West London Tram
 

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.
--
Thoss

West London Tram
 

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

West London Tram
 

At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.
--
Thoss

West London Tram
 

"thoss" wrote in message
...
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

Given the length of time that it takes to get authorisation
for something that is current, being put on hold and cancelled
are much the same thing.

AIUI the Chelsea-Hackney line is still on hold ... from 1972.

tim

West London Tram
 

"tim....." wrote in message
...

Given the length of time that it takes to get authorisation
for something that is current, being put on hold and cancelled
are much the same thing.

AIUI the Chelsea-Hackney line is still on hold ... from 1972.


Down but not quite out, there has been some recent DfT consultation on the
route safeguarding for planning and development purposes.

Paul

West London Tram
 

thoss wrote:
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT
until after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

West London Tram
 

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

It's disappointing but inevitable. I have posted before on how
surprised I have been at the depth of feeling against the tram in the
Ealing area where I have been working for 2 years. And, in all
honesty, I am coming round to the idea that the scheme is something of
a waste of money compared to a much cheaper bus based scheme.

For instance, my daily journey of Acton Central to a couple of stops
after Ealing Broadway could be reduced by half from the current 20
minutes (and I think this is a conservative estimate) by some simple
and relatively cheap measures:

1. Enforce a zero-tolerance on parking on the High Street in Acton
(particularly during rush hour) - every single day buses are delayed
through this narrow stretch by inconsiderate parking
2. Prioirity bus lanes/traffic lights on the Western end of the High
Street in Acton (and to the west of that stretch going the other way)
3. Stop buses parking on the eastbound Uxbridge Road at the tram depot
(why is this ever allowed??) and knock down the pavement-side wall of
the Tram Depot allowing easier access for buses terminating at the
Tram Depot heading west.
4. Priorirty bus lane/traffic lights on the A406 crossing both ways
5. A bus lane between A4020 westbound between the A406 and the
junction with The Common with - preferably - priority traffic lights
at the junction
6. Zero tolerance on bus lane parking on Ealing Broadway (again there
is not a day without several cars parked on this stretch during the
morning and evening rush hour)
7. Bus lane at the western end of the Ealing Broadway to allow buses
to pass traffic turning right between the 2 town hall buildings

Jase

West London Tram
 

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 20:28:17 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

thoss wrote:
At 13:14:10 on Fri, 3 Aug 2007 asdf opined:-

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:51:28 +0100, thoss wrote:

Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT
until after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.

I hadn't heard anything about this, so I went to
http://www.london.gov.uk to look for an announcement.

And it's there, under the utterly irrelevant heading of "Crossrail".

Hidden amongst a press release that digresses repeatedly onto the
subject of Crossrail is the news that WLT has been cancelled.

Ken doesn't seem to want us to find out about it, though. If he's
going to cancel a major transport project he could at least have the
guts to tell us.

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when he
visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not cancelled, just
put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the enemy with
contradictory statements.

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

Not really. The GLA press release says that the cancellation is
dependent on Crossrail proceeding. Now that may well be clever
semantics but the whole thing is a mess.

Quite why Ealing Council believe a bus based system employing many of
the same traffic priorities as the tram would have used will be any more
popular I do not know. The main point of opposition to the tram, if I
have been paying attention, was the effect that its tracks and
priorities would have on people being able to use their cars. I can't
see buses being more readily acceptable to those same opponents. I
suspect Ealing Council hope they can scrap the majority of the proposed
priorities and just leave the bus service (enhanced or otherwise) to be
a disaster area. Current services are supposedly at capacity and
allegedly so are the roads so what is going to give to make all this
work? Apologies for the cynicism but I would have preferred the tram
scheme to proceed as that was the only option that would have both
forced a reduction of road space and provided a suitable attractive
alternative to car drivers.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

West London Tram
 

Well, Crossrail will be serving quite a few of the communities along
or near Uxbridge Road, which should help with the bus traffic in that
area. I wonder if it's possible to turn West Drayton - Uxbridge into
an extra Crossrail Branch to serve Uxbridge as well? Or maybe a feeder
shuttle train.

West London Tram
 

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 04:39:39 -0700, sweek
wrote:

Well, Crossrail will be serving quite a few of the communities along
or near Uxbridge Road, which should help with the bus traffic in that
area. I wonder if it's possible to turn West Drayton - Uxbridge into
an extra Crossrail Branch to serve Uxbridge as well? Or maybe a feeder
shuttle train.

