Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels.
(this article - with details and pictures - was published in Subterranea No.37 December 2014. Copies are available from their bookshop http://www.subbrit.org.uk/)
The Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels have been
the subject of a great deal of local controversy and with Thames crossings
being a major subject of public discussion at the moment, they are likely to
become more so.As far as we are aware thesetwo Thames tunnels are one of only three
or four sub-river pedestrian tunnels – all in Britain apart from one in
Antwerp.They were built to allow access to north London jobs for south London
residents and also to provide them with a free crossing. In an era when tolls
had only recently been abolished on up river bridges it was seen as only fair
that equally free crossings should be provided for residents who lived east of
the Tower. That crossing needed to go
under the river rather than over it on a ferry or a bridge – which would
essentially be obstructions on the busy commercial river.
The Greenwich tunnel was the earlier of the two and
a great deal more has been writtenabout it than the later Woolwich tunnel. It was intended that it should replace ferry
services which had enjoyed a statutory existence since 1676 and which owned the
rights for the transfer of foot passengers. By 1900 the ownership of these
rights was with the Great Eastern Railway Company and they, and TheLondon
County Council acquired an enabling Act of Parliament for the foot tunnel in
1897. This, the Greenwich tunnel was
designed by Sir Alexander Binnie - the second tunnel built by the County
Council following on from the Blackwall, with which is hardly compares. The
contractors were J. Cochrane and Sons and work began in 1899. It tunnel opened
in 1902.
Construction began with the sinking of a shaft on
the north bank of the River in Island Gardens and advanced under the river and it
emerged in Greenwich by what was then the Ship Inn. GeologistDr. Jackie Skipper
recently gave a presentation to Greenwich Industrial History Society which drew
our attention to the complexities of the river bed which faced the engineers. Much of the information which she is now able
to provide to potential tunnel builders would have been unknown in 1900 and
engineers would have had to handle problems as they encountered them.
The tunnel is formed of 32mm iron plates bolted
together, lined with concrete and white glazed ceramic tiles..The tunnel itself
dips towards the centre of the river with a gradient of 1 in 15. The gradients were designed for the sake of
economy as the enabling Act of Parliament required should allow for dredging of
the river at 48ft at high water
It is accessed by lift
and by spiral staircases descending in shafts – 88 steps on the north side and
100 at GreenwichThe stairs are of wrought iron with brittle non-polishing cast
iron tread plates. The shafts are accessed via a brick entrance rotunda capped
with a listed glass dome. The walls of
the rotundae are built over the outer edge of caissons which hold the shafts; the
lift and stair structures hang from the caisson, and do not bear structurally
on the horizontal surface at the base of the shafts. The caissons themselves are of two steel
skins 43ft in external diameter with four foot of concrete between outside and
inside skins. A thick vertical stanchion stands in front of the lift doors and this
runs the whole depth of the shaft and ties the stairs and lifts together.
. Great care was taken to make the jointing water
proof. Bolts had lead washers put on
them completely filling any spaces and soft lead wire was hammered into the
joints between castings.
The tunnelling shield used was 14ft 6 in in length
with 13 segments at the cutting edge, each segment have two 6inch teeth. Care
was also taken with the health of the men employed and new apparatus was
designed to remove ‘carbonic acid’ from the air and also to ventilate
generally. It was noted that ‘only nine
cases of caisson sickness occurred, mostlytrivial’ and ‘caused by indiscretion
on the part of the sufferers’. It was
hoped that the County Council could use the results which emerged from the use
of this new apparatus to improve future works. Messrs Leslie and Macmorran were
the Medical Offices in charge. A number
of learned paper emerged from this paper as results were published. However it is said that the ‘rate of
progress has been exceptionally rapid’ – 10ft per working day.
During the Second World War the Greenwich tunnel was
bombed but a strengthened section near the north end attests to the damage and
repair work. There is also shrapnel
damage left unrepaired in the brickwork of the south rotunda. It is thought that the bomb which caused the
damage was on the foreshore of the north bank – but there were numerous hits on
the south side, including rocket attacks.
Hundreds of people have daily used the tunnel to
cross the River - and pedestrians have now been joined by many cyclists, for
whom it is the major crossing point between Tower Bridge and the Woolwich Free
Ferry. The visible part of the tunnel is its small
circular cupolaewith an entrance made of StuartsGranolithic cement and a ribbed
glass dome above. Over the doorways at
the Greenwich end is a bronze plaque which commemorates the completion of the work.
These are nowlisted Grade II.
The tunnels were built by the LondoncountyCouncil
and passed in due course to the Greater London Council. When that was closed
down Greenwich Council took over managementresponsibility of the tunnels on behalf
of the three constituent boroughs – Greenwich, Towner Hamlets and Newham.
