Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 12:16:56 GMT
Absent services over the Watford North Curve (i.e. Watford - Rickmansworth and beyond) much of the potential benefit will be forgone: the scheme essentially is for traffic to (rather than from) Watford, with very little benefit for passengers to London.
|
|
pitdiver
No longer gainfully employed
Posts: 439
|
Post by pitdiver on Dec 14, 2011 12:26:37 GMT
Pardon me for my ignorance on the current situation re Croxley Link but is there anywhere a mention of what will happen to Watford Met Stn. I was always led to believe it was a listed building. If this is the case does that mean it can't be demolished. Watford Met was the first station I worked at as a Booking Clerk under the old nomination system. (Does anybody remember that)
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Dec 14, 2011 12:37:31 GMT
Fantastic news!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 12:37:43 GMT
Pardon me for my ignorance on the current situation re Croxley Link but is there anywhere a mention of what will happen to Watford Met Stn. I was always led to believe it was a listed building. If this is the case does that mean it can't be demolished. Watford Met was the first station I worked at as a Booking Clerk under the old nomination system. (Does anybody remember that) In the short term Watford Met station will be used as a stabling point for stock. XF |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Dec 14, 2011 14:56:21 GMT
When the link is built who's to say what will happen wrt services over the north curve. As has been observed many times, a couple of WTT down the line and only the awkward ones who pay attention will care about or remember the original arrangements!  CRL will provide a good oppertunity to re-examine the entire fundamentals of service to the north including fasts, Chiltern and Chesham. Roll on an A stock tour to WJ though! |
|
kabsonline
Best SSL Train: S Stock Best Tube Train: 92 Stock
Posts: 686
|
Post by kabsonline on Dec 14, 2011 15:11:48 GMT
Watford Met was built with an extention to the town in mind. Why not pursue that and keep Watford Met open if you see what I mean?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 15:23:01 GMT
Watford Met was built with an extension to the town in mind. Why not pursue that and keep Watford Met open if you see what I mean? Tunneling from the Met Station to Watford Junction was an option which was considered in the past, however the costs were prohibitive and the Croxley Link solution is seen as being far more beneficial to wider area around Watford XF |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 17:02:30 GMT
The Met and Piccadilly have this issue on the Uxbridge branch without any problems. Tell that to my 86-year old mother who has problems getting in and out of a Metropolitan line train at Ruislip. Especially when the driver tries to close the doors when she's half way in. It's a taxi to Kings Cross from now on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 18:00:52 GMT
Does this mean that Watford Junction will be in Zone 8 or 9 rather than in it's own little world?
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 14, 2011 18:24:50 GMT
The Met and Piccadilly have this issue on the Uxbridge branch without any problems. Tell that to my 86-year old mother who has problems getting in and out of a Metropolitan line train at Ruislip. Especially when the driver tries to close the doors when she's half way in. It's a taxi to Kings Cross from now on. I can see why that's a problem. But even if the step was level, there would still be the issue ot using the stairs from the westbound platform to the exit. This is a classic example of whi step free access to trains is so meaningless at most stations, and why TFL had to change the way they identified it on the journey planner. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 18:46:59 GMT
Yay! Can't wait to see the viaduct go up over the A412. I think it will look cool. We've come a long way architecturally since the Westway.
If Watford station is a listed building, they could always turn it into a pub as happens to disused rail facilities in Watford.
Now all Watford needs is my monorail idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2011 18:52:50 GMT
Great news, Watford - Amersham and Aylesbury would be a nice service, or even chesham!
|
|
|
|
Post by thc on Dec 15, 2011 0:01:55 GMT
Tunneling from the Met Station to Watford Junction was an option which was considered in the past, however the costs were prohibitive and the Croxley Link solution is seen as being far more beneficial to wider area around Watford XF I've been following this project for years and have all the literature I can find on the Met in Watford and today is the first time I've ever come across any suggestion that the Met was considering extending beyond its town centre site at 44 High Street (Jamie Thompson on u.t.l beat you to the same idea by a whole afternoon). Care to substantiate or provide a source? THC |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 1:29:32 GMT
Does this mean that Watford Junction will be in Zone 8 or 9 rather than in it's own little world? I'm not convinced it would as London Midland would lose revenue which I believe is why it was excluded from the zones back in 2008. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
|
Post by Chris M on Dec 15, 2011 2:03:07 GMT
It may be possible to have the LM services in a different zone to the TfL services. ISTR asking some time ago about physical segregation of the TfL platforms and being told that it wouldn't be very practical.
