London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   ELL in peril yet again (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/1689-ell-peril-yet-again.html)

marcb April 30th 04 12:11 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government. What angers me is that noone seems to be
accountable for this abject failure to build a railway that has always
had surefire economic benefit.

M.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard


David Fairthorne April 30th 04 04:27 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 

"marcb" wrote in message
...
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government. What angers me is that noone seems to be
accountable for this abject failure to build a railway that has always
had surefire economic benefit.

M.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard

Where are the Olympic Games facilities (existing or proposed) located, and
how would the ELL extension serve them?



TheOneKEA April 30th 04 05:39 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
marcb wrote in message ...
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government. What angers me is that noone seems to be
accountable for this abject failure to build a railway that has always
had surefire economic benefit.

M.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard


I got so fed up at this that I went and got a response straight from
the horse's mouth. According to the ELLP contact, all the bureaucratic
crap is finished, and all they need now is formal permission to
approach the construction industry for the purposes of building the
extension.

I guess 2010 was a good forecast after all.

Brad

David Fairthorne April 30th 04 05:43 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 

"marcb" wrote in message
...
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government. What angers me is that noone seems to be
accountable for this abject failure to build a railway that has always
had surefire economic benefit.

M.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard

According to the London Development Agency (see
http://www.lda.gov.uk/mediaoffice/pr...8.asp?print=1),
an "Olympic Zone" is to be developed in the Lower Lea Valley, extending from
the Thames to Stratford. But the proposed East London Line extension would
not pass anywhere near the River Lea. Nor would it pass near any other
sports facilities that would be used for the Olympic Games.

The "surefire economic benefit" of the ELL extension is debatable, but
that's another story.



Paul Terry April 30th 04 06:59 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
In message
able.rogers.com,
David Fairthorne writes

According to the London Development Agency (see
http://www.lda.gov.uk/mediaoffice/pr...8.asp?print=1),
an "Olympic Zone" is to be developed in the Lower Lea Valley, extending from
the Thames to Stratford.


But a large number of events are also expected to take place outside
that area (Beach Volley Ball on Horse Guards Parade is one that takes my
breath away).

But the proposed East London Line extension would
not pass anywhere near the River Lea. Nor would it pass near any other
sports facilities that would be used for the Olympic Games.


I thought the National Sports Centre at Crystal Palace (ELL) was likely
to be a major Olympics venue, at least for training purposes?

Also, events such as Sailing (probably Weymouth), Rowing (Eton),
Shooting (Bisley) and Tennis (Wimbledon) can all be reached from Clapham
Junction (ELL) - the ELLE making the east-west journey possible without
crossing central London.

Of course, the mystery is how well the ELLE might serve Stratford - the
Jubilee exchange at Canada Water is a cheap and cheerful answer, but I
suspect there was always a lingering hope of an eastward extension at
Dalstan for the games.

But the real mystery goes much deeper - Stratford will almost surely
become an "international transport hub", but nobody seems very clear how
the Lea Valley, should it become the "Olympics Zone", will connect with
that international hub.

In such a context, the ELLE does start to seem rather small fry!
--
Paul Terry

David Fairthorne April 30th 04 08:25 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...
In message
able.rogers.com,
David Fairthorne writes

According to the London Development Agency (see


http://www.lda.gov.uk/mediaoffice/pr...28.asp?print=1)

,
an "Olympic Zone" is to be developed in the Lower Lea Valley, extending

from
the Thames to Stratford.


But a large number of events are also expected to take place outside
that area (Beach Volley Ball on Horse Guards Parade is one that takes my
breath away).

But the proposed East London Line extension would
not pass anywhere near the River Lea. Nor would it pass near any other
sports facilities that would be used for the Olympic Games.


I thought the National Sports Centre at Crystal Palace (ELL) was likely
to be a major Olympics venue, at least for training purposes?

"With the track, a 50m pool and an indoor sports hall, Crystal Palace could
make an ideal holding camp for any one of the 200 countries that may
complete in London in 2012." All options for training facilities for the
Games are being worked on at the moment, he added, and the bid team was
"delighted" that Crystal Palace has been confirmed as one of those options.

The above comes from the site
http://www.london2012.org/en/news/ar...2-24-12-40.htm

How many "confirmed optional" passengers are we talking about here, and over
what period?