Well there will be no additions to Crossrail such as you suggest simply
because it would cause more uncertainty and risk delaying it even
further. To get the money out of private hands you need certainty. I
think people are reading "between the lines" and probably will not be
shocked if there was an extension to Reading but that's largely an
electrification task now that the government has funded the remodelling
of Reading and there is space for a nice EMU depot in the triangle
beyond Reading.

Given that Germany and France have no issues with both RER / S Bahn
lines *and* trams running in similar corridors I wonder why we have to
trade such things in the UK? I personally don't see Crossrail as a
local replacement on a very high use corridor between Ealing and
Uxbridge.

The Uxbridge Road corridor is not dissimilar to the A11 corridor in East
London - there you have Great Eastern trains, the Central Line and an
intensive service on route 25 with supplementary services on the 205 and
86 and yet all modes are very busy. Really the 25 bus could quite easily
be replaced by a tram service as that sort of capacity is really needed.
People travel long distances on the 25 even though logic would dictate
travel by rail would be more effective. The same happens in West London
with the 207s being busy, so is the 607 Express (one of very few such
London services) plus the 427 on the Western Section. You have FGW,
Heathrow Connect plus the District, Central and Piccadilly Line
providing a form of parallel rail service. Again many of these are busy
services.

The local train service, while not as frequent as Crossrail will
probably be, is not as busy as the bus corridor and the stations are
awkwardly located. There are no proposals to add stations as that would
increase running times overall and mean more trains were needed. There
might also be a reduction in overall capacity on Western Crossrail
services which have to pander to the "must get into London fast"
inclinations of both Heathrow travellers and people from Slough and
Maidenhead. I'd argue the transport demand of that part of West London
is such that it could easily support Crossrail and WLT. Still Ken might
have the last laugh and put in nice long articulated Trolleybuses with
loads of priority measures - I wonder if Ealing residents would be happy
then?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

West London Tram
 

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 11:04:53 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

Not really. The GLA press release says that the cancellation is
dependent on Crossrail proceeding. Now that may well be clever
semantics but the whole thing is a mess.

I think it's just a poor (and slightly bizarre) attempt at
face-saving. Needless to say, the tram and Crossrail would have
catered for completely different types of journey, just like other bus
and bus-like services that approximately follow a rail corridor for a
portion of their route length, and the necessity of the tram is not
affected by whether or not Crossrail goes ahead. £30 million has been
spent on the tram scheme in full knowledge of the plans for Crossrail.

Quite why Ealing Council believe a bus based system employing many of
the same traffic priorities as the tram would have used will be any more
popular I do not know. The main point of opposition to the tram, if I
have been paying attention, was the effect that its tracks and
priorities would have on people being able to use their cars. I can't
see buses being more readily acceptable to those same opponents. I
suspect Ealing Council hope they can scrap the majority of the proposed
priorities and just leave the bus service (enhanced or otherwise) to be
a disaster area.

Agreed. I fully expect to see this happen.

Current services are supposedly at capacity and
allegedly so are the roads so what is going to give to make all this
work? Apologies for the cynicism but I would have preferred the tram
scheme to proceed as that was the only option that would have both
forced a reduction of road space and provided a suitable attractive
alternative to car drivers.

I agree with everything you've said here. I think it's sad that the
private car stalwarts have managed to kill off a scheme that would
have left them relatively little worse off (whilst reducing car
capacity in places, it would have compensated by removing cars from
the road), while denying everyone else the option of a fast tram
journey, effectively dragging everyone down with them into congestion
hell.

West London Tram
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 20:28:17 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

thoss wrote:

According to the Ealing Gazette article (they interviewed Ken when
he visited somewhere in Ealing for a photoshoot) it's not
cancelled, just put on hold. Maybe he's just trying to confuse the
enemy with contradictory statements.

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by
the Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both
the Mayor's and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both
parties will proceed to work on "a bus-based solution rather than
the tram originally envisaged".

Not really. The GLA press release says that the cancellation is
dependent on Crossrail proceeding. Now that may well be clever
semantics but the whole thing is a mess.

The word "dependent" is nowhere to be found in the press release. It says
that the Mayor and the local boroughs will work together on a bus-based
solution "on the assumption of a positive government decision on the
construction of Crossrail". Nothing is said that implies that the tram
would resurface if Crossrail were abandoned.

Quite why Ealing Council believe a bus based system employing many of
the same traffic priorities as the tram would have used will be any
more popular I do not know. The main point of opposition to the
tram, if I have been paying attention, was the effect that its tracks
and priorities would have on people being able to use their cars.

