CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS PROGRAMME Construction Logistics Improvement - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS PROGRAMME

Construction Logistics Improvement Group Meeting 5

Housekeeping

Ref Item Timing Lead

1 Introductions and actions from last meeting 15 GD 2 Product launch: new Construction Logistics Plan guidance and training 25 Arup 3 Final report: Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 20 SDG 4 Construction Logistics communications planning 20 GD 5 Break 15 6 Discussion: Defining consolidation, consolidation centres and consolidation activity 20 MS 7 Progress update: Investigating the construction industry’s use of HGV types 20 WSP 8 Project overview: Tideway Logistics 25 Tideway 9 Progress updates: Construction Logistics Baseline Model and Water Freight Toolkit 15 GD 10 Future meeting dates, summary and AOB 10 GD

Introductions ▪ Organisation and role

Standard method of communications

Establishing industry change initiatives

Actions from CLIG 4 – 29 March 2017

Item Action Progress Construction Logistics Plan

• 1. Dan Evanson to incorporate feedback and comments and

include the third map (Figure 3 of the exemplar) into the guidance

• 2. Call to CLIG stated in the minutes - to let Dan know if

interested in participating in the initial CLP pilot training sessions Complete Communicating the Programme

• 3. GD on behalf of TfL to send an Email to CLIG inviting offers
• f sponsorship / contributions towards a Comm platform

Complete Investigating the use of HGV types

• 4. Call to CLIG stated in the minutes - please contact TfL or WSP

to participate in a study interview / suggest who else to involve Complete Investigating the impact of delivery inefficiencies 5 .Call to CLIG stated in the minutes - any further comments or suggestions for the study please contact AECOM Complete Summary and AOB

• 6. TfL to contact Anna Walker who co-ordinates the CILT group to

explore bringing the group and CLIG together Complete

Product launch: new Construction Logistics Plan guidance and training

Presentation Scope

• CLP Technical Guidance update
• CLP Training update
• Questions

What we were trying to address…

• Past guidance had some wrinkles to be ironed
• ut…..
• Multiple documents
• Several years old
• Ambiguity over planned measures
• Vague language
• No templates
• Also a desire to provide bespoke training

Key Technical Guidance Alterations

A reminder of the ambition:

• Refine content and language – SIMPLE
• Remove ambiguity in the guidance – CLEAR
• Introduce multiple levels of CLP – PROPORTIONATE
• Develop a clearly defined CLP structure – CONSISTENT
• Develop a CLP Tool to accompany the Guidance and

standardise data fields – EFFICIENT

• How adoption of a standardised methodology will

enable accurate review – COMPARABLE

CLP Technical Guidance Update

Since I last presented to you the guidance has been completed, incorporating the feedback from each of you The revised CLP Guidance is complete and can be found at:

It is accompanied by supporting documents:

• CLP Tool
• CLP Skeleton Template
• CLP Exemplar

CLP Training Update

• Full delivery is now underway
• Both Foundation and Practitioner

courses now Accredited by the CILT

• Over 70 funded Foundation

places filled so far

• We even have 10 fully fledged

Practitioners!

Forthcoming dates of interest

Training is underway. Forthcoming dates:

• Monday 31st July

(Arup) FOUNDATION

• Monday 14th August (Arup)

FOUNDATION

• Tuesday 15th August

(Arup) FOUNDATION

• Wednesday 16th August

(Arup) PRACTITIONER

• Tuesday 29th August

(WSP, Holborn) PRACTITIONER

Strong focus on communication and

• collaboration. Training is open to:

Developers, Contractors, Local Authority personnel, Planners, Vehicle Operators

Forthcoming dates of interest

Forthcoming dates:

• Monday 18th September (City of London)

FOUNDATION

• Tuesday 19th September (City of London)

FOUNDATION

• Friday 29th September

(City of London) FOUNDATION

• Friday 6th October

(City of London) FOUNDATION

Any Questions?

dan.evanson@arup.co.uk

Final report: Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail

|

• Project context
• Methodology
• Findings and recommendations
• Responsibility
• Awareness
• Improving availability of information
• Timing
• Resource demand
• Policy
• Conclusions

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 17

|

Project Context

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 18

|

Methodology

Organisation by sector % by sector TOTAL Contractor 39% 62 Developer 9% 15 Supply Chain 13% 21 Borough/Planner 11% 17 Key stakeholder 27% 43 Total 100% 160 27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 19

• A multi-staged stakeholder

engagement process allowed a variety

• f views to be captured from across

the construction industry.

