-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why did they have the DLR , rather than extend the Underground/overground
- Thread starter Simon75
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Short answer, the project was sponsored by the Dept of Environment, not Transport, and was aimed at regeneration of the Isle of Dogs against a planning assumption of low-to-medium density commercial usage. And a very limited budget. £70m (if I recall) bought a light railway that was able to re-use abandoned elevated rail routes from Tower Gateway as far as Limehouse to bring costs down. What scuppered that admirable plan was the arrival of Olympia and York and the mega-project at Canary Wharf. This radically changed the traffic forecasts for the railway and meant that DLR was always playing catch-up in terms of capacity, at least until JLE came along. As an example of the chaos this created, when the signalling system was designed, it had to take account of an as-yet unbuilt station at Canary Wharf, so the train stopped there even though the station had yet to be built. Nearly 40 years on I may have some of the detail wrong and I stand to be corrected, but the essence is reasonably reliable.
PG
Established Member
Presumably without opening the doors!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
This was arguably a good move to do this even with hindsight. The light rail concept has proved to be "scalable" and now covers many more routes and greater passengers flows than originally expected. It it still more versatile than the Underground in minimum curvature, which helps it fit in at tight spots like Poplar. Yes it ruled out ever extending onto the Waterloo and City, but I don't believe that would ever have been feasible anyway due to the geography of Bank station.
Your analysis is pretty correct, except for presenting it in an unfavourable light. Built to budget (actually it was £77m) was an absolute bargain compared to what you got, or not, for that much elsewhere, and it included rolling stock, everything. It was a real kick-starter, and if it hadn't been under construction and Docklands was still relying on the "Docklands Clipper" single-deck bus then O&Y likely wouldn't have come in the first place.
Canary Wharf DLR station was being reconstructed and extended when it opened - no issue. Momentarily stopped at the site and then carried on. No chaos. It was built and ready, the railway opened. It was full from day 1 (and certainly ON that day 1) and has never looked back. To give you some idea of the efficiency, it took less time to build and open the whole thing from scratch than nowadays it has taken to just test the new DLR trains from delivery to London and get the first into service (still not achieved)! Now that's chaos.
Incidentally it was the same guy, Docklands Development leader Reg Ward, who drove the DLR along with government, whose idea was City Airport (Reg was ex-National Service RAF), and who at the initial meeting with O&Y when they first proposed their Canada Place office. the high rise at the centre, while others at the meeting said "Ooooh, I'm not sure about that", Reg said "Absolutely, when do we start"
Last edited:
The DLR serves that area of South East and East London but it'd be difficult to implement elsewhere. The Trams for example were another low cost solution to get areas which weren't served well by rail or public transport in South London connected and that wasn't too expensive because they used existing railways line with only street running in Croydon.
pokemonsuper9
Established Member
Part of what made the DLR work was the ability to use old/abandoned railway structures, there aren't too many areas with that infrastructure available (Manchester made a tram using some of the alignments instead)
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Because you can't really have driverless trains unless the alignment is completely segregated, and that means you lose the ability to have any sort of on-street running.
The DLR is really just an automated light rail/tramway anyway. Take away the automatic part and you just have a tramway.
As for the OP's question as to why it was built like that: because it was cheaper.
DLR was also set up as a separate quasi-autonomous operation for political reasons so that it could benefit from "private free enterprise" (snigger).
That’s not my recollection. I went on it a few days in, and we stopped on the viaduct between West India Quay and Heron Quay and there was literally nothing of a station there. At least not at track level.
It’s perhaps not understood what Docklands was like in the mid 80s. There was nothing there. The stretch from Poplar to South Quay ran on a viaduct over nothing but ex docks and quayside. Barely any buildings to speak of. Rather easy to build!
Cloud Strife
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 2,964
Just to confirm here: there were stairs already built, but they didn't connect to the DLR, they were just stairs to nowhere. I think there might have been something at ground level too, but I'm not 100% on that. Certainly the platforms weren't built, nor the roofs, as the plan was to build it in the same way as Heron Quays originally, but it seems that they changed the plan for Canary Wharf at a relatively early stage before the station was built, as what existed on the first day of opening was nothing more than those stairs.
