"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

[x-posted to uk.transport.london]

On May 27, 3:23*pm, kev wrote:

Slasher Hammond to strike again?

From
http://www.building.co.uk/crossrail-...000374.article

Central London station and two spurs face the axe as project team
works to cut £5bn from budget

The government is considering making £4-5bn of cuts to the £16.9bn
Crossrail scheme, as the scale of capital spending cuts starts to
emerge.
An internal Crossrail team, under instruction from ministers to save
money on the scheme, is understood to be considering dropping either
the planned Tottenham Court Road or Bond Street station.

All the options under consideration include:

Dropping one of the planned central London stations
Dropping or reducing some spurs outside central London, including the
link to Canary Wharf and Abbey Wood in the east, and Maidenhead in the
west
Reducing the trains from 12 to 10 carriages, thereby minimising the
size of stations
Wide-ranging value engineering for the rest of the project.
A source close to the process said: “The team is being asked to look
at the whole scheme. If you took out both spurs and reduced the
platforms and stations then they’re looking at £4-5bn of cuts.”

London mayor Boris Johnson last week said Crossrail had to mount a
“Stalingrad defence” to guarantee funding for the original scheme.
Stephen Norris, former Tory MP and Transport for London board member,
said he believed axing a central station and the spurs were being
looked at. “The government needs to understand the difference between
the kind of spending that fills ad pages in the Society Guardian and
genuine investment in the country.

“If you’re going to cut Abbey Wood or Maidenhead you might as well
shelve the whole lot. It only makes sense to dig the tunnel if you do
the whole scheme. It’s like planning to buy a new car without an
engine.”

A Crossrail spokesperson said the organisation “constantly makes
efforts towards value management and value engineering to achieve
maximum value for money”, but declined to comment on specific
cutbacks.

It is not known what impact a decision to drop Tottenham Court Road
station might have on the £250m upgrade of the tube station, currently
being undertaken by Vinci and Bam Nuttall.

If cuts that deep are really on the cards, then as Steven Norris says,
they might as well not bother.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 27, 7:40*am, Mizter T wrote:
[x-posted to misc.transport.urban-transit]
[x-posted to uk.transport.london]

On May 27, 3:23*pm, kev wrote:





Slasher Hammond to strike again?

From
http://www.building.co.uk/crossrail-...ed-by-a-third/...

Central London station and two spurs face the axe as project team
works to cut £5bn from budget

The government is considering making £4-5bn of cuts to the £16.9bn
Crossrail scheme, as the scale of capital spending cuts starts to
emerge.
An internal Crossrail team, under instruction from ministers to save
money on the scheme, is understood to be considering dropping either
the planned Tottenham Court Road or Bond Street station.

All the options under consideration include:

Dropping one of the planned central London stations
Dropping or reducing some spurs outside central London, including the
link to Canary Wharf and Abbey Wood in the east, and Maidenhead in the
west
Reducing the trains from 12 to 10 carriages, thereby minimising the
size of stations
Wide-ranging value engineering for the rest of the project.
A source close to the process said: “The team is being asked to look
at the whole scheme. If you took out both spurs and reduced the
platforms and stations then they’re looking at £4-5bn of cuts.”

London mayor Boris Johnson last week said Crossrail had to mount a
“Stalingrad defence” to guarantee funding for the original scheme.
Stephen Norris, former Tory MP and Transport for London board member,
said he believed axing a central station and the spurs were being
looked at. “The government needs to understand the difference between
the kind of spending that fills ad pages in the Society Guardian and
genuine investment in the country.

“If you’re going to cut Abbey Wood or Maidenhead you might as well
shelve the whole lot. It only makes sense to dig the tunnel if you do
the whole scheme. It’s like planning to buy a new car without an
engine.”

A Crossrail spokesperson said the organisation “constantly makes
efforts towards value management and value engineering to achieve
maximum value for money”, but declined to comment on specific
cutbacks.

It is not known what impact a decision to drop Tottenham Court Road
station might have on the £250m upgrade of the tube station, currently
being undertaken by Vinci and Bam Nuttall.

If cuts that deep are really on the cards, then as Steven Norris says,
they might as well not bother.

True, but that would be tragic. IMHO, this is one infrastructure
project that should go ahead.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

I hope they are almost working out how much more it would cost to
correc these omissions at a later point. Extending platforms on an
existing line or adding a station will cause seemingly endless WCML
style disruptions and overruns. Is this worth it? Or is it just part
of a game to reduce the project to the point that it doesn't make
sense and then either abandon it, or worse still, build it anyway out
of spite just to have a token project that nobody actually uses but
that makes the government look as if it's actually doing something
useful with its money.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

correc these omissions at a later point. Extending platforms on an
existing line or adding a station will cause seemingly endless WCML
style disruptions and overruns. Is this worth it?

