London = Reconnections

skip to main = | skip to = sidebar=20

Friday, 20 November 2009

The=20 South London Line In Parliament

Last week saw Simon Hughes and = Martin=20 Linton bring up the question of the South London Line in Parliament. = Although it=20 doesn't really add hugely to the debate, the dialogue between themselves = and=20 Chris Mole, representing the Department for Transport, does neatly set = out some=20 of the perspectives on both sides of the SLL debate. With this in mind, = I=20 believe it's worth summarising it here.

As the parliamentary=20 representative for North Southwark and Bermondsey, Simon Hughes' = interest in the=20 fate of the South London Line is easy to understand. His stated aim here = was to=20 secure confirmation from the DfT that they would not oppose a solution = to the=20 South London Line problem, assuming funding could be found. As he = confessed, it=20 may seem an issue of negligable importance in the grand scheme of = things, but at=20 a local level he believed it had serious ramifications.

I accept that it is not in the same league as ending the = nuclear=20 arms race [the discussion before this one], but for people who live = and work=20 in or visit this great capital city of ours, the future of the South = London=20 line is very important.

Hughes began his arguments = with a point=20 that will be familiar to many South Londoners:

Those of us who have represented south London for a while = have had=20 many battles about transport. I was reflecting earlier on a debate = that=20 occurred when I was first elected, in which Lynda Chalker =E2=80=94 = now Baroness=20 Chalker=E2=80=94was a Transport Minister. I remember that she conceded = that south-east=20 London was a white hole on the London transport map and that we needed = to do=20 something about it. In those days, the first battle was to persuade = London=20 Underground, as it then was, to extend the Bakerloo line down to New = Cross to=20 connect with the East London line, and to extend the Northern line = down to=20 Camberwell. Both of those extensions seemed entirely logical to = everyone =E2=80=94 the=20 space was available and there were old railway lines at the = Bricklayers Arms=20 yards =E2=80=94 but we lost those opportunities, which was a mistake, = as the=20 congestion on our roads and buses ever since has shown. I am keen to = ensure=20 that we do not lose another opportunity to sustain the level of train = and rail=20 services, especially given the changed pattern of = services.

Both=20 Hughes and Linton (MP for Battersea) then stressed that they felt that = while=20 South London possesed much in the way of infrastructure, too often = long-distance=20 commuters received priority upon it, rather than services that would = benefit=20 South Londoners. Hughes highlighted the number of local stations that = have=20 disappeared in the South as evidence of this:

This morning at the Armistice day service in Bermondsey, = someone=20 who had heard that I would be having this debate asked me, "Are you = also=20 campaigning to make sure that the Spa Road station is reopened?" There = used to=20 be more stations like that one, and one of the great battles of recent = years=20 has been trying to get the train services to service the people of our = communities and not just to pass through, over or under us. I have = some=20 suggestions on ways we can ensure that it does not happen=20 again.

Hughes continued by highlighting other projects = that,=20 over the years, he felt had short-changed (or attempted to short change) = South=20 London. The Jubilee Line received a mention:

the proposal that was the main runner was for the line to = run from=20 Waterloo to
London Bridge and then directly to Canary Wharf without = stopping anywhere in between. That case required private legislation, = and I am=20 happy to say that I blocked it for long enough to achieve what was = needed. I=20 later saw a memo that said something like, "If we don=E2=80=99t give = in to the local=20 MP, we're never going to get this line at all." So I think that the = most=20 prized success of my political life has been winning two extra tube = stations =E2=80=94=20 one in Southwark and one in Bermondsey =E2=80=94 at a cost of =C2=A325 = million each. They=20 are very valued stations, and it would have been a nonsense to have a = tube=20 line extension that did not stop to serve the local business and = resident=20 communities, and visitors. Fortunately, we were = successful.

He=20 also highlighted the battles that have taken place over the East London = Line=20 over the years, and both the need for it to be rebuilt and expanded into = the=20 Overground line it soon will be, and the extension to be built as part = of Phase=20 2.

Finally, Hughes highlighted the current Thameslink project, = and its=20 effects on both the style and substance of Borough Market and the need = to catch=20 night services from St Pancras.

Ultimately, Hughes' claimed, his = argument=20 was simple:

I do not accept that as a result of Thameslink, all services = on=20 the South London line should finish because it is impossible to = accommodate=20 them at London Bridge. I know the lay-out of London Bridge and I = understand=20 the arguments =E2=80=94 it needs more through track and through = platforms and fewer=20 terminus platforms=E2=80=94but I do not think it impossible in = engineering or=20 structural terms to continue the service. That would mean that people = starting=20 at Victoria or any other stop on the line could carry on around the = same line=20 to London Bridge, or vice versa. That is important because clearly, = people who=20 live and work in my constituency or visit it find it more convenient = to use=20 one train than to change trains, with all the uncertainty that that = always=20 produces.