• 160 people were consulted as part of

this project providing both qualitative and quantitative responses to the issues being analysed.

|

• Double Handling
• Timing of deliveries (night

time / early morning)

• Tides / Rail Freight Paths
• On-site storage availability
• Site orientation and logistics
• Availability of infrastructure

(i.e. barges / trains)

• Geography – UK wide

industry

• Conflicts with other users (i.e.

rail passenger movements)

Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 20

Physical Barriers Logistical Barriers

• Rail Head Availability
• Wharf Availability
• General accessibility issues

between river / rail and the site

• River wall suitability
• Tidal restrictions
• Bridges
• River capacity constraints
• Protected Wharves
• Application of existing

policies

• Timing and Enforcement of

CLPs

• Enforcement of existing

policy

Policy Barriers

• General costs – perception of

costs

• Known vs Unknown
• Financial Risk
• Lack of competition within

the industry – value for money

Financial Barriers

• Communication / Awareness
• Skills and Resource Gaps
• Availability of information to

potential users.

Industry Related Barriers

Identification of Barriers…..

27/07/2017

|

• Key Finding 1 - Responsibility
• Key Finding 2 - Awareness
• Key Finding 3 - Improving availability of information
• Key Finding 4 - Timing
• Key Findings 5 & 6 - Resource demand
• Key Finding 7 - Policy

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 21

Key Findings

|

Key Finding 1 - Responsibility

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 22

|

Key Finding 2 - Awareness

• Without having the

knowledge or access to appropriate information, decision makers are unable to make an informed decision about the likely feasibility and viability of the river and rail without expending substantial resources and costs.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 23

|

Key Finding 3 - Improving availability of information

• When researching the feasibility
• f river and rail many

stakeholders found it to be an arduous process with great difficulty in identifying relevant individuals to contact

• An effective, clear, concise,

coherent and up-to-date toolkit/s for the entire industry would provide a resource for decision makers to make informed choices for both river and rail.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 24

|

Key Finding 4 - Timing

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 25

|

Key Findings 5 & 6 - Resource demand

• To transfer materials and waste onto rolling stock a rail head is
• required. Competition for land within London puts pressure on rail

heads, which are consistently under threat from development.

• Unlike river wharves there is no policy to safeguard rail heads,

therefore there is increasing pressure to develop on the valuable land they occupy.

• Transporting materials by river requires a unique set of skills which are

very specific to that sector. There was a perception that the relevant skills across the industry were dwindling due to the lack of experienced

• perators, thereby further limiting potential future use.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 26

|

Key Finding 7 - Policy

• Planning policy was identified as having a major

role in encouraging river and rail use

• Ultimate responsibility for what and how

developments are assessed lies with planners and key stakeholders, who have the power to approve, reject or amend approaches to projects through the planning process.

• The earlier implementation of a Construction

Logistic Plans was believed to be an effective way

• f introducing river and rail into the construction

process, whilst improving the awareness and knowledge of those approving planning applications is also considered to be a significant positive step forward.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 27

|

Benefits

• Reducing construction freight vehicle movements can positively influence many
• f the strategic challenges currently facing London, including:
• reducing air pollution;
• easing congestion; and
• simplifying the construction logistics process.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 28

|

Conclusion

• By focusing efforts on addressing the

barriers discussed in relation to Policy and Awareness the ability for projects to use river and rail in the transportation of construction materials and waste will become easier.

• The introduction of a package of

measures targeted at Policy and Awareness has the ability to assist in reducing air pollution, easing congestion and simplifying the logistics

• f construction projects.

27/07/2017 Investigating the barriers to transporting bulk construction materials and waste by river and rail 29

• Reducing freight vehicle movements has the opportunity to positively influence the

strategic challenges currently facing London.

DISCLAIMER: This work may only be used within the context and scope of work for which Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this work without the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage resulting therefrom.

Questions

Matthew Clark Matthew.Clark@sdgworld.net

Communicating the Construction Logistics programme

Standard method of communications

Establishing industry change initiatives Some effect but no industry wide movement Localised action but not debated in any detail

Standard method of communications Establishing industry change initiatives

Background to successful communications Powerful industry-led change initiatives

Over 400 champions signed up Over 4000 operators accredited Over 1000 stakeholders involved

Communicating construction logistics Where do we want to be?

Communicating construction logistics How are we going to get there?

