wrote:
Aidan Stanger wrote:

According to section 6.3 of
http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/data/...ing-report.pdf
the proposal to close Wapping station is just a cost saving measure,
and if they can't find a way of retaining it under the current safety
regulations they could build a replacement on LU owned land just N of its
existing location.

Firstly, is this true?
Secondly, is that the reason why LU owns that land?
Thirdly, why isn't the plan to retain the station better publicised?


The Tower Hamlets report is dated March 2004. It seems their campaign
succeeded since in August, when TfL took over the ELL project from the
Strategic Snail Authority, it was announced that Wapping will not be
closed. I don't know, however, what solution they have found to the
technical problems at this site which led them to consider closure.

The "solution" is that the ELLP is being progressed as two phases. The
first phase, with the northern extension to Dalston Junction and the
southern extensions to West Croydon and Crystal Palace, will still only
use 4-car trains which can fit into the short platforms at Wapping,
Rotherhithe and Canada Water, earning them a reprieve for the time being.

Phase two to Caledonian Road & Barnsbury and Clapham Junction requires
8-car trains, bringing the future of Wapping and Rotherhithe back into
question. Canada Water would never close but would be expensive to
extend as it is on a slope and uses special safety equipment to stop
trains running away. Rotherhithe could close as a new northern exit
could be constructed at Canada Water.

As for Wapping, the expense of extending the platforms could jeopardise
the whole of Phase 2; I wonder whether TfL would rather try to negotiate
with the HMRI or whoever to allow long trains to serve the short
platforms there ("For Wapping, use front 4 cars only").

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London