Not just cars, but commercial vehicles too. If it was just cars, then there
would be some scope for diverting their occupants on to the tram, or on to
more reliable buses, but you can't do that with delivery vans, builders'
trucks etc etc.

I can't see buses being more readily acceptable to those same
opponents.

Buses are much more flexible in operation than fixed-rail trams, which
should avoid the need for complete closure of roads like Acton High Street
to non-bus traffic.

I suspect Ealing Council hope they can scrap the majority
of the proposed priorities and just leave the bus service (enhanced
or otherwise) to be a disaster area. Current services are supposedly
at capacity and allegedly so are the roads so what is going to give
to make all this work?

Crossrail should remove some of the traffic.

Apologies for the cynicism but I would have preferred the tram scheme
to proceed as that was the only option that would have both forced a
reduction of road space and provided a suitable attractive alternative
to car drivers.

True for east-west car drivers, but not for those on other routes who
currently need to use stretches of the Uxbridge Road, nor for commercial
vehicles (see above). The biggest problem with the tram was that it
attempted to use 80-year-old ideas of laying tram tracks on narrow streets,
and expecting other legitimate road users to sod off elsewhere, e.g. through
even narrower and less suitable residential roads.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

West London Tram
 

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 02:44:24 -0700, whos2091 wrote:

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

It's disappointing but inevitable. I have posted before on how
surprised I have been at the depth of feeling against the tram in the
Ealing area where I have been working for 2 years.

My own take on it is that whilst the majority of people quietly
thought it was a good idea, there was a very vocal minority of NIMBYs
who felt their car usage was under threat and launched a campaign
against the tram. Those in favour of the tram didn't have anywhere
near the same depth of feeling, so there was never much of a "pro"
campaign to counter the vocal and passionate "anti" campaign, which
successfully managed to invoke reactionary tendencies and spread
anti-tram feeling (using plenty of lies, half-truths and
exaggerations[1]) amongst a population that did not hear (and did not
care to find out) both sides of the argument. The local Tories saw an
opportunity and, together with the "anti" lobby, made it an election
issue, which stepped up the campaign to a reactionary frenzy (with
"Vote No Tram" posters all over Ealing).

[1]
See, for example, http://www.ealingstreets.org/ses_10reasons.htm .


For instance, my daily journey of Acton Central to a couple of stops
after Ealing Broadway could be reduced by half from the current 20
minutes (and I think this is a conservative estimate) by some simple
and relatively cheap measures:

2. Prioirity bus lanes/traffic lights on the Western end of the High
Street in Acton (and to the west of that stretch going the other way)
4. Priorirty bus lane/traffic lights on the A406 crossing both ways
5. A bus lane between A4020 westbound between the A406 and the
junction with The Common with - preferably - priority traffic lights
at the junction

Priority traffic lights won't work for buses because, if bus
frequencies are increased to cope with the rising demand over the next
few years, they will simply be too frequent, and traffic on the A406
etc would experience something too close to a constant red light.

A tram would have been able to satisfy the demand with just one every
3 minutes, allowing traffic light priority to work.

West London Tram
 

"Richard J." wrote in message
.. .

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the
Mayor's and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will
proceed to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally
envisaged".

Here in Plain English Land that smells like "cancelled"
--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."

West London Tram
 

At 13:09:47 on Sat, 4 Aug 2007 Paul Corfield opined:-

Ken might
have the last laugh and put in nice long articulated Trolleybuses with
loads of priority measures - I wonder if Ealing residents would be happy
then

Much more sensible than trams.
--
Thoss

West London Tram
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

The Uxbridge Road corridor is not dissimilar to the A11 corridor in East
London - there you have Great Eastern trains, the Central Line and an
intensive service on route 25 with supplementary services on the 205 and
86 and yet all modes are very busy. Really the 25 bus could quite easily
be replaced by a tram service as that sort of capacity is really needed.

Have you seen how narrow the Romford Road is in places? Why would a tram be
any more workable here than in Ealing?

People travel long distances on the 25 even though logic would dictate
travel by rail would be more effective.

A bit but part of it is where the stations are located and the desirability
of a direct service. Generally I only use the 25 late at night (and the
service is atrocious) but for route combinations such as Whitechapel to
Forest Gate the 25 is at least direct rather than the interchange scrum at
Mile End and Stratford.

(Also let's not beat about the bush - the 25 is heavily prone to free
riding.)