Research

• Construction

industry’s use of HGV types

• Impacts caused by

construction delivery inefficiencies

• Barriers to River and

Rail

• Old Oak and Park

Royal Construction Logistics Strategy

Communicating construction logistics Discussion points

• Should the programme be positioned as industry led or TfL?
• Should the programme develop a branding identity that is

carried through all assets?

• Should the programme develop a web presence that is

independent from the TfL dot gov domain?

• How does the programme engage with the wider industry, what

does the stakeholder engagement look like?

• Are there any other communications points to consider?

How should programme communications be funded?

In association with

Communicating the Construction Logistics Programme

Glen Davies

In association with

Construction Logistics website

http://constructionlogistics.org.uk/

In association with

Funding the communications

• 1. Website sponsorship
• 2. Signposting commercial planned

measures

• 3. Signposting CLP development

services

• 4. Third party support contributions
• 5. Communication elements built into

research specifications

In association with

Break

In association with

Discussion:

Defining consolidation, consolidation centres and consolidation activity Mark Starosolsky

In association with

Discussion: Defining construction consolidation

• 1. TfL Looking to update the directory
• 2. 2017 Mayors’ Transport Strategy
• 3. Seeking CLIG views
• 4. Possibility of further research

In association with

Mayor’s Transport Strategy (Draft for consultation)

Proposal 15 d) Ensuring that all London is within a 30-minute drive of a construction consolidation centre and encouraging their use through Construction Logistics Plans and the planning process

In association with

Discussion question 1

How would we define construction consolidation? What’s in? What’s out?

In association with

Discussion question 2

What’s an appropriate maximum drive time from consolidation centre to site and how do we get more of it?

In association with

Discussion question 3

What does CLIG want to see in the next update of the directory?

In association with

Thank you

In association with

Progress update:

Investigating the construction industry’s use of HGV types Ian Brooker WSP

49

Contents

— What's The Problem? — Mitigation — Industry Trends — Way Forward — We Still Need Your Help

50

What’s The Problem

— Articulated vehicles have a higher payload — Operating costs only slightly higher so lower cost per Tonne — But . . . .

— Safety — Access — Attitude

51

Safety Issues

— MPA Data very poor, but may be best available — HSE identified 6 fatal and 68 major accidents involving goods transport vehicles on construction sites between 2003/4 and 2007/8

Principal Circumstance of Overturn Totals 2011 Transverse slope at point of discharge 6 14 Unevenly loaded to one side Unevenly loaded (front to back) Other reason 8 2012 Transverse slope at point of discharge 4 14 Unevenly loaded to one side 4 Unevenly loaded (front to back) Other reason 6 2013 Transverse slope at point of discharge 8 22 Unevenly loaded to one side 2 Unevenly loaded (front to back) Other reason 12 50

52

Tipover Causes

— The MPA and construction companies have extensively researched the cause of tipovers on site.

— Tipping on an incline or uneven ground — Tipping on soft ground that cause the trailer to sink and lean — Not tipping with the tractor and trailer in line — Load sticking in body, on one side of the body, uneven

• r overloaded

— Moving forward causing instability whilst load at height — Raising body too quickly with excessive product retained inside — Load freezing / sticking to body floor — Poor maintenance of the chassis and suspension — Strong cross winds

53

Tipover Causes

54

Access

— Several concerns about access:

— Turning circle — Single powered axle on artics — General issues of site conditions favouring off road vehicles

55

Attitude / Status Quo

— Perception that articulated vehicles need specially designed sites — Construction sites constantly changing — The assumption is that rigids will be used — Some contractors insist on rigids — Hauliers invest in the vehicles which they can get most use from — Mismatch of costs (who makes the effort) and benefits (from the lower cost and external benefits)

56

But . . . .

— Incidence of accidents still not clear — Artics and rigids both meet the same standard (7 degrees) — Arguably artic turning circle is no worse than rigid — Artics access most construction sites – to deliver steel, windows, etc. — Some developers and contractors take a close interest in payloads – particularly major infrastructure projects

57

Mitigation

— Industry Standards and Best Practice — Vehicle Design — Inclinometers — Liners — Tipping Frames — Moving Floors

58

Industry Standards: CLOCS Site Conditions

— However, the site assessment

• nly measures four

characteristics:

— Ground condition 1: Approach angle. — Ground condition 2: Material type. — Ground condition 3: Rutting and bumps. — Ground condition 4: Water.