No way will they worry about that! The idea will be to cut as much as
possible while still allowing Boris to claim that the project has been
saved thanks to his lobbying, and thus allow him to be reelected.
Doesn't matter if problems emerge in the 2020s, or even on completion:
Cameron can simply point out to Boris that by that stage, "I'll be
gone, you'll be gone".

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

No way will they worry about that! The idea will be to cut as much as
possible while still allowing Boris to claim that the project has been
saved thanks to his lobbying, and thus allow him to be reelected.
Doesn't matter if problems emerge in the 2020s, or even on completion:
Cameron can simply point out to Boris that by that stage, "I'll be
gone, you'll be gone".

Ideas are luxuries the politicians can no longer afford, the 1.4
trillion pound deficit in the public finances is now the only idea
left on the table.

The six billion in spending cuts announced this week, that’s already
got us all scratching our heads, is only the start.

Just think on this, over the next two to three years, and probably
this year as well, it’s going to have to be nearer twenty to thirty
billion a year in public sector spending cuts.

Over in Ireland, they’ve already reached the point of closure
proposals. Lets’ just hope that here in the UK we get to hang on to
what we’ve got.

If the railways come through this completely unscathed we should
consider that to be a bonus.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

Over in Ireland, they’ve already reached the point of closure
proposals. Lets’ just hope that here in the UK we get to hang on to
what we’ve got.

As a matter of interest what lines in Ireland, apart from Rosslare Strand
to Waterford are proposed for closure?

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 27, 5:02*pm, allantracy wrote:

Over in Ireland, they’ve already reached the point of closure
proposals.


If you are refering to Waterford Rossalare or whatever it is thats
closing soon, its 1 or 2 hardly used trains through nowhere.

This is an isolated case in an area that does have better road access
(I've driven through it many times) and has zero to do with UK
budgetary policy.

--
Nick

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

E27002 wrote on 27 May 2010 16:19:42 ...
On May 27, 7:40 am, Mizter wrote:
[x-posted to misc.transport.urban-transit]
[x-posted to uk.transport.london]

On May 27, 3:23 pm, wrote:

Slasher Hammond to strike again?

From
http://www.building.co.uk/crossrail-...ed-by-a-third/...

Central London station and two spurs face the axe as project team
works to cut £5bn from budget
[snip]

If cuts that deep are really on the cards, then as Steven Norris says,
they might as well not bother.

True, but that would be tragic. IMHO, this is one infrastructure
project that should go ahead.

As well as running the "£5bn Crossrail cuts" story today, the London
Evening Standard also carries a report of an interview with Philip
Hammond, the new Transport Secretary, which includes this:

"London's long-delayed, £16 billion, east-west link railway will be
finished but every mile of track and every station is being scrutinised
for savings. “It's under way and we are committed to it,� said Mr
Hammond. “But it has to be tested and re-tested at every stage to ensure
it is delivering value for money.� Canary Wharf station had been
redesigned to reduce costs and the project should look for similar
opportunities. “I want to be sure we have asked if there is anything
that was designed in the days when we thought money grew on trees that
we can look at again in the post-Labour world. We owe this to
hard-working families.�

That sounds rather less drastic than had been feared, but we'll have to
wait and see, I guess.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

In message
,
Mizter T writes

It is not known what impact a decision to drop Tottenham Court Road
station might have on the £250m upgrade of the tube station, currently
being undertaken by Vinci and Bam Nuttall.

It's very unlikely to result in significant savings, if any, given that
a lot of the work is already well under way, a huge amount has already
been spent on compulsory purchase of expensive buildings for both the
Eastern and Western Ticket Halls, and that signed contracts (no doubt
with costly withdrawal clauses) are in place.

Similarly, I can't really see that shortening platforms will create any
savings - quite the opposite, in fact, given that in many cases ticket
halls are at both extreme ends of the planned long platforms. Either
longer underground passages would be needed, or the entire sites of some
ticket halls would have to be changed, leaving abandoned works and
creating more rounds of compulsory purchases with associated massive
costs.

Axing two of the branches is a more achievable, albeit undesirable, way
of cutting the cost.
--
Paul Terry

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT), allantracy
wrote:

Ideas are luxuries the politicians can no longer afford, the 1.4
trillion pound deficit in the public finances is now the only idea
left on the table.

The six billion in spending cuts announced this week, that=92s already
got us all scratching our heads, is only the start.

Just think on this, over the next two to three years, and probably
this year as well, it=92s going to have to be nearer twenty to thirty
billion a year in public sector spending cuts.