I argue, therefore, that rather than promising a = service that=20 will always connect - because, with the best will in the world, it = does not=20 always connect=E2=80=94it is better to keep the existing good service, = even if it does=20 not run as frequently as it does currently. If people know that there = is a=20 regular service twice, three times or four times an hour, they can = organise=20 their lives accordingly. If people know that it is more frequent = during rush=20 hour than the rest of the day and on weekdays than at weekends, they = can=20 organise their lives.

Hughes claimed that there = were three=20 good reasons for keeping the South London Line in some = form.

Firstly,=20 that boroughs such as Southwark and Bermondsey are likely to see major=20 population growth over the coming years.

Secondly, he argues that = a=20 direct service between London Bridge, South Bermondsey and Denmark Hill = (which=20 he points out has recently been refurbished) is important due to the = number of=20 Hospitals this route covers:

[Denmark Hill] is the station for King=E2=80=99s College = hospital and the=20 Maudsley hospital. London Bridge is the station for Guy=E2=80=99s = hospital. Both serve=20 the university partnership, with the students and those who teach = them, at=20 Guy=E2=80=99s and St. Thomas=E2=80=99s and King=E2=80=99s. There are = huge numbers of patients, plus=20 all those pursuing their academic life. The numbers of patients are = almost=20 unexpectedly high. There are 2 million patients locally, and a = potential 5=20 million patients using the hospitals, as they are specialist teaching=20 hospitals. The Maudsley, with its Institute of Psychiatry, is the = premier=20 psychiatric hospital in the country, and Guy=E2=80=99s is hugely busy = internationally=20 as well as nationally. We are talking about very large numbers indeed. = For=20 those people, the South London line is important, particularly for the = mentally ill, physically ill or disabled. Changing trains or finding = access to=20 stations difficult adds to the burden, risk and difficulty or puts = people off=20 altogether, and they resort to other, more expensive forms of = transport such=20 as their own private car or a cab.

Thirdly, Hughes = claims that=20 the presence of Millwall FC should be taken into consideration:

the New Den is at South Bermondsey, and is used regularly.=20 Millwall, happily, are doing fantastically well again, having just won = in the=20 cup on Monday, and they are shooting back up to the top of their = league. It is=20 also used for other events, not just football. It would be nonsense if = we cut=20 off people=E2=80=99s direct access to such an important = venue.

Linton=20 then built on Hughes' arguments by pointing out that the removal of the = SLL=20 would leave Wandsworth Road without a direct link to Victoria, and leave = Battersea Park without a direct connection to the SLL = stations.

Linton's=20 main argument was that this could be avoided through selective door = operation=20 (of course, it is probably fair to say that this is an = oversimplification):

Service into Victoria from all of them could be accommodated = easily provided that Network Rail got over its embarrassment at having = selective door opening so close to Victoria. That seems to be the only = reason=20 holding it back grom continuing a direct link to Victoria from those=20 stations.

Hughes then returned to the debate, and=20 highlighted that although the publicised Options study - exploring = possible=20 alternatives to the SLL - was underway and would be finalised shortly, = it was=20 important to keep any discussion of possible options focussed on finding = a=20 solution that maintained a connection to all stations on the loop, if it = was in=20 any way possible.

It was Chris Mole, Parliamentary = Under-Secretary of=20 State for Transport who was tasked with provided the DfT's response to = the=20 comments made by Hughes and Linton. He was blunt and to the point - he=20 highlighted that the South London Line comprised two services at 30 = minute=20 intervals that ran as two carriage formations off peak and four carriage = at=20 peak. Only Wandsworth Road and Clapham High Street, he pointed out, are = not=20 served by alternate services already. He then commented on the usage = figures for=20 SLL Services

These services on the South London Line, although busy in = peak=20 periods, do not have a material crowding problem. Indeed, the latest=20 "passenger in excess of capacity" figures for autumn 2008 show fewer=20 passengers than overall capacity on all = trains.

Chris Mole=20 then moved on to highlighting the inate problems upgrading London Bridge = presented to maintaining all existing services to the = station:

It is simply not possible to rebuild a Victorian station = that is=20 situated on a viaduct in a congested part of central London without = some=20 disruption to services. We all recognise that that reduction in the = number of=20 services that can operate into London Bridge is not ideal but, as they = say, it=20 is simply not possible to make an omelette without breaking some=20 eggs.