— The ground condition ratings are not intended to and cannot be used to assess the availability of a safe unloading area for tippers.

59

Industry Standards: MPA

60

Mitigation and Prevention

— Vehicle Design

— Trailer rigidity — Real axle steering

— Inclinometers — Cameras — Tipping Frames — Moving Floors / Ejectors

61

Industry Trends

— A definite move towards more use of artics, particularly moving floors — Focussed initially on:

— “Internal” movements controlled by aggregate cos — Major infrastructure projects — Longer distance movements

— Case studies of suppliers working closely with developers and contractors to demonstrate the benefits of articulated vehicles — Slow process — When will this become viable for smaller hauliers?

62

The Way Forward

— Use of articulated vehicles should be the norm, not the exception — CLPs should require evidence of why articulated vehicles cannot be used — Developers need to become more involved – lower costs and reduced impact on the community — Dissemination of best practice — More research into tipover incidence

63

We Still Need Your Help

— We particularly need to speak to:

— Developers — Dealers — Drivers — International case studies

Thank you!

wsp.com

In association with

Project overview:

Tideway logistics Gordon Battye

66

Project Background

67

Project background

Current Situation

68

Project background

Current situation

69

Project background

• Approx. 45M tonnes a year discharged into the Thames

70

Project background

Intercepting the CSOs

71

The project

72

What are we building?

• Statistics:
• Length: 25 kilometres
• Internal Diameter: 7.2m
• Gradient: 1 in 790 to be self-cleansing
• Volume: 1.6M m³ (including Lee Tunnel)

73

Delivery Model

• Project secured through a Development Consent Order (DCO) September

2014

• A new Infrastructure Provider, Bazalgette Tunnel Limited (BTL), has been

formed to deliver the project.

• Regulated by Ofwat.
• Licence awarded 24 August 2015.
• Main works contractors commencement on 1st September 2015.

West - BMB Central - FLO East - CVB System Integrator

74

Tideway Sites

75

The tunnel route and worksites

76

Typical CSO Connection / Intervention shaft

77

Physical legacy

Blackfriars: After

78

Timetable for Construction

2016

Main works preliminary construction begins

2017

Tunnelling begins

2021

Tunnelling ends

2023

Project completion

2015

Main Works contracts awarded

79

Materials need to build it.

Material Estimated quantity Excavated material 4,612,000 Tonnes Demolition material 137,000 Tonnes Ready mixed concrete 635,000 Tonnes Bulk fill material 651,000 Tonnes Precast concrete shaft and tunnel linings 613,000 Tonnes Bulk aggregates for onsite production of concrete and grout 425,000 Tonnes Site consumables (formwork / pipe / track etc.) 313,000 Tonnes Plant and equipment 164,000 Tonnes Cement and bentonite 122,000 Tonnes Steel reinforcement for concrete structures 97,000 Tonnes Office supplies 40,000 Tonnes TOTAL: 7,809,000 Tonnes

By Road and by River

80

Road Transport

81

Tideway HGV Numbers (Including More by River)

All by Road DCO Contract More By River East 172,760 93,940 77,820 61,100 Central 232,240 94,210 51,640 45,740 West 101,600 50,970 37,980 33,280 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000

HGV numbers - All worksites

West Central East 53% reduction 67% reduction 72% reduction

82

HGV Numbers

• At both Foreshore and Non Foreshore sites we still have:
• 300 per day (600 movements) average daily HGV deliveries during

the peak month.

• 185,000 HGV deliveries (370,000 movements) over the

construction period.

• 135 per day average number of HGV deliveries across the

construction period.

• And plenty of vans
• Still a risk to Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs)

Residual HGV Numbers

83

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

• Our approach to Transformational Health & Safety
• Tideway’s vision is to set a new benchmark for Health and Safety

performance in infrastructure projects within the UK.

• To challenge traditional working practices and develop solutions that

comprehensively raise standards above existing industry norms.

“The RightwaY “

84

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

• CLOCS and FORS Champions
• Committed to “improving levels of safety, efficiency and protecting

the environment; as well as driving best practice driving forward”

• Lorry management commitments in the CoCP.
• Includes CLOCS and FORS Silver standards
• Development of best practice from other projects
• More use of river transport to further reduce vehicle numbers
• Efficient logistics for residual lorry numbers. Requirement for

construction logistics plans.

• Work alongside our MWCs to further minimise risk.
• Enhanced vehicle standards (latest technology)
• Enhancements to driver training and awareness

What are we doing?