So, this is quite an interesting story in itself. The government knew as early as the mid 60s that the Docklands needed to be revitalised and that there was no future in them as commercial docks, and so as things progressed, the plan in the early to mid 70s was to use some sort of automatic people mover system to connect into the planned Fleet Line at Fenchurch Street. The infrastructure was already there (viaducts/etc), so the idea was simply to create a cheap system that would funnel people from the new housing developments into London Underground.
Then the boroughs and the Greater London Council got together and planned for some sort of light rail system that would feed into either Tower Hill or Fenchurch Street, as they correctly realised that a people mover system probably wouldn't have the capacity needed. This idea got dropped because it was simply too expensive. Then there was another plan that would just have extended the Fleet Line (now the Jubilee Line) via Fenchurch Street, Surrey Docks (which was also going to be transformed beyond recognition) towards the Isle of Dogs, North Greenwich and Woolwich Arsenal, so the light railway idea was dropped.
Thatcher came to power, and the Jubilee Line extension was dropped because it was incredibly expensive and didn't really connect anything to anything at the time. Instead, Thatcher (in one of her better moves!) created the London Docklands Development Corporation, and they tasked London Transport to come up with a budget idea for transport in the Docklands. The Jubliee Line extension was not going to happen because of the cost, so they went back to the existing infrastructure. They knew that the existing rail lines towards Tower Bridge would be used, but there was a lot of debate over where the terminus would be. Eventually the cheapest option (today's Tower Gateway) won out because it was simply the easiest to build, although there was a lot of thought to extending to Aldgate East so that the DLR trains could also run on London Underground.
Essentially, in the end, they chose the cheapest and easiest way to bring mass transport to the Docklands by using as much existing infrastructure as they could. The core idea was that it would connect the Isle of Dogs to the City, and then when it wound its way through Parliament, they realised that it made much more sense to keep the DLR separated from traffic and so the northern terminus was changed to Stratford.
It's worth pointing out that the original DLR idea from the early 1980s didn't really envisage Canary Wharf and the transformation of the area into a business district. They were expecting it to be mostly a way of getting from new housing areas towards the City, nothing more. The system was arguably never designed for heavy commuter use, which is why the system opened with just single car trains and why they needed to spend quite a bit of money on upgrading the system not long after opening.
Essentially, the DLR was never really intended to become what it is today. I'd expect it to get quite a few extensions in the next 10-20 years too, as there's a strong reason to at least extend it through to Kings Cross / St Pancras so that passengers from Euston and Kings Cross can get to the City and the Docklands on a single train.
Yes, that matches what I remember of the early years. The train just stopped briefly on the viaduct, there wasn't a platform at track level or anything much at ground level, the doors were not released / did not open (I can't remember now whether in the original form, whether the 'train captain' had to release doors at stations or if that happened automatically) then after a few moments there was a 'ping' noise and the train went onwards (again, i can't remember if, with not having opened the doors, whether the train captain had to press the 'go' button or if it all happened automatically.)
There may have been a later phase while the station was being (re)built when trains stopped in a station that wasn't finished / wasn't open, but I can't remember it ever being a big deal.
And in answer to the original question, yes - if the whole thing had been built to current specifications at the outset, it would probably have been cheaper overall than starting small and rebuilding, but if the whole thing had been proposed to current specifications at the outset, it probably would never have happened.
The sands shifted a few times with the whole Docklands project - one example being the old Custom House building, which had money put in to refurbishment some time in the late 80s / early 90s, then not very many years later, it was demolished for the Excel centre to be built.
Badly phrased on my part, the station was built and demolition had already begun for the rebuild before the line opened. I have seen a photo of the original CW station somewhere but can't remember where
edwin_m
Veteran Member
At one time there was talk of trams along Mile End Road.