Wrong. The figure is £60 billion a year for the next three years, ten
times more than this year's £6.2 billion fleabite.

And it wouldn't have mattered which party or parties formed the
government, because all three of the main parties had projected cuts
in the deficit of between £52 billion and £62 billion per year for the
next three years 2011/12. 2012/13 and 2013/14.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT), allantracy
wrote:

Over in Ireland, they've already reached the point of closure
proposals.


The poor Irish. They were the first Euro zone country to hit severe
problems as a result of the credit crunch.

Their courageous government brought in a severe austerity programme
with massive cuts in public spending and huge rises in taxes. This
stabilised their economy which is just seeing a return to growth and
beginning to climb out of recession.

Then along came Greece, whose economy was in an even worse state. But
the Greek government did almost nothing, continued to borrow more and
more, and eventually got to the point of no return.

Then the whole of the Euro zone got together and gave Greece a very
generous bail-out package.

Poor Ireland, who had already gone through hell to put their own
economy back into shape, could only look on in amazement as Greece got
major hand-outs from other Euro member states. Ireland got no help at
all.

And, to add insult to injury, Ireland had to pay some of the bill to
bail out Greece!


The joys of Euro membership ...

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

And, to add insult to injury, Ireland had to pay some of the bill to
bail out Greece!

The joys of Euro membership ...

The Euro must now surely collapse.

Maggie’s economist of choice, that arch monetarist, Milton Friedman
predicted it would be so.

He always argued that a single currency with a central bank could
never succeed alone without centralised fiscal responsibility across
the whole of Europe.

His advice was for Europe to adopt the best practice of the
Deutschmark and the Deutsche Bank to set Europe wide interest rates
and Europe wide spending levels.

Pity now also the poor Germans who must be appalled to be once again
experiencing fiscal irresponsibility of a sort they must have thought
they had so carefully left behind.

Credit where it’s due to Gordon as well who effectively overruled Tony
to delay our entry further into the Euro, not a difficult choice
though when you consider the mess the Tories had got themselves into
previously with the Euro.

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:55:59 -0700 (PDT), allantracy
wrote:

And, to add insult to injury, Ireland had to pay some of the bill to
bail out Greece!

The joys of Euro membership ...

The Euro must now surely collapse.

Maggie’s economist of choice, that arch monetarist, Milton Friedman
predicted it would be so.

He always argued that a single currency with a central bank could
never succeed alone without centralised fiscal responsibility across
the whole of Europe.

His advice was for Europe to adopt the best practice of the
Deutschmark and the Deutsche Bank to set Europe wide interest rates
and Europe wide spending levels.

Pity now also the poor Germans who must be appalled to be once again
experiencing fiscal irresponsibility of a sort they must have thought
they had so carefully left behind.


But the proposed Treaty changes will do just what you say. Every EU
country would have to submit its draft annual fiscal budget to the
European Commission who may demand modifications before returning the
proposals to national parliaments to be voted into law.

Of course there is no reason for EU countries outside the Euro zone to
do this, which is why David Cameron quite justifiably threatened to
use the UK's veto if the UK was going to be compelled to take part.


Credit where it’s due to Gordon as well who effectively overruled Tony
to delay our entry further into the Euro, not a difficult choice
though when you consider the mess the Tories had got themselves into
previously with the Euro.


Yes, that was one of Gordon's better decisions, made in the era when
he was known as the "Iron Chancellor" and before he began to play fast
and loose with public spending and taxation. He went rapidly downhill
after that.


I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.


Until that paragraph you were making a lot of sense, then you went and
spoiled it.

The US doesn't want us. The "Special Relationship" died years ago.
There is no way that a US Administration would tolerate our high taxes
and dedication to services delivered by the public sector. Equally,
there is no way that the British people would tolerate the US attitude
to welfare and healthcare.

Britain's political ideology, even under a Conservative government,
has never been closer to American than mainland European ideology. So
being the 51st state would be unworkable. The US realises this, and
wants us to be part of a united Europe.

The only possible way to extricate the UK from the EU is for the UK to
revert to being a member of EFTA/EEA as we were before 1973. However,
in order to gain access to EU markets, we would need to comply with
almost as many EU directives as we do now.

I read an article which included a comment from Norway's Prime
Minister in which he said that he received a fax every Monday morning
from the European Commission in Brussels. He said that it contained a
list of the laws that the Norwegian parliament needed to enact that
week.