85

Vehicle Movement Planning & Management

• Requirement for a Vehicle Booking Management System (VBMS) to

ensure:

• Vehicles booked in at realistic time slots
• No congestion around worksites

All vehicles checked at gate for:

• Real-time arrival and departure information
• Vehicle safety equipment checks
• Driver training compliance
• Details recorded by gate staff on hand-held devices (PODFather).
• Production of management reports

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

86

Checks on proposed operators / transport providers

• Membership of the Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS)
• Bronze at time of first site access date
• Silver within six months after that date
• Depot-specific
• Companies who use owner-drivers should be checked to ensure each
• wner-driver has their own FORS membership
• Companies who operate HGVs must have a valid Operator Licence for the

type of vehicle(s) and business they operate

• Restricted (Orange disc)
• Standard National (Blue disc)
• Standard International (Green disc)

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

87

Vehicle checks

• All vehicles to be checked - every visit
• Checks apply to Vans and Heavy Goods Vehicles
• ‘HGVs’ means any vehicle over 3.5t Gross Vehicle Weight, including suction

excavators and volumetric mixers

• Checks cover every tier in the supply chain, including owner-drivers
• Each check should be comprehensive and complete; and evidence-

based

• Checks carried out at vehicle holding areas, recessed gates or on site.
• Safety is number 1 priority during vehicle checks

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

88

Driver training requirements

• For regular drivers (more than 3 trips in a 12 month period to any Tideway

site) of any vehicle, including vans

• Tideway “on-boarding” process for regular drivers
• Driving licence checks form part of on-boarding
• Safe Urban Driving course for HGV drivers
• Van Smart course for van drivers (Crossrail driver training accepted as

an alternative)

• Yearly online e-learning module undertaken
• Contractors need to issue each driver with a photo-ID badge
• Driver information packs issued
• General project-wide
• Site specific, including routes and local hazard information
• Issued to irregular drivers too

Tideway Strategy for VRUs

89

River Transport

90

Key Commitments to River Transport

• The DCO Transport Strategy was secured in the River Transport

Strategy(APP207.02)

• RTS commitments - at least 4.2 million tonnes of material moved by river,

reducing estimated total number of HGVs from approximately 506,000 to 239,000

• Tideway has worked with Main Works Contractors to increase use of river

including in MWC tenders and the More by River initiatives.

• The forecast amount of material moved by river is 5.8 million tonnes.
• This has resulted in reducing vehicle numbers up to a total of around

140,000.

91

River Transport Strategy

• Developed to provide a transparent process through which the movement
• f the Specified Materials by the River can be secured.
• Process for the GLA, TfL, PLA and the Relevant Local Authorities to

approve elements of the works affecting the River Thames, and the local and strategic highway network.

• Six Elements:
• Appointment of Relevant Authority and Independent Panel
• Preparation of Sustainable Freight Transport Plans
• Approval of Operational and Sustainability Derogations
• Monitoring and reporting
• Remedial action plans
• Completion review of performance

The Strategy will be secured through the project wide requirement PW15 in the Draft DCO which provides: “The authorised development shall be carried out in accordance with Section 4 and Schedules 1 to 7 of the River Transport Strategy (document reference APP180), or such updated version of the River Transport Strategy which is the result of any approval given or other decision taken further to the terms of the River Transport Strategy.”

Overview and Principles

92

Key Commitments to River Transport

DCO committed ‘Specified’ materials for river transport:

• Cofferdam fill material (to and from site)
• Shaft excavated material
• Main tunnel excavated material
• Excavated material for chambers and connections
• Main tunnel secondary lining aggregates
• Main tunnel lining segments at Chambers Wharf

Additional materials for river transport now includes:

• Tunnel segments at Kirtling Street and Carnwath
• Shaft material at Kirtling Street
• Tunnel excavation at Greenwich Pumping Station
• Office accommodation
• TBMs at Kirtling Street and Chambers Wharf
• Secondary Lining reinforcement
• Material deliveries at Blackfriars and Victoria sites

93

Marine Logistics - Implementation

• MWCs currently forecasting approximately 6,700 barge movements

compared to the DCO estimate of 11,000 movements.

• Although more is being moved by river the overall barge numbers have

reduced due to change in barge sizes.

• DCO estimates based on existing practice and current barge sizes

indicated by PLA.

• A number of barge trials and development work undertaken to increase

the barge size, key example is change from 800t to 1,500t barges.

