Discussion:
Barking Riverside Extension approved
(too old to reply)
Paul Corfield
2017-08-06 22:38:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00

Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision

Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report

A few interesting things in the report.

1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.

2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.

3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.

4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
--
Paul C
via Google
Basil Jet
2017-08-07 02:12:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
A few interesting things in the report.
1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.
2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.
3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
Thanks.

Clarification... At the moment trains from Barking to Seven Sisters have
to cut across to the Barking-bound track halfway through South Tottenham
station, so the 6tph from South Tottenham to Barking would presumably
skip South Tottenham in the other direction. They might even skip South
Tottenham in both directions to save confusing people - South Tottenham
is pretty close to Seven Sisters.
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-08-07 10:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Clarification... At the moment trains from Barking to Seven Sisters
have to cut across to the Barking-bound track halfway through South
Tottenham station, so the 6tph from South Tottenham to Barking would
presumably skip South Tottenham in the other direction. They might
even skip South Tottenham in both directions to save confusing people
- South Tottenham is pretty close to Seven Sisters.
Hmm. So they do. Didn't there used to be a standard double junction west of
the station at South Tottenham? If so when was the layout changed?
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Robin9
2017-08-07 07:40:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Work
Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service t
Barking Riverside, last week.
'Go-ahead for London Overground Barking Riverside extension
(http://tinyurl.com/y8b8rh3l)
Decision letter - http://tinyurl.com/yc6f9l6q
Inspector's report - http://tinyurl.com/y8p9gyaq
A few interesting things in the report.
1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be adde
at Renwick Road.
2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated lin
structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood
This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking th
extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetar
loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled lin
is eventually constructed..
3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tp
passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. No
quite sure how that works current signalling.
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extr
trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tot
curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give
tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though
for this possible variant service.
--
Paul C
via Google
I wonder if Network Rail agree about the feasibility of 6 passenger
trains and 6 freight trains an hour. (Mind you, I've never seen any
evidence that there's a need for 6 freight paths an hour!)

I don't know how likely a cross Thames extension is, but I hope
it won't require much demolition of newly created infrastructure


--
Robin9
Paul Corfield
2017-08-07 16:49:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robin9
I wonder if Network Rail agree about the feasibility of 6 passenger
trains and 6 freight trains an hour. (Mind you, I've never seen any
evidence that there's a need for 6 freight paths an hour!)
I don't know how likely a cross Thames extension is, but I hope
it won't require much demolition of newly created infrastructure.
Don't know if NR agree or not. The operation of extra trains would require an extra freight passing loop - that's in the inspector's report. I think past NR documents have said that signalling mods would also be needed to run an enhanced frequency. However this isn't mentioned in the inspector's report.

TfL told the inquiry that it will likely be the 2030s before a cross river link could be contemplated or afforded. A cost of £1.2-£1.8bn is cited. One objector went to great lengths to try to discredit the elevated design as it would need to be demolished and replaced with a descending tunnel alignment and sub surface station if the link to Abbey Wood is built. The objections were rejected because forcing TfL to build a tunnelled link now was not in the current project scope / design, not funded and not within the pervue of the inquiry. The inspector said that if the elevated link eventually had to be demonlished then it would not be money wasted given that providing the link would have enabled the building of 10,500 new homes.
--
Paul C
via Google
Recliner
2017-08-07 13:55:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 15:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Paul Corfield
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?
Post by Paul Corfield
A few interesting things in the report.
1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.
2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.
3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
Roland Perry
2017-08-07 14:04:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?
One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-08-07 14:05:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?
One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?
Is it TfL or NR that raises the finds to build the track?
Roland Perry
2017-08-07 15:14:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to
Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?
One of the biggest: can TfL actually raise the funds (or even still wish
to raise the funds) to do the work, now that they have "planning
permission" to do the work?
Is it TfL or NR that raises the finds to build the track?
Inside London such projects are traditionally TfL's hat being passed
around.
--
Roland Perry
Paul Corfield
2017-08-07 16:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 15:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Paul Corfield
Post by Paul Corfield
Chris Grayling, SoS for Transport, signed off the Transport and Works Act Order, for the extension of the Barking - Gospel Oak service to Barking Riverside, last week.
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/commuter-rail/go-ahead-for-london-overground-barking-riverside-extension.html?channel=00
Decision letter - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-decision
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
Does this mean that construction can now start, or are there more
stages and hurdles to pass?
Post by Paul Corfield
A few interesting things in the report.
1. Provision to be made for a station, with island platform, to be added at Renwick Road.
2. Lots of argument from one petitioner about the elevated line structure into Riverside preventing a cross Thames tunnel to Abbey Wood. This was dismissed by the Inspector who was content that unlocking the extra housing at Barking Riverside would compensate for any monetary loss if the elevated alignment has to be demolished if a tunnelled link is eventually constructed.
3. Interesting comments from TfL about possibly running a 6 tph passenger service *and* 6 freights an hour on the GOBLIN itself. Not quite sure how that works current signalling.
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
I'll answer Roland's question first. The scheme is fully funded by TfL (circa £90m) and also the body responsible for redeveloping Barking Riverside (circa £170m). This was all signed off before the last Mayoral election. It is worth noting that Barking Riverside can't be developed further without a fixed transport link being provided - it's a key planning condition.

I understand that the plan is that preparatory works start later this year. TfL then have to complete their procurement process to agree the final bidder for the work. There are also a number of standard planning approvals needed - many are set out in the conditions to the TWA order. Given TfL have been working with Barking and Dagenham Council for a long time this should not be hugely problematic. B&D Council want the extension built so I can't see them being hugely argumentative. Substantive works will probably start next year with completion in 2021.
--
Paul C
via Google
Basil Jet
2017-08-07 23:25:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Corfield
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
The exact quote in the report is "TfL planners are already considering
diverting Enfield Town to Seven Sisters trains to Barking." This might
imply that the entire Enfield service would go that way. Either way it
seems odd... here's some passenger figures from Wikipedia.

