Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
I question the accuracy of that £90m claim Kevin. The TfL website -
the only publicly available online resource on the scheme - gives the figure at 2004 prices as £65 million. I can't see a near-50% hike in less than two years, even allowing for construction inflation the way it is. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tube/company/p...ley-rail-link/ AIUI the Croxley Rail Link is central to the multi-agency regeneration of a large area of west Watford and the development of the Watford Health Campus as well as being expected to abstract a decent number of vehicles off the A412 and A404 every morning and evening. You have to factor all of these benefits into your appraisal. As the Croxley Rail Link is not just about the good people of Watford and Hertfordshire (despite what you think) TfL have committed to pay about £19 million in contribution to reflect the wider social and economic benefits of this scheme to Londoners. The quicker this scheme is sanctioned the better. It is an excellent chance for radically improving rail connectivity for the whole of north west London at an affordable enough price. It would only enhance the business case were Chiltern to take interest in this scheme - direct Aylesbury North - Watford Junction services (via Watford North Curve) anyone? THC |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
THC wrote: As the Croxley Rail Link is not just about the good people of Watford and Hertfordshire (despite what you think) TfL have committed to pay about £19 million in contribution to reflect the wider social and economic benefits of this scheme to Londoners. The quicker this scheme is sanctioned the better. It is an excellent chance for radically improving rail connectivity for the whole of north west London at an affordable enough price. The biggest advantage is the creation of a second link between the metropolitan centres of Harrow and Watford via the Metropolitan Line - the existing link via the DC lines, while undoubtedly adequate, doesn't have the same capacity that the four-track Met Main does. It would only enhance the business case were Chiltern to take interest in this scheme - direct Aylesbury North - Watford Junction services (via Watford North Curve) anyone? Everybody keeps bringing this up, and yet so far no one knows if Chiltern really is interested in this or not. Considering that northward links from Aylesbury to Bletchley, Milton Keynes and Bedford seem unlikely to ever take place, strengthening the town's existing links to the south could be very beneficial. Besides, Aylesbury North to Watford Junction seems like a no-brainer of a service to run anyway - it creates capacity on the outer stretches of the Met without having to go into the city and it provides a fast link from south Bucks to the WCML without requiring passengers to drive to MKC or go all the way into Euston. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
On 23 Feb 2006 06:55:18 -0800, "TheOneKEA"
wrote: The biggest advantage is the creation of a second link between the metropolitan centres of Harrow and Watford via the Metropolitan Line - the existing link via the DC lines, while undoubtedly adequate, [...] I wouldn't say it's all that adequate - the Met station at Harrow is right in the town centre, whereas the nearest DC line stations (at Kenton and Harrow & Wealdstone) are a good 15-20 mins walk away. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
northward links from Aylesbury to Bletchley, Milton Keynes and
Bedford seem unlikely to ever take place Really? I'd have thought there was a decent chance - there is a huge amount of new housing going into this area, and thus funding for transport projects. People have wondered if Chiltern are interested in operating certain services - but they can be required to, as part of the franchise renewal process. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
Chiltern's franchise was renewed for a 20-year term in February 2002
when the late great Sir Alastair Morton was in charge at the SRA - they were the only company to secure one of that length and so are sitting pretty for some time to come. There may have been a five-year break clause but I recall reading that this is conditional only on poor performance, therefore unlikely to be invoked. I also remember that the heads of agreement for this particular refranchise contained proposals for an M1/M6 parkway and a reopened portion of the Great Central to serve it. And a new/relaid line from Princes Risborough to Oxford. That kind of vision in a franchise bid seems so far away now. THC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Chiltern franchise aspirations (was: Rail link scheme a priority)
THC wrote:
Chiltern's franchise was renewed for a 20-year term in February 2002 when the late great Sir Alastair Morton was in charge at the SRA - they were the only company to secure one of that length and so are sitting pretty for some time to come. There may have been a five-year break clause but I recall reading that this is conditional only on poor performance, therefore unlikely to be invoked. Indeed. Chiltern's longevity in the reliability department is matched, AFAIK, only by c2c. I also remember that the heads of agreement for this particular refranchise contained proposals for an M1/M6 parkway and a reopened portion of the Great Central to serve it. And a new/relaid line from Princes Risborough to Oxford. That kind of vision in a franchise bid seems so far away now. The former is still a possibility, unless the GCML is transformed into the NSHSL. The latter will never happen, as it would require too many disruptive alterations to the M40 at Junction 8. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Chiltern franchise aspirations
TheOneKEA wrote:
THC wrote: Chiltern's franchise was renewed for a 20-year term in February 2002 when the late great Sir Alastair Morton was in charge at the SRA - they were the only company to secure one of that length and so are sitting pretty for some time to come. There may have been a five-year break clause but I recall reading that this is conditional only on poor performance, therefore unlikely to be invoked. Indeed. Chiltern's longevity in the reliability department is matched, AFAIK, only by c2c. I also remember that the heads of agreement for this particular refranchise contained proposals for an M1/M6 parkway and a reopened portion of the Great Central to serve it. And a new/relaid line from Princes Risborough to Oxford. That kind of vision in a franchise bid seems so far away now. The former is still a possibility, unless the GCML is transformed into the NSHSL. The latter will never happen, as it would require too many disruptive alterations to the M40 at Junction 8. Why would it require any at all? Surely it could just bridge it? -- Aidan Stanger http://www.bettercrossrail.co.uk |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
"TheOneKEA" wrote:
Those Who Know have repeatedly stated that despite rammed roads, poor bus links and increased housing, the restoration of the rail link Will Not Happen until someone can get enough money together to convince the DfT that the restoration of the route is viable. The truth is that a comprehensive survey was commissioned by a rail industry consortium to establish whether the Oxford-Cambridge route would be viable. The report showed it wouldn't be, not by a long way. It wasn't even a marginal case. The consortium that commissioned and supported the study was disbanded soon after the report was completed. That should have drawn a line, ending any further speculation about Oxford-Cambridge. But no. It keeps cropping up on here, time and time (and time) again. And again. Oxford-Cambridge is dead and buried. Just forget it. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Rail link scheme a priority
Tony Polson wrote:
That should have drawn a line, ending any further speculation about Oxford-Cambridge. But no. It keeps cropping up on here, time and time (and time) again. And again. Oxford-Cambridge is dead and buried. Just forget it. I agree with you about Oxford-Cambridge. But I was talking about Aylesbury-Bletchley, or Aylesbury-Bedford, or any number of other possibilities that would be brought about by the restoration of the relevant trackwork. I wish I could find a copy of the study and see the results for myself. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Crossrail Select Committee adds Woolwich station to scheme | London Transport News | |||
Southern keen to run pilot Oyster scheme | London Transport | |||
West London Tram Scheme | London Transport | |||
Ealing Council CPZ Scheme - Open Letter | London Transport | |||
No statement for Crossrail scheme | London Transport |