Mole then laid out in simple terms the = original=20 post-SLL plans:

The original plan, as consulted on by Network Rail as part = of the=20 South London route utilisation strategy=E2=80=94or = RUS=E2=80=94document, was to divert the=20 South London line service away from London Bridge. That would have = created a=20 new Victoria to Bellingham service south of Catford, where sidings = exist to=20 allow trains on that service to terminate.

The reason for the = diversion=20 of the South London line between Peckham Rye and London Bridge is that = that=20 line carries the smallest number of passengers into London Bridge of = all the=20 services into London Bridge. Typically in the morning peak period, = some 350=20 people are on each of the South London line trains arriving at London = Bridge=20 between 8 am and 9 am. The evening peak loadings are significantly = lower than=20 that.

I recognise that changes to these services will = consequently=20 impact on these current users. However, similar train services into = London=20 Bridge carry more than double the number of passengers compared with = the South=20 London line, and South London Line passengers from Peckham Rye, = Queen=E2=80=99s Road=20 Peckham, and South Bermondsey will have other services that they can = use,=20 which operate from the East Dulwich corridor. For example, South = Bermondsey=20 would still have six trains an hour to London Bridge at peak times and = four=20 trains an hour in off-peak times.

Although it was recognised = that links=20 between South London line stations west of Peckham Rye and London = Bridge would=20 be cut, journeys would still be possible via a change of train at = Peckham Rye=20 or Queens Road, Peckham, and that is without having to change=20 platform.

As to why those plans would now not be carried = out.=20 Mole was again concise and to the point - and also clearly indicated who = the DfT=20 felt should carry any burden of blame (bolding mine).

It was the Department's intention to implement a Victoria to = Bellingham service in late 2012 in place of the existing Victoria to = London=20 Bridge service. The service changes made by TfL now mean that such a=20 replacement strategy will not be implemented as originally planned. = The=20 changes were made at the request of the Mayor and=20 TfL.

Mole then went into some detail describing = the=20 background to the ELL Extension Phase 2, beginning with what could = perhaps be=20 interpretted as a subtle dig from the DfT on the issue of transport=20 priorities:

I turn now to the East London line extension phase 2 to = Clapham=20 Junction. The south London route utilisation strategy highlighted the=20 potential benefits that the extension of the East London line to = Clapham=20 Junction would bring to this area of south London in providing new = orbital=20 links to and from south, west, east, north and north-east London and = reducing=20 passenger congestion on London Bridge while rebuilding works were = under way.=20 However, despite a significant increase in the budget made available = to them=20 in recent years, TfL and the Mayor did not believe that the =C2=A375 = million scheme=20 was affordable within the TfL budget. That reflected the priority that = the=20 Mayor gave to this scheme against other transport improvements in=20 London.

Mole continued:

The Department recognised that the East London line would = deliver=20 some additional benefits to passengers, and therefore accepted the=20 responsibility to fund a =C2=A319 million addition to Network = Rail=E2=80=99s borrowings to=20 fund works on the national rail network. It also supplied a further = =C2=A320=20 million increase to TfL=E2=80=99s overall grant to fund part of the = East London line=20 project and help fund other transport schemes in London. I understand = that=20 around =C2=A315 million of that was earmarked for the East London=20 line.

It was at this point, Mole claimed, that TfL = approached=20 the DfT and requested the decision be made that would ultimately lead to = the=20 current sitution:

TfL therefore proposed to fill the funding gap by = withdrawing the=20 replacement South London line service to Bellingham in its entirety = from late=20 2012, with the money saved being diverted towards the capital costs of = the=20 East London line extension. The cost savings over 10 years for not = operating=20 this service were =C2=A324 million, which the Department agreed to = provide to=20 TfL.

Put simply, as far as the DfT was (and indeed one = assumes=20 remains) concerned. The decision was TfL's and TfL's alone. Something = Mole then=20 elaborated on further:

TfL made the judgment that the East London line service to = Clapham=20 Junction provided better overall benefits than the South London line = to=20 Bellingham. As London=E2=80=99s transport planning body, it is = entirely appropriate=20 that it should make that judgment and assess the trade-offs between = the=20 different service proposals, especially as the service operates solely = within=20 the zone 2 boundary.

TfL analysis showed that some 12 million = people=20 would use the second phase of the East London line, compared with 5 = million=20 who would use the Bellingham service.

The DfT's points = made,=20 Linton asked what he regarded as a simple question - did the DfT believe = that it=20 would be a simple matter to restore service to several stations be = adding stops=20 to existing services.