The first DLR station at Canary Wharf had been fully built, what you (and I) saw on opening day was it was being dismantled again, the platforms and (some) of the shelter, I think I recall the canopy, had gone, but not the uprights, and many noticed the stairs. The rest went in the week or so following. There was actually a photo of the completed station, taken a couple of weeks beforehand, in the opening literature. Reg Ward, head of Docklands Development, used to say that the shelf life of a "current" photograph of anything in Docklands was three weeks. Given the completely modular construction style of the original DLR stations with their barrel-vault shelter roofs, it was straightforward just to unbolt them. The door release had been inhibited, that was easy, but stop for the station less so in the automatic system.
Requirements change. And it's a different attitude between "striving for utopia, one day", which is often never achieved, and "get done what we can, get open what we can". Trains delivered by the manufacturer fully tested and working on the Friday, and in service on the Monday would surely be an amazement to the current New DLR Trains team.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Um ... a somewhat well-known poster on here was there, in his new house
.
Last edited:
Cloud Strife
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 2,964
The problem is essentially that the current layout of Bank means that trains need three minutes to reverse there, while there's demand for a more frequent service. The general idea is that Tower Gateway should be closed and the branch demolished, with DLR trains going through Bank instead. They would then build an underground connection from Bank to Tower Hill, and Fenchurch would then receive a connection to Tower Hill as well.
The broad idea is that the (new) western terminal of the DLR would either be at Liverpool Street or at King's Cross / St Pancras, with the latter getting new stations at City Thameslink, Holborn, Euston and then King's Cross / St Pancras. The second option is the one that Canary Wharf wants, because the Northern Line is unbearable between Euston and Bank, and having the DLR reach the WCML/ECML and HS2 would mean passengers could go directly from there to the City and Docklands. They would need to build a terminal station with four platforms (possibly three, but that would be operationally pushing it) at King's Cross / St Pancras, which isn't impossible if this is the long term terminal station for the DLR.
The problem with the King's Cross / St Pancras extension is that it would likely make it very difficult for passengers to board at Bank. One option could be to only allow every second train to be boarded at the terminus and then open the doors at City Thameslink during peak times, so passengers from Bank would still be able to get on the DLR.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Thanks for that! Interestingly, I found a plan of the DLR from 1984 that shows clearly that the Canary Wharf station would open 'later'. I suppose that reflects the fact that they didn't have a set plan for Canary Wharf at that time, and from what I know, the Docklands was thought to be a place for commerce rather than offices in the early 1980s. If I've got my history right, they didn't create a masterplan for the Docklands, but rather they adopted the philosophy that they would take what they could get as long as it was commercially viable.
Last edited:
Excellent history lesson there.
May I ask, why would there be a need to extend to Kings Cross/Euston? These lines already connect to the Elizabeth Line at Farringdon and TCR which are a few stops further? Or are we specifically talking about traffic originating at Euston/Kings Cross (or traffic coming from the WCML/ECML)
The DLR opened in late 1987, contracts were likely not even signed in 1984. Does it show the northern branch only terminating at Mile End Underground? Fundamentally the LDDC were "open to ideas", for example when the Billingsgate Fish Market was offered they just said Yes. There were some initial 2-3 storey apartments, and even houses, right in Canary Wharf, and a few of these are still there, now turned into minor offices. Here:
Multiple ownership issues have prevented them being bought up, demolished, and a big office put there.
There was extensive discussion about whether it was worth it to build the DLR on the (somewhat) expensive viaduct across the docks, instead of just about 300m away round the west end of them. Key was the land value of being next to the stations and overlooking the water, bearing in mind that this was decided before high rise offices were even contemplated, and not to sterilise the land value that would be lost if it went round the edge.
The City Airport came close to being put on Heron Quay, right at Canary Wharf, and demonstration flights were done there. Advice, including from the senior pilot who did these (who was an old mate of Reg Ward's from RAF days) was it was just too tight and no scope for expansion, there being better land to the east (where it ended up). If you are at ground level at Heron Quays DLR station there a plaque commemorating these flights there, rather unbelievable now. In this video of them the DLR viaduct, started the following year, comes through at right angles the gap between the two larger warehouses behind the aircraft, and Heron Quays DLR is just where the camera is filming from.
