| Author |
Message |
Disillusioned Traveller
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 March, 2004 - 09:27 am: | |
One of Labour’s 2001 election manifesto promises was to build the missing links to create a rail service that would circle London and improve transport access for some of London’s most deprived boroughs, north and south of the Thames. Delivery was promised for 2006. Our town was to be a beneficiary of this imaginative scheme.
Due to lack of committed government funding, it now seems very unlikely that this delayed project will ever be delivered. Does anyone else feel as let down as I do? If so, perhaps we could have an online protest form on this website to complete and send to Alastair Darling. Over to you, webmaster. |
a
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 March, 2004 - 09:42 am: | |
I was under the impression that work had already started on the northern extension of the ELL - the initial delay on work starting was due to a planning inquiry regarding the Bishopsgate goods yard (where the new Shoreditch station will be), which has now been resolved. Once the northern extension is done, work will then start on the southern extension. I agree that the delays have been extensive but it will get there eventually.
Have I got it wrong - has the whole project gone down the swannie? |
Rob
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 March, 2004 - 09:45 am: | |
I had the same thoughts. I have therefore just written to Lewisham West MP, Jim Dowd.
Here's my letter. Mr Dowd's email address is jimdowd.newlabour@care4free.net.
Please feel free to use this letter as a template. It only takes 25 letters before an MP must raise this issue in Parliament. So go on, email...
Dear Mr Dowd
Re: Proposed East London Line
I am writing to express my concern at yesterday's report in The Times, "£1bn rail link to be shelved"
The report states that the Department of Transport has ordered the East London Line project team to save money by producing options for building the line in stages. Extending the East London Line from New Cross Gate to West Croydon via Forest Hill is the only part of the proposal that does not require a new section of track. This extension should therefore be the first to be developed, without delay.
Putting Lewisham West on the transport map must be a priority if we are to avoid further areas being neglected. Businesses continue to suffer in Forest Hill due to a lack of investment. However, there are signs that improvements are being made. A multi-million pound investment would help to sustain local businesses and regenerate disadvantaged communities.
Given the importance of the East London Live to Lewisham West's local economy, I would urge you to raise these issues with the House, Transport for London, the East London Line project team and the Strategic Rail Authority.
I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
XXX
Forest Hill resident |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 March, 2004 - 01:24 pm: | |
A - what you say is a totally reasonable assumption of what SHOULD happen, but lack of commitment and leadership make the situation more complicated. Work has started on the northern section; they got the permission to demolish the arches at Bishopsgate, much against the wishes of Prince Charles et al. This work is now finished; the arches are a pile of rubble. However the contractor is now moving off site (!) and the site "mothballed" - not exactly full steam ahead...
The DoT wants them to cut costs; planning permission for the rest of the project expires later this year and will need to be re-obtained if they don't get on with the work - so further delays.
What is most frustrating is that of all the various schemes being bandied about this is the easiest and cheapest to achieve. Good to see the fine tradition of overlooking SE London and denying it investment continues though, with the less necessary and more expensive northern section proceeding first if anything does. Genius - build a tube line in an area where there are already some, rather than convert some lines in an area where there are none.
Good to see from my last council tax bill how much of our money goes to overground (very little) compared to London Underground - which we don't get the full benefit from. Cheers Tony, cheers Gordon - and cheers Jim? |
Rob
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 March, 2004 - 01:44 pm: | |
Hilltop General - I agree with all your comments. So take action and write to Jim Dowd. Even if the rest of the proposal fails, SE23 should lobby for the extension to West Croydon. |
John
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 26 March, 2004 - 07:56 pm: | |
Rob.
Thank you for the nudge -I've sent my email.
I hope you don't mind, but I've altered your version to make my point in slightly different way:-
Dear Mr Dowd
Re: Proposed East London Line - THE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS OWNERS OF FOREST HILL ARE ON THEIR KNEES - THERE'S NO TIME TO LOSE!