This article has been about the Greenwich Foot
Tunnel – and sadly there is much less detail About the Woolwich one. In Woolwich the tunnel entrance originally
sat on the ferry approach – but access to the ferry was moved to allow for vehicle
movements and a new leisure centre now cut the foot tunnel off from road and
leaves it out of sight. On the North Woolwich
side the entrance is visible but isolated in the centre of roads jammed with
traffic waitingfor the ferry. The
Woolwich tunnel is much less heavily used than the Greenwich one and many
people prefer to use the Free Ferry.
It was surprise to discover that the existing
Woolwich tunnel was n fact the second to be planned here. Research on the Woolwich tunnel produced
press cuttings of an attempt to build a tunnel twenty years earlier – hitherto
unknown. Investigations have failed to
discover any research, or indeed mention of it. It appears to have been begun in 1877 under
Mr. Gilbert, engineer, with Messrs. Sharp as contractors. It is said that it resulted from an accident
on the Thames were eight people were drowned trying to cross the river. It was
to run from near the Great Eastern Railway station in North Woolwich and
terminate in Woolwich high street accessed by ‘an enclosed road. The tunnel would be 1,800
ft. long and would lie 25ft-35ft below the river bed. It was to be made up of a
circular tube of iron 9 ft. in diameter and about 12ft in height. It should take four people walking abreast. The press comment that it would be very
useful to take troops and artillery guns across the river. However by 1879 work was ‘in abeyance’. The strange thing about the press reports
on which this is based is that none of them are local.
The Woolwich tunnel was opened ten years
after the Greenwich, in 1912. - by Lord Chesleymore the then Chairman of the
London County Council. It was designed by Maurice Fitzmaurice who had taken
over from Binnie as Chief Engineer to the County council in 1901. It was and built
by Walter Scott and Middleton. It is said that the provision of the tunnel
owned much to the efforts of Will Crooks, who had been Chair of the LCC Bridges
Committee in 1898 when, it is said, the Greenwich Tunnel was planned. From 1903 he was Member of Parliament for Woolwich,
at a time when the Woolwich constituency covered both sides of the river and
thus both tunnel entrances.
Construction began on the north bank
in 1910 with workers digging by hand and the tunnel continued to be dug in this
way and, like other tunnels, used the Greathead shield. The tunnel id 1655 feet long and thetop is 10
feet below the river bed –covered by 38 feet of water at low tide and 69 feet
at high tide. It is a cast iron tube
made of a series of connecting rings
Like the Greenwich tunnel it was lined
with white ceramic tiles and the floor was York stone flags. Lifts were not allowed for in the original scheme
and they were added later in the project at an additional cost of £5,000 – and
with manually operated gates. Like the Greenwich lifts they were replaced in the
early 1990s with the original panelled interiors retained. They can carry up to
40 passengers. The rotundas are red
brick on a plinth of blue engineering brick, with sash windows protected by
iron grilles and above the parapet is a conical roof with circular copper clad
lantern. The entrances have glass canopies on cast iron columns. They were
listed GradeII in 1989.
Work started to upgrade the Woolwich tunnel in 2010
and the tunnel closed during the day as work proceeded. However in 2010 the tunnel was closed
completely as structural weaknesses were discovered in the stairways. It eventually reopened in 2011 although the
lifts were not completed. The tunnel
has a leaky feeder system to allow the use of mobile phones.
The tunnel is now over a hundred years old and
feeling its age. In 2008 it was agreed
that it needed to be, at least, refurbished.
Work began in 2009 funded by the Department of Communities and Local
Government but it soon became clear
that the project was running very late and was in trouble. As 2012 neared, when the tunnel would be needed
as a river crossing during the Olympics, public disquiet grew.The stairs at
Greenwich reopened on time in 2011butwereheavily boarded so as to cause difficulty
in use. Various reasons were given for
delays, promises were made on opening.
The problems clearly remained. The homes
and communities agency which had been overseeing the project was wound up, and
another long delay with no information ensured. At this point FOGWOFT was
launched – Friends of Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels.
In 2012 with works still in a complete mess the
Royal Borough of Greenwich set up an inquiry into the refurbishment scheme. FOGWOFT officers attended meetings where the
tunnel was discussed and made representations. Meanwhile the original contractors
were no longer on site and a new firm was undertaking unfinished work.
The eventual consultant’s report to the Council
commented that while work on the tunnel was a small job for the construction
industry it was nevertheless unique and complex in a way that had not really
been appreciated. FOGWOFT has worked
closely with Council officers and reported on work as it has been
completed. Officers have had several
interesting visits to see the problems faced by the construction team – they
can hardly be called tours of the works, since the area involved is small and
cramped. As work progressed problems
with century old structures were uncovered as well as problems of drainage and
with the formation of miniature stalagmites as condensation drips onto the
floor. The clear wired glass on the
domes had the dirt of many decades on it and people assumed the murky look was
traditional. English Heritage agreed
that the new laminated glass would have a feint white smoke tint to reproduce
that unwashed look! FOGWOFT helped with
a public consultation as to whether the tunnel should be re-tiled or whether
the traditional tile work should be cleaned but remain, however scarred. It has however proved that however clean
the tiles are that they are never going to return to their original bright
white state.