West London Tram
 

On Sat, 4 Aug 2007, sweek wrote:

I wonder if it's possible to turn West Drayton - Uxbridge into an extra
Crossrail Branch to serve Uxbridge as well? Or maybe a feeder shuttle
train.

Hang on, what? Do you mean West Ealing - Uxbridge? If so, how? Via the
Central line depot?

tom

--
Technology is anything that wasn't around when you were born. -- Alan Kay

West London Tram
 

On Aug 4, 8:35 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
Hang on, what? Do you mean West Ealing - Uxbridge? If so, how? Via the
Central line depot?

There used to be a line running due north from the GWML at West
Drayton to Uxbridge Vine St station. It's just about all been built
on, though.

The idea I have for reaching Uxbridge is taking over the Piccadilly
branch, which will be feeling very neglected after T5 opens.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

West London Tram
 

On 3 Aug, 21:28, "Richard J." wrote:
The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".

Since the uxbridge road already has a "bus based solution" that gets
nicely stuck in traffic jams I assume that means they're going to do
bugger all.

B2003

West London Tram
 

On 4 Aug, 13:36, asdf wrote:
care to find out) both sides of the argument. The local Tories saw an
opportunity and, together with the "anti" lobby, made it an election
issue, which stepped up the campaign to a reactionary frenzy (with
"Vote No Tram" posters all over Ealing).

Does anyone take the Tories seriously anymore with anything related to
public transport? They've proven time and time again they simply don't
have a clue. If they could get away with it they'd probably get rid of
all public transport and spend the money on road widening schemes (and
if it could plough stright through a historic or scientific interest
site in the process so much the better)

B2003

West London Tram
 

On Sat, 4 Aug 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On Aug 4, 8:35 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

Hang on, what? Do you mean West Ealing - Uxbridge? If so, how? Via the
Central line depot?

There used to be a line running due north from the GWML at West Drayton
to Uxbridge Vine St station. It's just about all been built on, though.

Aha. I'd never heard of that. Or of the branch from the Chiltern line!

The idea I have for reaching Uxbridge is taking over the Piccadilly
branch, which will be feeling very neglected after T5 opens.

I was thinking a while ago that could be grafted on to the Central line
via a flyover at Park Royal. In conjunction with the classic
Queen's-Park-to-North Acton extension of the Bakerloo, probably.

tom

--
Love as a principle and order as the basis; progress as the goal.

West London Tram
 

On Aug 5, 6:59 pm, Boltar wrote:
Since the uxbridge road already has a "bus based solution" that gets
nicely stuck in traffic jams I assume that means they're going to do
bugger all. I

Probably - but will the residents notice as they are lulled into
unconsciousness by the increasing carbon monoxide levels in West
London? Perhaps it is already happening in view of the relatively low
response to the consultation exercises undertaken by TfL. If I were a
conspiracy theorist I could suggest that Ken is trying to lull the
residents into a false sense of security before coming up with his
next scheme - The Heathrow and West London Congestion Zone - after all
he may need to find funds for Crossrail - see articles below


quote
http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4264

Mayor bows to calls to axe £648m West London Tram
Filed 06/08/07

London Mayor Ken Livingstone has announced his intention to abandon
plans to build a tram line between Uxbridge and Shepherd's Bush in
west London after six years of developing the scheme.

The move follows opposition to the tram plans from local residents and
a concerted effort by the three London boroughs through which the line
would have run to have the light rail proposals replaced with extra
bus services along the Uxbridge Road. In a statement the Mayor said
the decision to axe the project had been taken because government go-
ahead for the Crossrail scheme would significantly increase public
transport capacity in the area, reducing the need for a tram line.
However, given that since 2001 Transport for London's plans for
enhancing the capital's transport infrastructure have envisaged both
projects being developed side-by-side, observers believe the Mayor is
using Crossrail as a smokescreen for dropping what has proved a
controversial and unpopular Mayoral commitment.

While the West London Tram could be resurrected if the government
decides not to approve Crossrail, ministers are expected to approve a
funding package later this year. A green light for the scheme will
almost certainly seal the fate of the tram line.

In a 2004 public consultation on the project TfL sent out 440,000
questionnaires and received 17,000 responses with 30% of those who
completed a questionnaire saying they supported the West London Tram,
but 59% saying that they did not. Opposition to the scheme intensifed
after the local elections in May 2006 when the pro-tram Labour Ealing
council was taken over by a Conservative administration. In the most
recent opinion poll conducted by IPSOS MORI in October 2006, 44% of
local residents were against the West London Tram, with a none too
convincing 40% of people backing the tram scheme.

