On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Dave Arquati wrote:

That suffers the misconception that cancelling project X means the
money being spent on it could go to project Y instead. A lot of
funding is very project-specific - for example, if that were not
true, the DfT would have a list of schemes ranked by benefit-cost
ratios, and would fund them down the list from the top BCR until
they ran out of money.

Even worse is the philosophy that if the current budget isn't spent
out, then the department or division in question is deemed to have
over-budgeted, so their next budget can have an equal amount deducted
from it too.

So, towards the end of the budgeting period, departments/divisions are
inclined to throw money at anything they're allowed to fund,
irrespective of need, to make sure the budget allocation will be spent
out by the end of the period. The fact that something else (that
they're not authorised to fund) is justifiably crying out for
resources, has no place in that logic, unfortunately.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Looming in the distance at Shoreditch on the ex-BR side is a sort of
signal box type cabin high up with a concrete structure beside it. I
was told this is the remains of a wagon hoist? Anyone know more about
it?

It was a signal box. The entire viaduct was built for the Bishopsgate
terminus before Liverpool Street took over that role. Bishopsgate then
became a major goods station.
http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/s...on/index.shtml

Nick Pedley

Mark Morton wrote in news:4en72hF1foaaoU1
@individual.net:

Tristán White wrote:
I hope they've made the right decision. Personally, I'm not
convinced.

Why do you think that?

Brick Lane is fast becoming one of London's major thoroughfares for late
night bars and clubs, not to mention the restaurants. But it's not the
safest of areas late at night (in case you're wondering, a good mate of
mine was beaten up there by a gang in an unprovoked attack not long
ago). It never has been the safest of areas right from Jack the Ripper
days! :-))

Having an underground station nearby means that it's easy to get in and
out without having to make your way through backstreets to the new
alternative station on Shoreditch High Street. Which is not ready yet as
an alternative (if it goes to schedule, we're looking at June 2010 -
four years to go!)

Therefore, I think they should have extended the current hours of the
station, rather than dispense of a very quaint station.

Another thing: Has anyone studied the impact that 4 year period will
have on Brick Lane market?

But my main reason is much more 'romantic'. It's always sad to see the
death of a station, especially one which has survived two world wars in
one of the country's most heavily blitzed areas. And a Grade II listed
one at that (I am sure palms will be greased and it will be turned into
yet another bunch of offices or something).

Do we really want to lose even more history? Could they not have gone up
to Hoxton from the current station? (surely Brick Lane needed it more
than Shoreditch High Street, which is served excellently nearby by
Liverpool Street station (which has trains going to Hackney area
already). Come on! The old Bishopsgate station was made redundant in the
19th century when Liverpool Street expanded!

I remember seeing PDFs and consultations and stuff on UTL when they were
discussing the exact route north of Whitechapel, but I can't remember
reading a completely convincing argument why they couldn't use the
existing route that used to go to Liverpool Street pre-war (and which
was a goods-only service until the 60s).

If they could have provided an interchange from the ELL-Extension at
Bishopsgate/SHS to the Central Line, I would agree that there is sense
in moving the station to Bishopsgate. But since there's not (another
missed opportunity), what is the exact thinking? Or they could even have
integrated Bishopsgate with Liverpool Street via an escalator link or
something - done a Monument/Bank thing.

But no. So was it really necessary to get rid of another piece of
functional history? A quaint little station, with original wooden floors
in the booking hall, and with the bizarrest opening hours on the whole
network. A great shame.

I'm not an expert, just a 'passenger' (I prefer calling myself a
passenger than a customer, sorry). So my thoughts are largely governed
by personal feelings and sorrow at areas losing a bit of history. I
should add that.

asdf wrote in
:

On 7 Jun 2006 11:14:26 -0700, wrote:

The closure also brings to an end the most unusual service pattern
on the Underground: M-F peaks and Sunday until mid-afternoon only.

Will the replacement buses follow a similar pattern of operation?

Yes. Shuttle buses will run every 10 minutes between Shoreditch and
Whitechapel, during the same hours as the current Shoreditch ELL
service.

I wonder how popular they'll be, and what the ticketing arrangements
will be.


Monday night I was coming from town on the H&C and was going to the Vibe
Bar on Brick Lane. I decided to get off at Liverpool Street and walk,
rather than go all the way to Whitechapel which would actually not leave me
*that* close to the original station anyway.

I could have walked from Aldgate East I guess, but there's not much in it.

7
It's not just about the present, it's about the future too.

It would be nice if areas outside London could get lines built for the
present, nevermind the future.
--
Chris Johns
Amen!

Mark

On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 18:38:25 -0500, Tristán White wrote:

Therefore, I think they should have extended the current hours of the
station, rather than dispense of a very quaint station.

Another thing: Has anyone studied the impact that 4 year period will
have on Brick Lane market?

But my main reason is much more 'romantic'. It's always sad to see the
death of a station, especially one which has survived two world wars in
one of the country's most heavily blitzed areas. And a Grade II listed
one at that (I am sure palms will be greased and it will be turned into
yet another bunch of offices or something).