It was a tongue in cheek comment, but one that made a serious point:
If we want to trade with the EU while only being a member of EFTA/EEA
then we must comply with regulations over which we have no control. At
least as a member of the EU we do have some influence over those
regulations, although exactly how much is a moot point.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

Mizter T wrote:

[x-posted to uk.transport.london]

On May 27, 3:23*pm, kev wrote:

The government is considering making £4-5bn of cuts to the £16.9bn
Crossrail scheme, as the scale of capital spending cuts starts to
emerge.
An internal Crossrail team, under instruction from ministers to save
money on the scheme, is understood to be considering dropping either
the planned Tottenham Court Road or Bond Street station.

If cuts that deep are really on the cards, then as Steven Norris says,
they might as well not bother.

Surely deep cuts always were inevitable with Crossrail...

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632988.html
(43 184 at Exeter St Davids, 1985)

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 28 Mai, 10:06, Chris Tolley (ukonline
really) wrote:


Surely deep cuts always were inevitable with Crossrail...


Really? I thought they were going to use a tunneling shield?

I'll get my trenchcoat.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 27, 11:55*am, allantracy wrote:
And, to add insult to injury, Ireland had to pay some of the bill to
bail out Greece!

The joys of Euro membership ...

The Euro must now surely collapse.

Maggie’s economist of choice, that arch monetarist, Milton Friedman
predicted it would be so.

He always argued that a single currency with a central bank could
never succeed alone without centralised fiscal responsibility across
the whole of Europe.

His advice was for Europe to adopt the best practice of the
Deutschmark and the Deutsche Bank to set Europe wide interest rates
and Europe wide spending levels.

Pity now also the poor Germans who must be appalled to be once again
experiencing fiscal irresponsibility of a sort they must have thought
they had so carefully left behind.

Credit where it’s due to Gordon as well who effectively overruled Tony
to delay our entry further into the Euro, not a difficult choice
though when you consider the mess the Tories had got themselves into
previously with the Euro.

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

You really want to live under our Constitution? What will you do with
your Head of State? Will your fellow Commonwealth countries agree to
Her Majesty’s dismissal?

Can you handle our First and Second Amendments? Will the Church of
England be disestablished in England? Will the Presbyterians be
disestablished in Scotland?

Will we see gun store selling semi-automatic weapons on High Streets
around the UK? I don't think so. May I refer you to my response
here?
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.ra...7161887fce266f

Imperial measurements was "Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:55:59 -0700 (PDT), allantracy
wrote:

much snipped

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

But British Imperial measurements aren't always the same as the US
Imperial measurements,the gallon for example.

Imperial measurements was "Crossrail budget may be slashed bya third"
 

would be much better off with the dollar

Nay nay and thrice nay.

We should go to Galleons Sickles and Knuts

which with 29 Knuts = 1 Sickle and 17 Sickles = 1 Galleon will really
raise arithmetic standards.

..

But British Imperial measurements aren't always the same as the US
Imperial measurements,the gallon for example.

nitpcik

Are US measures ''imperial'' ?

I think not.

1 US pound and 1 US foot are the same length and weight as British
imperial - various standards agree on this - but surely not use of the
term imperial in US ?

/ nitpick

--
Nick

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

E27002 wrote


You really want to live under our Constitution? What will you do
with
your Head of State? Will your fellow Commonwealth countries agree to
Her Majesty’s dismissal?

You mean "Republican form of government" ?

Easy, we just elect Liz for life (like William, William and William &
Mary). She can carry on being Queen of Canada, New Zealand etc.

Can you handle our First and Second Amendments? Will the Church of
England be disestablished in England? Will the Presbyterians be
disestablished in Scotland?

The Welsh solution works fine.

Will we see gun store selling semi-automatic weapons on High Streets
around the UK? I don't think so.

You mean "self-loading" ?

We just need to revert to 1990 laws. These would also allow our Olympic
pistol team to practice at home.


--
Mike D

Imperial measurements was "Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Fri, 28 May 2010 13:59:30 -0700 (PDT), D7666
wrote:

would be much better off with the dollar

Nay nay and thrice nay.

We should go to Galleons Sickles and Knuts

which with 29 Knuts = 1 Sickle and 17 Sickles = 1 Galleon will really
raise arithmetic standards.

.

But British Imperial measurements aren't always the same as the US
Imperial measurements,the gallon for example.

nitpcik

Are US measures ''imperial'' ?

I think not.

1 US pound and 1 US foot are the same length and weight as British
imperial - various standards agree on this - but surely not use of the
term imperial in US ?

/ nitpick

Ah, the US liquid measurement isn't the same as Imperial.

I stand corrected, but I believe that's why an American quart of booze
is known in Canada as "a fifth" in slang terms.