Mole, in reply, indicated that there were a = number=20 of options under consideration, but once again returned to what appeared = to be=20 the DfT's simple, and brutal, point. Options may exist, but they are not = the=20 DfT's decision to make:

The decision not to implement the proposed London Victoria = to=20 Bellingham service was requested by TfL and the Mayor. Implementing = both the=20 Bellingham service and the East London line would have been ideal. TfL = and the=20 Mayor judged that the East London line extension provided more = benefits than=20 the South London line and decided to use funds allocated to a = replacement=20 Victoria to Bellingham service to finance a shortfall in funding = allocated by=20 the Mayor to the East London line. As a result, central Government = will be=20 funding over three quarters of the overall budget for the scheme, with = the=20 Mayor funding around =C2=A317 million.

The DfT would = approach=20 Southeastern on TfL's behalf, he indicated, to raise the question of the = possibility of adding stops to services run under that Franchise but the = DfT's=20 attitude would remain the same:

Let me be clear. Funding in forthcoming years will be tight = and we=20 would expect TfL to fund any additional services, given that the = Victoria to=20 Bellingham service would have maintained these links and that TfL = requested=20 that that service should not be implemented.

This, = effectively,=20 marked the end of the debate. Mole finished by pointing out that whilst = services=20 to the Hospitals named by Simon Hughes would indeed be affected, other=20 improvements already underway in the area - including the ELL line - = would=20 compensite for these.

Thus, with the attitudes of both = Parliamentary=20 Members and the DfT clearly laid out, the debate ended. Concurrent with = this=20 meeting, a delegation from the London Assembly and the Mayor were in = discussion=20 with Mole's colleague at the DfT, Sadiq Khan, over possible options. Val = Shawcross indicated afterwards that this had been a relatively fruitful=20 discussion and the DfT had seemed open to ideas.

If Mole's = comments in=20 Parliament are any guide, however, it seems there are two areas which = the DfT=20 are likely to be more closed on - funding and blame.=20

Thursday, 19 November 2009

New=20 ELL Footbridge

Daimler_fan has kindly passed on some = photos of=20 the new footbridge at Trundley's Terrace/Oldfield Grove. The original = was=20 removed as part of the early ELL works and it's good to see that access = across=20 the line will soon be restored (if, indeed, it hasn't opened = already).

=20

Monday, 16 November 2009

In=20 Pictures: 38 Debendification

Did any readers commute on one = this=20 morning?

the = warning signs=20 last week, courtesy anonymous MMS sender

Replacements at the Lea Bridge roundabout = yesterday,=20 courtesy of me on the way to the pub.

On the = inside,=20 courtesy of my Missus earlier today.

Pulling up to the bus stop this morning, = courtesy of=20 my Missus

Friday, 13 November 2009

Oyster=20 PAYG On National Rail From Jan 2nd

London Reconnections understands = that the=20 current intention is to have Oyster PAYG in place on National Rail = services from=20 the 2nd January 2010. This is = obviously=20 good news, but will also mean some changes to the way Oyster works = =E2=80=93=20 particularly for Season Ticket Holders.

Oyster Extension = Permits

Before looking=20 at fares, it's worth drawing attention to a new element of Oyster = ticketing that=20 this change will usher in for Season Ticket holders =E2=80=93 Oyster Extension Permits.

When Will I Need = One?

From the 2nd=20 of January, if you have a season ticket on your Oyster Card, you will = need to=20 charge it with an =E2=80=9COyster Extension Permit=E2=80=9D if you wish = to make a journey via=20 National Rail services that will take you outside your paid-for zones. = In this=20 context, =E2=80=9CNational Rail=E2=80=9D effectively means = =E2=80=9Cnon-TfL=E2=80=9D - so no OEP is required for=20 travel on the Overground.

So, essentially, if all three of = following are=20 true:

You are starting your journey =E2=80=9Cinside your zones=E2=80=9D
Your final destination is =E2=80=9Coutside your zones=E2=80=9D
You will, at any point, be travelling on a service that ISN'T part = of the=20 London Underground or London Overground

You will need to = acquire an=20 Oyster Extension Permit before = tapping in=20 to begin your journey. If you don't have an OEP, then you will be liable for a penalty fare if = you happen=20 to have the misfortune to bump into a National Rail ticket inspector = outside of=20 your zones.

So, to give some examples, lets assume (um... hypothetically) that for the = purpose of these=20 examples this author is a Hackney resident with a Zone 1-2 Oyster Season = Ticket:

Rectory Road =E2=80=93 Liverpool Street: journey is on National = Rail, but purely=20 within zones so no OEP required.
Rectory Road =E2=80=93 Enfield Town: journey starts =E2=80=9Cin = zone=E2=80=9D and finishes=20 outside. NR services all the way. OEP required.
Hackney Central =E2=80=93 Stratford: journey starts =E2=80=9Cin = zone=E2=80=9D and finishes=20 outside. TfL services all the way. No OEP Required.
Bethnal Green =E2=80=93 Enfield Town via Liverpool Street: journey = starts =E2=80=9Cin=20 zone=E2=80=9D on Tube, changes to NR services and requires leaving = zones. OEP=20 required.

