tran165-0267

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

1/9

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Transport 165 November 2012 Issue TR4

Pages 267275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/tran.12.00041

Paper 1200041

Received 11/04/2012 Accepted 10/07/2012

Published online 29/08/2012

Keywords: history/transport management/transport planning

ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Transport

Volume 165 Issue TR4

Delivering London 2012: Transport legacy

Sumner

Delivering London 2012:Transport legacyHugh Sumner MBA, CEngDirector of Transport, Olympic Delivery Authority, London, UK

Legacy was embedded across all of the UK Olympic Delivery Authoritys capital projects 75 pence out of every pound

spent went towards long-term regeneration. The around 500 million invested in long-term transport improvements

was designed with this legacy in mind to leave a positive impact across all venues wherever they were across the UK.

The great majority of these permanent legacy benefits were delivered by the end of 2010, nearly two years before

actually needed for games time capacity and operational needs. From the very start of Londons bid for the 2012

Olympic and Paralympic Games there was a determination to host a public transport event. There were two main ways

to meet this aim: create new public transport systems but risk them becoming redundant after the 2012 games; or

invest in and enhance the existing network. In a purely practical sense, the latter course was the obvious choice because

it was deliverable in the six-year timescale and because of the lack of physical space and high capital costs associated

with inserting new systems in existing cities. But by far the major influence in the decision to invest in existing systems

was the opportunity to use the significant investment in transport to deliver benefits that were felt by passengers long

after the 2012 games. This paper explores the legacy of the UK Olympic Delivery Authority transport programme and its

place in the great tradition of transformational transport investment in the capital over the past 150 years.

1. OverviewIn contrast to the 1948 austerity Olympic Games in London,

when investment in new transport infrastructure was out of the

question, the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games was

the catalyst for major transport improvements that will leave a

lasting physical and social legacy in the capital.

The full range of projects and their individual legacy benefits are

already well documented in a variety of existing publications such

as the ODA Olympic Transport Plan (ODA, 2011a), Transport for

2012 and Beyond (ODA, 2009b), Transport Big Build Complete

(ODA, 2011b) and Leaving a Transport Legacy Olympic and

Paralympic Transport Legacy Action Plan(GLA, 2012) which setsout how the Greater London Authority (GLA) and the six host

London boroughs will be taking the transport legacy forward in

the coming years to ensure that the benefits are permanent.

However, as ensuring a long-term transport legacy was integral to

the development and implementation of the Olympic transport

plan, no publication seeking to provide an insight into the

approach and methods used to deliver transport for the London

2012 games would be complete without a paper dedicated to the

subject. This paper therefore seeks to offer an alternative perspec-

tive to existing publications and to set the transport improvements

driven by London 2012 in the context of the other major public

transport programmes that have been implemented in the capital

over the past century or so.

It is not unreasonable to contend that particularly in the east and

the south-east around the Olympic Park, which will now have

some of the best transport links in London, the investment drivenby the 2012 games can be expected to have an impact on the

same scale as the really major public transport schemes com-

pleted over the past 150 years, from the first cut-and-cover

underground railways, through the new works programme in the

1930s, to the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) and Jubilee Line.

2. Summary of the transport legacyThe transport legacy left after the London 2012 games can be

summarised under two headings physical legacy and soft

legacy.

Physical legacy is the term used to describe the new transportinfrastructure and facilities predominantly rail schemes with

Transport for London (TfL) and Network Rail (NR) but also

some highways schemes, cycling and walking routes and other

projects which were needed for the 2012 games but which will

also make a significant long-term difference to people living and

working in London, particularly to the east in the traditionally

disadvantaged communities near the Olympic Park.

