|
|
Post by arrivaarriva on Nov 21, 2018 0:08:23 GMT
Am I correct in assuming that no TfL bus service serves this underground station? Does anyone know a simple route from either Watford High Street Station or Watford Junction Station. I know both stations but am unfamiliar with Watford generally.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 21, 2018 0:35:38 GMT
Am I correct in assuming that no TfL bus service serves this underground station? Does anyone know a simple route from either Watford High Street Station or Watford Junction Station. I know both stations but am unfamiliar with Watford generally. There is no TfL service that serves Watford Station - the only buses that serve the station are Vale Travel's 352 running from Watford to Hemel Hempstead & Red Rose's W30 running between the town centre & the business park. I've walked from Watford to Watford Junction before and it's a fair old slog - Google Maps is quoting 26 mins walking but as I'm a fast walker, I reckon it took me 15-20 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Nov 25, 2018 23:01:51 GMT
Am I correct in assuming that no TfL bus service serves this underground station? Does anyone know a simple route from either Watford High Street Station or Watford Junction Station. I know both stations but am unfamiliar with Watford generally. It’s walking I’m afraid. The 352 is only every 2 hours (only 5 buses in each direction Mon-Sat) and the W30 only serves the Met station in the peaks |
|
|
|
Post by ian on Nov 27, 2018 22:20:15 GMT
I am afraid you need to wait a decade/lifetime/indefinitely for the Croxley Rail Link.
|
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Nov 28, 2018 22:57:03 GMT
I am afraid you need to wait a decade/lifetime/indefinitely for the Croxley Rail Link. And then some. I really can't see the Croxley link being built unless Herts (it is Herts I think) suddenly find the money for the ballooning cost. I can't see the government funding it further, and TfL with its precarious finances has little incentive to do so give it is outside of London.
I could easily see a new regular bus service linking the two coming first, and that bus service isn't even on the horizon. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2018 12:47:37 GMT
I am afraid you need to wait a decade/lifetime/indefinitely for the Croxley Rail Link. And then some. I really can't see the Croxley link being built unless Herts (it is Herts I think) suddenly find the money for the ballooning cost. I can't see the government funding it further, and TfL with its precarious finances has little incentive to do so give it is outside of London.
I could easily see a new regular bus service linking the two coming first, and that bus service isn't even on the horizon. IIRC the powers to build the Met Line extension have either expired or do so very soon (as in next month). Therefore the alignment will cease to be protected unless Herts CC or Watford borough council impose planning constraints. As soon as anything new / permanent is built on or encroaches upon the alignment then it's gone forever. That probably also applies to any ideas about segregated bus roads which will need a similar width to a railway alignment. |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Nov 29, 2018 13:15:30 GMT
And then some. I really can't see the Croxley link being built unless Herts (it is Herts I think) suddenly find the money for the ballooning cost. I can't see the government funding it further, and TfL with its precarious finances has little incentive to do so give it is outside of London.
I could easily see a new regular bus service linking the two coming first, and that bus service isn't even on the horizon. IIRC the powers to build the Met Line extension have either expired or do so very soon (as in next month). Therefore the alignment will cease to be protected unless Herts CC or Watford borough council impose planning constraints. As soon as anything new / permanent is built on or encroaches upon the alignment then it's gone forever. That probably also applies to any ideas about segregated bus roads which will need a similar width to a railway alignment. Oh dear, as ever thanks snoggle , sounds dead in the water to me. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2018 13:29:35 GMT
IIRC the powers to build the Met Line extension have either expired or do so very soon (as in next month). Therefore the alignment will cease to be protected unless Herts CC or Watford borough council impose planning constraints. As soon as anything new / permanent is built on or encroaches upon the alignment then it's gone forever. That probably also applies to any ideas about segregated bus roads which will need a similar width to a railway alignment. Oh dear, as ever thanks snoggle , sounds dead in the water to me. The funding problem was never resolved. The Mayor refused to take on the extra project cost risk - rightly in my view. Government refused to budge on this point too citing the agreement that Mayor Johnson had signed. I think some extra funding from a housing development fund (for supporting infrastructure) was found to cover some of the increased cost but there was still huge uncertainty on the likely outturn cost. Also a Tory government is not going to dig a Labour mayor out a hole (even one created by a former Tory mayor). The politics were therefore pretty poisonous. A lot of this is due to very shoddy planning years ago and some very dubious financial moves by HCC. When TfL were made responsible for the project their review caused costs and risks to escalate hugely - because they were using railway costings whereas Herts's consultants had used highway costings (I think). Worse the more work that was done to finalise the design the more the costs went up. Even descoping the new stations to a minimum standard didn't help very much. We then had a load of issues about signal integration with Network Rail's DC lines and the possible timing of works to create the new junction near Watford High Street - there were very few opportunities to do this work because of the impact of the signalling changes affecting the WCML too. IIRC NR's costs were also huge and kept going up too. As the costs kept rising the business case evaporated as the benefits side of the equation was never very strong. Why would you spend over £300m on a project that will never deliver benefits anywhere near that level? Answer - you don't! It is almost a text book example of how not to plan and design an extension to a railway line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2018 14:13:54 GMT