Cloud Strife
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 2,964
From what I understand, the problem with Bank is that there's just too many people starting their journey on the DLR at that point. Getting rid of the (relatively) underused Tower Gateway would allow them to put more trains towards Bank, but this comes with the problem that the station complex can't handle a massive increase in traffic, even with the large reconstruction of the station. So, if the DLR is extended via City Thameslink, Euston to Kings Cross, then you have people starting their journey on the DLR at those stations. You can then run more trains through Bank without serious overcrowding, because you've eliminated the need to use the station at all.
The DLR would also be attractive to people coming from the WCML/ECML/HS2, because they would only need to transfer onto the DLR directly to the Docklands, rather than having to mess about with an inevitably busy train to Farringdon and then a busy interchange to the Elizabeth Line.
I found it again - https://www.thepwi.org/wp-content/u...nd-operation-of-the-original-DLR_P-Ebbutt.pdf , as there's a lot of very excellent historical materials on the DLR here, including things like the proposed Aldwych loop.
The fascinating thing about this is that the terminal at Mile End has already been changed to Stratford, the stop at Canary Wharf is there (but planned to open later) and that the extension to Bank is already being thought about, even though there were no specific plans to build Canary Wharf as an effective extension of the City at the time. The other curious thing is that the "Green Route" and "Red Route" are shown as separate lines. I've always thought that the DLR should have letters for lines, as it's not such a simple network to navigate nowadays.
That's incredibly interesting, thank you for that! I didn't know that they had built apartments / houses there, and it's even more surprising that they haven't been bought up and turned into another office block. In a way, it's fortunate that the LDDC didn't end up going down the easy route of simply turning the entire area into residential and light commercial units, although I suppose that London in the early 1980s still had plenty of areas in Zone 1 for new housing.
I still can't decide about the viaducts. On one hand, I like the fact that they chose a central route, meaning that the DLR is always easily accessible regardless of where you are there. On the other hand, the failure to provide a pedestrian walkway alongside/under the viaducts means that you need to use the DLR to get from the West India Quay over to South Quay, unless you fancy trying to find your way through the maze of walkways and bridges there.
Thanks for sharing that! It's incredible to think that they even considered it, and it led me down the rabbit hole of looking at the history of what became London City Airport. It seems that the original approach angle was that 7.5 degrees, which is just astonishing.
A minor digression. At some point in the mid-80s, I remember visiting Greenwich Park and my father pointing at the Isle of Dogs and telling me that there'd be skyscrapers there before long. I couldn't believe it at the time - and even now I find every visit to DLR shows significant change in the area
I always thought it was a bit of a shame that the Bow Church - Hackney Wick/Victoria Park section wasn't retained, even for just for passive provision. On the other hand, there was nothing there at the time.
I have memories looking down onto the rusting metals as we trundled through east London on our way to holiday in Norfolk.
I have memories looking down onto the rusting metals as we trundled through east London on our way to holiday in Norfolk.
Some anecdotal memories from me, albeit only back in 2008 when the Bank <> Lewisham section was being upgraded in preparation for three car running, but gives credence to earlier comments and experiences of the capacity constraints over the years as the area expanded exponentially.
During the summer of 2008 (and for a fair few months), they effectively chopped the service back to every ten mins between Bank and Lewisham (used to be every three), and the service split at Island Gardens. I believe this was mainly due to the tricky extension work at Cutty Sark (where SDO continues to this day?). So for each half of the works, one tunnel under the Thames was closed for the changes, and you had to change from the reduced ten minute service at Island Gardens, for a cross-platform change to continue your journey south / north.
The knock on effect back in Canary Wharf (where I worked) at the time was quite pronounced. I lived in Greenwich, so opted to simply walk to work and back (just under an hour), but for the vast swathes of SE London / Kent commuters, they effectively gave up on the ten minute Bank <> Island Gardens shuttle, walked to Island Gardens from Canary Wharf, then waited for the southbound service to take them to Lewisham, and then on to their final destination. To this day it still sticks in my mind the sight of thousands of people in suits walking down Millharbour / East Ferry Road etc. to get to Island Gardens of an evening.