Before London won the 2012 games, TfL and NR already had

plans in place to spend 6.5 billion on transport schemes such as

the East London line, new train fleets for Victoria, Circle,

Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan lines, and Jubilee Line

and Central line improvements but the games were a catalyst for

bringing these programmes forward. The ODA also contributed

around 500 million: some for completely new projects; some to

enhance existing projects; and some to bring forward projects that

would otherwise not be completed before the games. Key projects

267

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

2/9

essential to the smooth running of the games but which also havea strong legacy value include the following.

j Stratford station enhancements. Used by around half the

people visiting the Olympic Park each day during the games,

the extensive capacity and access enhancements at Stratford

station, including lifts, passageways, staircases, straightening

and lengthening platforms, a new mezzanine level entrance,

track work and signalling changes, were all essential. After

the games the same improvements will support the continued

regeneration and development of the town and its

increasingly important role as a destination and successful

metropolitan centre in its own right. The Stratford City

development is the UKs largest retail-led, mixed-use

regeneration project. Some 37 000 commuters were using

Stratford station each day during the morning peak in 2008;

by 2016 that number is expected to rise to 83 000 (ODA,

2011a). Figure 1 shows the work in progress.

j The DLR upgrade projects. These included conversion to

DLR of the North London line between Stratford and

Canning Town; infrastructure for three-car operation; an

extension under the Thames to Woolwich Arsenal; and a new

train fleet. The improvements were designed to act as a

catalyst for regeneration in the Lower Lea Valley, bringing

new jobs, homes, shops and other leisure facilities to the area

and also allowing more people to access jobs in CanaryWharf, Central London and other parts of east and south-east

London (GLA, 2012). Figure 2 shows one of the new trains.

j The Jubilee line improvements. These included longer

trains, new signalling and more frequent trains, which will

allow greater numbers of people to access jobs within Canary

Wharf, North Greenwich, Stratford town centre and the

Olympic Park, also helping to support local employment and

businesses within the area while improving connectivity for

east London as a whole (ODA, 2011a).

j London Overground improvements. These included new

trains, refurbished stations, capacity to operate longer trains

and more frequent services on the North London linebetween Willesden, Highbury and Stratford. This has

improved orbital travel allowing people to avoid central

London and connections to and from Stratford, and within

Figure 1.Works at Stratford station in progress

Figure 2.A new DLR train

268

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

3/9

Hackney and Tower Hamlets. Access to jobs and services areimproved, as well as supporting businesses within and around

the Olympic Park, Shoreditch and Dalston. The new East

London line links 21 stations from Dalston Junction in east

London to West Croydon and Crystal Palace and links to the

North London line at Highbury and Islington (GLA, 2012)

j New cycleways and walking routes with TfL. More than

100 walking and cycling schemes on eight routes across

London including some that link the Olympic Park were

upgraded, as well as paths linking to outer London venues.

Improvements included wider paths, smoother surfaces and

better entry and access points. Providing the right walking

and cycling infrastructure was designed to help London 2012

to meet its aim of 100% of spectators getting to the games by

public transport, cycling or walking. It is, however, also

expected to further encourage cycling in London, which has

increased by 83% since 2000 (ODA, 2011a).

j Highways improvements. The Olympic route network

(ORN), paralympic route network (PRN) and new transport

coordination centre (TCC), will leave a legacy of improved

transport coordination across London with upgraded traffic

signals and new CCTV. Highway improvements have been

made as part of the construction of the Olympic Park,

particularly new bridges that reduce severance caused by the

River Lea and railways (GLA, 2012).

The 2012 transport legacy will also continue to contribute in

many ways over and above the delivery of capital projects. This

is known as the soft legacy and includes the following.

j Accessible transport.The aim of the ODA accessible

transport strategy was to change the experience disabled

people had when using public transport during the games and

to leave a legacy of more accessible transport access

infrastructure improvements, greater awareness of disability

issues, passenger confidence in public transport accessibility.

This involved major investment in improvements across the

network. Encouragement of disabled spectators to use publictransport during the games and experience these

improvements for themselves will mean they are more likely

to feel confident using it in the future, providing lifelong

benefits of greater travel independence (ODA, 2009b).

j Behavioural change and long-term health benefits. Hosting

a public transport games and encouraging people to use

environmentally sustainable and active transport, such as

walking and cycling, will help to encourage a shift in

attitudes to travel. Better public transport, an Active Travel

programme and safe walking and cycling routes all led the

way.

The Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games showed that a shift from

car to public transport is achievable if public transport is efficient,

reliable and accessible. The Games estimated that more than 80% of

trips to the event were made by public transport. This took around

200,000 car journeys off the roads and saved around 860,000 car

miles. The Commonwealth Games also showed that commuters willcontinue to use new travel options if they have a good initial transport

experience. For example, the Park and Ride service that was

successfully used during the Manchester Games was also well-used by

Christmas shoppers during December 2003. (ODA, 2011a)

j Park-and-ride. Road-based bus and coach services had much

to offer in terms of spectator choice, sustainability and access

for 2012. The ODA researched, planned and funded a large

direct coach services network to the Olympic Park, a similar

one to Ebbsfleet station and to the Weymouth and Portland

venue. This also offered the potential to demonstrate the

attractiveness of point-to-point travel to various market

segments, particularly family groups. Increased mode share

and better public perception of park-and-ride post-2012 will

be important lasting benefits. Figure 3 shows the park-and-

ride, bus and coach routes.

j Travel demand management. Further soft legacy gains will

come from the discreet c. 30 million travel demand

management programme which through a range of integrated

methods and messaging sought to influence targeted groups

to change their travel habits during the summer and autumn

of 2012, to modify, defer or bring forward their journeys at

games time. Demonstrating the benefits will help to change

target audiences behaviour.

The integrated event and transport ticketing information is animportant innovation too. An integrated package from bed to

seat it sets new standards of value to other sporting and

cultural events.

j Growth, regeneration and general socio-economic benefits.

It has long been acknowledged that good transport links play

a key role in delivering these benefits to an area and the

people who live there. The 2012 transport improvements will

also make it easier for people to access new jobs. This will

support the Mayor of Londons convergence agenda, which is

that within 20 years the communities who host the 2012

Games will have the same social and economic chances as

their neighbours across London (GLA, 2012).j An integrated transport industry. Delivering transport for

the London 2012 games has meant working together as an

integrated transport industry has been essential. The co-

operation has been unprecedented joining up national rail

with the underground network, buses and London rail and

connecting specialist transport groups in a way that has never

been done before.

The ODA also set up and led stakeholder groups within the

taxi and road freight industries. A legacy of the taxi group

will be an increased awareness of pooling arrangements to

better utilise capacity between key traffic objectives.

Similarly, the road freight group, formed with the support of

the Freight Transport Association, is already investigating and

trialling more flexible delivery patterns including trials of

night-time deliveries in London.

This co-operation is continuing and will result in better

services.

269

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

4/9

As already stated, more comprehensive information about these

projects and themes can be found in the publications listed in the

second paragraph of the overview section above.

But how does the transport legacy of the London 2012 games fit

into Londons long public transport history? The following

sections seek to offer some useful comparisons.

3. Early daysLondons local public transport began with horse buses c. 1830;

the new mainline railways provided limited short-distance ser-

vices from the 1840s and horse tramways served working-class

districts from the 1880s. The innovation of building steam-

powered cut-and-cover underground railways in the 1860s was

followed by a delay until electric traction made deeper level

(bored tube) lines feasible and practical from c. 1900 (Barker and

Robbins, 1970).

Then, investment in rail capacity in the 1930s, known as the New

Works Programme (Barker and Robbins, 1970), focused on the

rapid rise of the post-First World War suburbs particularly in east,

west and north London, on changes of ownership and on types of

operation. All of these programmes brought and still bring

significant benefits to the communities they reached. New stations

built at the time, like the one at Chiswick Park by architect

Charles Holden shown in Figure 4, were part of the 1930s New

Works Programme.

The building of further underground lines, one at a time over the

next 50 years, attained in each case great significance the

0 40 km 80 km

N

Figure 3.The London 2012 games park-and-ride bus and coach

routes

270

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

5/9

Victoria Line in the 1960s, the Jubilee Line in the 1970s (Willis,

1990) and the Dockland Light Railway network from 1987

followed by the eastern extension of Jubilee Line in 1999. These

last two lines now provide an important link to east London and

are being further enhanced for the 2012 games.

