Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2009 14:34:48 GMT
What is the point of the ELT? Why go to all the expense of creating a 'dedicated route' (=a few new bus lanes) just for a limp 10 bus per hour service? Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Jan 5, 2009 14:43:32 GMT
It's watered down trams, and was going to be upgradable. It's now become high quality bus routes, watered down from the Fastrack type thing that was the watering down from Trams.
Greenwich Waterfront Transit has had a similar thing of watering down. The loss of the Thames Gateway Bridge also makes both projects more pointless.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Jan 6, 2009 20:38:51 GMT
Something has to go to pay for replacing bendy buses which presumably haven't had their costs written off yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Jan 6, 2009 22:53:19 GMT
Seeing as this was watered down under Ken, Peterc you are wrong.
It was a victim of over-planning more than anything - Ken decided that East London deserved a tram like South London (North London's came to nothing much of a plan) and the business came back and said "not the demand to warrant that yet - build something and upgrade later". I was wrong about it being watered down a second time - it still is the almost fully segregated busway thing. That John Prescott's Thames Gateway housing projects were watered down lowered the business case more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2009 23:05:54 GMT
Is it almost fully segregated? Where does that fit into Ilford Lane, Fanshawe avenue and Ripple road?
As far as I can see it's a segregated route through Barking, and possibly a segregated route at the Dagenham dock end, but that's no more than 50% of the route. The rest of it is pretty much bus lanes, unless they're demolishing properties?
|
|
