Waterloo Main and International platforms

[swt_passenger]

I see in one of the short pieces in the June Modern Railways they mention that NR have issued an ITT for Waterloo re-modelling. In the article they define the revised use of Waterloo's platform layout as follows:

Main Suburbans 1 - 6
Main Lines 7 - 18
Windsor Lines 19 - 24

The latter reflects something SWT's top man was saying a while back, that they'd prefer to have a whole service group operating from the international side, and of course P19 although in the main shed is the other side of P20's platform, so it lends itself to being accessed through a common entrance with P20-24.

So that definitely looks like the final nail in the coffin for 'sleepers to Waterloo'...

 

[Tio Terry]

There's a lot to be done to make WIT suitable for domestic services and it wont happen overnight. If you look an Waterloo Concourse you will see that the retail units that backed up on to the "Orchestra Pit" have all gone - just Terence Cuneo remains and it seems he's going to have to be relocated. The Orchestra Pit will be rafted over to allow access/egress from 20-24 on to the main concourse.

There are lots of other things to be tackled - PA/VA, Lighting, Signal sighting, Ticket Barriers, platform tactiles, Fire Alarm, Security System, ARS (currently the Automatic Route Setting kit at Wimbledon can only route trains on to the Windsor lines, not the mains), Radio system coverage for Emergency Services - the list goes on and on.

NR is only leasing the site from BR Residual or whatever they are called now and all alterations have to be able to be returned to the current configuration when the lease expires so it's all temporary works.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes, I was aware of much of that from previous discussions, I just thought it useful to underline the final allocations to service groups - it actually gives the main lines a couple of extra platforms to play with as well.

I'd expect it will be a good 3 or 4 years of work once it starts (next year maybe?), including all the track alterations in the throat, and of course the CP5 plans also mention work at Queenstown Rd, Twickenham and perhaps as far out as Woking.

 

[Tio Terry]

Yes, I was aware of much of that from previous discussions, I just thought it useful to underline the final allocations to service groups - it actually gives the main lines a couple of extra platforms to play with as well.

I'd expect it will be a good 3 or 4 years of work once it starts (next year maybe?), including all the track alterations in the throat, and of course the CP5 plans also mention work at Queenstown Rd, Twickenham and perhaps as far out as Woking.

The work has started. There are plans to rebuild and bring back in to use the platform at QTR and yes, sidings and turn-back at Twickenham. There's even been mention of a flyover between the Mainlines and the Windsor side between Clapham and QTR so that the Soto's could be 15 car and use the full length of the platforms in WIT but I think that's now been dropped.

 

[swt_passenger]

There's even been mention of a flyover between the Mainlines and the Windsor side between Clapham and QTR so that the Soto's could be 15 car and use the full length of the platforms in WIT but I think that's now been dropped.

The London and SE RUS of 2011 mentioned that idea, but only in passing to explain that it wasn't recommended, because it did not provide sufficient additional capacity. I think it can be ignored nowadays, especially as they have come up with two other alternatives that would provide extra the capacity, such as the Surbiton to Waterloo '5 tracking' OR the diversion of the main suburban side onto Crossrail 2.

 

[higthomas]

NR is only leasing the site from BR Residual or whatever they are called now and all alterations have to be able to be returned to the current configuration when the lease expires so it's all temporary works.

That seems silly. I highly doubt it will ever need to be returned to its previous incarnation, since that was designed for low-volume, high spec passengers, which the Windsor suburban's aren't.
I would guess that this will mean the work is either more expensive, not as high quality or both, so all in all a strange move.

 

[Stats]

NR is only leasing the site from BR Residual or whatever they are called now and all alterations have to be able to be returned to the current configuration when the lease expires so it's all temporary works.

BRB Residual has been abolished. Waterloo international is owned by the Secretary of State with LCR acting as management agents on behalf of the DfT

I'd expect it will be a good 3 or 4 years of work once it starts (next year maybe?), including all the track alterations in the throat, and of course the CP5 plans also mention work at Queenstown Rd, Twickenham and perhaps as far out as Woking.

The tender requires work to be completed by 31 March 2019, or if an option for design works for Woking grade separation is exercised 31 March 2021.

 

[swt_passenger]

The tender requires work to be completed by 31 March 2019, or if an option for design works for Woking grade separation is exercised 31 March 2021.

Is it online anywhere please?