In addition to these tangible improvements, it is important to note

the soft transport measures that have been implemented in the

past that continue to benefit passengers today. Also regarded as

good commercial propositions, they include off-peak and cut-rate

tickets to encourage travel when the network has spare capacity,

or go anywhere tickets and rover tickets that offer value and

flexibility. These are more widely understood today as Travel-

cards and recently electronic, stored value tickets such as Oyster

cards. They have brought a further series of travel habit-changing

moves, best judged for their full effects over a longer time span.

Further soft measures introduced during the games will also play

an important role in legacy after 2012.

Periods with lack of transport investment conversely produced

acute local or area negative effects on Londons communities.

The Victorians endured intense street congestion in the horse-

drawn vehicle era, alleviated by the building of the electric deep-

level tubes in Edwardian times. The new post-First World War

suburbs badly needed improved links, which was what led to the

large-scale investment in the Underground network from 1935

(Barker and Robbins, 1970).

In essence, public transport either focused on land use develop-

ment, for example the Metroland expansionist project of the

Metropolitan Railway in the Chilterns, or tackled major urban

problems. For instance, congestion and lack of direct routes

between key traffic objectives such as Oxford Circus and Victoria

prompted the development of the Victoria Line from the late

1960s. In Figure 5 a London Underground member of staff

explains the improvements. Congestion-solving and time-saving

links such as this are relatively rare examples of investment in

Londons railways post-Second World War, however. The later

Jubilee Line provided access to Docklands and Stratford (Willis,

1990) as did the DLR to East London. The ODAs 2012 transport

package is also based on land use redevelopment and regenera-

tion.

4. The austerity gamesThe 1948 Olympic Games held in London are sometimes referred

to as the austerity games for the good reason that the population

of London and the UK were still living a highly regulated, austere

life with post-war shortages and restrictions still in place,

including restrictions on private motoring. The games took place

in an atmosphere in which spectators were compliant and well

used to limited transportation. Even queuing for buses (see Figure

6) was still mandatory a wartime legal measure still in force.

There was therefore little scope for investment in transport and

little or no transport legacy as a result.

5. Contemporary investmentLondon as a whole and east London in particular were not

deprived of contemporary investment in public transport in the

years before the bid for the 2012 games. Costing nearly 4

Figure 4.Chiswick Park station. Copyright TfL, from the collection

of London Transport Museum

Figure 5.A London Underground member of staff explains the

new Victoria Line link between Victoria and Oxford Circus.

Copyright TfL, from the collection of London Transport Museum

271

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

6/9

billion, the 10-mile extension of the Jubilee Line had linked

Stratford with central London from 1999.

Periodic improvements, some of them significant, had extended

the Docklands Light Railway network after its modest opening in

1987. Around 8000 step-free, low-floor single-deck and double-

deck buses had entered service in just a few years into the newcentury, driven by political determination and design develop-

ments.

The East London Line, for which legal powers to expand had

been obtained in the mid-1990s, was finally closed for rebuilding

and repackaging as a new northsouth link. The high-speed rail

link between Brussels and Paris and St Pancras was under

construction with the promise of an international station to the

north of Stratford Regional Station.

6. London 2012Nevertheless, while there had been significant investment over

the years to improve east Londons transport links, major

transport investment in London had been irregular and intermit-

tent. Consequently, as plans for the 2012 games bid were being

made, it became clear for instance in the transport demand

modelling process described in Dosunmu (2012) that significant

gaps in capacity, in quality of delivery and in accessibility had tobe addressed.

Although not specified as such in the Olympic Act 2006, the

desirability of providing permanent or very long-term transport

benefits quickly emerged as a key feature of the transport

strategy. With a focus on an Olympic Park site in east London,

north of Stratford, and several venues to the south by the River

Thames, it was this part of London that would benefit most

significantly.