How Will = They=20 Work?

OEPs themselves are free but (and it's potentially a very big = but) they=20 will only be available at places that already sell Oyster top-ups. So = you'll be able=20 to get one in any TfL-run station, but - to use the above Rectory Road = example=20 again =E2=80=93 if I wanted to make the second example journey above and = didn't already=20 have an OEP on my Oyster Card, I would need to find a nearby newsagent = that sold=20 Oyster top-ups in order to get one added to my card. I wouldn't be able = to get=20 one in Rectory Road station itself.

Also, whilst OEPs themselves = are=20 free, in order to have an OEP added to your Oyster card, you will also = need a=20 minimum PAYG balance on the card of =C2=A31.50 =E2=80=93 this is because = OEPs aren't really a=20 ticket (they don't carry or contribute to your fare), they are = effectively=20 simply an electronic =E2=80=9Cpermit to travel.=E2=80=9D

In = expiry terms, OEPs are=20 effectively =E2=80=9Cone shot=E2=80=9D - the OEP is removed the first = time you tap out outside=20 your zones. They do not, however, carry a time-linked expiry. This means = that=20 one can be added to an Oyster Card at any point and it will not expire = until it=20 is either used, or removed by a member of staff. LR also understands = that only=20 one OEP can exist on an Oyster Card at any given time.

The Fares

From the 2nd, there = will be=20 three different fare-scales that apply on Oyster =E2=80=93 = =E2=80=9CNational Rail only,=E2=80=9D =E2=80=9CTfL=20 and National Rail=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CTfL = only.=E2=80=9D

Broadly speaking, the rate for=20 National Rail travel will be half that of an Off-Peak Return rounded = down to the=20 nearest 10p =E2=80=93 this generally makes it a little bit cheaper than = the equivalent=20 single paper fare.

The fare tables below are taken from the Fares = document=20 presented to the London Assembly in October and are, we understand,=20 accurate.

When reading these tables, you'll notice Zones W and G = making=20 an appearance. W is Watford Junction via London Midland services and G = is=20 Purfleet, Rainham, Grays and Chafford Hundred (all C2C = stations).

National Rail=20 Only

TfL and National=20 Rail

Tfl=20 Only

The other fare-related change is in the initial charge = made to an=20 Oyster Card on tapping in. This changed a couple of months back from = being a=20 minimum fare to a maximum one, and this is set to continue under the new = January=20 fares.

Basically, to use an example, a Travelcard holder = currently=20 tapping in outside their zone has =C2=A32.80 deducted from their card = balance. This=20 is equivalent to the charge for a zone 1-4 fare, and is =E2=80=93 = broadly speaking =E2=80=93 the=20 maximum any travelcard holder is likely to pay for their travelcard = extension.=20 Upon tapping out, the balance of the card is updated, refunding whatever = sum is=20 required to =E2=80=9Ccorrect=E2=80=9D the fare.

From January, = this will be true for both=20 PAYG and Travelcard holders starting a journey outside their zone, with = the=20 Travelcard charge jumping to =C2=A34.20 - the appropriate value for a = TfL and=20 National Rail Zone 1-4 fare.

BorisWatch=20 and 853=20 both have some interesting posts on these fares, which are worth a read=20 (BorisWatch also=20 have graphs).

Obviously both the issue of OEPs and the fares=20 themselves open up lots of questions [and I'm=20 looking forward to the discussions in the comments - JB]. = Unfortunately=20 answers to many of them aren't currently available =E2=80=93 this post = has been confined=20 to information that we have been able to confirm.

Hopefully more=20 information will become available once an official announcement = concerning=20 National Rail appears from TfL=20

Thursday, 12 November 2009

DLR:=20 3 Car Trains and Footbridges

Apparently its not just the MOD = who leave=20 things on trains. A staff briefing note for the upcoming DLR Bank = blockade,=20 which turned up on a DLR train last night, contains an update on the = 3-Car=20 project. This appears to suggest that the current plan is to begin = operating=20 3-Car services immediately after the blockade. The current plan appears = to be=20 for 3-Car units to enter passenger service from Monday 25th January 2010 onwards, = with the=20 first services running between Bank and Lewisham on = weekdays.

Obviously=20 the above will no doubt be subject to change, but at the very least it=20 demonstrates that we're likely to see 3-Car services sooner rather than=20 later.