I am writing to express my concern at a recent report in The Times, "£1bn rail link to be shelved"
With the originally anticipated delivery of this scheme a mere two years away, the report states that the Department of Transport has ordered the East London Line project team to save money by producing options for building the line in stages. This will, no doubt lead to further, unacceptable, delays. However, extending the East London Line from New Cross Gate to West Croydon via Forest Hill is the least expensive element as it is ONLY part of the proposal that does NOT require a new section of track; this extension should therefore be the first to be developed, WITHOUT ANY MORE UNACCEPTABLE EXCUSES OR DELAYS!
Putting Lewisham West on the transport map MUST be a priority if we are to avoid further areas being neglected and falling into decay. Businesses continue to suffer in Forest Hill due to a lack of serious investment. Even though there are some token signs of improvement, only THIS multi-million pound investment would be the catalyst to sustain and invigorate local businesses and to regenerate our disadvantaged communities.
Given the importance of the East London Line to Lewisham West's local economy, it needs someone to STAND UP AND SHOUT about these issues within the House and to Transport for London, the East London Line project team and the Strategic Rail Authority.
I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
John Ward
Owner of 13 rented shops and flats in Dartmouth Rd, Forest Hill since 1986. |
Bill
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 28 March, 2004 - 09:16 am: | |
excellent, John. Lets hope our MP takes this seriously. How about arranging a petition also. I am sure the station staff would not mind one being left at the station. |
Dom C
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 March, 2004 - 10:58 am: | |
Network Rails 2004 budget was released today with the following section on the East London Line. So it looks like its on just delayed (for a change)
"East London Line
We continue to support the development of the SRA sponsored East London Line Project. Project
development continues and the SRA and Network Rail are working together to identify the impact of the project on our stewardship of the network as well as developing the core project proposition. Key activities presently being addressed include timetable feasibility for the SRA's train service aspiration of 4 trains per hour to Crystal Palace, Clapham Junction, New Cross, and West Croydon to the south giving a total of 16 trains per hour through the core section from Surrey Quays to Dalston, with 8 trains per hour continuing over an upgraded NLL infrastructure to Highbury and Islington. We, TfL and the SRA jointly intend to issue an Official Journal of European Union (OJEU) notice this year with construction commencing in 2006/07.
The project is proposed to be procured as an SPV. Upon completion the works will be transferred to
Network Rail, which will become the network operator for the transferred infrastructure. Completion is anticipated in 2010 when transfer of the asset to Network Rail will take place." |
Dom C
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 March, 2004 - 10:59 am: | |
Oh, also there is no mention of an upgrade to Forest Hill station in the plans although smaller works under £5m not always detailed. |
bill
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 March, 2004 - 01:21 pm: | |
Sorry, but 6 years further wait , with the current level of passenger traffic is absolutely unacceptable. How on earth are we supposed to get into work. It can only get worse.
Lets get Labour to keep to their promises for once. |
b
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 March, 2004 - 02:48 pm: | |
Bill, I agree that it's inconvenient that the works are delayed further, but at least it will happen, unacceptable is a little strong for the situation, no? - and as for how you get into work, well how do you get to work now? The train system as it now is may not be ideal but presumably the delay on the ELL does not mean you cannot get to work for another 6 years. If that is truly the case then I would have to agree that it's unacceptable |
RJS
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 01 April, 2004 - 11:38 am: | |
Getting to work isn't too much of a problem from Forest Hill. People getting on the train at Honor Oak / Brockley etc have a much greater chance of having to wait for an emptier train to come along. That said, the East London extension is eagerly awaited. |
a
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 07 April, 2004 - 04:47 pm: | |
Got the e-mail below from East London Line Project - thought it might be of interest to some of you!
Thankyou for registering with the project e-mail group. Please be aware that there are now more than 800 members to administer and approximately thirty new individuals are joining each week. In recent weeks there has been much speculation about the project in the press and I wish to provide you with a definitive update.
In February the project team passed final documentation to the Department for Transport and is now awaiting approval to formally approach the construction industry. If this is received an advert will be placed in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) and the procurement process will have been initiated. The Department for Transport remains adamant that the project will not approach the commercial market until they are certain that funding has been identified to reimburse the builder of the project when the infrastructure is transferred to Network Rail on completion.
