Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

A few interesting things in the report.

1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.

2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed..

3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.

4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.

--
Paul C
via Google

On 2017\08\06 23:38, Paul Corfield wrote:
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

A few interesting things in the report.

1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.

2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.

3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.

4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.


Thanks.

Clarification... At the moment trains from Barking to Seven Sisters have
to cut across to the Barking-bound track halfway through South Tottenham
station, so the 6tph from South Tottenham to Barking would presumably
skip South Tottenham in the other direction. They might even skip South
Tottenham in both directions to save confusing people - South Tottenham
is pretty close to Seven Sisters.

In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

Clarification... At the moment trains from Barking to Seven Sisters
have to cut across to the Barking-bound track halfway through South
Tottenham station, so the 6tph from South Tottenham to Barking would
presumably skip South Tottenham in the other direction. They might
even skip South Tottenham in both directions to save confusing people
- South Tottenham is pretty close to Seven Sisters.

Hmm. So they do. Didn't there used to be a standard double junction west of
the station at South Tottenham? If so when was the layout changed?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

I wonder if Network Rail agree about the feasibility of 6 passenger
trains and 6 freight trains an hour. (Mind you, I've never seen any
evidence that there's a need for 6 freight paths an hour!)

I don't know how likely a cross Thames extension is, but I hope
it won't require much demolition of newly created infrastructure.

I'm intrigued by this suggestion. Obviously it's prompted partly
by the mass migration to the Victoria Line at Seven Sisters -
Tottenham Hale and Blackhorse Road stations see similar levels -
but will this not require selective door operation at GOBLIN stations
whose platforms have been lengthened to cater only for 4 coaches?
Or is it the intention to run special 4 coach trains from Enfield?

I wonder if Network Rail agree about the feasibility of 6 passenger
trains and 6 freight trains an hour. (Mind you, I've never seen any
evidence that there's a need for 6 freight paths an hour!)

I don't know how likely a cross Thames extension is, but I hope
it won't require much demolition of newly created infrastructure.

Don't know if NR agree or not. The operation of extra trains would require an extra freight passing loop - that's in the inspector's report. I think past NR documents have said that signalling mods would also be needed to run an enhanced frequency. However this isn't mentioned in the inspector's report.

TfL told the inquiry that it will likely be the 2030s before a cross river link could be contemplated or afforded. A cost of £1.2-£1.8bn is cited. One objector went to great lengths to try to discredit the elevated design as it would need to be demolished and replaced with a descending tunnel alignment and sub surface station if the link to Abbey Wood is built. The objections were rejected because forcing TfL to build a tunnelled link now was not in the current project scope / design, not funded and not within the pervue of the inquiry. The inspector said that if the elevated link eventually had to be demonlished then it would not be money wasted given that providing the link would have enabled the building of 10,500 new homes.

--
Paul C
via Google

On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 15:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Paul Corfield
wrote:

Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?


A few interesting things in the report.

1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.

2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.

3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.

4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.

In message , at 14:55:14 on
Mon, 7 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked:

Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?

One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 15:04:41 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 14:55:14 on
Mon, 7 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked:

Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?

One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?

Is it TfL or NR that raises the finds to build the track?

In message , at 15:05:45 on
Mon, 7 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked:
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...tml?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...pectors-report

Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?

One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?

Is it TfL or NR that raises the finds to build the track?

Inside London such projects are traditionally TfL's hat being passed
around.
--
Roland Perry