Walter Briscoe wrote:
I much prefer an attributed copy of a URL than a mere reference so
searching a news archive is more effective.
I agree and posted the link to the original article in the first
posting of this thread. IIRC the Independent moves material to its
premium payable archive after five days
The East London Line is being extended in the north to Dalston and in
the south to West Croydon and Crystal Palace in the first phase of
I saw this the first time and could not understand why the line should
go south to West Croydon and then north to Crystal Palace.
And the second time you saw it - you realised that for the ELL - West
Croydon and Crystal Palace are separate termini? - Crystal Palace will
reopen the northern bay platforms 5 and 6 for the ELL.Direct connecting
services from West Croydon to Crystal Palace go via platforms 1&2 and
on to Victoria
I infer that East Croydon is not served - it is the only Croydon station
I have ever used. It has tram services and good Gatwick Airport
connections. I don't know about trams from other stations served by the
"new" line. OTOH, a recent trip from London Bridge to East Croydon did
go through Norwood Junction. Perhaps I need another diagram. 
West Croydon has a tram station on the northern inbound town centre
"Cannon Hilling" section. The Brighton line RUS has been discussed
extensively in other threads on this group particularly in relation to
the Gatwick Express. East Croydon has very busy six through platforms -
turn rounds are not practical.
I find it depressing it goes from roughly nowhere to roughly nowhere.
Only at the northern end - again something that has aready been
discussed extensively
I fear I may be dead before CrossRail is built.
Separate project from the ELL. Gestation periods tend to be lengthy -
the LUL Victoria line IIRC took thirty plus years from inception to the
beginning of construction and that is regarded as quick.
This had been slated to be completed by 2012. But the timetable is
likely to slip as other infrastructure projects, which will more
directly benefit the Olympic Games, take priority to be completed in
time for 2012.
I have still to see a satisfactory explanation of what will slip and
why and how long. The northern end restoration is underway with no
insuperable problems found so far in the existing viaduct
infrastructure. the Liverpool Street station approach bridge push is
booked. The stock is being procured. Only under the Thames and in the
New Cross area do developments not seem to have a firm date
yet.Capacity constraints might arise in London's construction industry
but in the absence of a Thameslink and Crossrail go ahead this should
not seriously affect this project which is small by comparison to them
at this stage.
Infrastructure for a 16 day sporting festival? I am reminded of the 3.5
thousand million pounds spent to serve the obsolete tent at North
Greenwich. (AKA The Millennium Dome
Every Olympic City seeks to gain a permanent infrastructure legacy -
Athens has a new tramway - Montreal had a new metro system. The Jubilee
Line extension was a classic tale of mismanaged construction project
management but the routing and the stations on the south bank of the
Thames all broke new ground in linking the previously split transport
infrastructure of London. Bermondsey, Canada Water and North Greenwich
have a significant impact on social exclusion in some of the most
deprived inner city areas. If nothing else North Greenwich reclaimed
the "poisoned peninsula" for London As a piece of construction the Dome
was not expensive - per square metre it cost about as much as a B&Q
warehouse. An operational nightmare - its failure to attract punters
because of its content and prices and then the lack of a post
operational closure/disposal plan were its biggest problems. The
transport hub for both buses and the Jubilee line remain and act as a
focus for employment and investment.If big events shake money for
transport out of the Treasury's grasp I am all for them - Sensible
transport infrastructure investment plans don't seem to cut it.