One American gallon: 3.785 litres

One Imperial gallon: 4.546 litres

(roughly)

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Fri, 28 May 2010, Willms wrote:

Am Thu, 27 May 2010 18:55:59 UTC, schrieb allantracy
auf uk.railway :

I don't know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

Just as George Orwell layed out the basis of his "1984".

We were an airstrip in that, not a state.

If we did join the US, i'd hope we wouldn't be a state - with twice the
population of California, we should be at least two. We wouldn't get our
fair share of senators otherwise. In fact, this could be the great day of
devolution: Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland could all join as states
completely separate from England, and England could split into North and
South. Or perhaps revert to the seven Anglo-Saxon kingdoms?

tom

--
Also, thinking about that Velociraptor thing, I think -- what with having
trained on turkeys, guineafowl, geese, large chickens, swans and peacocks
as a child -- that I could take a Velociraptor. I'd need a large hessian
sack, some baler twine, and a hook to hang it from. And gloves. Not to
forget the gloves. -- cleanskies

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Sat, 29 May 2010 12:31:41 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010, Willms wrote:

Am Thu, 27 May 2010 18:55:59 UTC, schrieb allantracy
auf uk.railway :

I don't know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

Just as George Orwell layed out the basis of his "1984".

We were an airstrip in that, not a state.


Sounds a bit like our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 27 May, 15:40, Mizter T wrote:
[x-posted to uk.transport.london]

On May 27, 3:23*pm, kev wrote:



Slasher Hammond to strike again?

From
http://www.building.co.uk/crossrail-...ed-by-a-third/...

Central London station and two spurs face the axe as project team
works to cut £5bn from budget

The government is considering making £4-5bn of cuts to the £16.9bn
Crossrail scheme, as the scale of capital spending cuts starts to
emerge.
An internal Crossrail team, under instruction from ministers to save
money on the scheme, is understood to be considering dropping either
the planned Tottenham Court Road or Bond Street station.

All the options under consideration include:

Dropping one of the planned central London stations
Dropping or reducing some spurs outside central London, including the
link to Canary Wharf and Abbey Wood in the east, and Maidenhead in the
west
Reducing the trains from 12 to 10 carriages, thereby minimising the
size of stations
Wide-ranging value engineering for the rest of the project.
A source close to the process said: “The team is being asked to look
at the whole scheme. If you took out both spurs and reduced the
platforms and stations then they’re looking at £4-5bn of cuts.”

London mayor Boris Johnson last week said Crossrail had to mount a
“Stalingrad defence” to guarantee funding for the original scheme.
Stephen Norris, former Tory MP and Transport for London board member,
said he believed axing a central station and the spurs were being
looked at. “The government needs to understand the difference between
the kind of spending that fills ad pages in the Society Guardian and
genuine investment in the country.

“If you’re going to cut Abbey Wood or Maidenhead you might as well
shelve the whole lot. It only makes sense to dig the tunnel if you do
the whole scheme. It’s like planning to buy a new car without an
engine.”

A Crossrail spokesperson said the organisation “constantly makes
efforts towards value management and value engineering to achieve
maximum value for money”, but declined to comment on specific
cutbacks.

It is not known what impact a decision to drop Tottenham Court Road
station might have on the £250m upgrade of the tube station, currently
being undertaken by Vinci and Bam Nuttall.

If cuts that deep are really on the cards, then as Steven Norris says,
they might as well not bother.

they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

They could have had the chelsea-hackney line built by now if they'd
done it on victoria line levels of cheapness.

The amount of money they've wasted demolishing much loved places like
the Astoria, when its not in the way of anything (check the detailed
plans in the westminster planning brief - there is nothing to be
constructed below the Astoria at all) is ridiculous.

They could cut out all the secondary ticket halls for a start. They've
already controversially demolished a load of buildings that had made a
"positive contribution" to the local environment, if they'd had the
decency to wait until it was necessary, they wouldn't have wrecked the
townscape for no reason.

They should just use big versions of the Leslie Green design - that's
out of copyright, or if it isn't, TfL must own it anyway, and its
pretty - that must work out much cheaper than the massive vacuous
wastes of space they had planned for the ticket halls.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

"lonelytraveller" wrote

they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

Too much on the cheap. Kings Cross was left as a fire trap. Several
stations, notably Victoria, Oxford Circus and Kings Cross were too small for
the number of passengers using them, and are having to be expensively
enlarged. Brixton needs three platforms to turn back the whole service, but
only has two. While there is good cross-platform interchange at Stockwell,
Oxford Circus, Euston, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park, interchange
at other stations, particularly Vauxhall and Green Park is as bad as it is
possible to make it.