If we get a decision to proceed in the near future, we will be able to deliver the project in June 2010. This date has been in the public domain for at least eight months and was calculated once the full impact of the legal challenges had been assessed.
At the current time there is only one method of delivery with the Department for Transport and that is to build the whole project. However as a contingency measure the project team has begun looking into the impact of delivering the whole project in phases. The Mayor of London has recently expressed interest in taking over responsibility for the delivery of the project from the Strategic Rail Authority. Although alternative funding mechanisms are being looked into by Transport for London, it is unlikely that any firm decisions will emerge until the outcome of the current rail industry review in the early summer.
Please be reassured that if any change were to occur to the status of the project you will receive an e-mail from myself. |
r
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 08 April, 2004 - 06:15 pm: | |
A copy of a community newpaper popped through my door last night- lots of interesting things but a good mention of this issue, where people were asked to make their concerns known directly to Alistair Darling MP. Think we should really put together a proper petition on this issue and/or arrange to email Alistair Darling and others etc simultaneously within one particular hour on one particular day, etc- anyone any experience of organising anything like this? Or how about doing this on this website, with everyone listing their email addresses only. What was that about 50 people needed to have the MP ask questions in parliament? |
Les
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 08 May, 2004 - 05:40 pm: | |
An update...
As a professional engineer, I am aware that the Institution of Civil Engineers is strongly supporting the East London Line extension. See the attached link for details:
http://www.nceplus.co.uk/b_bank/search_results_details/?report_ID=6369&report_num=0&channelid=6
Under the headline "Ministers Delay East London Line Decision Until July" their magazine (New Civil Engineer 6th May) states:
"Ministers are delaying a decision on the future of the ELL extension until Chancellor Gordon Brown's comprehensive spending review in July...
Ministers are considering whether the project should be funded through central government or by London mayor Ken Livingstone's Transport for London TfL department..."
So more prevarication it appears.
Les. |
Johnnyb7
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 21 May, 2004 - 06:51 pm: | |
Tonight's Evening Standard Page 15 |
Forest Gump
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 30 May, 2004 - 10:43 am: | |
Anyone know what "tonights evening standard page 15" said? |
cathy
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 30 May, 2004 - 02:11 pm: | |
yep, it said that if London's to stand any chance of winning the Olympic bid, we need to sort out the East London Line. The Stratford Crossrail link was deemed to be too ambitious to complete by 2012 so attention has been focused back onto the East London , as a goal that can be achieved by 2007. So it seems that the Olympic bid is providing a much needed trigger to get things moving again. No idea what's happened since this article appeared. |
Dommy
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 01 June, 2004 - 09:20 am: | |
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." |
??
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 02 June, 2004 - 08:25 am: | |
Phew! |
bill
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 02 June, 2004 - 10:15 pm: | |
dream on- we ain't going to get either the Olympics or the East London line in our lifetime- |
johnnyb7
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 02 June, 2004 - 10:27 pm: | |
Tread softly bill.............. |
Les
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 09 July, 2004 - 05:21 pm: | |
Go ahead from Gordon Brown next week, if this story is to be believed.
I had seen in other sources that the project had survived Brown's comprehensive spending review.
http://icthewharf.icnetwork.co.uk/thisweek/news/tm_objectid=14403974&method=full&siteid=71670&headline=boost-in-the-east-name_page.html
How about a street party if this is true - Free beer at the Hob! |
henry
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 10 July, 2004 - 08:57 am: | |
Pity our illustrious MP can't/won/t fill us in on what is actually happening on this. Talk about keeping everything at arms length.... |
Rob
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 15 July, 2004 - 09:42 am: | |
Message from TfL following my enquiry relating the Treasury Spending Review earlier this week:
Although the Government have made their announcement about how much money they are allocating to Transport over the next few years, they have as yet made no commitment to any specific projects.
However, the Secretary of State, Alistair Darling will next week make his announcement of the DfT's funding allocation, and he may mention the East
London Line extension then. |
boo
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 15 July, 2004 - 03:10 pm: | |
See below e-mail received today from Peter Boxell head of communications for the East London Line Project
Dear
At 1230 hrs today the Secretary of state for Transport announced the findings of the rail industry review that was initiated in January 2004. The review does not refer specifically to the East London Line Project but has made clear that the Strategic Rail Authority, the organisation currently responsible for project delivery will be disbanded.