7. Comparison of investment programmecosts and scope

The ODAs transport investment programme is delivering area

benefits more akin to the effects of Edwardian investment in

deep-level tubes and the 1935 programme, than individual linear

line projects like the Victoria Line or Jubilee Line extension.

Approximately 15 million was raised to fund the new deep-level

tubes under Charles Yerkess leadership (London Transport

Museum, 2012), which created 42 km of tube railway built within

four years and gave the present Underground its character by

forming the Piccadilly, Northern and Bakerloo lines, at least in

the central area.

The London Passenger Transport Boards (LPTB) 1935 NewWorks Programme cost 35 million. It initially had a much wider

geographical spread and was interrupted by the Second World

War but had delivered much by c. 1940. Again, it was heavily

focused on mass transit railways, although significant investment

in new bus and trolleybus fleets took place at the same time.

It is difficult to compare monetary values between the 1905 era

investment, the 1935 investment and the ODA transport pro-

gramme. Broadly, the financial investment involved in the ODA

programme is lower than for the deep-level tubes and the New

Works Programme but is nevertheless a significant transport

investment programme, delivered in comparably tight timescales.

8. Permanent investmentAs briefly mentioned earlier, the ODA defined the main transport

legacy benefits in three ways. First, it enhanced some existing

transport projects by carrying part of the cost identified in

delivery of specific parts of a larger project, such as co-funding

part of the new fleet of trains for the Docklands Light Railway.

Second, it enabled some projects to be started and finished before

2012 that might not otherwise have materialised until some time

after that date, thus providing benefits earlier than would other-

wise have been the case. An example of such a scheme is the Lee

Valley Line capacity enhancement.

Third, it directly managed and delivered some key transport

projects, such as the major upgrade of Stratford Regional station,

tripling capacity.

Figure 6. In 1948 queuing for buses was mandatory. Copyright

TfL, from the collection of London Transport Museum

272

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

7/9

In addition, 6 billion background schemes, included in the bidand in guarantees to the International Olympic Committee, also

feature in the longer-term benefits delivered. These projects were

planned, funded and delivered by government or other transport

bodies outside of games-specific funding.

The East London Line project, improvements to London Over-

ground (Figure 7) and the new train fleets for the Victoria, and

Circle, Hammersmith and City and Metropolitan lines are

examples of such projects. London Undergrounds on-going

investment in the Jubilee, Northern and Central lines was part of

the bid offer and these projects provide a mix of permanent

capacity increases, faster journeys, improved reliability and im-

proved access to specific localities.

9. Temporary measuresAt some but not many locations to serve venues, temporary

facilities were put in place to assist in delivery of public transport

services during the summer of 2012. These facilities were used

where they represented better value for money and avoided an

unwanted legacy.

A prime example of this was at West Ham station. West Ham is a

major interchange in east London with eight platforms and, with

Stratford Regional and Stratford International, is one of the three

main gateway stations serving the Olympic Park. Transportmodelling work predicted that over 15% of London 2012

spectators could be routed by way of this station, relieving the

two other gateway stations. Spectators walked by way of an

enhanced route called the Greenway, a public pathway enhancedfor the Games and beyond (Figure 8).

In previous attempts to provide permanent improvements to

interchange at West Ham in 1989, London Underground had not

been able to secure complex consents for a western side ticket

hall and entrance, the present (2010) layout being something of a

compromise on the eastern side.

The ODA faced similar difficulties with obtaining consents in

20072008 and opted for temporary crowd-moving measures to

the north of the station directing spectators towards the Greenway

by way of temporary bridges and public roads and pavements.

10. Governance of deliveryWhereas earlier major transport investment projects were simply

and directly managed, the ODA, faced with a non-movable

completion date and the need for simultaneous design, construc-

tion and completion of most of the projects to which it was

contributing funds, had to evolve several ways of governing

delivery. These ran largely in parallel.

For directly managed schemes such as Stratford Regional station

permanent upgrade and West Ham temporary infrastructure

improvements, both a small ODA client team and an ODA

project delivery team operated. Network Rail and London Under-ground safety and operating regimes were not interfered with and

the ODA worked through the operators existing communication

mechanisms.