In other DLR news the footbridge at Stratford has now = reopened as=20 well, which is good news.

Thanks to=20 Phil J and RB for the spots.=20

Tuesday, 10 November 2009

The=20 End of the Bendy 38

According to signage on the = route, this=20 weekend marks another major change in the London Transport Landscape - = on=20 Saturday the 14th, double-deckers will replace Bendy-buses on the 38 bus = route.

According to London Bus = Routes, a mixed=20 fleet of 72 buses will replace the existing Bendies on the route. For = those=20 interested, the fleet composition will apparently be 56 10.4m = DB300/Gemini 2 DLs=20 and 16 9.9m Trident/Enviro400s.

As part of the change (and to = compensate=20 for the lower capacity of the buses), service frequency will be = increased to=20 every 2-3 minutes Monday to Friday during peak hours, 3-4 minutes Monday = to=20 Saturday during shopping hours, and 5 minutes during Sunday shopping = hours and=20 daily early evenings.

On the downside (if you're a Clapton = resident at=20 least) alternate 38s will now terminate at Hackney Central on Mondays to = Fridays=20 (except evenings). This is in line with the recommendations made in the = Bus=20 Consultation carried out by KPMG earlier this year, where it was = indicated this=20 would lead to a unit saving overall.

The changeover on the 38 = will=20 arguably represent a major test of the Mayor's debendification strategy. = Even=20 with the issues of load times and capacity set aside, Amhurst Road and = the=20 Narrow Way in Hackney are both highly susceptable to bus-jams already, = and even=20 early termination of the extra 38s will do little to help mitigate that = (they'll=20 still need to turn). It'll be interesting to see what happens next=20 week.

Thanks to MD for the spot.=20

Saturday, 7 November 2009

Oyster=20 PAYG on Victoria - Balham Services From Tomorrow

From Sunday, travellers will be = able to use=20 Oyster PAYG on Southern services from Balham, Wandsworth Common, Clapham = Junction and Battersea Park to London Victoria.

Confirmation of = this can=20 be found on=20 the Southern website here. Sadiq Khan also makes mention of it in = his latest=20 email to Tooting constituents, which makes interesting = reading.

To steal=20 a phrase from Railway = Eye, "Sadiq=20 says":

From Sunday people travelling from Balham and Wandsworth = Common=20 (and Clapham Junction) to London Victoria will be able to use Oyster=20 Pay-as-you-go - which is great news and something I have been = campaigning for=20 since I was elected in 2005.

It should mean shorter queues for = tickets=20 in the morning, cheaper journeys and greater convenience=20 all-round.

There's been a lot of work done behind the scenes = (including=20 a financial contribution from my Department for Transport) in recent = months to=20 get all of London's train operating companies on board, but we're = finally=20 there. I'll hopefully have good news for residents near Earlsfield = Station=20 too!

Thanks to Anonymous and = AG for=20 the spots=20

Wednesday, 4 November 2009

Kings=20 Cross Ticket Hall Opens 29th November

If F= irst=20 Capital Connect are to be believed, London Underground's new Kings = Cross=20 Ticket Hall opens on the 29th of this month.

This won't mark the = full=20 completion - the step-free works will continue until the middle of next = year -=20 but it's certainly a major milestone.

First's press release = helpfully=20 includes a fly-through video (which I've included at the foot of this = post) and=20 the map below (which I've blown up).

They've also provided a breakdown of the estimated = time-savings=20 for interchanging between Thameslink and FCC services out of platforms = 9, 10 and=20 11. It'll be interesting to see how accurate these turn out to = be.

From Thameslink/St Pancras = platforms

Piccadilly line: 5 mins 40 secs (currently 8 mins)
Victoria line : 7 mins (currently 8 mins)
Northern line: 5 mins 50 secs (currently 9 mins 30 secs)
Circle, Metropolitan & Hammersmith and City lines: 4 mins = (route=20 doesn=E2=80=99t change)

From Platforms 9,=20 10 & 11

Piccadilly line: 4 mins 30 secs (currently 6 mins =E2=80=93 or up = to 11 mins if=20 station entrance temporarily closed in the morning rush hour)
Victoria line: 6 mins (no change =E2=80=93 but currently can be up = to 11 mins if=20 station entrance temporarily closed in the morning rush hour)
Northern line: 4 mins 40 secs (currently 7 mins =E2=80=93 or up to = 12 mins if=20 station entrance temporarily closed in the morning rush = hour)

Finally,=20 for those who have not seen it before, the flythrough video:

Thanks to U=20 Thant for the spot.=20

Tuesday, 3 November 2009

New=20 Online Lost Property System Inbound

Computing are reporting that = Software=20 Developers PDMS have picked up a contract to develop a new Management = System for=20 TfL's Lost Property services.