• Excavated material receptor sites are being arranged on Thames Estuary

eliminating need to tranship to take to other locations such Wallasea

• Island. Eliminates need for ships and associated crews.

94

Tideway predicted vessel movements per day

2 4 6 8 10 12 Jan-16 Mar-16 May-16 Jul-16 Sep-16 Nov-16 Jan-17 Mar-17 May-17 Jul-17 Sep-17 Nov-17 Jan-18 Mar-18 May-18 Jul-18 Sep-18 Nov-18 Jan-19 Mar-19 May-19 Jul-19 Sep-19 Nov-19 Jan-20 Mar-20 May-20 Jul-20 Sep-20 Nov-20 Jan-21 Mar-21 May-21 Includes: Excavated materials Cofferdam fill Segments Secondary lining More by River Excludes: Other site servicing activities Sum of Total - TTT East Sum of Total - TTT West Sum of Total - TTT Central

95

Marine Logistics - Implementation

• 11 peak vessel movements/day - Tideway in June 2018.
• Current background freight on the Thames is approximately 7 vessels

movements/day, mainly day time.

• Tideway will increase large freight traffic by at least 150% on top of the

existing freight traffic on the River.

• This is a small proportion of total vessel movements on the Thames that

include passenger services and leisure vessels.

96

Marine Logistics - Implementation

• 3 main marine transport supply operators (west/central/east) with

experienced existing river transport providers.

• Plus a number of specialist marine contractors/suppliers.
• 6 new/refurbished tugs, (2 per operator).
• More than 40 barges ranging from 500t – 2,500t (new & existing).

97

Marine Logistics - Implementation

• Marine transport operators - 26 total tug crews - each comprising of at

least 3 staff/tug.

• Minimum total requirement of 78 crew.
• Additional marine crew for other activities in the supply chain.

98

Marine Logistics - Implementation

Enhancing Marine Safety and Training

• Tideway Code of Practice for Marine Operations
• Marine Training Programme:
• Training materials
• Train the Trainer Course
• Competency Validation – Vessel Simulator

Thames Skills Academy

• New river wide training academy to address needs for trained river

personnel.

• Set up in conjunction with PLA, TfL, Tideway and marine vessel operator

members.

• Tideway funding and provide input on management.
• Main Works contractors active in academy.
• Established in 2016.

99

Marine Logistics - Implementation

Marine Training Programme:

• 13 Boat Master’s through Train the Trainer course.
• 6 Boat Master’s already through HR Wallingford vessel simulator/competency

validation.

• New MWC marine specific induction introduced.

Safety Management:

• All marine operators are implementing new Safety Management Systems and

increased safety standards.

• New Towing & Pushing Course being developed through TSA.

100

Vessel movements

• Vessel Control Plan
• Passage plans.
• Schedules of vessel movements
• Register and record all vessel movements to and from sites
• Record vessel and resource details (compliance with DCO Schedule 15

Deemed Marine Licence, and Schedule 16 PLA Protective Provisions, River Regulators (4WLA))

• Load Monitoring Plan
• Marine Coordination with other sites and other river users.
• Etc Etc

River Movement Planning and Monitoring System

101

Lessons Learned?

102

What has been learned?

• DCO process – biggest ever
• Political will
• Funding model
• Stakeholder engagement – earlier the better
• Consents
• LoPs

In association with

Progress update:

Upcoming technical research projects

In association with

Technical Research update: Water Freight toolkit

Water Freight toolkit - Commissioned

• Aim: To create an electronic interactive web based

tool that maps suitable wharves and also unloading and loading areas on the Grand Union Canal (Mainline and Paddington)

• Due to complete in February 2018
• Progress to be presented at the next CLIG

In association with

Technical Research update: Baseline Model

Baseline model - Tender out

• Aim: To develop a baseline model which defines and

quantifies construction logistics operations by mode, load and vehicle type in London

• Defining movement patterns from origin to

destination and also the impacts generated by construction logistic activity in London in 2017

• Due to complete in December 2017
• Progress to be presented at the next CLIG

In association with

CLIG summary:

Any other business and future meeting dates

In association with

Summary and any other business

In association with

Future CLIG dates for the diary

Friday 20 October 2017

Arup 13 Fitzroy Street W1T 4BQ

Wednesday 28 February 2018

City of London Guildhall EC2P 2EJ

In association with

Thank you

enquiries@constructionlogistics.org.uk