Peter

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 27 May, 18:36, Paul Terry wrote:
In message
,
Mizter T writes

It is not known what impact a decision to drop Tottenham Court Road
station might have on the £250m upgrade of the tube station, currently
being undertaken by Vinci and Bam Nuttall.

It's very unlikely to result in significant savings, if any, given that
a lot of the work is already well under way
The only thing under way is demolition of existing buildings, sorting
out local utility diversions, and preliminary works for the tube
station upgrade. None of the big tunnelling or restructuring is yet
taking place. Its easy to scrap both (although it now leaves a big gap
where the Astoria used to be.

the entire sites of some ticket halls would have to be changed, leaving abandoned works and
creating more rounds of compulsory purchases with associated massive costs.

They haven't started construction work in any major way on any ticket
hall site except Canary Wharf (which is actually at Westferry).

The only abandoned works would be the plots they have now demolished
the buildings on
-Astoria
-Denmark Place (north side)
-Dean Street (north end, west side)
-Cardinal House (tower block near Farringdon)

Apart from Cardinal House, the loss of these buildings is a tragedy,
but they would have done that anyway. The loss of Cardinal House is a
positive benefit to the local environment.

All of these are key sites in central london, and developers will be
keen to snap them up if they can. They are so central that even
constructing buildings designed to last less than 5 years would be
profitable, if put to the right use.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 29 May, 14:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote



they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

Too much on the cheap. Kings Cross was left as a fire trap. Several
stations, notably Victoria, Oxford Circus and Kings Cross were too small for
the number of passengers using them, and are having to be expensively
enlarged. Brixton needs three platforms to turn back the whole service, but
only has two. While there is good cross-platform interchange at Stockwell,
Oxford Circus, Euston, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park, interchange
at other stations, particularly Vauxhall and Green Park is as bad as it is
possible to make it.

Peter

And Warren Street.

But before being too critical, the interchanges are still a helluva
lot better on average than the Jubilee managed. Apart from Baker
Street (the original Jubilee, using a Bakerloo platform), they are all
terrible.

The inclusion of a lift that can carry one or two disabled people
seems to be an excuse for sending thousands of everyone else all
around and up and down at all new interchanges.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 29 May, 14:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote



they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

Too much on the cheap. Kings Cross was left as a fire trap. Several
stations, notably Victoria, Oxford Circus and Kings Cross were too small for
the number of passengers using them, and are having to be expensively
enlarged. Brixton needs three platforms to turn back the whole service, but
only has two. While there is good cross-platform interchange at Stockwell,
Oxford Circus, Euston, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park, interchange
at other stations, particularly Vauxhall and Green Park is as bad as it is
possible to make it.

Peter

In a choice between having the Victoria line, and not having it, which
would you prefer?

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 29 May, 14:49, MIG wrote:
On 29 May, 14:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:



"lonelytraveller" wrote

they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

Too much on the cheap. Kings Cross was left as a fire trap. Several
stations, notably Victoria, Oxford Circus and Kings Cross were too small for
the number of passengers using them, and are having to be expensively
enlarged. Brixton needs three platforms to turn back the whole service, but
only has two. While there is good cross-platform interchange at Stockwell,
Oxford Circus, Euston, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park, interchange
at other stations, particularly Vauxhall and Green Park is as bad as it is
possible to make it.

Peter

And Warren Street.

But before being too critical, the interchanges are still a helluva
lot better on average than the Jubilee managed. *Apart from Baker
Street (the original Jubilee, using a Bakerloo platform), they are all
terrible.

The inclusion of a lift that can carry one or two disabled people
seems to be an excuse for sending thousands of everyone else all
around and up and down at all new interchanges.

To be fair, they wanted to build the Waterloo platforms near the
Northern Line ones, but that involved putting them on a slight curve
(so that the line didn't have to turn sharply to reach Southwark). And
Health & Safety laws, in their infinite wisdom, regard that as
illegal. Just like its down to them for forcing the new Park Royal
platforms to avoid being close to the ones on the other line that
crosses it - the line has a slight slope where the crossing is.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

lonelytraveller wrote on
29 May 2010 14:49:11 ...
On 27 May, 18:36, Paul wrote:

the entire sites of some ticket halls would have to be changed,
leaving abandoned works and creating more rounds of compulsory
purchases with associated massive costs.

They haven't started construction work in any major way on any ticket
hall site except Canary Wharf (which is actually at Westferry).

It's at West India Quay, about half a mile east of Westferry DLR station.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

"Paul Corfield" wrote

There is a real fallacy in building assets that will last for over 100
years for about 10 years worth of projected demand. People complain
about the scale of somewhere like Canary Wharf JLE station but it can
handle huge numbers of people very effectively - it's in complete
contrast to somewhere like Victoria or Kings Cross which jam up or else
send people round corridors for 10 miles to spread the passenger load
out.