Public Sector software development = is a=20 notoriously tricky business, largely due to the difficulties the = tendering=20 process presents to projects that by their nature require a certain = degree of=20 scope flexibility (at least that's been this author's experience on both = sides=20 of the process). PDMS picked up an award last year for their work on the = NHS'=20 Pharmacy software, however, and TfL have a well-deserved reputation for = being on=20 the ball when it comes to software - particularly for the web. With any = luck=20 this will increase the chances that the new system is a success. The = timetable=20 attached to the project is certainly an ambitious one - the intention is = apparently to have the new system in place by the middle of = 2010.

The=20 most notable change for commuters and travellers with the introduction = of the=20 new software will apparently be the addition of new Online Lost Property = services. According to Reuters, it will be possible to register lost = items=20 online, as well as search for them amongst the items TfL already=20 hold.

Given that TfL currently collect upwards of 200,000 items = of lost=20 property a year (a figure that is only likely to grow with the arrival = of the=20 Olympics), the online service seems likely to face some serious = usability issues=20 ("your search for 'black umbrella' returned 27,000 results") and it'll = be=20 interesting to see how it tackles them. Again, TfL have a relatively = good=20 reputation in this area, which is likely to help.

Overall, = therefore,=20 it'll be interesting to see what comes of the project. Whether it helps=20 streamline the Lost Property process for both sides remains to be seen, = but at=20 the very least its online search may prove an interesting gateway for = those=20 curious to find out what mysterious and unusual lost objects lurk in the = Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-esque store-rooms of TfL.=20

Monday, 2 November 2009

The=20 Post-Metronet Management Structure

The DfT put out a statement at = the end of=20 last week, confirming the arrangements for the management of the BCV and = SSL=20 contracts post-Metronet.

The Department confirmed that, for the=20 foreseeable future at least, the responsiblity for managing the = maintenance and=20 renewal contracts on the Metronet lines will remain with London = Underground.=20 This arrangement reflects the findings of the Joint Steering Committee = (on which=20 LUL, TfL, the DfT and the Treasury all sat) commissioned to evaluate the = post-Metronet options.

The decision not to throw the contracts = back out=20 under a new PPP arrangement is one that will probably be greeted with=20 substantial enthusiasm within LUL and TfL, but it does come at a price = (so to=20 speak) - as part of the deal, TfL have agreed to a shake-up of their=20 accountability structure.

Going forward, a new committee will be=20 appointed with the responsibility for scrutinising the entirety of the TfL investment = programme -=20 including all maintenance, renewal, upgrades and major projects. =

The=20 members of this committee will come from a shortlist of nominees drawn = up by the=20 Mayor and TfL, with the final appointments agreed with the Secretary of = State.=20 The terms of reference for the committee will also be agreed by both the = Secretary of State and the Mayor.

This committee will then report = directly to the TfL Board and, in the words of Lord Adonis himself = will:

...be able to review all aspects of project delivery = including=20 cost and programme deliverability. It will also review delivery of the = investment programme at a portfolio level, including management and=20 organisational capability and the efficiency, effectiveness and = economy of=20 delivery of the investment programme. The panel will report its = findings=20 directly to the TfL board, which will also receive a TfL management = response=20 setting out how the issues raised have been or will be dealt with. The = panel=20 will commission other reports as it or the TfL board consider = appropriate. It=20 will publish an annual report making overall conclusions on the = delivery of=20 the investment programme.

In addition to all this, LUL = themselves=20 will also be required to be more accountable to TfL with regards to the = delivery=20 of upgrades, including the identification of "project sponsors" - a term = that=20 some LUL directors will no doubt come to dread.

In some ways, = thanks to=20 the role played by the Secretary of State in the reporting and = appointing of the=20 committee, this arrangement harks back to the pre-TfL days of London = Regional=20 Transport. Up until 2000, LRT fulfilled the role largely carried out by = TfL and=20 reported directly to the Secretary of State for Transport. Obviously, = the=20 situation is by no means an exact parallel - this Committee's power is = limited=20 to the advisory and the admonisory (if that's not a word then it should = be), and=20 the remaining PPP contract with Tube Lines is specifically excluded from = its=20 mandate. It's an interesting similarity nonetheless, and one that the = Secretary=20 of State justified by pointing out that about 40% of TfL's budget comes = from the=20 transport subsidy granted to the GLA by Central Government.

As = has been=20 commented (perhaps uncharitably) elsewhere, something about the tone = taken by=20 Lord Adonis before Parliament doesn't exactly suggest that he envisions = the=20 Mayor having much of a say in the committee's appointments and role, = despite the=20 theoretical dual responsibility.