Also, events such as Sailing (probably Weymouth), Rowing (Eton),
Shooting (Bisley) and Tennis (Wimbledon) can all be reached from Clapham
Junction (ELL) - the ELLE making the east-west journey possible without
crossing central London.


It takes you to Clapham Junction, where you can catch a train to Woking,
where you can catch a train to Weymouth!


Of course, the mystery is how well the ELLE might serve Stratford - the
Jubilee exchange at Canada Water is a cheap and cheerful answer, but I
suspect there was always a lingering hope of an eastward extension at
Dalstan for the games.


That would be more relevant, but the ELL extension is supposed to go to
Highbury!


But the real mystery goes much deeper - Stratford will almost surely
become an "international transport hub", but nobody seems very clear how
the Lea Valley, should it become the "Olympics Zone", will connect with
that international hub.


There's no shortage of railways in that general area. How close is new the
hub to Stratford station?


In such a context, the ELLE does start to seem rather small fry!
--
Paul Terry




Paul Terry May 1st 04 10:21 AM

ELL in peril yet again
 
In message ogers.com,
David Fairthorne writes

Crystal Palace

How many "confirmed optional" passengers are we talking about here, and over
what period?


No idea - I was merely pointing out that the ELLE may well have a
peripheral role in Olympics transport, since it provides a route to the
National Sports Centre (and out to venues SW of London) that avoids
central London. I have never thought the ELLE has any claim to being a
key element in Olympics travel.

There's no shortage of railways in that general area. How close is new the
hub to Stratford station?


The Olympic village would best be served by the hypothecated Temple
Mills station (*) - unfortunately, passenger services on the Stratford -
Tottenham Hale line are not too good at present :) - and the DLR has
still not made up its mind whether it wants to go as far as Temple
Mills.

Failing that, Stratford International will be closest to the village,
and Leyton (Central line) is probably closest to the more northerly
venues such as the Velodrome and Baseball stadium.

For the main stadium, the closest stations are Hackney Wick (hence a
possible ELLE link) and Pudding Mill Lane (DLR). Stratford itself is not
particularly near to any of the venues except the aqauatic centre.

Of course, none of the distances from stations are vast, but I haven't
seen anything that really resembles a coherent transport plan for the
main Olympics complex - just the general claim that Stratford will be an
international transport hub, and the hope that a station at Temple Mills
would be rather useful.

(*) If the NLL is diverted up the Lea Valley route to Tottenham Hale, it
could actually serve two of the main Olympics sites (the village at
Temple Mills and the main stadium near Hackney Wick) - a sobering
thought!
--
Paul Terry

Boltar May 1st 04 03:13 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Paul Terry wrote in message ...
Of course, none of the distances from stations are vast, but I haven't
seen anything that really resembles a coherent transport plan for the
main Olympics complex - just the general claim that Stratford will be an


I suspect thats because the politicians know that London has about as much
chance of staging the Olympics as Eygpt does for the 2005 downhill skiing
championships. Even in politics reality occasionally creeps in and there is
sod all chance of the olympic commitee going ahead in a city that can't even
transport its normal day to day population properly , never mind being able to
manage a few hundrends of thousands (or even millions?) of extra visitors.

Personally I'm not too upset about the ELL not going ahead. If it was to be
a proper tube line then fine , but I'd rather my tax money was spent on
something other than a bit of track to join up a load of **** poor TOCs
just so they can **** up east london travel as much as they have everywhere
else.

B2003

[email protected] May 1st 04 06:56 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Boltar wrote:
Personally I'm not too upset about the ELL not going ahead. If it was to be
a proper tube line then fine , but I'd rather my tax money was spent on
something other than a bit of track to join up a load of **** poor TOCs
just so they can **** up east london travel as much as they have everywhere
else.


As far as I can tell, there isn't any "east london travel" that does the
job the ELL would, and so I can't see how the ELL could **** up travel
routes that don't exist. It might not improve them as much as we might
hope, I suppose. Do you have a more cogent argument that you can advance?

#Paul

David Fairthorne May 1st 04 08:11 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Terry"
Newsgroups: uk.transport.london
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 6:21 AM
Subject: ELL in peril yet again


Thanks for the interesting information about the Olympic sites, Paul.