Figure 7.The London Overground network has been extended

and improved.

273

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

8/9

Where the ODA was making a contribution to existing projectssuch as the DLR and the London Overground North London Line

reconstruction, as well as investment in new cycleways and

walking routes with Transport for London and local authorities, a

system of client monitoring of both financial expenditure and

project milestone deliverables was used.

Governance is explained in more detail in the papers on transport

programme assurance and transport operations appearing else-

where in this issue.

11. Conclusion

The ODAs transport investment, although focused on mass transitrailways because they were the only feasible way to deliver large

numbers of spectators en masse to most venues in realistic times,

took a much wider view of opportunities than earlier transport

investment programmes, to invest in modes that not only in-

creased travel choice, such as direct coach services, but ones that

were measurably more sustainable and environmentally friendly,

such as the walking and cycling route investment programme.

Also soft legacy such as accessibility and behaviour change

were as central to the approach as the more traditional, physical

projects.

Although the London 2012 transport legacy benefits may be less

dramatic in their finished content and less visible than previous

large-scale investment, they are just as powerful from a society

perspective as well as being vital for effective games-time

operation.

In other words, although very different in its modern, multi-modalapproach, in the fine tradition of transformational transport invest-

ment in London the 2012 games has been the catalyst for major

transport improvements that will leave a lasting physical and social

legacy, particularly in the east and south-east of the capital.

As proposed in the introduction, the investment driven by the

2012 games can be expected to have an impact on the same scale

as the really major public transport schemes completed over the

past 150 years, from the first cut-and-cover underground railways,

through the New Works Programme in the 1930s, to the Dock-

lands Light Railway (DLR) and Jubilee Line.

REFERENCES

Barker T and Robbins M (1970) History of London Transport

Volume Two, The Twentieth Century to 1970. George Allen

and Unwin, London, UK, pp. 6184, 113117, 289290.

Dosunmu B (2012) Delivering London 2012: Transport demand

forecasting. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Transport165(4): 257266.

GLA (Mayor of London and Transport for London)(2012)

Leaving a Transport Legacy Olympic and Paralympic

Transport Legacy Action Plan. Greater London Authority,

London, UK.

London Transport Museum (2012) Online museum Charles

Tyson Yerkes. London Transport Museum, London. See http://

www.ltmcollection.org/museum/glossary.html?ix

glossaryCharles+Tyson+Yerkes (accessed 23/07/2012).

ODA (Olympic Delivery Authority) (2009a) Accessible Transport

Strategy. Olympic Delivery Authority, London, UK. See

Figure 8.Spectators walked by way of the Greenway from West

Ham to the Olympic Park

274

Transport



Sumner

8/14/2019 tran165-0267

9/9

http://www.london2012.com/about-us/publications/transport/(accessed 23/07/2012).

ODA (2009b) Transport for 2012 and Beyond. Olympic Delivery

Authority, London, UK. See http://www.london2012.com/

about-us/publications/transport/ (accessed 23/07/2012).

ODA (2011a)Olympic Transport Plan, 2nd edn. Olympic

Delivery Authority, London, UK. See http://

www.london2012.com/about-us/publications/transport/(accessed 23/07/2012).

ODA (2011b)Transport Big Build Complete. Olympic Delivery

Authority, London, UK. See http://www.london2012.com/

about-us/publications/transport/ (accessed 23/07/2012).

Willis J(1990)Planning the Jubilee Line Extension. London

Regional Transport, London, UK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the

editor at [email protected]. Your contribution will be

forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered

appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as a

discussion in a future issue of the journal.

Proceedingsjournals rely entirely on contributions sent in

by civil engineering professionals, academics and students.

Papers should be 20005000 words long (briefing papersshould be 10002000 words long), with adequate illustra-

tions and references. You can submit your paper online via

www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you

will also find detailed author guidelines.

275

Transport



Sumner

tran165-0267

Documents