Lord Adonis does, however, make = one=20 thing abundantly clear about this post-Metronet setup:

These arrangements are in accordance with the existing = framework=20 of devolution of powers to the mayor, who now bears full = responsibility for=20 delivery.

One can't help but feel that's a situation that = the Mayor=20 might have preferred not be made quite so explicit.

The official = DfT=20 Press Release for this announcement can=20 be found here, although it doesn't add much more in the way of = detail. In=20 fact, it's largely a paraphrase of Lord Adonis' statement to Parliament = on the=20 arrangement which can=20 be found in Hansard here, and which contains a little more detail = (including=20 the quote included above).

[UPDATE: I've tweaked the wording = on the=20 appointments process, as the previous text wasn't quite right - JB] =

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) =

Blog Archive

=E2=96=BC =20 2009=20 (364)=20
- =E2=96=BC =20 = November=20 (10)=20
  - The=20 South London Line In Parliament=20
  - New=20 ELL Footbridge=20
  - In=20 Pictures: 38 Debendification=20
  - Oyster=20 PAYG On National Rail From Jan 2nd=20
  - DLR:=20 3 Car Trains and Footbridges=20
  - The=20 End of the Bendy 38=20
  - Oyster=20 PAYG on Victoria - Balham Services From Tom...=20
  - Kings=20 Cross Ticket Hall Opens 29th November=20
  - New=20 Online Lost Property System Inbound=20
  - The=20 Post-Metronet Management Structure
- =E2=96=BA =
  = October=20 (39)=20
  - Uncircling=20 The Circle - Publicity Begins=20
  - TfL=20 Withdraws BCV and SSL Civil Maintenance Framew...=20
  - In=20 Pictures: A Return To The Crossrail Webcam=20
  - Northern=20 Line News From Battersea=20
  - Things=20 That Go Bump in the Night =E2=80=93 Latchmere Road=20
  - In=20 Pictures: New South Quay DLR Station Opens=20
  - East=20 London Line Videos=20
  - From=20 Dartford to Westminster=20
  - The=20 October Meeting of the London Assembly Transpo...=20
  - The=20 Thames Estuary Airport Report=20
  - Oyster=20 On National Rail: Linguae Centum Sunt, Oraq...=20
  - With=20 a Ladder and Some Glasses - Hornsey Thameslin...=20
  - C-Charge=20 Up, Fares Up And Cuts Coming=20
  - Crossrail:=20 Abbey Wood - Gravesend Safeguarded=20
  - In=20 Pictures: New West Hampstead Station=20
  - Mayor's=20 Transport Strategy Released=20
  - SLL:=20 A Letter From Sadiq Khan To Boris Johnson=20
  - RAC=20 Report Alleges Weaknesses in Communication and...=20
  - Quick=20 Note: Waterloo Station Consultation=20
  - The=20 2008 Planning Act: New Game =E2=80=93 New Rules. Faste...=20
  - In=20 Pictures: The First ELL Test Train=20
  - Exploring=20 the Kingsway Tram Tunnel=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: A Summary=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: A Bank Loop via Barbican and Can...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Bank - Barbican (Previously Farr...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Bank - Liverpool Street - Bishop...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Bank - Liverpool Street=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: The Dagenham Dock Extension=20
  - = Quick=20 Note=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: A Branch to Thamesmead=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: A Branch from Greenwich to New C...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: All Saints - Crossharbour=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: A Bow Church - Hackney Central B...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Stratford - Lea Valley - Tottenh...=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Lewisham - Catford=20
  - DLR=20 Horizon 2020: Bank - Aldwych - Charing Cross=20
  - First=20 Train Runs on New ELL=20
  - Fusing=20 the Fords of Stratford and Chingford=20
  - A=20 Restoration Story: The Wood Lane Facade
- =E2=96=BA =
  = September=20 (37)=20
  - South=20 London Line - The TfL/Travelwatch Joint Stud... =
- =E2=96=BA = = August=20 (29)
- =E2=96=BA = = July=20 (45)
- =E2=96=BA = = June=20 (35)
- =E2=96=BA = = May=20 (26)
- =E2=96=BA = = April=20 (24)
- =E2=96=BA = = March=20 (57)
- =E2=96=BA = = February=20 (34)
- =E2=96=BA = = January=20 (28)

=E2=96=BA =
2008=20 (150)=20
- =E2=96=BA = = December=20 (37)
- =E2=96=BA = = November=20 (23)
- =E2=96=BA = = October=20 (28)
- =E2=96=BA = = September=20 (32)
- =E2=96=BA = = August=20 (30) =

=20

London Reconnections