Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.
--
Thoss

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.
--
Thoss

"thoss" wrote in message
...
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

Given the length of time that it takes to get authorisation
for something that is current, being put on hold and cancelled
are much the same thing.

AIUI the Chelsea-Hackney line is still on hold ... from 1972.

tim

"tim....." wrote in message
...

Given the length of time that it takes to get authorisation
for something that is current, being put on hold and cancelled
are much the same thing.

AIUI the Chelsea-Hackney line is still on hold ... from 1972.


Down but not quite out, there has been some recent DfT consultation on the
route safeguarding for planning and development purposes.

Paul

thoss wrote:
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT
until after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

It's disappointing but inevitable. I have posted before on how
surprised I have been at the depth of feeling against the tram in the
Ealing area where I have been working for 2 years. And, in all
honesty, I am coming round to the idea that the scheme is something of
a waste of money compared to a much cheaper bus based scheme.

For instance, my daily journey of Acton Central to a couple of stops
after Ealing Broadway could be reduced by half from the current 20
minutes (and I think this is a conservative estimate) by some simple
and relatively cheap measures:

1. Enforce a zero-tolerance on parking on the High Street in Acton
(particularly during rush hour) - every single day buses are delayed
through this narrow stretch by inconsiderate parking
2. Prioirity bus lanes/traffic lights on the Western end of the High
Street in Acton (and to the west of that stretch going the other way)
3. Stop buses parking on the eastbound Uxbridge Road at the tram depot
(why is this ever allowed??) and knock down the pavement-side wall of
the Tram Depot allowing easier access for buses terminating at the
Tram Depot heading west.
4. Priorirty bus lane/traffic lights on the A406 crossing both ways
5. A bus lane between A4020 westbound between the A406 and the
junction with The Common with - preferably - priority traffic lights
at the junction
6. Zero tolerance on bus lane parking on Ealing Broadway (again there
is not a day without several cars parked on this stretch during the
morning and evening rush hour)
7. Bus lane at the western end of the Ealing Broadway to allow buses
to pass traffic turning right between the 2 town hall buildings

Jase

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 20:28:17 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

thoss wrote:
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT
until after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

Not really. The GLA press release says that the cancellation is
dependent on Crossrail proceeding. Now that may well be clever
semantics but the whole thing is a mess.

Quite why Ealing Council believe a bus based system employing many of
the same traffic priorities as the tram would have used will be any more
popular I do not know. The main point of opposition to the tram, if I
have been paying attention, was the effect that its tracks and
priorities would have on people being able to use their cars. I can't
see buses being more readily acceptable to those same opponents. I
suspect Ealing Council hope they can scrap the majority of the proposed
priorities and just leave the bus service (enhanced or otherwise) to be
a disaster area. Current services are supposedly at capacity and
allegedly so are the roads so what is going to give to make all this
work? Apologies for the cynicism but I would have preferred the tram
scheme to proceed as that was the only option that would have both
forced a reduction of road space and provided a suitable attractive
alternative to car drivers.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Well, Crossrail will be serving quite a few of the communities along
or near Uxbridge Road, which should help with the bus traffic in that
area. I wonder if it's possible to turn West Drayton - Uxbridge into
an extra Crossrail Branch to serve Uxbridge as well? Or maybe a feeder
shuttle train.

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 04:39:39 -0700, sweek
wrote:

Well, Crossrail will be serving quite a few of the communities along
or near Uxbridge Road, which should help with the bus traffic in that
area. I wonder if it's possible to turn West Drayton - Uxbridge into
an extra Crossrail Branch to serve Uxbridge as well? Or maybe a feeder
shuttle train.

Well there will be no additions to Crossrail such as you suggest simply
because it would cause more uncertainty and risk delaying it even
further. To get the money out of private hands you need certainty. I
think people are reading "between the lines" and probably will not be
shocked if there was an extension to Reading but that's largely an
electrification task now that the government has funded the remodelling
of Reading and there is space for a nice EMU depot in the triangle
beyond Reading.

Given that Germany and France have no issues with both RER / S Bahn
lines *and* trams running in similar corridors I wonder why we have to
trade such things in the UK? I personally don't see Crossrail as a
local replacement on a very high use corridor between Ealing and
Uxbridge.

The Uxbridge Road corridor is not dissimilar to the A11 corridor in East
London - there you have Great Eastern trains, the Central Line and an
intensive service on route 25 with supplementary services on the 205 and
86 and yet all modes are very busy. Really the 25 bus could quite easily
be replaced by a tram service as that sort of capacity is really needed.
People travel long distances on the 25 even though logic would dictate
travel by rail would be more effective. The same happens in West London
with the 207s being busy, so is the 607 Express (one of very few such
London services) plus the 427 on the Western Section. You have FGW,
Heathrow Connect plus the District, Central and Piccadilly Line
providing a form of parallel rail service. Again many of these are busy
services.

The local train service, while not as frequent as Crossrail will
probably be, is not as busy as the bus corridor and the stations are
awkwardly located. There are no proposals to add stations as that would
increase running times overall and mean more trains were needed. There
might also be a reduction in overall capacity on Western Crossrail
services which have to pander to the "must get into London fast"
inclinations of both Heathrow travellers and people from Slough and
Maidenhead. I'd argue the transport demand of that part of West London
is such that it could easily support Crossrail and WLT. Still Ken might
have the last laugh and put in nice long articulated Trolleybuses with
loads of priority measures - I wonder if Ealing residents would be happy
then?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!