.lambeth.gov.uk/onli...ils.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=NRT0Q2BOHRX00

I had a fruitless search there as well, there's often a delay of a couple of weeks before the detailed info appears on the public planning sites.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The documentation has now been loaded, here's the planning supporting statement which I'm just scanning through. It includes loads more info, including a summary of works at some other stations; but I haven't found a track layout yet.

ii) Remodelling of former WIT
1.3.13 Between approximately Leake Street and the existing Waterloo Station non- ticketed concourse, the former WIT requires remodelling to enable the Windsor 20 tph project. This involves:
 relocation of the existing buffer stops approximately 50m south, to allow the platform slab to be cut back, which provides an enlarged concourse for increased passenger flow and dwell capacity;
 installation of new stairs, lifts and escalators to improve vertical circulation;
 construction of two new accesses to the London Underground station: a staircase from this enhanced concourse space and an at-level access from the lower level of the terminal;
 construction of passenger and operational facilities; and
 construction of a new roof structure to provide complete coverage of the passenger concourse area between the 1993 WIT roof and the original 1922 concourse roof, to provide a safe, dry connection to the platforms and enhance passenger experience.
1.3.14 These works are subject to on-going design and do not need to commence construction until after the commencement of the Waterloo Approaches Works. The requirement for planning permission for these works will be considered separately and a planning application submitted if required.
Queenstown Road
1.3.15 Works at Queenstown Road are proposed to provide capability for 20tph and include: track works; bringing Platform 1 back into use; and station modification to enable the use of Platform 1.
Nine Elms
1.3.16 Track work (enabling trains to cross over between tracks) to facilitate the running of Windsor Line services.
Hounslow
1.3.17 The installation of a train turnback loop (a new section of track) to allow trains to pull off the main line, stop and change direction, as well as track works to allow trains to cross between tracks.

http://planning-docs.lambeth.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00574985.pdf

 

[infobleep]

No it isn't. Works at various suburban stations has always been part of the Waterloo capacity improvements, certainly for the last three or four years of drip fed hints in NR publications. In any case, Crosrail 2 is unfunded.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



I had a fruitless search there as well, there's often a delay of a couple of weeks before the detailed info appears on the public planning sites.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The documentation has now been loaded, here's the planning supporting statement which I'm just scanning through. It includes loads more info, including a summary of works at some other stations; but I haven't found a track layout yet.

Thanks for that reply. I always through it was a case of an extra line between Surbiton and Clapham Junction if Crossrail 2 didn't happen or Crossrail 2 a d thus nothing would happen u til Crossrail 2 had been decided, which will be some years away.

I wonder are the station improvement works separate to the extra line?

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder are the station improvement works separate to the extra line?

AIUI the works mentioned are more to do with passenger capacity to/from the platforms, and for interchanging, e.g. the proposal for an extra London end interchange footbridge at Wimbledon.

I think that member Pumbaa has posted in the past that the 5th track may be accelerated and done independently of the Crossrail 2 decision; but I can't easily find the post in the forums.

IIRC NR's official stance in the 2011 London and SE RUS was that it would be a 5th track OR Crossrail 2 but not both.

 

[infobleep]

AIUI the works mentioned are more to do with passenger capacity to/from the platforms, and for interchanging, e.g. the proposal for an extra London end interchange footbridge at Wimbledon.

I think that member Pumbaa has posted in the past that the 5th track may be accelerated and done independently of the Crossrail 2 decision; but I can't easily find the post in the forums.

IIRC NR's official stance in the 2011 London and SE RUS was that it would be a 5th track OR Crossrail 2 but not both.

Admirably trying to get onto the 17.39 or 18.40 isn't so easy once people start get off the train and yes it takes a while for people to exit.

However extra stay on capacity won't provide extra train capacity, not that anyone is saying it would.

 

[hwl]

AIUI the works mentioned are more to do with passenger capacity to/from the platforms, and for interchanging, e.g. the proposal for an extra London end interchange footbridge at Wimbledon.

I think that member Pumbaa has posted in the past that the 5th track may be accelerated and done independently of the Crossrail 2 decision; but I can't easily find the post in the forums.

IIRC NR's official stance in the 2011 London and SE RUS was that it would be a 5th track OR Crossrail 2 but not both.

Some of the works around Queenstown Road will help enable the 5th SWML track.

The works also allow more SWML fast platforms in the future.

Plenty of talk of other SWML works including Woking Flyover included in the 3rd and 4th points below which does seem to hint that 5th track is going to be done lots of the work will need to be done for both like Surbiton. Wimbledon flyover would presumably need to be rebuild for 5th track too and there is the often talked of plan sort P7,8&9 at Clapham Jn.