 

[Stats]

Is it online anywhere please?

http://www.publictenders.net/node/2587232

 

[swt_passenger]

Thanks, I'll paste the relevant sections here, might prompt some discussion when people see the scope in terms of stations, and the values being mentioned:

II.1.5) Short description of the contract or purchase(s):
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (“NRIL”) is using an alliance contracting arrangement to procure the programme of works (design & execution) and ancillary services and supplies relating to the Wessex Capacity Programme which will increase train and passenger capacity at London Waterloo Station and across the Wessex Route. The works involve bringing the Waterloo International Terminal back into use for domestic train services, increasing the length of some platforms at London Waterloo Station, alterations to the track, signalling, communications, buildings and civils infrastructure on the Wessex Route and at Waterloo, Vauxhall, Clapham Junction, Richmond, Wimbledon and Surbiton Stations. The design of works for Woking Grade separation is also included and the potential for resultant works – see section II.2.1 below. Under the alliance contracting arrangements NRIL will provide certain works and/or services as a participant in the alliance, and the contractors and NRIL each as an alliance participant will work as an integrated team providing resources on a best for project basis and sharing risk and reward.

II.2.1) Total quantity or scope:
NRIL wishes to provide an opportunity, under this call for competition, for either an economic operator or economic operators, working in a consortium (see section III.1.3), to deliver this multi-disciplinary programme of works, comprising buildings, civils, track, signalling and communication railway construction works on a design & execution basis. The works will be undertaken in and around London Waterloo Station and on the Wessex Route via stations at Vauxhall, Clapham Junction, Richmond, Wimbledon and Surbiton in southeast England. The design of works for Woking Grade Separation is also included and at the option of NRIL the works related to this may be awarded under the contract awarded pursuant to this procurement depending on inter alia the funding being allocated. The economic operator, or economic operators must be capable of undertaking the key disciplines of building, civils, track, signalling and communication railway construction works on a design & execution basis (see section III.1.3).

Estimated Value Range: between 200 000 000 and 300 000 000 GBP with an additional potential 100 000 000 GBP if the option for works at Woking Grade Separation is exercised – see the explaination above.

Estimated value excluding VAT

Range: between 200 000 000 and 400 000 000 GBP

II.2.2) Information about options
Options: yes

Description of these options: Please see option regarding Woking Grade Separation explained at section II.2.1. Completion date detailed at section II.3 2021 below assumes that the Woking Grade Separation option is exercised. If this option is not exercised the estimated completion date for the remainder of the works is 31.3.2019.

II.3) Duration of the contract or time limit for completion
Starting 1.1.2015 Completion 31.3.2021

 

[Goldfish62]

That seems silly. I highly doubt it will ever need to be returned to its previous incarnation, since that was designed for low-volume, high spec passengers, which the Windsor suburban's aren't.
I would guess that this will mean the work is either more expensive, not as high quality or both, so all in all a strange move.

Indeed - returning to original state is just a standard legal clause in leasing agreements, whether it's intentional or not. Obviously in this case it's not.

 

[swt_passenger]

There'll surely have to come a time when the top level(s) of the WIT gets put in NR's ownership, (which could presumably be a long leasehold ownership) even if the lower unused levels are transferred to some other use.

I believe they are thinking about a direct route off the platforms down one level to get to the Bakerloo/Northern underground concourse without doing a U-turn on the main station concourse - but there are still a couple of other lower levels that will never be much use for rail operations.

 

[Tio Terry]

Indeed - returning to original state is just a standard legal clause in leasing agreements, whether it's intentional or not. Obviously in this case it's not.

It's a legal requirement, the Engineering Design has to facilitate the need.

I understand the offices and other accommodation at the lower levels are to be used by SWT as office space.

 

[Olaf]

So it would seem that they are proceeding with this work without consideration to the possible future impact of Crossrail2, if that was to go-ahead.

 

[edwin_m]

It's a legal requirement, the Engineering Design has to facilitate the need.

I understand the offices and other accommodation at the lower levels are to be used by SWT as office space.

As a contractual term it would be enforceable in civil law if breached. However the parties to a contract can vary it by mutual agreement (within the limits of the law, which certainly doesn't require something like this to be included). Since the other party is the Secretary of State then it would seem sensible to have this item struck out. Even before Network Rail was officially brought into the public sector, the taxpayer would ultimately have paid the cost of holding them to this requirement.

 

[mister-sparky]

So it would seem that they are proceeding with this work without consideration to the possible future impact of Crossrail2, if that was to go-ahead.

What would change then?

 

[higthomas]

Originally Posted by Olaf View Post
So it would seem that they are proceeding with this work without consideration to the possible future impact of Crossrail2, if that was to go-ahead.

What would change then?