Oh dear, as ever thanks snoggle , sounds dead in the water to me. The funding problem was never resolved. The Mayor refused to take on the extra project cost risk - rightly in my view. Government refused to budge on this point too citing the agreement that Mayor Johnson had signed. I think some extra funding from a housing development fund (for supporting infrastructure) was found to cover some of the increased cost but there was still huge uncertainty on the likely outturn cost. Also a Tory government is not going to dig a Labour mayor out a hole (even one created by a former Tory mayor). The politics were therefore pretty poisonous. A lot of this is due to very shoddy planning years ago and some very dubious financial moves by HCC. When TfL were made responsible for the project their review caused costs and risks to escalate hugely - because they were using railway costings whereas Herts's consultants had used highway costings (I think). Worse the more work that was done to finalise the design the more the costs went up. Even descoping the new stations to a minimum standard didn't help very much. We then had a load of issues about signal integration with Network Rail's DC lines and the possible timing of works to create the new junction near Watford High Street - there were very few opportunities to do this work because of the impact of the signalling changes affecting the WCML too. IIRC NR's costs were also huge and kept going up too. As the costs kept rising the business case evaporated as the benefits side of the equation was never very strong. Why would you spend over £300m on a project that will never deliver benefits anywhere near that level? Answer - you don't! It is almost a text book example of how not to plan and design an extension to a railway line. And the answers is, look at the Northern line's Battersea extension [albeit extended for different purposes] |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Nov 29, 2018 14:26:01 GMT
Oh dear, as ever thanks snoggle , sounds dead in the water to me. The funding problem was never resolved. The Mayor refused to take on the extra project cost risk - rightly in my view. Government refused to budge on this point too citing the agreement that Mayor Johnson had signed. I think some extra funding from a housing development fund (for supporting infrastructure) was found to cover some of the increased cost but there was still huge uncertainty on the likely outturn cost. Also a Tory government is not going to dig a Labour mayor out a hole (even one created by a former Tory mayor). The politics were therefore pretty poisonous. A lot of this is due to very shoddy planning years ago and some very dubious financial moves by HCC. When TfL were made responsible for the project their review caused costs and risks to escalate hugely - because they were using railway costings whereas Herts's consultants had used highway costings (I think). Worse the more work that was done to finalise the design the more the costs went up. Even descoping the new stations to a minimum standard didn't help very much. We then had a load of issues about signal integration with Network Rail's DC lines and the possible timing of works to create the new junction near Watford High Street - there were very few opportunities to do this work because of the impact of the signalling changes affecting the WCML too. IIRC NR's costs were also huge and kept going up too. As the costs kept rising the business case evaporated as the benefits side of the equation was never very strong. Why would you spend over £300m on a project that will never deliver benefits anywhere near that level? Answer - you don't! It is almost a text book example of how not to plan and design an extension to a railway line. To be honest if I were Mayor I wouldn't fund it either. Perhaps it would have been better to extend the Overground NLL from Watford Junction to the three proposed stops and leave the Met line alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2018 16:25:44 GMT
And the answers is, look at the Northern line's Battersea extension [albeit extended for different purposes] I'll reserve judgement about the NLE if you don't mind. We know there is a multi million pound (as in possibly 8 or 9 digits big) claim due to the BPS developer forcing a redesign of one of the new Underground stations. The scheme was also delayed for months while the redesign work proceeded. We know nothing about whether the developer has coughed up the money for the redesign and will compensate LU for delay / extra costs and possible breach of the funding agreement which requires the station to open on a given date. I've not seen any statements from LU that the NLE remains on time nor on budget. If LU has to bear *any* of extra costs and has not been able to get the completion data changed then it will have to find millions of pounds which it just doesn't have. I agree some of the physical works seem to be proceeding reasonably well but that is typically the easy bit - especially on land where you have relatively easy access and few people around you to get in the way. Getting the line linked into the Northern Line's signalling and control system and getting all the systems and stations commissioned is the hard bit. |
|