Boltar May 3rd 04 09:49 AM

ELL in peril yet again
 
wrote in message ...
Boltar wrote:
Personally I'm not too upset about the ELL not going ahead. If it was to be
a proper tube line then fine , but I'd rather my tax money was spent on
something other than a bit of track to join up a load of **** poor TOCs
just so they can **** up east london travel as much as they have everywhere
else.


As far as I can tell, there isn't any "east london travel" that does the
job the ELL would, and so I can't see how the ELL could **** up travel
routes that don't exist. It might not improve them as much as we might
hope, I suppose. Do you have a more cogent argument that you can advance?


The service on the ELL at the moment is not bad (going by personal experience).
Once some TOC takes over you can guarantee that service levels will go through
the floor. That was my point.

B2003

marcb May 4th 04 09:07 AM

ELL in peril yet again
 
David Fairthorne wrote:

"marcb" wrote in message
...
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government. What angers me is that noone seems to be
accountable for this abject failure to build a railway that has always
had surefire economic benefit.

M.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard

Where are the Olympic Games facilities (existing or proposed) located, and
how would the ELL extension serve them?


The Olympics is a red herring - the ELL extensions are for us Londoners and were assessed
independently of an Olympic bid.

M.



Mark Hynes May 16th 04 12:40 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
On Sat, 1 May 2004 19:56:03 +0100,
wrote:
Boltar wrote:
Personally I'm not too upset about the ELL not going ahead. If it was to be
a proper tube line then fine , but I'd rather my tax money was spent on
something other than a bit of track to join up a load of **** poor TOCs
just so they can **** up east london travel as much as they have everywhere
else.


As far as I can tell, there isn't any "east london travel" that does the
job the ELL would, and so I can't see how the ELL could **** up travel
routes that don't exist. It might not improve them as much as we might
hope, I suppose. Do you have a more cogent argument that you can advance?


Other than the extension north the route follows existing national rail lines.
Living on the proposed southern route of the extension, I've never quite been
able to work out why it's been trumpted as so important. It doesn't open up
many (if any, really) new journey opportunities that seem likely to have any
great demand. All of the southern stations are currently commuter stations
to London Bridge and London Victoria, and unsurprisingly commuter journeys
to those terminuses are the vast majority of journeys. I can't really see
the demand changing from that and all of a sudden there being a rush of
people travelling from, say, Forest Hill to Whitechapel. Which is a journey,
like most others using the proposed extension, which can already be made
easily with just one change anyway.


--
| Mark Hynes
|
| "What are you trying to incinerate?" |

Paul Corfield May 16th 04 02:10 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
On 16 May 2004 12:40:35 GMT, Mark Hynes wrote:

[ellx]
Other than the extension north the route follows existing national rail lines.
Living on the proposed southern route of the extension, I've never quite been
able to work out why it's been trumpted as so important. It doesn't open up
many (if any, really) new journey opportunities that seem likely to have any
great demand. All of the southern stations are currently commuter stations
to London Bridge and London Victoria, and unsurprisingly commuter journeys
to those terminuses are the vast majority of journeys. I can't really see
the demand changing from that and all of a sudden there being a rush of
people travelling from, say, Forest Hill to Whitechapel. Which is a journey,
like most others using the proposed extension, which can already be made
easily with just one change anyway.


but surely the ELLX does the following?

a) extend Tube services to South London
b) provides a new cross London service
c) provides faster journeys to Docklands via Canada Water / Shadwell
stations
d) provides a new access point to part of the City via the Shoreditch
High St station
e) provides a Tube service into the London Borough of Hackney
f) provides a potential for economic development in deprived parts of
London
g) provides an orbital rail service across South and Inner East London
h) provides a second Tube link into the Tramlink network
i) potentially reduces the loading / congestion via key Central London
termini and their adjacent tube stations.