The liftsat Greenwich were originally installed two
years after the tunnel was opened and there are stories of gallant young men
helping young ladies to descent the steps, sometime with bicycles. The lifts were replaced in 1992 with an 80
person capacity and the beautiful original mahogany lift interiors r-installed.
These lifts were always attended with
staff members at both and south lifts. It was decided to install lifts which
did not need to be manned and thus new
state-of-the-art lifts are now in place, complete with the original mahogany
interiors – but there have been problems of constant lift breakdowns. The ventilation system allows hot air from
the tunnel to be vented through louvres in the cupolae but solar heat builds up
under the listed glass domes. The
electronic lift controls cut out at temperatures above 43deg.C. – The highest
recorded temperature in the domes has been 56deg.C. Initially it became a struggle to keep the new
equipment cool; temporary air conditioned boxes were built round the control
cabinets and industrial fans used. Even
so they could not cope and now permanent cool boxes have been installed as well
as back up air conditioning units and fans put on new steel gantries below the
cupola. Since then the lifts have been
more reliable – and it has been a lesson in how advances in technology can
produce systems more vulnerable to environmental change than old mechanical
systems.
The tunnelsare classed as public highways and are
thus permanently open. They are also part of the UK NationalCycle Route I which
linksInverness and Dover.
As the tunnels have returned to normal use FOGWOFT
there are challenges to be met. The
by-laws – dating from 1902 – rule that there shall be no cycling in the tunnel,
but this is ignored by many cyclists, and in particular a lycra-clad minority
who hurtle through the tunnel to the danger of pedestrians. FOGWOFDT had been asked by Greenwich Council
to help participate in a pilot scheme which to monitor electronically – and
hopefully regulate – movement in the tunnel.
It is thought that if this is successful that it could be used elsewhere
–canal towpaths would be one obvious use. However, it has now emerged that
funding for the scheme from the GLA is notforthcoming and as this article is
written we wait for news from Greenwich Council Officers about new ideas and
new initiatives to deal with this ongoing problem.Some problems have still not
been completely overcome – the lifts at Greenwich failed again during the Tall
Ships Festival, and it emerged that spare parts needed to be specially made, in
Germany.
FOGWOFT will continue to monitor the tunnels and
hopefully help to make them both better known but to enable them to become an
important part of the Greenwich heritage which visitors come to see and provide
not only a crossing place for them, and for locals, but significant local places
which might have a variety of other uses - there is space, for example, for art
works in the rotunda.
Thames crossings of all sorts have been proposed
recently and there is current a consultationexercise being undertaken on behalf
of Transport for London. At FOGWOFT’s
recent AGM it has been suggested that the problems of cyclists who want to
speed over could be solved by the provision of other tunnels paralleling the
existing foot tunnels but for the use of cyclisrs. In the context of some of the
other propsoals this is cheap and cheerful..
Both tunnels continue to do the job they were built
for a century ago, and do it efficiently, however modernising them, while
maintaining their traditional features, has been more problematic than anyone
thought – and provided some valuable lessons. . This makes an important point about the tunnels
– they seem so simple – and yet they were major engineering works of their day,
and should be appreciated as such. To quote one report to Tower Hamlets Council
‘they represent a magnificent feat of Edwardian engineering – impressive
ambition of the project - the character
is consistent and defined by the finest engineering techniques of the day - the design throughout ... and fabric is
coherent, logical and simple and the materials used are robust and designed to
last’.
Sources
- the material for most of this article was obtained verbally from construction
team members on site at the tunnels. An
article on the history of the Greenwich Tunnel by Myles Dove appeared in the
September 2002 edition of the Greenwich Industrial History Newsletter. (http://gihs.gold.ac.uk/gihs27.html#foot)
. Other material has come from Dr.
Skipper’s presentation to Greenwich Industrial History Society (also
unpublished).Materialcan also be found in reports to meetings of the three LondonBoroughs
concerned – sometimesburied in minutes or as appendices.
Article
in Engineer 4th April 1902.
Institution
of Civil Engineers 1901-1902. Minutes of proceedings. The Greenwich Footway Tunnel
by William Charles Copperthwaite. M.Inst. C.E. (much of this paper describes
the arrangements made to allow construction to proceed)
Press
cutting file Greenwich Heritage Centre
London
Borough of Greenwich. Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels. Feasibility Study
for refurbishment
Dr. Mary Mills (incidentally Chair of FOGWOFT)
2 comments:
Excellent update. Thanks, Mary.
Thanks for sharing, it was interesting to read!
Post a Comment