I have just received an email from TfL which may be of general interest:

"Thank you for taking part in our consultation earlier and/or registering for
Crossrail 2 project updates.

We are now able to update you on the consultation results and let you know
that the consultation results report is now available online at www.crossrail2.co.uk.

We are now working through the suggestions and comments made during the
consultation. We hope to be able to publish our response to issues raised in
the early spring 2014.

There were a total of 13,933 replies to the recent consultation: 13,767 were
from the public and 166 from stakeholders

Of the 13,767 replies received, 96% of the public respondents strongly
support or support the principle of Crossrail 2. Only 2% oppose or strongly
oppose the principle.

Support is high for both route options, but it is the Regional option which has
the greatest overall level of support, with 84% total support, against 73%
total support for the Metro option. Many of the responses received, requested
specific destination to be served.

Of the 166 stakeholder replies received, 86% strongly support or support the
principle of Crossrail 2. Only 3% oppose or strongly oppose the principle.

The Regional option has strong support from stakeholders, with 75% strongly
supporting or supporting this option, as opposed to just 36% who strongly
supported/supported the Metro option. Only 6% of stakeholders opposed or
strongly opposed the Regional option. 16% of stakeholders strongly opposed
or opposed the Metro option.

As with public responses, a number of specific destinations were requested to
be served."

It would be interesting to know how many of the public respondents live
outside London.

On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 21:02:40 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
A summary of the responses is given in a 192 page document. I skimmed
it yesterday. People in Kensington and Chelsea near the Kings Road
seem to be particularly opposed to the line.

If those sorts of people had their way we wouldn't have a tube system at all.
If their houses lose a few percent of their over inflated values too bad.
Though I suspect the opposite will occur and they'll be able to continue to
flog them to russian criminals and other assorted euro trash for even more
silly money in the future.

--
Spud

I'm sure many people in Kensington & Chelsea would like an Underground
Station in the vicinity of Sydney Street and perhaps would have preferred an
unadorned Hackney/Chesea route.

I agree that neither of the two options being touted is the best that could
have been imagined. I'm surprised this point hasn't been brought home to TfL.

"Robin9" wrote in message
...

Paul Corfield;139967 Wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:54:19 +0100, Robin9
wrote:
-

I have just received an email from TfL which may be of general
interest:

"Thank you for taking part in our consultation earlier and/or
registering for Crossrail 2 project updates.

We are now able to update you on the consultation results and let you
know that the consultation results report is now available online at
www.crossrail2.co.uk.

We are now working through the suggestions and comments made during the
consultation. We hope to be able to publish our response to issues
raised in the early spring 2014.

There were a total of 13,933 replies to the recent consultation: 13,767
were from the public and 166 from stakeholders

Of the 13,767 replies received, 96% of the public respondents strongly
support or support the principle of Crossrail 2. Only 2% oppose or
strongly oppose the principle.

Support is high for both route options, but it is the Regional option
which has the greatest overall level of support, with 84% total support,
against
73% total support for the Metro option. Many of the responses received,
requested specific destination to be served.

Of the 166 stakeholder replies received, 86% strongly support or
support
the principle of Crossrail 2. Only 3% oppose or strongly oppose the
principle.

The Regional option has strong support from stakeholders, with 75%
strongly supporting or supporting this option, as opposed to just 36%
who
strongly supported/supported the Metro option. Only 6% of stakeholders
opposed or strongly opposed the Regional option.
16% of stakeholders strongly opposed or opposed the Metro option.

As with public responses, a number of specific destinations were
requested to be served."

It would be interesting to know how many of the public respondents live
outside London.-

A summary of the responses is given in a 192 page document. I skimmed
it yesterday. People in Kensington and Chelsea near the Kings Road
seem to be particularly opposed to the line.

There seems to have been a bit of a campaign in Merton and Wandsworth
to generate support for Crossrail 2 with some demands for Lots Road
and Battersea to be served. There are also predictable supportive
responses from Kingston, Epsom and Twickenham.

There is quite a spread of comments from Stakeholders outside of
London with a decent spread of responses from councils in the Home
Counties. Oddly East Hertfordshire is not keen on being served by
Crossrail 2.

Several east London boroughs and Thurrock are annoyed that a
previously proposed eastern branch has been scrapped.

I didn't respond to this consultation as I didn't really agree with
either of options put forward. I agree there should be more rail
capacity but neither scheme made much sense to me.
--
Paul C

I'm sure many people in Kensington & Chelsea would like an Underground
Station in the vicinity of Sydney Street and perhaps would have
preferred an
unadorned Hackney/Chesea route.

I agree that neither of the two options being touted is the best that
could
have been imagined. I'm surprised this point hasn't been brought home to
TfL.

Well it's a solution cobbled together from what was meant to be a new
"standard" underground line (the Chelsea and Hackney proposal).

When Cross rail 2 was originally proposed it was just supposed to be a "main
line Tunnel from one of the southern termini to one of the northern termini,
similar to the way that CR1 just goes underground from Padd to LS

tim
..

Our ex-Mayor, one Ken Livingstone, frequently asserts on LBC on Saturday
mornings that instead of spending a fortune on HS2 we should build just such a
tunnel across London.

On 2013-12-02 18:02:13 +0000, Robin9 said:

Our ex-Mayor, one Ken Livingstone, frequently asserts on LBC on Saturday
mornings that instead of spending a fortune on HS2 we should build just
such a tunnel across London.

It's sobering that Ken - along with many of us - will probably not live
to see Crossrail 2 go into service at current rate of progress, so the
orginal tunnel could well have been in place before he goes.

One point form the consulation is that Essex Road is said to be one of
the busiest bus stops which would make dropping this station a poor
decision I think.

(A response says: "Essex Road and Walworth Road have the highest volume
of bus passengers in London - true?)


E.

On 03/12/2013 18:37, eastender wrote:

On 2013-12-02 18:02:13 +0000, Robin9 said:

Our ex-Mayor, one Ken Livingstone, frequently asserts on LBC on Saturday
mornings that instead of spending a fortune on HS2 we should build just
such a tunnel across London.

It's sobering that Ken - along with many of us - will probably not live
to see Crossrail 2 go into service at current rate of progress, so the
orginal tunnel could well have been in place before he goes.

Sorry, not quite following you - which "original tunnel" - Crossrail 1
you mean?


One point form the consulation is that Essex Road is said to be one of
the busiest bus stops which would make dropping this station a poor
decision I think.

(A response says: "Essex Road and Walworth Road have the highest volume
of bus passengers in London - true?)

There are 'only' five routes along Essex Road, whilst are nine that
travel the length of Walworth Road. Would be interesting to know if that
comment was true.