Or do what was done with the DLR, the ever-expanding railway, and design it
so that it can be expanded. Easier to do with a surface railway than
underground, though at least they built Bank long enough for 3-unit trains,
and even then they're now having to use SDO (at the 2nd Island Gardens
station and Elverson Road), and announce a train (from Bank) as 'all
stations to Lewisham, and then, as it's passing West India Quay on the new
spur advise that it won't stop there.

Perhaps what's needed is not building for 10 years and throw hands up in
horror when demand overwhelms capacity, nor build for what might be needed
in 30 years, but to build for 10 years with passive provision for expansion
so that increased capacity can be provided affordably.

Peter
(memories of a DLR fleet of 11 units, with manual PIS which could be rotated
to display destinations of Island Gardens, Tower Gateway, Stratford, or
Poplar)

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 29, 5:22*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010 06:54:31 -0700 (PDT), lonelytraveller



wrote:
On 29 May, 14:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote

they managed to produce the victoria line pretty cheaply. I don't see
why its such a struggle to produce another line cheaply.

Too much on the cheap. Kings Cross was left as a fire trap. Several
stations, notably Victoria, Oxford Circus and Kings Cross were too small for
the number of passengers using them, and are having to be expensively
enlarged. Brixton needs three platforms to turn back the whole service, but
only has two. While there is good cross-platform interchange at Stockwell,
Oxford Circus, Euston, Highbury & Islington and Finsbury Park, interchange
at other stations, particularly Vauxhall and Green Park is as bad as it is
possible to make it.
In a choice between having the Victoria line, and not having it, which
would you prefer?

That's not really a sensible proposition though. I live on the Victoria
Line route so I am very pleased it exists. As Mr Masson pointed out the
Victoria Line was pared to the bone and we have had decades of
passengers being delayed due to inadequate capacity in stations and
massively overcrowded trains. *All that disbenefit - and it will amount
of hundreds of millions of pounds if not billions - just because they
wanted to save a few tens of millions in the 60s? *If the planners, back
in the 1960s, had been able to accurately estimate how patronage would
grow, the extent of people being delayed due to poor capacity and then
the massively expensive additional works that have been needed would
they ever have agreed to cut back the original scheme? *I doubt it very
much.

There is a real fallacy in building assets that will last for over 100
years for about 10 years worth of projected demand. *People complain
about the scale of somewhere like Canary Wharf JLE station but it can
handle huge numbers of people very effectively - it's in complete
contrast to somewhere like Victoria or Kings Cross which jam up or else
send people round corridors for 10 miles to spread the passenger load
out.

I appreciate that the government says it has to review projects - that
is its prerogative. At the same time it says it wants an entrepreneurial
economy and more private sector jobs. *The bit it seems to forget is
that those same entrepreneurs and private sector employees do need an
effective and efficient transport system to support their endeavours.
For London that means big schemes like Thameslink, tube upgrades and
Crossrail need to happen. *Similar schemes in the rest of the country
that improve city transport and inter-urban transport also have to
happen. *Condemning people to decades of car borne congestion and no
viable alternative is not sensible even if the money is very tight. *You
can sacrifice other things to allow capital investment to carry on -
provided you're sure you're getting it at a good price. *This is where
the frogs have to stop boiling in Network Rail's scoping and costing
departments and where cost has to be taken out in all of the
"interfaces" in the rail industry. *By all means send in the forensic
accountants and auditors to make our money go further.

--
Paul C

Aside from the omission of most of the central escalators in each
bank, don't suppose you have any details on what else was cut from the
original plans?

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 27 May, 19:55, allantracy wrote:

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

You really are a prick, aren't you?

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Sat, 29 May 2010 11:03:49 -0700, Jamie Thompson wrote:

Aside from the omission of most of the central escalators in each bank,
don't suppose you have any details on what else was cut from the
original plans?

I'm pretty baffled that they've not been put in since? Is there any
reason why escalators couldn't replace the stairs? There are plenty of
places where they'd be a god-send.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Sat, 29 May 2010 12:34:36 -0700 (PDT), contrex
wrote:

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back to Imperial measurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

You really are a prick, aren't you?

He certainly has an odd view. There are strong arguments in favour of
leaving the EU (and also strong arguments against doing so - I'm
personally pretty undecided), but I would be amazed if a referendum to
become the 51st state of America returned an even vaguely positive
result.