Since then however pink readers have been invented, and so a requirement for pax to tap on the pink reader on the Met/LO platforms to get the lower fare would work. To stop fraudulent tapping and then travelling on LM, this tap would need to be visible to LM's on-train staff (presumably not difficult), and prevent exit (or charge a penalty/top up fare) at Euston and Wembley Central LM platforms without there being a subsequent touch elsewhere first. The same sort of thing might be possible at Bushey and Harrow and Wealdstone, but I can't remember the layouts at those stations with sufficient clarity to be certain. If physically possible, this shouldn't be any more difficult than the Tramlink arrangements at Wimbledon.
What Oyster really needs though is some form of train-based route proving. Off-peak this would be as simple as tapping an on-board reader, but on peak trains this isn't always going to be possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Dec 15, 2011 2:16:21 GMT
I've been following this project for years and have all the literature I can find on the Met in Watford and today is the first time I've ever come across any suggestion that the Met was considering extending beyond its town centre site at 44 High Street (Jamie Thompson on u.t.l beat you to the same idea by a whole afternoon). Care to substantiate or provide a source? Mr Jamie R Thompson I'll reply there rather than repeat myself  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 9:03:33 GMT
Tunneling from the Met Station to Watford Junction was an option which was considered in the past, however the costs were prohibitive and the Croxley Link solution is seen as being far more beneficial to wider area around Watford XF I've been following this project for years and have all the literature I can find on the Met in Watford and today is the first time I've ever come across any suggestion that the Met was considering extending beyond its town centre site at 44 High Street (Jamie Thompson on u.t.l beat you to the same idea by a whole afternoon). Care to substantiate or provide a source? THC Here it is - details on Page 18 www.croxleyraillink.com/media/30034/croxley%20rail%20link%20alternatives%20review%20report.pdfXF |
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Dec 15, 2011 13:54:28 GMT
Brilliant! I asked them explicitly for this information (somewhat surprising them I must say!) at the consultation and never heard back from them! Just what I was after.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Dec 15, 2011 14:56:24 GMT
to much looks to have been spent on this already,is it really required.
this will impact not only during construction with congestion, but visual impact.will have a detrimental affect on the area.also with chiltern railway planning to use this route with their diesel pollutant trains' this will additionally affect the area.
there is adequate bus transport to watford including harrow from greater london and gives further reason against this project.it would be interesting to see the cost recuperation timescale predictions too.
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Dec 15, 2011 15:28:37 GMT
The cost recuperation is mainly through the Croxley Business Park. I'm sure TfL are not expecting to recover their capital costs on this project for a long, long time if at all. The key question for TfL, I suspect, is will the revenue stream cover the operating costs?
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Dec 15, 2011 15:39:19 GMT
I've been following this project for years and have all the literature I can find on the Met in Watford and today is the first time I've ever come across any suggestion that the Met was considering extending beyond its town centre site at 44 High Street (Jamie Thompson on u.t.l beat you to the same idea by a whole afternoon). Care to substantiate or provide a source? THC Here it is - details on Page 18 www.croxleyraillink.com/media/30034/croxley%20rail%20link%20alternatives%20review%20report.pdfXF Hmm. After reading that, there are a few other options which were never considered. I wonder if they were even proposed? (1) reinstating the Wiggenhall Road bridge and running services from the DC line into Rickmansworth, Croxley, Watford Met etc. (2) turning the viaduct the other way, so that the CRL track terminates at the Met station instead of Croxley. A combination of these would allow LOROL from Euston to terminate at either Met. or Junction, and/or a LOROL shuttle could operate between the Met and the Junction. |
|
|
|
Post by mikebuzz on Dec 15, 2011 15:53:34 GMT
Tunneling from the Met Station to Watford Junction was an option which was considered in the past, however the costs were prohibitive and the Croxley Link solution is seen as being far more beneficial to wider area around Watford XF I've been following this project for years and have all the literature I can find on the Met in Watford and today is the first time I've ever come across any suggestion that the Met was considering extending beyond its town centre site at 44 High Street (Jamie Thompson on u.t.l beat you to the same idea by a whole afternoon). Care to substantiate or provide a source? THC Did you mean in the distant past? This thread may be of help: districtdave.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=met&action=display&thread=16444 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 15:53:44 GMT
The Croxley Green Moore option was an interesting idea - closing the Watford Met branch and removing the Watford triangle and effectively re-opening most of the Rickmansworth Church Street branch. Good old Sustrans scuppered on this - how much did they pay for the former trackbed £5 or £10 for the lot I bet?  Lord Ebury will be turning in his grave! XF |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 16:11:59 GMT
to much looks to have been spent on this already,is it really required. this will impact not only during construction with congestion, but visual impact.will have a detrimental affect on the area.also with chiltern railway planning to use this route with their diesel pollutant trains' this will additionally affect the area. there is adequate bus transport to watford including harrow from greater london and gives further reason against this project.it would be interesting to see the cost recuperation timescale predictions too. A bit melodramatic don't you think? Colossal is tabloid journalist speak for something that should simply be described as a viaduct! Diesel trains twice an hour polluting the area - what planet have you been living on all your life? Visual impact - it's outer suburban London we're talking about! Adequate bus transport - fine, how about you use only buses in future, with the additional benefit then of not being able to moan about the trains. A sense of proportion please, there are a lot worse things happening to people and in the world in general. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Dec 15, 2011 16:28:44 GMT
trt - yes, I've often wondered about that. Reinstating the triangle to the DC lines would provide a very large amount of potential flexibility, as the Croxley - Watford Hospital section would have a delta connexion at both ends.
Two things strike me about the report; the bias against services running over the north curve (despite the fact this is the far more progressive and revolutionary idea), and the fact that a shuttle service was considered to Ascot Road from WJ whereas a service Euston - Ascot Road over a rebuilt southern spur wasn't.
Just seems as though the report was written by someone who wasn't fully aware of local circumstances/history as might have been useful. The inclusion of the Mets original scheme though is a pleasant nod, however, the report strikes me as one written with the conclusion already decided beforehand. I don't want to seem harsh, but it remindes me of low level school science write ups.
Still, very glad to see it happen finally! Only been suggested since before Church Street closed...
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Dec 15, 2011 17:18:10 GMT
trt - yes, I've often wondered about that. Reinstating the triangle to the DC lines would provide a very large amount of potential flexibility, as the Croxley - Watford Hospital section would have a delta connexion at both ends. Two things strike me about the report; the bias against services running over the north curve (despite the fact this is the far more progressive and revolutionary idea), and the fact that a shuttle service was considered to Ascot Road from WJ whereas a service Euston - Ascot Road over a rebuilt southern spur wasn't. Just seems as though the report was written by someone who wasn't fully aware of local circumstances/history as might have been useful. The inclusion of the Mets original scheme though is a pleasant nod, however, the report strikes me as one written with the conclusion already decided beforehand. I don't want to seem harsh, but it remindes me of low level school science write ups. Still, very glad to see it happen finally! Only been suggested since before Church Street closed... Agreed - it smacks of post-decision write up, but thankfully in this case we got a decent option and we're not sitting here discussing a new misguided bus. The curve reinstatement proposed above is actually quite an interesting one, as operating the DC lines from Bushey exclusively via that, across the new link through to Rickmansworth, with the Met operating via the reopened NR line to Rickmansworth, interchanging at a new grade-separated station where they cross at Cardiff Road, would enable completely segregated services to operate, the only negative being that LO would cease to serve Watford High Street and Junction directly with a change being required. Effectively would enable the Watford Arches to go out of use saving on maintenance...but perhaps you could split the LO service at Bushey....2tph to Watford Junction and 2tph to Rickmansworth....or Bakerloo to Watford Junction and LO to Rickmansworth... Additionally...I've no idea whatsoever why they sabotaged the notion of a shuttle so readily by terminating it at Croxley! A shuttle turning back at Croxley would be useless, agreed....but one operating to the bay at Rickmansworth would be good...and one running to Chesham would be great! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 18:13:34 GMT
The that surprised me re the options report is that Watford - Rickmansworth & beyond option was only considered as a 'heavy' rail option to Aylesbury, not as an 'Underground' to Amersham one.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcard on Dec 15, 2011 22:04:58 GMT
to much looks to have been spent on this already,is it really required. there is adequate bus transport to watford including harrow from greater london and gives further reason against this project.it would be interesting to see the cost recuperation timescale predictions too. Clearly posted by someone who drives everywhere . The bus service between Watford Junction and say Northwood is appalling . Have you ever tried using the No. 8. This scheme is good news for the people of West Watford who don't happen to live in an expensive house in Cassiobury Park near the current station. Its good news for Watford and Saracens fans. Its good news for people in Northwood who want to shop at the Harlequin . Its a step in the right direction for the folk of Rickmansworth who can now get to the centre of Watford with a change at Moor Park and if Chiltern can be persuaded to part with £20m for a new platform 5 - we might yet get a Watford - Aylesbury service . |
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Dec 15, 2011 22:44:49 GMT
not so,just feel that there is plenty of access to watford as is and environmental impact of this project on croxley.it looks what it is a patchwork scheme.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 23:51:36 GMT
Just seems as though the report was written by someone who wasn't fully aware of local circumstances/history as might have been useful. ! If you look at the report it smacks of paying a consultant that knows very little about mass transit a lot of money to tell you what you already know! This document references sources from the late 1990's many of which have been published before or can be easily obtained! Option 12: Cycleway between Ascot Road and Watford Town Centre is one of the few new and laughable ideas; since when has cycling been a form of mass transit? Lots of nice ticks in the boxes at the end of this Report though. What a shame that a such a worthy project has to source such tosh as this report.  XF |
|