I don't doubt that a reasonable proportion of people will remain with
the National Rail services to current termini but at least many people
will be offered an increased choice of travel options with a reasonably
high level of service.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Stephen Richards May 16th 04 03:38 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 

but surely the ELLX does the following?

a) extend Tube services to South London

It won't be tube, it'll be National Rail with National Rail frequencies


b) provides a new cross London service


Yes... bu more of a round London service

c) provides faster journeys to Docklands via Canada Water / Shadwell
stations


Yes

d) provides a new access point to part of the City via the Shoreditch
High St station


Not many people working in the city woudl call Shoreditch the city.
Anyway, I think Shoreditch Station will be closed.

e) provides a Tube service into the London Borough of Hackney

See point a. Anyway, what is the use of a tube service if 90% of the
people want to use it to go to the city or West end, and the tube goes
somewhere else?


f) provides a potential for economic development in deprived parts of
London

Yes

g) provides an orbital rail service across South and Inner East London

Yes

h) provides a second Tube link into the Tramlink network


not a tube


i) potentially reduces the loading / congestion via key Central London
termini and their adjacent tube stations.


Yes



I agree with the originator of this thread - I don't see what all the fuss
is about. Yes, it would be nice to have, and it's a disgrace that it is
being stopped (if it is) after starting work because we "can't afford"
cost of 3.5 miiles of new track, but it's not a great addition to the
London network, and hardly a major infrastructure build that is worth
trumpeting from the rooftops..






--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Piccadilly Pilot May 16th 04 06:39 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Stephen Richards wrote:

I agree with the originator of this thread - I don't see what all the
fuss is about. Yes, it would be nice to have, and it's a disgrace
that it is being stopped (if it is) after starting work because we
"can't afford" cost of 3.5 miiles of new track, but it's not a great
addition to the London network, and hardly a major infrastructure
build that is worth trumpeting from the rooftops..


A factor being overlooked when discussing the proposed service over the ELL
is that having reconnected it to the national railway network is that
through services from further afield will be able to make cross London
journeys, "resident" service frequency permitting of course.



James May 16th 04 08:41 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Living on the proposed southern route of the extension, I've never quite been
able to work out why it's been trumpted as so important. It doesn't open up
many (if any, really) new journey opportunities that seem likely to have any
great demand. All of the southern stations are currently commuter stations
to London Bridge and London Victoria, and unsurprisingly commuter journeys
to those terminuses are the vast majority of journeys. I can't really see
the demand changing from that and all of a sudden there being a rush of
people travelling from, say, Forest Hill to Whitechapel. Which is a journey,
like most others using the proposed extension, which can already be made
easily with just one change anyway.


but surely the ELLX does the following?

a) extend Tube services to South London


Not in a meaningful way. For any sensible journey, it would simply
move a change at London Bridge to a change at Whitechapel. It would be
better to scrap the Northern half of the project, abandon Shoreditch
and extend the services terminating at Tower Hill and Whitechapel to
the South Central (then there would be serious new journey
opporunities - a one seat ride to the middle of things at Charing X
Embankment and losing one connection from any journeys involving the
ECML, MML, WCML, or GWML.

b) provides a new cross London service


No, it provides a service to stations in North London that aren't even
on any main line. One of the major reasons for Thameslink being so
successful is that passengers on the Midland Main Line have a single
change to get to the South Coast.

c) provides faster journeys to Docklands via Canada Water / Shadwell
stations


Depends where you're starting from. From Clapham Junction, it'd be
quicker via Waterloo; from Croydon, it'd be quicker on a fast train to
London Bridge; from New Cross you might as well walk to Deptford
Bridge. In fact a far easier and more useful extension for South
London to Docklands travel would be a DLR branch over the New Cross Rd
with stations at New Cross, New Cross Gate, and Queen's Rd Peckham.

d) provides a new access point to part of the City via the Shoreditch
High St station


It'd be almost as much a walk as from Whitechapel.

e) provides a Tube service into the London Borough of Hackney


Here's the real motive... pity it doesn't go anywhere like Chelney was
meant to.

f) provides a potential for economic development in deprived parts of
London


Explain.

g) provides an orbital rail service across South and Inner East London


Not quite. Tangential more like.

h) provides a second Tube link into the Tramlink network


And like the existing tube link, it has little practical use. Just as
from Wimbledon, you'd ride into Waterloo unless you wanted
specifically to go to Pad, I'm pretty sure anyone from Croydon would
get on a Fast train to Victoria or a Thameslink rather than sit on a
slow Underground train to Hackney (unless they wanted to go to
Hackney.

i) potentially reduces the loading / congestion via key Central London
termini and their adjacent tube stations.