In the reverse direction, I know of quite a few folk who opted in the mornings to get a train from Maze Hill to London Bridge and then walk over said bridge into The City, rather than trying to negotiate the service changes on the DLR.
The Greenwich foot tunnel was always rammed with people like me who lived in Greenwich and the surroundings at the time, and opted to simply walk the whole way home. It always used to annoy the cyclists who (naughtily) cycled through the foot tunnel as there was such a sheer mass of people on foot that they simply couldn't! That said, the queues for the lifts were bonkers as one would expect.
All very necessary works of course, as the prior and subsequent increase in passenger numbers proves out!
During the summer of 2008 (and for a fair few months), they effectively chopped the service back to every ten mins between Bank and Lewisham (used to be every three), and the service split at Island Gardens. I believe this was mainly due to the tricky extension work at Cutty Sark (where SDO continues to this day?). So for each half of the works, one tunnel under the Thames was closed for the changes, and you had to change from the reduced ten minute service at Island Gardens, for a cross-platform change to continue your journey south / north.
The knock on effect back in Canary Wharf (where I worked) at the time was quite pronounced. I lived in Greenwich, so opted to simply walk to work and back (just under an hour), but for the vast swathes of SE London / Kent commuters, they effectively gave up on the ten minute Bank <> Island Gardens shuttle, walked to Island Gardens from Canary Wharf, then waited for the southbound service to take them to Lewisham, and then on to their final destination. To this day it still sticks in my mind the sight of thousands of people in suits walking down Millharbour / East Ferry Road etc. to get to Island Gardens of an evening.
In the reverse direction, I know of quite a few folk who opted in the mornings to get a train from Maze Hill to London Bridge and then walk over said bridge into The City, rather than trying to negotiate the service changes on the DLR.
The Greenwich foot tunnel was always rammed with people like me who lived in Greenwich and the surroundings at the time, and opted to simply walk the whole way home. It always used to annoy the cyclists who (naughtily) cycled through the foot tunnel as there was such a sheer mass of people on foot that they simply couldn't! That said, the queues for the lifts were bonkers as one would expect.
All very necessary works of course, as the prior and subsequent increase in passenger numbers proves out!
If an extension and new stations were to happen to King's Cross, would they be new DLR stations built underground and where would the entrances be? King's Cross/St Pancras could use the abandoned Thameslink entrance perhaps but I'm not sure where you could put a DLR station entrance in Holborn, City Thameslink and Euston.
The issue here is the system doesn't always operate in a standard manner, some elements (including currently) come and go, or only run at certain hours, and weekends can see quite a different pattern, even Woolwich to Lewisham, when other parts are closed, or even on Marathon Sunday. It's very flexible.
There is indeed such rapid change, some areas are actually on their fourth building in place since I first came here in the mid-1980s. Old docks buildings (not that old themselves, the area had been devastated in WW2 and most docks buildings were actually 1950s), in final use, replaced by low rise commercial offices, an area of which was destroyed by the 1996 bomb attack at South Quay, replaced by further small-scale offices, which themselves are now being demolished and replaced by high rise.
These 1986 TV series "Prospects" intro shots, filmed around the area when the initial DLR was actually being built, show it well. Passing is the Docklands Clipper express bus, a predecessor of the DLR running broadly the same route down through the area (and at 1:18 has Cathy's Flowers florists shop at Island Gardens, which later did the flowers for our wedding
).
Last edited:
The essence is correct, also (from an O&Y architect I knew) O&Y did not consider the DLR to be adequate in capacity , a cut-price railway, something of a nuisance, and would have bought out the DLR and started again.
The history goes back a long way, post-WW2 included a plan to build a large station near Tower Bridge, never started.
The Fleet line was started, a trial tunnel bored somewhere near New Cross then abandoned, the intended route of the Fleet line changed many times, mainly the south of the Thames, the 1980s regeneration of the Docklands the trump card, the route pinned to become the present day DLR.
- Status