Alistair Darling also took steps to pass responsibility for some rail services to the Mayor of London. He said, "In the short term, we will work with the Mayor to rationalise fares and ticketing across the different types of public transport in London and to identify the options for giving the Mayor an increased role for services that lie almost entirely within the GLA boundary, and possibly beyond the GLA boundary, subject to consultation with neighbouring regional and local bodies".
As the East London Line Project lies entirely within the GLA boundary, the implications of the above statement will need to be considered in more detail.
As soon as greater clarity emerges, I will keep you informed.
Yours
Peter
Peter Boxell
Head of Communications
East London Line Project
020 7941 7422 (O) |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 15 July, 2004 - 04:56 pm: | |
Go Ken! Go Ken! |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 15 July, 2004 - 11:45 pm: | |
yes just give another Government problem/policy failure to Ken to sort out, as this will enable this goverment to wash its hands of any responsibility for its failure just as it has done with Iraq. |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 11:17 am: | |
Well quite, after the poor show by the 18th Ken's Royal Lambeth Lancers in Basra.
.
What are you on about?!
.
Take a visit to Paris / Lyon / Bilbao and see what a decent mayor with some real powers can do for local transport. |
Nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 11:54 am: | |
Hilltop - I think you're missing the point. Other European mayor's have real power - and the money - to make things happen. Ken Livingstone is incredibly dedicated to making transport in London work but without financial backing even he can't make progress. The govt will probably come up with the money for Crossrail but ignore the East London Line. Ken will be given the almost impossible job of raising £1bn to buld the line.If anything goes wrong in between, Ken - not the govt - gets it in the neck.
Look what happened over Congestion Charges - the govt stepped to one side whilst Ken took the flak. Once the project was seen to be a success they are claiming it as their own!
Most members of the Cabinet hate Ken - they aren't going to pass power on to him except as a means of tripping him up. The Labour govt promised in their manifesto to back the ELL extension - let them put their money where their mouth is! |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 12:30 pm: | |
Well, if he is allowed to make a bond issue (like they do everywhere else) then we might see some progress. I feel a bit more comfortable with Ken in charge of the ELL as I am more confident in his sincerity in wishing to see it done. |
John2
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 01:12 pm: | |
Not sure if I agree with Nasaroc, I had a BBQ with a friend on Sunday who is in the City Police and has just been transferred to Ken's TFL task force. He rated it highly and feels there is very good funding as Ken has made it a priority. I rate Ken as I use both train and bus everyday to get to work. The train is a pain but the bus is great, guess which one Ken controls? |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 03:09 pm: | |
I appreciate both your comments. No-one is more supportive of Ken than me. As politicians go, he is sincere and principled.
All I am doubting is whether this - or any other urban transport project - can make any progress without central government taxpayer support. London Bus services don't make money - they are subsidised by the taxpayer; the same goes for railway operating companies - without public funds no company will take on running the railways.
Public transport requires government support. That's why they're so good in Paris/Lyon and Bibao. It's not just about the sincerity of their Mayors; it's about money. Ken improved London buses by offering the operating companies large sums of money to increase the number of buses on each route plus pouring large amounts of cash into bus routes.
Simply issuing shares in a non-profit making service like the ELL just won't wash. No sensible person is going to invest. |
Virgin
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 03:34 pm: | |
Just to be pedantic Hilltop was suggesting a bond issue not shares. However, would either means of raising finance in the private sector actually work, just look at the record of Eurotunnel and Jarvis (especially its investment into the tube).
As all seam to be stating, Public/Government money is the way forward for public transport I see the issue more as is this actually going to be granted. |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 04:35 pm: | |
Bond issues are the way forward. The government backs them and that is why they are one of the cheapest ways of borrowing money. This is what they usually do elsewhere. The tunnel was in serious doodoo until the rules were bent to allow them to issue bonds. What is not going to happen is upfront cash from HMG. |
henry
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 19 July, 2004 - 10:33 pm: | |
still not a sausage from our venerable MP. What a surprise. |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 20 July, 2004 - 11:58 am: | |
Today Alistair Darling announced a "go-ahead" for Cross Rail. The problem is that the government want business/investors to come up with the lion's share of the funds - a process described by last night's Evening Standard as "window dressing".