This would be particularly useful at London Bridge, but ELLX in its
current form looks like a bit of a damp squib.

Gary Jenkins May 17th 04 08:58 AM

ELL in peril yet again
 
I've never understood why all the southern extensions will run from
New X Gate rather than being shared between New X Gate and New X. As
a result passengers from outer South-East London will hardly benefit
at all from the ELL extension.

Dave Arquati May 17th 04 10:02 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Gary Jenkins wrote:

I've never understood why all the southern extensions will run from
New X Gate rather than being shared between New X Gate and New X. As
a result passengers from outer South-East London will hardly benefit
at all from the ELL extension.


In a nutshell - capacity issues at Lewisham, which would be extremely
expensive to resolve.

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

Dave Arquati May 17th 04 10:23 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
Stephen Richards wrote:


but surely the ELLX does the following?

a) extend Tube services to South London


It won't be tube, it'll be National Rail with National Rail frequencies


Correct on the first point - but 4tph on the other branches is a similar
frequency to some outer London LUL services. And there will be 16tph
through the core section.

b) provides a new cross London service


Yes... bu more of a round London service


....but it does get you across London.

(snip)
d) provides a new access point to part of the City via the Shoreditch
High St station


Not many people working in the city woudl call Shoreditch the city.
Anyway, I think Shoreditch Station will be closed.


Shoreditch High St, where the new station will be located, is certainly
quite close to the City (about 10 minutes' walk from Livepool St?) and I
believe some new developments are spreading out of the City in this
direction.

The existing Shoreditch station will close, to be replaced by the new
Shoreditch High St station further west.

e) provides a Tube service into the London Borough of Hackney


See point a. Anyway, what is the use of a tube service if 90% of the
people want to use it to go to the city or West end, and the tube goes
somewhere else?


Hackney has a rail link directly into the City. OK, it doesn't have a
direct service to the West End - but such a route will be extremely
expensive and is already being planned (Crossrail 2).

This will certainly be a good link to *Docklands*.

h) provides a second Tube link into the Tramlink network


not a tube


Again true - many people don't seem to realise this!

i) potentially reduces the loading / congestion via key Central London
termini and their adjacent tube stations.


Yes


Recent modelling predicted that 5,000 passengers will be removed from
each of Waterloo and London Bridge stations - presumably passengers
travelling to Docklands, who will use the less-used Canada Water station
or Shadwell instead.

I agree with the originator of this thread - I don't see what all the
fuss is about. Yes, it would be nice to have, and it's a disgrace that
it is being stopped (if it is) after starting work because we "can't
afford" cost of 3.5 miiles of new track, but it's not a great addition
to the London network, and hardly a major infrastructure build that is
worth trumpeting from the rooftops..


There are two major points which haven't been mentioned.

Price - the ELL avoids Zone 1. At current season ticket prices, someone
travelling between two Zone 2 stations - for example Clapham Junction
and Canary Wharf - could save themselves *£416* per year by taking the
ELL. Passengers from West Croydon to Canary Wharf would save £548.
If that's not a major point, I don't know what is. Part of the ELL's
economic regeneration aspect is that it makes travelling cheaper for
passengers from some depressed inner-city areas like Hackney.

Orbirail - Construction of these links is the most important step to
Orbirail, orbital services via Willesden Junction, Clapham Junction,
Highbury, the NLL and ELLX. Journeys between opposite sides of London
might still be faster via the centre (although some people will
appreciate the not having to change) - but this orbital route connects
some major centres, and once again, the price factor comes into play.

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

Annabel Smyth May 18th 04 07:36 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
On Mon, 17 May 2004 at 23:23:22, Dave Arquati wrote:

Recent modelling predicted that 5,000 passengers will be removed from
each of Waterloo and London Bridge stations - presumably passengers
travelling to Docklands, who will use the less-used Canada Water station
or Shadwell instead.

Were I still to be working where I am now, I'd certainly be one of them.
And a rail link from Clapham High Street to Clapham Junction would be
extremely useful to both my husband and me.
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 9 May 2004

John Rowland May 19th 04 02:55 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
"James" wrote in message
om...

One of the major reasons for Thameslink being so
successful is that passengers on the Midland Main
Line have a single change to get to the South Coast.


