On Dec 13, 9:04*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"77002" wrote in message

...

However, approved does not mean funded?

What do we know about funding?

It was one of a number of local authority development pool schemes, and
included on the second part of a list published last month by DfT, for which
a funding decision was to be made in mid December. *The first part of the
document was the projects awarded funding last month in the Autumn
Statement.

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/local-authority-major-schemes-d...

Paul S

It will be interesting to see what today's announcement says about how
much funding will come from Watford and Herts councils. I hope we
won't still be reading posts copied from the Watford Observer in a few
years time, describing arguments over funding between local
councillors.

Dominic

"Dominic" wrote in message
...

It will be interesting to see what today's announcement says about how
much funding will come from Watford and Herts councils. I hope we
won't still be reading posts copied from the Watford Observer in a few
years time, describing arguments over funding between local
councillors.

You don't get the DfT contribution to these type of projects confirmed
until/unless the local authority portion is guaranteed AFAICT...

Paul S

On Dec 13, 7:03*pm, Scott wrote:

If they are worried about air pollution, I say build a public
transport system that runs on electricity and introduce a congestion
charge to discourage use of cars.

Their complaint appears to be raised pollution caused by diversions
during the endlessly protracted building of said electric transport
system. Which is a not unreasonable point: if public transport is to
be built, it shouldn't be built as incompetently as has happened in
Edinburgh.

ian

On Dec 14, 6:26*am, 77002 wrote:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/local-authority-major-schemes-d....

Excellent. *The may actually happen.

A local authority funded piece of transport infrastructure?
Excellent: the success of Edinburgh replicated in Watford.

ian

"allantracy" wrote in message
...


I know all the Communists of the North that frequent here will deny
it.

But, this government is turning out to be all our Xmas and New Years
combined as far as the railways are concerned.

Such relief, after the last lot, who were so determined to file away
stuff like this in the cabinet marked 'to be forgotten for a very long
time'.

The boys are back in town.


I do think that you are wrong in saying that the last lot would have done
nothing about it.

They would have had another public enquiry and invited all stakeholders to
put their cases to it (complete with the usual lawyers, etc).

Few million down the drain and nothing to show for it as usual.

And we aren't all communists up here either! It is good to see a government
that is approving projects rather than going through the motions.

"burkey" wrote:

Croxley Rail Link plan approved by Government

5:35pm Tuesday 13th December 2011 – Watford observer

By Adam Binnie and Mike Wright »

Work on a £120m rail project that will change the face of Watford and
Croxley Green has been approved by the Government.

An official announcement that the long-running Croxley Rail Link
project has been approved is due to take place tomorrow, the Watford
Observer understands.
[...]

And here is the DfT announcement:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press20111214

Relevant bullet point:
---quote---
Croxley Rail Link (Watford). Extension of the Metropolitan line from Croxley
to Watford Junction mainline station plus two new stations (inc closure of
current Watford Met line station). (£76.2m DfT contribution towards a total
cost of £115.9m).
---/quote---

On Dec 13, 9:26*pm, wrote:
In article
,

(77002) wrote:
On Dec 13, 8:37*pm, The Gardener wrote:
On the subject of Watford, I can only agree with those who say "and
not before time". This is the sort of project that should be
championed: relatively low-cost and largely using disused or under-
used heavy rail lines, to optimise their utility.

1948 would have been a good time to start this project, :-), if not
sooner.

1925, surely, when the Met branch was built?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Well, the Met branch as it stands is only half the job - it was
intended to continue under the park, weave a little south, then head
up under Clarendon Road to Watford Junction...upon which I suspect the
Met had set it's eyes on the St. Albans branch. New station to be
provided at Watford Town where Clarendon Road meets the High Street,
currently the famous Weatherspoons station

This is pretty much the only proposal that would be better than the
Croxley rail link, and even then it doesn't offer a station in the
centre of west Watford, though it does offer one at the top end of
town, where one would be most welcome.

....phase 2 of my plans are now to get the diveunder south of Watford
Junction built next

Having done some musing about the situation around there, I wonder if
the branch does prove popular, that there won't be the capacity for
Chiltern to run services from Amersham over it. In that case,
reinstate the disused line to Rickmansworth up to where the Met
crosses it, then build a grade-separated junction up to the fast
lines. Chiltern gets to skip the local stations at Croxley, Ascot Road
and Watford Hospital, and the Met can terminate some services at the
current Watford Met to free paths for Chiltern services. Watford High
Street is going to become quite the bottleneck even without all
these...

On Dec 14, 1:40*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
Well, the Met branch as it stands is only half the job - it was
intended to continue under the park, weave a little south, then head
up under Clarendon Road to Watford Junction...upon which I suspect the
Met had set it's eyes on the St. Albans branch. New station to be
provided at Watford Town where Clarendon Road meets the High Street,
currently the famous Weatherspoons station

I've been following this project for years and have all the literature
I can find on the Met in Watford and this 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. Care to substantiate
or provide a source?

THC

"Mizter T" wrote in message
...

And here is the DfT announcement:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press20111214

Relevant bullet point:
---quote---
Croxley Rail Link (Watford). Extension of the Metropolitan line from
Croxley to Watford Junction mainline station plus two new stations (inc
closure of current Watford Met line station). (£76.2m DfT contribution
towards a total cost of £115.9m).
---/quote---

So - despite all the handwringing when these 45 projects were supposedly put
on the back burner by the current lot, 45 of 45 have eventually been
approved, after various cost estimates have been whittled down. Is there a
positive story here after all?

Paul S

What is this gender obsession you have? *The Conservatives' greatest
leader in recent times was female, as is the current transport
secretary. *We have close to full equality in this country and its done
society and business a world of good. *It really does not matter whether
someone is male, female, TG, or other. *People are people and anyone
with a brain and a half decent education can achieve whatever they want.
Regardless of what bits they happen to have.


Agreed, of course.

But, come on, they are different, albeit in such a nice way.

It's Labour that brings out the worst in us blokes, in the bloke club,
all that positive selection and quota crap and actually taking
Harperson seriously when she is quite clearly deranged.