Crossrail is currently expected to be completed in 2015. In the
meantime, the Mayor and Ealing Council have agreed to work together
with the other local boroughs to deliver an improved bus priority
system along the Uxbridge Road, one of the busiest in the capital. The
Mayor says much of the work already carried by Transport for London on
traffic congestion and the tram project will assist in the planning of
the new bus-based solution.

Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London, said: "A positive decision on
Crossrail will mean that substantially improved bus services become a
practical alternative to a tram along the Uxbridge Road to meet the
need for more public transport, boost the local economy and to deal
with rising congestion in the area."

Cllr Jason Stacey, leader of Ealing Council said: "Residents have
overwhelmingly expressed the view that the proposed West London Tram
was not the answer to the area's transport problems. We have been
working tirelessly over the last year to represent this view to the
Mayor and TfL and to stop this scheme."

Although funding for the scheme had not been secured, abandoning the
project will allow TfL to remove an estimated £648m of planned
expenditure, freeing up money for other transport schemes, including
bus enhancements along the Uxbridge Road. The decision also means the
Cross River Tram project will now take precedence in plans to extend
the role of light rail in the capital.

The most recent assessment of the total cost of the West London Tram
scheme, given by the Mayor in answer to a written Mayoral question on
23 May 2007, is £648m at 2004 prices.

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/s...d3 bbe0df27ff


£38m development bill for doomed West London Tram
Filed 06/08/07

The decision by Mayor Ken Livingstone to axe the West London Tram
scheme after six years of work is the latest setback for ambitious
plans to return trams to the capital.

An estimated £38m has been spent on the now doomed project, which was
one of four new light rail schemes proposed in the Mayor's Transport
Strategy, published in 2001 shortly after his election to office.

Since then, the East London and Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes
have been downgraded to bus priority routes and have seen delivery
dates slip. Last month's decision by communities secretary Hazel
Blears to order a second public inquiry into plans for the Thames
Gateway Bridge, which would link together the two bus networks, will
further delay progress.

Development of the Cross River Tram scheme, designed to relieve
pressure on the Northern and Victoria Tube Lines, has been delayed and
a phased delivery is now expected with a cross river tram connection
unlikely before 2016. Plans to extend the Croydon Tramlink network
have also made slow progress. Of four shortlisted extensions, only one
is currently being taken forward and, according to Transport for
London, is unlikely to open before 2013.

Since 2001 the Mayor has also voiced support for a tram line running
along Oxford Street, although no detailed proposals for such a scheme
have so far been published.

According to Richard Barnes, Conservative London Assembly Member for
Ealing and Acton, total spending on the West London Tram scheme was
expected to rise to £38m this year from £29m in 2006/07, a figure
given by Ken Livingstone at Mayor's Question Time. In addition, Ealing
Council has a budget which has been used to fund opposition to the
project.

Cost of West London Tram Scheme development as of January 2007:
Pre 2003/4: £1 m
2003/4: £7.3m
2004/5: £7.5m
2005/6: £7.5m
2006/7: £6.5m (budgeted figure)
Total to date: £29.8m
Source: Transport for London

Unquote

West London Tram
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
oups.com...
On 4 Aug, 13:36, asdf wrote:
care to find out) both sides of the argument. The local Tories saw an
opportunity and, together with the "anti" lobby, made it an election
issue, which stepped up the campaign to a reactionary frenzy (with
"Vote No Tram" posters all over Ealing).

Does anyone take the Tories seriously anymore with anything related to
public transport? They've proven time and time again they simply don't
have a clue. If they could get away with it they'd probably get rid of
all public transport and spend the money on road widening schemes (and
if it could plough stright through a historic or scientific interest
site in the process so much the better)


I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions or owt, but I'm detecting perhaps
a very slight anti-Tory bias in this post.

BTN

West London Tram
 

It's disappointing but inevitable. I have posted before on how
surprised I have been at the depth of feeling against the tram in the
Ealing area where I have been working for 2 years.

My own take on it is that whilst the majority of people quietly
thought it was a good idea, there was a very vocal minority of NIMBYs
who felt their car usage was under threat and launched a campaign
against the tram. Those in favour of the tram didn't have anywhere
near the same depth of feeling, so there was never much of a "pro"
campaign to counter the vocal and passionate "anti" campaign, which
successfully managed to invoke reactionary tendencies and spread
anti-tram feeling (using plenty of lies, half-truths and
exaggerations[1]) amongst a population that did not hear (and did not
care to find out) both sides of the argument. The local Tories saw an
opportunity and, together with the "anti" lobby, made it an election
issue, which stepped up the campaign to a reactionary frenzy (with
"Vote No Tram" posters all over Ealing).
See, for example,http://www.ealingstreets.org/ses_10reasons.htm.

