Croxley Rail Link: London Underground could take over construction of £230m project


http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/new..._230m_project/

Watford Observer 171214 By Michael Knowles.


London Underground could take over construction of the Croxley Rail Link and the projected cost will rise to £230 million.
Hertfordshire County Council and the rail provider are discussion about who will be responsible for specific aspects of the project, but it has emerged London Underground could take over the construction of the project later this year.
The county council attributed the higher price of the project to 'wider railway benefits' and the cost of inflation. The scheme had been expected to cost in the region of £120 million.
Jo Brown, from Hertfordshire County Council, said: "The wider railway benefits include refurbishing the existing line between Lower High Street and Watford Junction, as well as enhancing the power supplies to both the Metropolitan Line and the Network Rail sections.
"The improvements being made will allow more trains to run in the future, not just on the Croxley Rail Link but on the wider train network.
"In addition, while the Croxley Rail Link will not immediately enable services to run from Amersham into Watford Junction, it has been designed so that this can happen in the future with minimal work."
Construction has also been put back until Spring after it had been scheduled to start earlier this year.
Dorothy Thornhill, Watford's Elected Mayor, described the rail link as "absolutely critical to unlocking Watford's future economic potential".
The Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate said: "The Croxley Rail Link is a transformational project for the town.
"It is the thread that links Watford's major development projects together - Watford Health Campus, Ascot Road, Watford Business Park, Watford Junction Interchange and Charter Place Shopping Centre.
"That's over £1.2 billion of investment to the benefit of our residents and businesses."
The scheme will see the Metropolitan Line routed from Croxley Station, to a new one in Ascot Road called Cassiobridge, then another new station in Vicarage Road called Watford Vicarage Road before connecting with Watford High Street Station and then terminating at Watford Junction.
As a result of the scheme Watford Metropolitan Station will close to passengers and be used as siding.
David Hughes, London Underground's Director of Major Programme Sponsorship, said: "We are supporting Hertfordshire County Council with their proposal to re-route and extend the Metropolitan line to Watford Junction.
"The Croxley Rail Link will improve access to public transport for local residents, lead to jobs growth in the area and provide access for Metropolitan line passengers to West Coast mainline National Rail links from Watford Junction station."

.................................................. ....
.................................................. ....
John Burke
WRUG

In other words, they have not decided what the project is to do nor who
is to run it but have doubled the cost estimate and added 6 months to
the time scale.

Peter Lawrence


On 01/01/1970 00:00, r construction of £230m project wrote:

Croxley Rail Link: London Underground could take over construction of £230m project


http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/new..._230m_project/

Watford Observer 171214 By Michael Knowles.


London Underground could take over construction of the Croxley Rail Link and the projected cost will rise to £230 million.
Hertfordshire County Council and the rail provider are discussion about who will be responsible for specific aspects of the project, but it has emerged London Underground could take over the construction of the project later this year.
The county council attributed the higher price of the project to 'wider railway benefits' and the cost of inflation. The scheme had been expected to cost in the region of £120 million.
Jo Brown, from Hertfordshire County Council, said: "The wider railway benefits include refurbishing the existing line between Lower High Street and Watford Junction, as well as enhancing the power supplies to both the Metropolitan Line and the Network Rail sections.
"The improvements being made will allow more trains to run in the future, not just on the Croxley Rail Link but on the wider train network.
"In addition, while the Croxley Rail Link will not immediately enable services to run from Amersham into Watford Junction, it has been designed so that this can happen in the future with minimal work."
Construction has also been put back until Spring after it had been scheduled to start earlier this year.
Dorothy Thornhill, Watford's Elected Mayor, described the rail link as "absolutely critical to unlocking Watford's future economic potential".
The Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate said: "The Croxley Rail Link is a transformational project for the town.
"It is the thread that links Watford's major development projects together - Watford Health Campus, Ascot Road, Watford Business Park, Watford Junction Interchange and Charter Place Shopping Centre.
"That's over £1.2 billion of investment to the benefit of our residents and businesses."
The scheme will see the Metropolitan Line routed from Croxley Station, to a new one in Ascot Road called Cassiobridge, then another new station in Vicarage Road called Watford Vicarage Road before connecting with Watford High Street Station and then terminating at Watford Junction.
As a result of the scheme Watford Metropolitan Station will close to passengers and be used as siding.
David Hughes, London Underground's Director of Major Programme Sponsorship, said: "We are supporting Hertfordshire County Council with their proposal to re-route and extend the Metropolitan line to Watford Junction.
"The Croxley Rail Link will improve access to public transport for local residents, lead to jobs growth in the area and provide access for Metropolitan line passengers to West Coast mainline National Rail links from Watford Junction station."