It will no doubt disappoint you to hear the following. I don't know
about the station itself, but according to TfL's ELLX video[1], the
Shoreditch "branch" from the extended ELL, which lies in cutting, will
be filled in. (Presumably this is so they can build offices or
something on it.) This will all but preclude any future use of the
station, or the connection to the GEML.

[1]
http://ellp.tfl.gov.uk/UserFiles/Fil...don%20Line.zip

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Tristán White wrote:

Brick Lane is fast becoming one of London's major thoroughfares for late
night bars and clubs, not to mention the restaurants. But it's not the
safest of areas late at night (in case you're wondering, a good mate of
mine was beaten up there by a gang in an unprovoked attack not long
ago). It never has been the safest of areas right from Jack the Ripper
days! :-))

Having an underground station nearby means that it's easy to get in and
out without having to make your way through backstreets to the new
alternative station on Shoreditch High Street. Which is not ready yet as
an alternative (if it goes to schedule, we're looking at June 2010 -
four years to go!)

The underground station isn't on Brick Lane itself but down a side street -
not the most safe either.

And it's all very well looking at it as "an underground station" but in
terms of service destination Shoreditch doesn't really offer much. Even when
it's been open, I've found it better to access Brick Lane by staying/getting
off earlier (as appropriate) on the District/Hammer at Aldgate East (or even
getting the Circle/Met to Aldgate) rather than changing at Whitechapel. Plus
Aldgate East is so close to the start of Brick Lane it's actually a more
pleasant walk (and more logical for a walk along the entire lane).

I suppose that for those living on the route of the East London Line it may
be a better access point but there isn't really the traffic to support it.

I'd also like to add that there is now a lot more employment around
Shoreditch High Street which didn't exist a decade or so ago, and so the
new station is serving this employment and hopefully generating more.
This area is known as the "City fringe" and one of the reasons for the
ELLX is to encourage further regeneration in this area. There are
similar hopes for Whitechapel - if Crossrail arrives too, Whitechapel
will become an extremely well-connected area and it is hoped that this
will lead to extensive regeneration in one of London's poorest areas.

(snip)

If they could have provided an interchange from the ELL-Extension at
Bishopsgate/SHS to the Central Line, I would agree that there is sense
in moving the station to Bishopsgate. But since there's not (another
missed opportunity), what is the exact thinking? Or they could even have
integrated Bishopsgate with Liverpool Street via an escalator link or
something - done a Monument/Bank thing.

Is any provision at all being made for a later interchange with the Central?
Currently the Central simply can't cope with another station between
Stratford and Tottenham Court Road (at least) - it adds to journey times on
one of the most congested sections of the network. Maybe when Crossrail is
running the Central congestion will have eased to make this viable, so why
not stick to the route and leave that possibility open?

Obviously a Central line interchange was considered at an early stage,
but it was dropped for the reasons stated - the journey time increase
for such a large number of passengers was not worth it. However, not
much provision is really needed - Shoreditch High St will be right on
top of the Central line, so "all" that's needed are Central line
platforms. Unfortunately, that's the expensive part, and could only be
justified if high levels of traffic were anticipated. Crossrail may
relieve Central line congestion, but it will also deliver passengers to
the interchange at Whitechapel instead, probably making a Central line
interchange even less likely.

I think a subsurface link between Shoreditch High St and Liverpool St
would be so long as to be impractical - Bank/Monument lends itself to
this because of the way the platforms are arranged beneath the surface,
with the Northern line between the Central and the District. SHS-LS
would probably be about twice as long as Bank W&C - Monument.


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

Kev wrote:


Considering that the ELL will go from nowhere to nowhere it seems alot
of money to spend.

Hey - i live in nowhere (Dalston), We've been waiting for this line for far
too long.

E.

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:59:01 UTC, "Kevin" wrote:

: Just
: makes me wonder if the money being invested in the ELL wouldn't have
: been better spent going towards Crossrail, given that the latter can't
: get the funding.

It can't get the funding, though, because it's a completely crap idea
and would, if it were ever built, be the worst waste of infrastructure
money in living memory. At least the Chunnel might be useful, one day.

Ian

Ian Johnston wrote:
: Just
: makes me wonder if the money being invested in the ELL wouldn't have
: been better spent going towards Crossrail, given that the latter can't
: get the funding.

It can't get the funding, though, because it's a completely crap idea
and would, if it were ever built, be the worst waste of infrastructure
money in living memory. At least the Chunnel might be useful, one day.


For that remark, you are sentenced to an eternity of travelling between
Liverpool Street and Tottenham Court Road on the Central Line every
morning peak hour.

Seriously, nobody's suggesting (except, apparently, you) that Crossrail
won't immediately attract massive ridership. The question is whether
the benefits (pegged by several studies at somewhere between £10bn and
£50bn) exceed the costs (somewhere between £10bn and £20bn).

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org