The agreed infrastructure and rolling stock interventions as part of the Wessex Capacity Improvement Programme
sit in four main projects as follows:
 Windsor 20 trains per hour (tph) - to re-open the former WIT for all Windsor line services, and outlying track and station works (described below) to enable 20tph to operate at the busiest peak hour.
10-car suburban - To enable a 10 - car suburban network by extending Waterloo platforms 1-4 and to develop additional infrastructure and rolling stock solutions. This includes additional provisions to address congestion at Waterloo Station.
 Outlying stations -the development of solutions to address station congestion at outlying stations on the Wessex route, namely Vauxhall, Clapham Junction, Wimbledon and Surbiton.
Mainline – to facilitate 28 tph in the weekday morning peak period to London Waterloo for mainline services from the South Coast and South West. This involves a grade separated junction at Woking and a number of track modifications along the lines.

 

[swt_passenger]

Some of the works around Queenstown Road will help enable the 5th SWML track.

The works also allow more SWML fast platforms in the future.

Sure. I didn't really want to repeat what has already been discussed in other threads. But for those who weren't around when last discussed I believe the idea is to spread each of the three main service groups across a wider number of platforms, something like this:

Main Suburban in P1 - P6
Main Fast in P7 - P18
Windsor side in P19 - P24

(Or something similar. I think there might be a spare platform left between the main side groups during normal operations.)

Now that the move of the international buffers by 50 yards is pretty much confirmed, and the opening up of two new entrances to the underground, I expect that end of the station will be vastly different with quite a huge circulating area - is it possible they'll move the P19 and 20 buffers as well?.

Perhaps they'll completely alter the position of the escalators down to the Bakerloo/Northern ticket hall too?

 

[hwl]

Now that the move of the international buffers by 50 yards is pretty much confirmed, and the opening up of two new entrances to the underground, I expect that end of the station will be vastly different with quite a huge circulating area - is it possible they'll move the P19 and 20 buffers as well?.

Perhaps they'll completely alter the position of the escalators down to the Bakerloo/Northern ticket hall too?

Moving P20 makes a lot of sense but if the buffers on P19 stayed where they are you could have a gate line parallel to the tracks?
The WIT and concourse + domestic platforms being at different heights makes everything harder.

 

[Tio Terry]

Moving P20 makes a lot of sense but if the buffers on P19 stayed where they are you could have a gate line parallel to the tracks?
The WIT and concourse + domestic platforms being at different heights makes everything harder.

As I understand it, the buffers are not being moved, just the stopping point of the trains. This is because there is a tremendous amount of concrete to make sure those buffers could do the job when a full length E* hit them and because it will be difficult to see the starting signals from an 8 car train due to the curvature of the platforms if you are right up against the buffers.

 

[hwl]

As I understand it, the buffers are not being moved, just the stopping point of the trains. This is because there is a tremendous amount of concrete to make sure those buffers could do the job when a full length E* hit them and because it will be difficult to see the starting signals from an 8 car train due to the curvature of the platforms if you are right up against the buffers.

From p7 of the planning application

relocation of the existing buffer stops approximately 50m south, to allow the platform slab to be cut back, which provides an enlarged concourse for increased passenger flow and dwell capacity

The platform are getting cut back massively at the country end too and the points moved much closer to the concourse so will end up at something like 13 car length so the signals will move too?

 

[infobleep]

Will the implementation of the 5th tack from Surbiton affect the Crossrail 2 plans? In other words will it dictate the type of route Crossrail 2 use?

 

[TEW]

As I understand it, the buffers are not being moved, just the stopping point of the trains. This is because there is a tremendous amount of concrete to make sure those buffers could do the job when a full length E* hit them and because it will be difficult to see the starting signals from an 8 car train due to the curvature of the platforms if you are right up against the buffers.

Domestic trains in Platform 20 have always stopped some way along the platform, you have to walk a fair distance along Platform 19 before you come to the end of Platform 20. From what I can see from Platform 20, the stopping positions on Platform 21 and 22 are at the same point on the platform, so some distance from the actual buffers.

 

[swt_passenger]

Will the implementation of the 5th tack from Surbiton affect the Crossrail 2 plans? In other words will it dictate the type of route Crossrail 2 use?

