Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"JWBA68" wrote in message
...

CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a tube depot in Croxley Green have been
quashed by
Three Rivers District Council.
London Underground wants to build a new depot on Green Belt land at Long
Valley Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip depot serves?
Are they proposing loads of empty stock movements from the Central Line via
the depot curve onto the Uxbridge branch (reverse), then to
Harrow-on-the-Hill (reverse) and up to Watford?

Sounds like someone has got their depots confused. Replacing Neasden would
make more sense, transferring Metropolitan maintenance to the new depot,
either together with the Jubilee stock or by leaving Neasden as a Jubilee
*only* depot.

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
. ..

London Underground wants to build a new
depot on Green Belt land at Long Valley
Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip depot
serves?

I imagine that LU were planning to move Ruislip's non-Central-Line
activities to the Watford site, allowing more Central Line work to be done
at Ruislip, so that a replacement for the doomed White City depot would not
need to be found.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

John Rowland wrote:
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
. ..

London Underground wants to build a new
depot on Green Belt land at Long Valley
Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip
depot serves?

I imagine that LU were planning to move Ruislip's non-Central-Line
activities to the Watford site, allowing more Central Line work to
be done at Ruislip, so that a replacement for the doomed White City
depot would not need to be found.

This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc. The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

We had a thread in u.t.l about this in July this year called "New depot
plans not enough to satisfy residents".
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
In article
"Richard J." writes:

snip
This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc. The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

So if I've got this right, the local NIMBYs are objecting to a change of
use from railway to railway?

From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same line!

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

surely if its railway land and there is track on it there is no need for
this

railways act ????

Kev
"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
In article
"Richard J." writes:

snip
This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union
Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc.
The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

So if I've got this right, the local NIMBYs are objecting to a change of
use from railway to railway?

From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

IMHO there's more to it than that. The site is currently disused; all it was
ever used for was dumping of waste, mainly from Neasden Power Station, all
of which came by rail.

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

Is this depot being built by Metronet? IIRC TransPlant is owned by
TubeLines. One wonders if it is being built simply to allow Metronet to have
their own facility and not to have to rely on TubeLines/Transplant.

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

On 2004-09-25, David Splett wrote:

[...]

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

It's all here in detail:

http://www.google.com/search?q=DC+re...Valley+Wood%22

The original PDF of the planning application is no longer there but you
can click "View as HTML" and it's almost as good.


HTH,
Matt.
--
Matt Saunders http://www.yoyo.org/matts/contacts/
"This is getting very silly. Too silly."
- Professor Yaffle

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

In message , at 23:24:23 on
Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Robin Mayes
remarked:
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same line!

As someone said last time this came up, depots like that should be sited
miles away from any habitation. I suggest this particular one is sited
at least 10 miles away from any part of the underground.

/sarcasm
--
Roland Perry

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

I hate to say this - its not up to YOU to dictate how much traffic uses a
railway line, You chose to live near the line, accept the consequences, same
with people who live near airports , and those who live near motorways.

If you live near a line you must be prepared for noise at all hours of the
day and night.

If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do It will take more lorries
off the road, something everyone wants apparently.

it was there for god knows how long with trains working all hours before it
closed.

NIMBYS Make me sick "!!!!

K



"Matt Saunders" wrote in message
...
On 2004-09-25, David Splett wrote:

[...]

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is
this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

It's all here in detail:

http://www.google.com/search?q=DC+re...Valley+Wood%22

The original PDF of the planning application is no longer there but you
can click "View as HTML" and it's almost as good.


HTH,
Matt.
--
Matt Saunders http://www.yoyo.org/matts/contacts/
"This is getting very silly. Too silly."
- Professor Yaffle

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"David Splett" wrote in message ...
"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

IMHO there's more to it than that. The site is currently disused; all it was
ever used for was dumping of waste, mainly from Neasden Power Station, all
of which came by rail.

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

Is this depot being built by Metronet? IIRC TransPlant is owned by
TubeLines. One wonders if it is being built simply to allow Metronet to have
their own facility and not to have to rely on TubeLines/Transplant.

Although we do have to consider the implications of the dumping of old fuel

This electricity can be very harmfull as it leaks out of the shoes into the ground

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"kevin smith" wrote in message
...

Personally I'm interested because I live close to
Chalfont and Latimer tube station and I'm wondering
if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

I hate to say this - its not up to YOU to dictate
how much traffic uses a railway line,

He didn't say it was up to him, he just said he was interested. And you
obviously didn't hate saying that, or you wouldn't have bothered saying it,
because nothing he said warranted your hate-filled response.

If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do
It will take more lorries off the road

No it won't, unless you mean the road in Ruislip.

NIMBYS Make me sick "!!!!