.................................................. ...
.................................................. ...
John Burke
WRUG



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:56:40 +0000, Peter Lawrence
wrote:

In other words, they have not decided what the project is to do nor who
is to run it but have doubled the cost estimate and added 6 months to
the time scale.

It has been clear for many months that LU would be the operator and
that the line would transfer to them upon completion. There is an
agreement that went to the TfL Board that sets out the party's
responsibilities.

I suspect they have had the usual cost escalation once they started
confirming assumptions and looked at future train service patterns.
That's undoubtedly what has triggered the power and track related
changes on the NR tracks into Watford. There is a notorious lack of
asset knowledge in NR so it's no great shock that you get scope creep.
It is possible that there is a wish to run a more frequent service
into WJ and to Amersham. That may also have affected the power design
assumptions.

Wouldn't an element of the power supply costs be wanted for the plan to
extend the Bakerloo to Watford Junction once more? What's happening with
that plan, by the way?

I also suspect that HCC have decided they are not best placed, given
impending spending cuts, to manage a rail project effectively. LU do
have more experience and making them responsible for construction
should make bringing the line into service a rather smoother process.

Very true.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 05:37:22 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:56:40 +0000, Peter Lawrence
wrote:

In other words, they have not decided what the project is to do nor who
is to run it but have doubled the cost estimate and added 6 months to
the time scale.

It has been clear for many months that LU would be the operator and
that the line would transfer to them upon completion. There is an
agreement that went to the TfL Board that sets out the party's
responsibilities.

I suspect they have had the usual cost escalation once they started
confirming assumptions and looked at future train service patterns.
That's undoubtedly what has triggered the power and track related
changes on the NR tracks into Watford. There is a notorious lack of
asset knowledge in NR so it's no great shock that you get scope creep.
It is possible that there is a wish to run a more frequent service
into WJ and to Amersham. That may also have affected the power design
assumptions.

Wouldn't an element of the power supply costs be wanted for the plan to
extend the Bakerloo to Watford Junction once more? What's happening with
that plan, by the way?

Long abandoned, surely? And even it hadn't been, there wouldn't be
room at Watford Junction for the Bakerloo trains to terminate, along
with the Met and LO trains.

In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 05:37:22 -0600,
wrote:

Wouldn't an element of the power supply costs be wanted for the plan to
extend the Bakerloo to Watford Junction once more? What's happening with
that plan, by the way?

Long abandoned, surely? And even it hadn't been, there wouldn't be
room at Watford Junction for the Bakerloo trains to terminate, along
with the Met and LO trains.

Not what I understood to have been said.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

I suspect they have had the usual cost escalation once they started
confirming assumptions and looked at future train service patterns.
That's undoubtedly what has triggered the power and track related
changes on the NR tracks into Watford. There is a notorious lack of
asset knowledge in NR so it's no great shock that you get scope creep.
It is possible that there is a wish to run a more frequent service
into WJ and to Amersham. That may also have affected the power design
assumptions.

None of which is inconsistent with plain old "optimism bias" - something
the business case in 2009 played down[1] and the additions for which
some commentators (proponents) have simply omitted when citing costs.

[1] "As the project development of the rail link options has reached a
relatively mature stage, the optimism bias on capital costs applied
within the economic appraisal is 22%. Although this is lower than the
WebTAG recommended value of 44% at Programme Entry this is believed to
be entirely appropriate bearing in mind the extensive development work
undertaken previously on the proposals." Yeah, right.


--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

wrote:
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 05:37:22 -0600,
wrote:

Wouldn't an element of the power supply costs be wanted for the plan to
extend the Bakerloo to Watford Junction once more? What's happening with
that plan, by the way?

Long abandoned, surely? And even it hadn't been, there wouldn't be
room at Watford Junction for the Bakerloo trains to terminate, along
with the Met and LO trains.

Not what I understood to have been said.

From
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...nd-tube-lines/

"Queens Park to Watford Junction. Watford Junction in retrospect was really
too far out for a tube line and the Bakerloo line nowadays does not go
beyond Harrow and Wealdstone. Now that TfL have control of the surface line
from Euston to Watford Junction their enthusiasm for extending the Bakerloo
line to Watford Junction seems to have vanished."