As I said, NR have said 5th track or Crossrail 2, but not both. However if as stated in the London and SE RUS Crossrail 2 provided 6 tracking between New Malden and Wimbledon that would presumably remove the need for the 5th track in that area anyway, as many of the existing suburban services would now be on the 5th and 6th tracks as far as Wimbledon, making the main slows (call them 3 and 4) less used; so whether they'd also still need 5 tracks from Surbiton to New Malden (and then 7 tracks?) is questionable.

There are so many possibilities for what would already have to be a massive rebuild of Wimbledon with Crossrail 2 - I can't really get my head round it if they've already put in a 5th track...

But I think you are clouding the issue, Waterloo capacity as published stands alone without both of these other medium term projects.

 

[hwl]

As I said, NR have said 5th track or Crossrail 2, but not both. However if as stated in the London and SE RUS Crossrail 2 provided 6 tracking between New Malden and Wimbledon that would presumably remove the need for the 5th track in that area anyway, as many of the existing suburban services would now be on the 5th and 6th tracks as far as Wimbledon, making the main slows (call them 3 and 4) less used; so whether they'd also still need 5 tracks from Surbiton to New Malden (and then 7 tracks?) is questionable..

Either would need 5 tracks from Surbiton Jn to New Malden.

New Malden to NE of Wimbledon would needed 6 track for CR2 or 5 for 5th track scheme (no need for 7 either ... or ...).

NE of Wimbledon to Clapham Jn is outside CR2 scope and would need 5th track too but I'm not quite sure if it is needed - I think you would want it if you wanted to absolutely max out Waterloo but you might be only needed for extra capacity a while after CR2 is open. (The new Bridge to Emmanuel School
is 5th track ready (with passive provision for 6) and the embankment retaining walls are being rebuilt for 5 tracks on the school side.

 

[swt_passenger]

Either would need 5 tracks from Surbiton Jn to New Malden.

New Malden to NE of Wimbledon would needed 6 track for CR2 or 5 for 5th track scheme (no need for 7 either ... or ...).

Yes, I was really trying to explain rhetorically that there would be no need for both, and one doesn't prevent the other. But by the by, it's not part of the present tendered scheme anyway, AFAIAA.

 

[infobleep]

Yes, I was really trying to explain rhetorically that there would be no need for both, and one doesn't prevent the other. But by the by, it's not part of the present tendered scheme anyway, AFAIAA.

Could they do all the works at Waterloo without adding a fifth track and still get some benefits of extra platforms at Waterloo?

 

[nlogax]

The documentation has now been loaded, here's the planning supporting statement which I'm just scanning through. It includes loads more info, including a summary of works at some other stations; but I haven't found a track layout yet.

Thanks swt_passenger, just noticed the documents there too. Much to peruse..!

 

[swt_passenger]

Could they do all the works at Waterloo without adding a fifth track and still get some benefits of extra platforms at Waterloo?

Yes, because with a few more full length terminating platforms for the 'main line' group they can shove two or three extra long distance trains into the station in the high peak hour without having to worry about sending them back out down to Clapham Junction - as you probably know already, a number of empty trains have to use the down Windsor line to get out of the way of the incoming services. They do this so that a down ECS doesn't have to cross over to the down main in the station throat, and back over the up main somewhere else.

 

[MarkyT]

Yes, because with a few more full length terminating platforms for the 'main line' group they can shove two or three extra long distance trains into the station in the high peak hour without having to worry about sending them back out down to Clapham Junction - as you probably know already, a number of empty trains have to use the down Windsor line to get out of the way of the incoming services. They do this so that a down ECS doesn't have to cross over to the down main in the station throat, and back over the up main somewhere else.

Empties leaving Waterloo can use the Down Windsor Slow as far as Nine Elms Junction, then they have to slot in between the Down Windsor services through Queenstown Road. Beyond there two Windsor Downs resume again to Clapham. The Windsor line service doesn't need four tracks, so the DWS is usually available for these empty moves. Reopening platform 1 at Queenstown Road will allow up Windsor services to move over to the Windsor reversible and with a small signalling change Down Windsor services can shift over to platform 2, creating an independent line for empties all the way from Waterloo to Clapham Junction with no conflict with either the Windsor services or the Up Main Fast.

 

[infobleep]

Yes, because with a few more full length terminating platforms for the 'main line' group they can shove two or three extra long distance trains into the station in the high peak hour without having to worry about sending them back out down to Clapham Junction - as you probably know already, a number of empty trains have to use the down Windsor line to get out of the way of the incoming services. They do this so that a down ECS doesn't have to cross over to the down main in the station throat, and back over the up main somewhere else.

Thanks for that. I'm aware some trains go via Windsor but only since I've had access to real train times.