No, 95% of Thameslink journeys start or end in Zone 1. The reason Thameslink
is "successful" is because it doesn't have enough seats per hour to meet the
demand created by calling at up to five Zone 1 stations. Its demand does not
come close to the Central and Piccadilly Lines, which serve a dozen Zone 1
stations each.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes



Terry Harper May 19th 04 04:08 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

No, 95% of Thameslink journeys start or end in Zone 1. The reason

Thameslink
is "successful" is because it doesn't have enough seats per hour to meet

the
demand created by calling at up to five Zone 1 stations. Its demand does

not
come close to the Central and Piccadilly Lines, which serve a dozen Zone 1
stations each.


Isn't the reason for that that the passenger is continuing his journey by
other means? From observation, there is always a considerable number of
passengers getting on and off at each station between Kings Cross TL and
London Bridge, and a large number who decamp at East Croydon southbound. If
anything, City Thameslink, which doesn't have an interchange with other
railway lines, is the lightest used. I suspect that the number of travellers
whose total journey terminates at a Thameslink Zone 1 station is very small
indeed.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL:
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/



Bob Robinson May 22nd 04 09:58 PM

ELL in peril yet again
 
marcb wrote in message ...
I see the East London Line has now got yet another vote of no confidence
from central government.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard


This story behind this thread has more anticlimaxes than the Archers -
rumpty tumpty tumpty tum rumpty tumpty tum tum. Will Alastair be a
darling? Will Steve be able to prove criminal negligence? Who is the
they Ken is talking about? Will Seb Coe get the train to run on time?

Quote
Bid hangs on £1bn Tube
By Ross Lydall, Evening Standard Local Government Correspondent
21 May 2004
London's struggling Olympic bid would be revitalised if a delayed
£1billion Tube line extension is quickly approved, transport experts
and senior politicians said today.
Pressure was growing on Transport Secretary Alistair Darling to give
an urgent go-ahead to the East London line extension after strong
criticism of the capital's transport infrastructure from Olympics
chiefs.
The International Olympic Committee this week put London on the
shortlist of five cities bidding to host the 2012 Games - but warned
it had no chance of victory against Paris or Madrid unless rapid
improvements were secured to the creaking and overcrowded Tube.
Although the Government officially backs the bid to host the Games,
criticism has emphasised the need to improve the package of transport
measures that will definitely be in place by 2012.
The East London line extension has backing in principle but is in a
desperate battle against other national rail schemes to be awarded
public money to make it happen.
Campaigners now see it as the only way to convince the IOC that both
London and the Government are serious about hosting the Games - and
say construction work must start before July next year, when the
Olympic host city is chosen.
The extension would take the line to Highbury and Islington in the
north and three stations in the south - Crystal Palace, Clapham
Junction and West Croydon. This would allow direct connections with
the Victoria line, North London line - which goes to the proposed
Olympic village in Stratford - and suburban rail services in south
London.
The project has the advantage of being relatively cheap to build -
while dramatically improving the transport options of the expected
500,000-a-day spectators.
Many travelling from east and south-east London would not have to
travel into the centre to change trains, while spectators flying to
Gatwick would need only one connecting service to reach Stratford.
Crucially, the extension could be finished several years in advance of
the opening ceremony, unlike the eastwest Crossrail service, another
delayed project. This would have linked Heathrow direct to Stratford
but is now unlikely to be finished by 2013, at an estimated £10
billion cost.
Ken Livingstone and his Conservative rival for Mayor Steve Norris
joined forces last night to call on Mr Darling to find the money
needed.
Mr Livingstone said: "If they want to win the Olympics they have got
to invest in transport."
Mr Norris said: "Not to do the East London line has been criminally
negligent. If the IOC is a spur to getting it started, so much the
better."
The IOC's criticism has also prompted East London line campaigners to
write to London's new bid chairman, Lord Coe. Archie Galloway-chair of
the East London Line Group, which includes 13 borough councils and
major organisations such as Canary Wharf Ltd, London City Airport and
London First, said the scheme could help rescue the Olympic bid. Mr
Galloway said: "Crossrail is impossible to have done in that time. But
the East London line would not only be ready, it would be tried and
tested.
"If they don't do the East London line I think it will kill the bid."
Unquote


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk