Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2006 17:24:14 GMT
WARNING: Creative thought alert!
Being a Walthamstow man, I'm constantly annoyed by the lack of a rail link between Walthamstow/Chingford to Stratford (only 'south' Leyton on the Central has anything), so getting to places like Canary Wharf entails a very long journey by bus (sometimes up to 45 mins from north Walthamstow if the traffic's bad) to [south!] Leyton station and then a one stop journey.
At one time there was section of track connecting the Chingford-Liverpool Street Line [as it passes over] to the Temple Mills line, but this was removed and One have consistently stated that they will not reinstate any Chingford to somewhere via Stratford services as they are not considered to be profitable.
But (and I'm getting to the point, please bear with me!), now that Waltham Forest is to be one of the 5 Olympic boroughs, surely not having a direct rail link to Stratford is contradictory to this title? If the borough is going to provide accomodation for tourists potentially (or something like that, provide services anyway), then we need something more up here than buses to Stratford.
I propose extending the North London Line from its new platforms at Stratford (the old ones, IIRC, being taken for the new DLR extension) along the Temple Mills line in between Stanstead services, reinstating the bend connecting the line to the Chingford line, and have Silverlink trains calling at ...Stratford, St. James Street, Walthamstow Central and all stations to Chingford. Not only does this aid residents of the borough who work in East London and Canary Wharf, but will also ensure a reasonable-capacity rail link for the Olympics in 2012. Where One won't take it on, could TfL, who are a 'State' organisation, be prepared to take on a service instead?
It needn't be a heavy service (a proportion of trains could reverse at Stratford as they do now, but in this case to be able to fit in with Stanstead Express and Chingford-Liverpool Street trains), but at least one every half hour will help the traffic situation in Walthamstow and Leyton High Road considerably and ensure that necessary rail connection for 2012.
Just wondering if people here have any comments, and, is there any realistic way of getting TfL to listen to me and consider such a proposal if they haven't already? ;D
(Thanks for your time, chaps, you are now dismissed from essay hell!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2006 17:31:15 GMT
I thought that the Seven Sisters - Stratford service has been reinstated/upgraded recently? Surely from Chingford this helps?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2006 17:49:31 GMT
After deeper research, plus discovering that Stansted only has one 'a' in it (and feeling like a thorough idiot overall ;D) you're correct. I thought it was only Stansted Express going through Stratford! Still, though, it's not a very direct route, with the possibility of having to take 3 seperate trains (Chingford-Walthamstow, Walthamstow-Seven Sisters, Seven Sisters-Stratford) an inconvenience (those travelling to Canary Wharf would then use the Jubilee!). Thanks seniorplanner for that info, though. I'll have to travel on that route sometime! I still think a more direct service is needed though than the one you suggested, although it certainly helps as you say. Edit: Found a timetable, and it's not good. On weekdays, there are very few trains that stop at Seven Sisters  look here |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2006 19:07:00 GMT
Argh, found an article saying TfL have no interest either, according to alwaystouchout.com www.alwaystouchout.com/project/59Oh well, back to the Underground-related forums for me! |
|
|
|
Post by thc on Jan 3, 2006 8:50:45 GMT
Keep the ideas coming Biolizard. I for one feel that the NLL is being left somewhat high-and-dry by terminating at Stratford post-DLR extension. Extending it from the proposed platforms 11 and 12 to Tottenham Hale at the least would allow for a whole new set of journey possibilities and IIRC won't superimpose too many operational headaches on the existing service permutation.
THC
|
|
|
|
Post by russe on Jan 3, 2006 17:01:42 GMT
I for one feel that the NLL is being left somewhat high-and-dry by terminating at Stratford post-DLR extension. Extending it from the proposed platforms 11 and 12 to Tottenham Hale at the least would allow for a whole new set of journey possibilities and IIRC won't superimpose too many operational headaches on the existing service permutation. As a 'sarf Leyton type, I expect Biolizard might be a bit envious of me, but I agree the Stratford to Walthamstow corridor is and has always been a bit problematic. There is no shortage of buses, the 69s and 97s and 158s being extremely well patronised, sometimes too much so in peak periods, proving that a lot of people do use the corridor, the only problem being of course the rest of the road traffic (traversing the Lea Bridge Road being the main bottleneck), not to mention the restricted and congested Walthamstow Bus Station. The new One service from Stratford to Broxborne (etc) stops at Tottenham Hale, so Walthamstowites can at least now get a Vic to there to get south, but the One service is I think only hourly, so is not much use for those who want a frequent link. Biolizard's NLL extension idea has merit, but I can't see anyone forking out for the reinstatement of the old Hall Farm curve. The other problem is that the proposed new NLL platforms at Stratford (see here for a 800k scan) are terminating platforms, so NLL trains could not proceed up the southern end of the Lea Valley line. Under the current proposals, these new platforms are "to be constructed by the DLR". In this respect, I agree with thc that Silverlink is being squeezed at Stratford - One has already jumped into the Lea Valley slot, and the DLR itself has eyes on the Olympic area and possibly north of that as well. I think Silverlink is relieved not to have been squeezed out of Stratford altogether. Realistically, for high-frequency inner-urban traffic, it is the DLR who might be best suited to expand its empire into the Walthamstow environs. Btw, the formal comment date for commenting (to the Dept of Transport) on the new arrangements at Stratford was 16 December. I can provide the Dept of Transport e-mail contact via PM if anyone wants it. (I have objected to the silly platform-numbering proposals.) On reflection, making at least one of the new NLL platforms a through one would be very sensible, but I suspect any comment to that effect will run into the heavy politics dominating the Stratford/Olympics issue. 'course, if we were living a hundred years ago, there would be no problem - frequent trams sped along the Leyton High Road without impediment.  Russ |
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Jan 3, 2006 19:02:21 GMT
The best thing would be to expand the Jubilee Line northward but that would be very expensive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2006 19:51:16 GMT
The best thing would be to expand the Jubilee Line northward but that would be very expensive. Indeed, an extension calling at Walthamstow Central and Chingford Mount (another underserved area) would be great, but about as likely to happen as District T/ops liking Circles! However, I wonder whether, as you said RussE, with the chosen DLR configuration at Stratford International (a loop for a possible extension to Temple Mills station) that an extension to Walthamstow via DLR may be an option, considering how successful the DLR has been so far and that it can all be done relatively cheaply? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2006 0:11:19 GMT
After sifting through a load of maps and satellite images, I reckon the DLR to Walthamstow could be an option. The line leaves Stratford International and bends round to run parallel to the Temple Mills line. Potential stations could be Ruckholt Road (for Leyton Orient FC and the proposed Olympic site around here) and Lea Bridge Road (for bus connections). These stations could be placed upon allotments such as this one between Gateway Road and Auckland Road: hereThe problem now is getting the line to somewhere. St. James Street station is useful and would only require minimal tunnelling, if any. However a terminus here would place the DLR at the wrong end of Walthamstow Market really, and could cause the line to have far less patronage as a result of the inconvenient interchange for some. Blackhorse Road is a possibility, as no tunnelling would be needed whatsoever (although there could be land issues just before Blackhorse Road station) and there's interchange with the Gospel Oak-Barking and Victoria lines. But, it's not helpful to Chingford folk and bus services connecting Walthamstow Central to here are fairly poor. It's very 'out of the way' and may not have the patronage, again, that the line could expect if it went to the right place instead. Walthamstow Central is the preferred choice. A DLR station at the end of the car park would mean links to the Chingford line, Victoria line and Queens Road station, but getting there will not be easy. A viaduct over half of Walthamstow will obviously not work like it can in industrial areas, so unless it could be squeezed in besides the Chingford line (there's a line of trees on both sides of the track, so single track from St. James Steet onwards, perhaps?) then an expensive tunnel will need to be bored, which I can't see being afforded. The preferred solution, therefore, from an amateur Tube enthusiast's POV, is single track from west of St. James Street onwards, with the DLR being squeezed in alongside NR, calling at St. James Street (God knows how a DLR station willl work here, but let's pretend!) and Walthamstow Central (considering it'll be only two car trains, I think some of the car park could be pinched for a small station, or it could be placed over the car park or something?). Single track will be a capacity issue, but there's potential for a passing loop east of the Selbourne Road-Palmerston Road junction (looking at Google Earth) and there needn't be single track until St. James Street station, so a fairly regular service is still possible (according to the Stratford International docs on the DLR site, 5tph from Beckton and 5tph from Woolwich Arsenal to Stratford International. This kind of service wouldn't be needed between Walthamstow and Stratford I suspect (5/6tph should be enough at the most!) so some trains could be turned back at Stratford International or Ruckholt Road for example). Edit:On second thoughts, only 3/4 tph would be enough, so the line could be single track in a lot of places to be cost effective. So....any chance something like this could happen, considering DLR's applauded history of providing much needed regeneration rail links on the cheap? |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,766
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 4, 2006 0:33:05 GMT
'course, if we were living a hundred years ago, there would be no problem - frequent trams sped along the Leyton High Road without impediment. Russ Given that (AFAIUI) the Croydon Tramlink has been a great sucess, what about a Walthamstow - Chingford - Stratford tram system? You could have lots of stops in the olympic area distributing some of the demand. I don't know the area at all thoguh so I don't know how practical it would be. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2006 10:10:18 GMT
'course, if we were living a hundred years ago, there would be no problem - frequent trams sped along the Leyton High Road without impediment. Russ Given that (AFAIUI) the Croydon Tramlink has been a great sucess, what about a Walthamstow - Chingford - Stratford tram system? You could have lots of stops in the olympic area distributing some of the demand. I don't know the area at all thoguh so I don't know how practical it would be. Hmm.....possibly, but there are some fairly steep gradients in the area, dunno if that would make life hard for trams, and it wouldn't be able to get into Walthamstow bus station because of the tight bends. Otherwise, sounds good, but tbh it's still road transport and would mean more congestion. Unless, it uses a rail route like Tramlink for most of the way, which is most desirable but also expensive. Oh the joys of planning on a budget! |
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Jan 4, 2006 12:11:57 GMT
The problem with a DLR extension (more particularly with 2 car trains) or a tram would be that in the long run the capacity would not be sufficient enough as lines like this created to offer a new link between two important places always end up with more than expected patronage.
As the cost-benefits ratio of a new link like this would be important, in my opinion an "hard" solution should be considered with a tube or a rail link.
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Jan 4, 2006 12:54:39 GMT
The problem with a DLR extension (more particularly with 2 car trains) or a tram would be that in the long run the capacity would not be sufficient enough as lines like this created to offer a new link between two important places always end up with more than expected patronage. As the cost-benefits ratio of a new link like this would be important, in my opinion an "hard" solution should be considered with a tube or a rail link. Bring back the Trolleybus's I say |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 4, 2006 13:11:23 GMT
Bring back the Trolleybus's I say Sorry Q8 - with today's traffic I'd say that was the worst of all options (even worse than guided busways.......) |
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Jan 4, 2006 19:04:06 GMT
A trolleybus would only efficient enough in his own separate way, and for the price of the separate busway this is better to build a full tram system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2006 20:37:38 GMT
The problem with a DLR extension (more particularly with 2 car trains) or a tram would be that in the long run the capacity would not be sufficient enough as lines like this created to offer a new link between two important places always end up with more than expected patronage. As the cost-benefits ratio of a new link like this would be important, in my opinion an "hard" solution should be considered with a tube or a rail link. Well a Tube extension isn't going to happen, since Walthamstow already has the Victoria line when Hackney has nothing, and to extend a line such as the Jubilee for a few stations will probably not justify the costs involved in all the Admin etc. There's nowhere else to go, either, as the area is bordered by the Central to the East and the West Anglia lines to the West, with Epping Forest to the North (oh, well there's Sewardstone but I doubt a Tube station there is worth it). If I could I would extend the Jubilee via Stratford, (possibly Baker's Arms or Leyton Midland Road), Walthamstow Central and terminating at Chingford Mount. But it'll never happen due to the need to restructure the Jubilee at Stratford and because it's only a very small extension which TfL think doesn't need doing. So, the cheapest solution (and the one which has been bounded around all along) is to reinstate the Hall Farm Curve and run some Silverlink trains along the Temple Mills line to Chingford (or some One trains via Stratford to Liverpool Street, but there's already congestion at the latter station anyway). For a couple of million pounds, it's a relatively cheap project. I can't see why TfL continually state that they see no business in it, Leyton High Road in the peaks is all the evidence needed! Even then, if the Curve is rebuilt, it'll only be 4 trains per hour max using current NLL service patterns. These have to be fit in with the Chingford-Liverpool St. services (which are higher priority) but also all the Temple Mills line traffic, so these considerations could mean a severely limited service, especially in peaks, so this solution may not work well anyway. Edit: The real problem is that areas like Waltham Forest are dense suburbs with established rail lines and few other areas where tracks can be built, so it's either underground boring or running alongside present tracks if some sort of new line is to be created, which is why a Tramlink solution wouldn't work offroad and onroad could backfire and create more congestion than ever. Edit2: The only way I could see a Jubilee extension is either a) they took it through Waltham Forest, Sewardstone and ending at Waltham Abbey. b) they go through Walthamstow, hit Chingford Mount, turn right into Friday Hill, Woodford Wells to take over Roding Valley-Hainault from the Central. But both of these situations is very highly unlikely IMO. Looks like it's just me, Paint Shop Pro, a Tube map and my fantasy world..... |
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Jan 5, 2006 17:54:42 GMT
4 tph would be fine as a 8 car commuter train can take a lot of passengers; but as you have said the congestion of the others line would be a problem which will only be solved when Crossrail line 2 will be built.
|
|