Good, then you'll know how your top posting makes normal people feel.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

In message , at 10:13:02 on Sun,
26 Sep 2004, John Rowland
remarked:
If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do
It will take more lorries off the road

No it won't, unless you mean the road in Ruislip.

The depot will receive material by canal, and deliver it by train. In
both cases cutting lorries out of the equation.
--
Roland Perry

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

Phil wrote:
"David Splett" wrote in message
...
"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing
a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the
same
line!

IMHO there's more to it than that. The site is currently disused;
all it was
ever used for was dumping of waste, mainly from Neasden Power
Station, all
of which came by rail.

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site
to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions
currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a
rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning?
Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large
depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

Is this depot being built by Metronet? IIRC TransPlant is owned by
TubeLines. One wonders if it is being built simply to allow Metronet
to have
their own facility and not to have to rely on TubeLines/Transplant.

Although we do have to consider the implications of the dumping of
old fuel

This electricity can be very harmfull as it leaks out of the shoes
into the ground

Is that why rubber soled shoes were invented?




:-)
(for the benefit of anyone who doesn't see the joke)

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk...
In message , at 10:13:02 on Sun,
26 Sep 2004, John Rowland
remarked:
If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do
It will take more lorries off the road

No it won't, unless you mean the road in Ruislip.

The depot will receive material by canal, and deliver it by train. In
both cases cutting lorries out of the equation.

That's just for the building work, and not all of it. Rails will be
delivered by one train twice a month and offloaded onto another for the work
to be done. You then have around 10 cars a day driving there on local roads
plus a few lorries.
After the site is built the canal unloading equipment will be removed and
the canalbank replanted. Surprisingly they complain about the canal (an
industrial transport link) being used again for work and not pleasure
purposes.
They say the depot will only be there for 15 years but I can see this
becoming permanent.

Nick

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

In message , at 12:20:08 on Sun, 26
Sep 2004, Nick Pedley remarked:

You then have around 10 cars a day driving there on local roads

Oh dear, what a disaster! Our thoughts are with you.
--
Roland Perry

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

On 2004-09-26, kevin smith wrote:
"Matt Saunders" wrote in message
...
On 2004-09-25, David Splett wrote:

[...]

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is
this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

It's all here in detail:

http://www.google.com/search?q=DC+re...Valley+Wood%22

The original PDF of the planning application is no longer there but you
can click "View as HTML" and it's almost as good.

I hate to say this - its not up to YOU to dictate how much traffic uses a
railway line, You chose to live near the line, accept the consequences, same
with people who live near airports , and those who live near motorways.

Really? I did wonder why they'd not telephoned me personally about it!
(not)

If you live near a line you must be prepared for noise at all hours of the
day and night.

You're right, I *do* have to prepare myself if I want a listen these days.
Despite still having single-glazed windows I've zoned out the trains to
an extent that I don't notice them unless I'm listening for them.

My nightly diet of A-stock and tame-sounding Chiltern diesels would be
complemented nicely by the occasional purposeful whoosh of something
more interesting than an empty stock move off the Chesham branch.

If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do It will take more lorries
off the road, something everyone wants apparently.

it was there for god knows how long with trains working all hours before it
closed.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment I think you may be ill-informed.

Back on subject, it seems to be a tricky one all round. Any sort of
significant planning application (even for a treehouse) gets fiercely
contested around here so the opposition is not surprising. The
residents may have had an expectation that the land would remain
derelict or be developed for housing so it's no wonder there's
opposition.

NIMBYS Make me sick "!!!!

No, that'll be your prejudice doing that.

Mind if I open a McDonald's next to your house? I consider your views
over-simplistic and unrealistic I'm afraid.


--
Matt Saunders http://www.yoyo.org/matts/contacts/
"This is getting very silly. Too silly."
- Professor Yaffle

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk...
In message , at 12:20:08 on Sun, 26
Sep 2004, Nick Pedley remarked:

You then have around 10 cars a day driving there on local roads

Oh dear, what a disaster! Our thoughts are with you.

As I don't live there, it's not directly a problem for me. Any problems for
me will be with tracks falling apart when I want to use the trains that run
on them.
Will 10 *extra* cars a day cause a major headache there?
And why go for a temporary 15year depot when tracks will always need
renewing?

(Yes, I should have said that *extra* in the first post!)

Nick

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

LUL battery locos could take over the train at Amersham if the noise of the 66s
wakes you up!

Paul

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

After the site is built the canal unloading equipment will be removed and
the canalbank replanted. Surprisingly they complain about the canal (an
industrial transport link) being used again for work and not pleasure
purposes.
They say the depot will only be there for 15 years but I can see this
becoming permanent.


If the canal is to be used for just bringing in the materials to build the
depot, then could it be used to bring the track materials in as well to keep
the NIMBY's quiet?

Paul