Less suburban trains. Under current plans most Wimbledon trains would be going under-ground, but it is also possible that some from Barnes might too, although it depends on what the final plan is.
The spare capacity made available would mostly go into increasing the number of outer suburban and long distance trains.

I don't know what ultimate difference taking it into account would make. There is a very pressing capacity issue now, which these plans will help alleviate. I don't know what difference Crossrail two would make, other than the destination of trains from each platform group.

 

[Pumbaa]

So it would seem that they are proceeding with this work without consideration to the possible future impact of Crossrail2, if that was to go-ahead.

Plenty of consideration. Unfortunately the dawning realisation that it will be too late means *something* has to be done in the meantime.

 

[edwin_m]

Plenty of consideration. Unfortunately the dawning realisation that it will be too late means *something* has to be done in the meantime.

More than that, nobody knows whether or when it will happen or what it will look like. It could be a self-contained Tube/Metro that takes passengers off the SW suburbans at Wimbledon but still leaves the same number of trains to terminate at Waterloo.

In the unlikely even that commuter growth suddenly stops, then Crossrail 2 might not be needed - or at least not in a form that relieves Waterloo.

 

[455driver]

The spare capacity made available would mostly go into increasing the number of outer suburban and long distance trains.

What spare capacity?
Its all well and good the suburban trains from Wimbledon diving underground but what about the capacity between Raynes park and Wimbledon?

CR2 wont be the utopia that some people think it will!

 

[edwin_m]

What spare capacity?
Its all well and good the suburban trains from Wimbledon diving underground but what about the capacity between Raynes park and Wimbledon?

Revive part of the fifth track idea?

 

[Olaf]

What would change then?

The principle impact of Crossrail2 on Waterloo would be that a large part of the suburban lines traffic would be routed away from Waterloo. It has not been decided what or if the freed-up capacity at Waterloo will be use for.

So, if Crossrail2 gets the go ahead, with the current proposed timescales, about 10 to 15 years after this work has been completed, part of the station will become surplus to requirements again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Plenty of consideration. Unfortunately the dawning realisation that it will be too late means *something* has to be done in the meantime.

I'm not sure that that is the case; the proposals appear to have gone to tendering with Cossrail2 just put out of scope. It looks like they have gone ahead with a cut-own plan, excluding the 1B GBP re-development of Waterloo.

 

[higthomas]

What spare capacity?
Its all well and good the suburban trains from Wimbledon diving underground but what about the capacity between Raynes park and Wimbledon?

CR2 wont be the utopia that some people think it will!

Based on the plans as outlined by London First, yes this is a major and stupid problem, but I am hoping that if CR2 does happen, network rail will have had some imput to get something done. I'd suggest simply extending it to Surbiton, but then you would still need two or three extra tunnel entrances near Raynes park.
In the South east RUS they made it clear that they know there is a problem with capacity into Waterloo, principally with long-distance trains. Their preferred solution was CR2, so I really hope that they wouldn't let CR2 happen, but without it solving the problem.

 

[swt_passenger]

What spare capacity?
Its all well and good the suburban trains from Wimbledon diving underground but what about the capacity between Raynes park and Wimbledon?

CR2 wont be the utopia that some people think it will!

The CR2 proposal is that the tunnel portals would be west of Wimbledon, but there would also be track changes out between Raynes Park and New Malden. I took that as some sort of 6 tracking in that area to sort out the Crossrail and Waterloo routes, ie Wimbledon's proposed Crossrail platforms would be additional and at Low level.

This option would effectively create a six-track SWML from Raynes Park/Surbiton, with two tracks for inner suburban services being in a new underground tunnel extending beyond Wimbledon. A six track approach to Central London would enable additional main line and suburban trains to run. Semi-fast trains currently switching from the slow to fast lines in the Surbiton area would remain on the existing slow lines and run semi-fast (probably calling at Wimbledon and Clapham Junction only). This would in turn enable additional fast line trains to run using the capacity freed up on those tracks. Some suburban services would use the new route to Central London via Victoria, potentially at increased frequency. The safeguarded tunnel under Central London, extended out to at least beyond Wimbledon via Clapham Junction would be needed. Once on the surface further additional tracks, potentially to Surbiton would be needed.

 

[cle]

As otherwise all of the slow and semi-fast trains would have to share from Raynes Park to Surbiton... obviously some slows would branch off at Ranyes Park and again after New Malden - but still not ideal.

 

[TEW]

For probably one of the first times Platform 20 was getting considerable use yesterday. Platform 10 was closed due to signalling problems for most the day and the majority of Reading services all day were using Platform 20.