We should, IMO, either be in the EU or take an approach of
independence from it but co-operation with it like Switzerland.
Joining the US is a ridiculous idea - while we are historical allies
and should most probably remain so, our cultures are far too different
for political or monetary union to be an even vaguely sensible idea.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:35:28 +0000 (UTC), Martin Petrov
wrote:

I'm pretty baffled that they've not been put in since? Is there any
reason why escalators couldn't replace the stairs? There are plenty of
places where they'd be a god-send.

I thought the stairs were deliberate for those who preferred for
whatever reason not to use escalators, and to make them easier to walk
up/down in the case of escalator failure (smaller steps with landings
compared with an escalator, generally). A set of stairs were
installed replacing one escalator at Liverpool Central for a similar
reason (in the early 1990s).

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On 27 May, 19:55, allantracy wrote:

I don’t know why we bother with Europe, the whole thing is flawed, we
would be much better off with the dollar and become the 51st state and
we could go back toImperialmeasurements far better than all this
foreign muck that no one wants.

SI units are starting to appear on some things in the US, as opposed
to American units also being printed as a conversion to an odd
quantity in SI units. I have seen soft drinks in 2 litre and 3 litre
bottles for example. I suspect that a lot of engineering is actually
done in SI units; there's a lot of multi-national work being done
these days, and the US is about the only place left that still uses
their own units these days.

As for going back to Imperial units, where do you think you're going
to get any support for that? The UK has been metric for well over 30
years. Young people, and that now probably means anyone under 40 will
have learned in metric at school from day one, so they're unlikely to
want to convert to another system.

Older people like myself originally learned in Imperial units, and
later had to convert to metric. Having converted, I think most people
recognised that it was a better system, and would not want to go
back. Even amongst those who still prefer the Imperial units I think
that many would acknowledge that the period of conversion, which we
dragged out for far too long, was the worst thing, and wouldn't want
to see another such conversion back to imperial units. I seriously
doubt that you would be able to find many people to support such a
conversion, and I wouldn't recommend any party which actually wanted
to get elected to put this in its manifesto.

If you'd stood against metrication 40 years ago you might have had a
chance of stopping it, or more likely delaying it, but not now. I
think it will eventually come in the US as well.

As for Imperial units being British, I suspect that most of them are
about as British as St. George; i.e. not very.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 29, 8:43*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:35:28 +0000 (UTC), Martin Petrov

wrote:
I'm pretty baffled that they've not been put in since? Is there any
reason why escalators couldn't replace the stairs? There are plenty of
places where they'd be a god-send.

I thought the stairs were deliberate for those who preferred for
whatever reason not to use escalators, and to make them easier to walk
up/down in the case of escalator failure (smaller steps with landings
compared with an escalator, generally). *A set of stairs were
installed replacing one escalator at Liverpool Central for a similar
reason (in the early 1990s).


With all the problems with the escalators between from the National
Rail and LU at Euston, I wonder if we might see the middle staircase
here converted to an escalator. There is a new lift and alternative
stairs available now, so people who don't like escalators have a
choice, and it should save having to impose the one-way system (during
the peak) when an escalator is broken.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:58:55 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

With all the problems with the escalators between from the National
Rail and LU at Euston, I wonder if we might see the middle staircase
here converted to an escalator. There is a new lift and alternative
stairs available now, so people who don't like escalators have a
choice, and it should save having to impose the one-way system (during
the peak) when an escalator is broken.

I've seen the lifts but didn't notice any other stairs - are those by
the lifts? Might be inclined to use those as a good way to skip the
crowds, just like the very useful "emergency" staircase from the
Vic/Bank branch northbound platforms that I use pretty much every
time.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

"Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On May 29, 11:10*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:58:55 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

With all the problems with the escalators between from the National
Rail and LU at Euston, I wonder if we might see the middle staircase
here converted to an escalator. *There is a new lift and alternative
stairs available now, so people who don't like escalators have a
choice, and it should save having to impose the one-way system (during
the peak) when an escalator is broken.

I've seen the lifts but didn't notice any other stairs - are those by
the lifts? *Might be inclined to use those as a good way to skip the
crowds, just like the very useful "emergency" staircase from the
Vic/Bank branch northbound platforms that I use pretty much every
time.


Yes, the stairs are by the lift, If you go down the escalator from the
mainline concourse, you can see the lift and the bottom of the
staircase straight ahead. The stairs bring you out in the south west
corner of the concourse, by the exit closest to the Network Rail
offices.

Imperial measurements was "Crossrail budget may be slashed by a third"
 

On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:58:50 -0700, Nobody wrote:

Ah, the US liquid measurement isn't the same as Imperial.

I think it probably was, until the UK standardised the gallon in the
19th century as being that volume of water which weighs ten pounds.
Before that, I suspect that the gallon was identical on both sides of
the pond.