I would almost guarantee that, in a few weeks time, the govt also announce that they want the ELL extension line go ahead - again without providing funding for the project.
Why should private companies/investors stump up money for public projects such as these? The last time they did this when asked to invest in Railtrack, Stephen Byers shut down the company and tried to get away with no compensation for shareholders.
Issuing bonds only mortgages future taxpayers.
Declaring you want something to go ahead without providing the funds is just a way of this government avoiding their responsibilities. |
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 20 July, 2004 - 12:15 pm: | |
Yes, issuing bonds only mortgages future tyax payers but like the average home buyer the government prefers to buy things this way - rather than come up with a few billion in the one tax year. |
Rob
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 21 July, 2004 - 10:37 am: | |
Hi - Good news for SE23! Please see below from the East London Line project team regarding yesterday's announcement by the Department of Transport.
"As promised, I wish to keep you up to date with fast moving developments. Today (Tuesday 20 July 2004), Ken Livingstone , the Mayor of London, announced that he would deliver phase 1 of the East London Line Project using prudential borrowing arrangements that have been agreed by the government.
"Phase 1 will provide extended services between Dalston Junction in the north and New Cross, Crystal Palace and West Croydon in the south. This could br delivered by June 2010 which is in good time to support a successful Olympic bid.
"Phase 2 will feature the link to Clapham Junction and the northern extension along the North London Line to Highbury & Islington."
Over the next few days the existing website will be brought upto date to reflect these significant developments and provide you with greater detail of what is proposed.
Your patience in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Yours
Peter
Peter Boxell
Head of Communications
East london Line Project |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 21 July, 2004 - 03:49 pm: | |
I think that it's worth looking at the wording of the actual press release which isn't anywhere near as confident as Peter Boxell's spin on it. It reads:
Mayor statement on East London Line extension
Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, today confirmed he has reached an agreement with the Government on Transport for London's borrowing limits that will allow TfL to proceed with constructing the East London Line extension. This follows Alistair Darling's statement on the Government's five year transport plan and transport Spending Review.
The Mayor said the agreement, which will enable TfL to go ahead with the East London Line extension, transit schemes in East London and Greenwich and extensions to the DLR and its services were a major boost to London's 2012 Olympic bid. He also strongly welcomed the announcement that the Government would be proceeding with the Hybrid Bill to allow the construction of Crossrail.
However, the Mayor warned that the great majority of the extra funding announced in the transport Spending Review would be going to Network Rail to deal with the disastrous consequences of rail privatisation.
As a result TfL had not secured the extra revenue resources that its successful track record merited and would face some difficult decisions in finalising its business plan.
Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone said:
"It's excellent news that the Government has accepted my proposal that TfL should take over construction of the urgently needed East London Line extension and agreed the borrowing approval we need. The first phase of this project is a big boost for everyone in east and south London who have campaigned for this vital new tube line. It also shows the Government's and my total commitment to London's Olympic bid.
"But today's announcement also shows just how much rail privatisation is still costing us all. The legacy of rail privatisation is swallowing up resources that should ideally have been available to invest in and build on our proven successes. That has denied TfL the resources it needs to proceed with its full plans for making more improvements to transport in London. As a result, we will face some difficult decisions in finalising the TfL Business Plan." |
Pete
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 21 July, 2004 - 05:17 pm: | |
I suspect the lack of available funds is the main reason why they're doing it in two phases. The good news is that Forest Hill's line is the first priority, which can only be a good thing in the grand scheme of the transport network. |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 24 September, 2004 - 02:08 pm: | |
Since the East London extension "go-ahead" was announced in July we've heard absolutely nothing more about this project. Could it be that the announcement was nothing more than a useful fillip for the London Olympics Campaign? You announce you're putting in a new transport link vital to the Olympic bid. The Olympic Committee is impressed but you hope they don't look too closely at the small print which says you don't intend to come up with any of the money needed to build the link.