You're right about the vocal "anti" campaign and the Tories' hijacking
of the issue, but I think the "majority of the people" didn't have a
strong opinion either way. However, the reason why those in favour of
the tram did not have a strong opinion (and I would put myself in to
that group, along with many people who I know who live and work in
Ealing) was that there was always a sneaking suspicion that this was
not money well spent, rather than objecting to the investment in
public transport in the area per se. My previously posted new station
at Acton Wells as well as the road improvements I mentioned (amongst
others) would still come in cheaper than the tram and be substantially
less disruptive.

2. Prioirity bus lanes/traffic lights on the Western end of the High
Street in Acton (and to the west of that stretch going the other way)
4. Priorirty bus lane/traffic lights on the A406 crossing both ways

Priority traffic lights won't work for buses because, if bus
frequencies are increased to cope with the rising demand over the next
few years, they will simply be too frequent, and traffic on the A406
etc would experience something too close to a constant red light.

A tram would have been able to satisfy the demand with just one every
3 minutes, allowing traffic light priority to work.

Sorry, I was not at all clear in my numbered comments. By "priority
traffic lights" I did not mean that as a bus approaches, it favours a
green light (which, you are right, would cause chaos on the A406) but
a bus lane from Ealing Common Tube to the traffic light which then
gives the bus a few seconds ahead of queuing traffic (much like the
light at Chalk Farm Tube southbound towards Camden from Belsize Park).

West London Tram
 

On 6 Aug, 11:51, "Sir Benjamin Nunn" wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

oups.com...

On 4 Aug, 13:36, asdf wrote:
care to find out) both sides of the argument. The local Tories saw an
opportunity and, together with the "anti" lobby, made it an election
issue, which stepped up the campaign to a reactionary frenzy (with
"Vote No Tram" posters all over Ealing).

Does anyone take the Tories seriously anymore with anything related to
public transport? They've proven time and time again they simply don't
have a clue. If they could get away with it they'd probably get rid of
all public transport and spend the money on road widening schemes (and
if it could plough stright through a historic or scientific interest
site in the process so much the better)

I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions or owt, but I'm detecting perhaps
a very slight anti-Tory bias in this post.

I thought I was stating more or less a fact given how they trashed the
railways and london buses by privatising them and starved the tube of
investment. Meanwhile on the roads it was bypasses aplenty - blank
cheques for Mr Laing and Mr Murphy. If thats bias on my part then so
be it.

B2003

West London Tram
 

On Aug 3, 12:51 pm, thoss wrote:
Today's Ealing Gazette has a story that Ken has suspended the WLT until
after Crossrail opens, if that goes ahead.
--
More News from Ealing

http://www.ealingtimes.co.uk/display...601275.0.0.php

Tram 'isn't over until it's over'
KEN LIVINGSTONE'S announcement last week that he will scrap the West
London Tram plans has been cautiously welcomed by Conservative London
Assembly member Richard Barnes.
The London Mayor had been pushing for the project to go ahead to solve
congestion problems on the Uxbridge Road, although it has been
attacked by residents and shopkeepers alike.
But Mr Barnes, the Ealing and Hillingdon representative, has attacked
the mayor for the £38 million squandered' on the scheme. He said: "I'm
glad that the Mayor has seen the light - albeit after £38m has been
spent on a project the people didn't want.
"Mr Livingstone's blind arrogance in pursuing this scheme, against the
wishes of the people, and spending millions of pounds of their money
in the process illustrates his willingness to play politics with
people's lives.
"The everyday experience of people who use any part of the proposed
tram's route would have been of massive inconvenience, and businesses
would have suffered.
"If Crossrail doesn't go ahead and the West London Tram is brought
back off the shelf then he can say he was forced into it by the Prime
Minister, Gordon Brown."
"It isn't over until it's over, and it ain't over yet."
4:29pm Tuesday 7th August 2007


Residents of Ealing - it's over. Other projects in areas where they
are welcomed by the local community will be built first. Gordon Brown
will not force Ken's hand. A few years of stewing in your own
congestion followed by the introduction of the "Heathrow and
surrounding areas congestion charge" is what now awaits you. As for
Crossrail - remember half the trains will not run west of Paddington.
And now for your further entertainment I shall read my latest
selection of Vogon poetry.