I've e-mailed Peter Boxell, head of communications for the East London Line Project twice to ask for "greater detail of what is proposed" (see his press release above) but I've received no reply. |
Elizabeth
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 24 September, 2004 - 07:14 pm: | |
I know this isn't official. But I have a friend who works as a civil engineer for the city and he says the East London line is approved and will go ahead. There is a second extension into Clapham off the East London line that is waiting approval. |
Perry Vale Pete
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 27 September, 2004 - 11:44 am: | |
Given the recent pessimism, I thought I would go and get the latest news from the horse's mouth. Read on.....
Dear Peter,
Thankyou for getting in touch. I can confirm that the project is very much
on and that Phase one will be delivered by June 2010.
Yours
Peter
Peter Boxell
Head of Communications and Stakeholder Management
East London Line Project
020 79417422 (O)
07788 101795 (M)
www.ellp.co.uk |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 27 September, 2004 - 02:59 pm: | |
I have just had a long conversation with Peter Boxell. He has convinced me that the ELLX IS going ahead. I was wrong to be pessimistic in my e mail above. My apologies.
What great news! |
Cathy
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 27 September, 2004 - 04:16 pm: | |
2010!! |
PVP
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 27 September, 2004 - 04:30 pm: | |
Are we phase 1? |
Pete
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 27 September, 2004 - 04:59 pm: | |
Yes. |
PVP
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 28 September, 2004 - 10:44 am: | |
Fantastic! 2010.... that's almost only around the corner... ish.... |
Bosco
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 28 September, 2004 - 11:16 am: | |
yep - think the original target was 2008 but that was held up because of the Bishopsgate Goods Yard injunction so 2 years behind isn't too bad all things considered. |
Cathy
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 28 September, 2004 - 11:40 am: | |
I thought the original target was 2005/6. When I moved into the area in 2000 that's what I remember reading and friends in the area were all saying the same thing. Oh well... |
nasaroc
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 01 October, 2004 - 02:29 pm: | |
Now we have heard the good news about the ELLX I should let you know of a slight downside to the proposed plans.
The coming of the ELLX will mean an extra six "tube" trains per hour in each direction running from Sydenham Station.
The SRA (Strategic Rail Authority) has just issued a consultation paper which is primarily about rearrangements to trains on the Brighton line but which also proposes changes to our service when the ELLX extension arrives.
There is a huge bottleneck of trains at both Norwood Junction and East Croydon. When the ELLX arrives it will mean an even larger bottleneck.
What the SRA is proposing is to reduce our through trains to London Bridge (currently six trains per hour at most times of the day) to four trains per hour to help reduce the bottleneck. In other words, we would have 10 trains per hour in both directions (six ELLX trains and four trains to London Bridge).
I am currently writing a response to the SRA proposal on behalf of the Sydenham Society and I'd welcome your views before this is sent. By the way all of you regular posters on this site should join the Sydenham Society so you can actually do something about local issues as a group not just talk about them on a website - the Sydenham Society also includes people who live in Forest Hill. It costs £6 per year per household and you'll receive four newslatters a year on local issues. see www.sydenhamsociety.com.
The Society's view on the SRA is that we will argue against any reduction of direct services to London Bridge but we aren't going to do this to the extent that we oppose the introduction of the ELLX , because we've been fighting for its introduction for over ten years.
What are you views? |
Johnnyb7
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 01 October, 2004 - 05:43 pm: | |
My understanding of the proposal is as below, taken directly from the TFL website
Service Pattern and Stations
The SRA submitted a Business Case for the Extended East London Line to the Secretary of State for Transport in September 2002. This was based on a 'core proposition'. The total service pattern proposed is four, four-car, all station services:
4 tph Highbury & Islington to Crystal Palace
4 tph Highbury & Islington to West Croydon
4 tph Dalston Junction to Clapham Junction
4 tph Dalston Junction to New Cross.
This would appear to mean 8 extra trains per hour (tph) as far as Sydenham, and then 4 going up and over to Crystal Palace, with the remaining 4 only impacting Norwood Junction etc. |