Bush Hill Park 0.992 million
Enfield Town 2.107 million

Southbury 0.834 million
Turkey Street 0.604 million
Theobald's Grove 0.352 million

(I can't get figures for Cheshunt Overground only, but it has faster
trains to the Victoria Line and to Liverpool Street via Tottenham Hale.)

So Enfield Town alone has more than the three Southbury Loop stations.

I think Enfield Town needs 8-car trains from Liverpool Street, and the
Southbury Loop should get the 4-car trains from Barking.
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-08-08 00:16:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Paul Corfield
Inspector's report -
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riversid
e-extension-order-inspectors-report
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Paul Corfield
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra
trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott
curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6
tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though,
for this possible variant service.
The exact quote in the report is "TfL planners are already
considering diverting Enfield Town to Seven Sisters trains to
Barking." This might imply that the entire Enfield service would go
that way. Either way it seems odd... here's some passenger figures
from Wikipedia.
Bush Hill Park 0.992 million
Enfield Town 2.107 million
Southbury 0.834 million
Turkey Street 0.604 million
Theobald's Grove 0.352 million
(I can't get figures for Cheshunt Overground only, but it has faster
trains to the Victoria Line and to Liverpool Street via Tottenham Hale.)
So Enfield Town alone has more than the three Southbury Loop stations.
I think Enfield Town needs 8-car trains from Liverpool Street, and
the Southbury Loop should get the 4-car trains from Barking.
But these are "planned extra trains" from Enfield Town, so on top of the
current 4 trains hourly in the peak when Cheshunt and the Southbury loop
only get half-hourly trains. Enfield Town also has 3 platforms to reverse
trains in while Cheshunt just has one for LO services.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Paul Corfield
2017-08-09 16:17:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Paul Corfield
Inspector's report - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/london-overground-barking-riverside-extension-order-inspectors-report
4. Another interesting possibility of extending planned peak extra trains from Enfield to Seven Sisters onwards to Barking via the S Tott curve. As the trains will be common stock in future this would give 6 tph from S Tott to Barking in the peaks. No timescale given, though, for this possible variant service.
The exact quote in the report is "TfL planners are already considering
diverting Enfield Town to Seven Sisters trains to Barking." This might
imply that the entire Enfield service would go that way. Either way it
seems odd... here's some passenger figures from Wikipedia.
Bush Hill Park 0.992 million
Enfield Town 2.107 million
Southbury 0.834 million
Turkey Street 0.604 million
Theobald's Grove 0.352 million
(I can't get figures for Cheshunt Overground only, but it has faster
trains to the Victoria Line and to Liverpool Street via Tottenham Hale.)
So Enfield Town alone has more than the three Southbury Loop stations.
I think Enfield Town needs 8-car trains from Liverpool Street, and the
Southbury Loop should get the 4-car trains from Barking.
I know what the report says. TfL have had plans for extra peak hours trains between Seven Sisters and Enfield Town to try to resolve the high demand on that flow because of the large scale of interchange. Obviously Liverpool St trains are still busy and pick up many more people further south. I have seen no suggestion at all that the current 4 tph peak / 2 tph off peak Enfied - Liv St service would be diverted anywhere.

The extras can't run to LST as there aren't the paths nor any effective intermediate turnbacks. This leaves only a couple of options as to what you do with the trains once they reached Seven Sisters. You either try to reverse on the chord or you run through South Tottenham and reverse them there or on the connecting tracks towards Stratford / Clapton or you send them eastwards on the GOBLIN. Given the GOBLIN is forecast in the future to have continued levels of overcrowding, even with longer electric trains, between Barking and Blackhorse Road I can see the attraction to TfL of trying to add some extra peak frequency on this section. Anyway this is all a fair number of years away given funding constraints. I only mentioned it in the first place as an interesting snippet from the report.
--
Paul C
via Google
Basil Jet
2017-08-09 18:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Corfield
I know what the report says. TfL have had plans for extra peak hours trains between Seven Sisters and Enfield Town to try to resolve the high demand on that flow because of the large scale of interchange. Obviously Liverpool St trains are still busy and pick up many more people further south. I have seen no suggestion at all that the current 4 tph peak / 2 tph off peak Enfied - Liv St service would be diverted anywhere.
The extras can't run to LST as there aren't the paths nor any effective intermediate turnbacks. This leaves only a couple of options as to what you do with the trains once they reached Seven Sisters. You either try to reverse on the chord or you run through South Tottenham and reverse them there or on the connecting tracks towards Stratford / Clapton or you send them eastwards on the GOBLIN. Given the GOBLIN is forecast in the future to have continued levels of overcrowding, even with longer electric trains, between Barking and Blackhorse Road I can see the attraction to TfL of trying to add some extra peak frequency on this section. Anyway this is all a fair number of years away given funding constraints. I only mentioned it in the first place as an interesting snippet from the report.
Another option is to send the extras from Enfield to Stratford. This
would allow them to be 8-car, and it would give Enfield-Seven Sisters a
service that might be useful for a fair number of commuters (although
it's possible that Docklands than via Stratford might be slower than
changing at Liverpool Street for Crossrail, or even walking from Bethnal
Orange to Whitechapel). But obviously that doesn't help with predicted
crowding on the Goblin.

Do they not think that the Crossrail interchange at Wanstead Park /
Forest Gate will suck a lot of the interchange out of Blackhorse Road?
They seem to be ignoring it, sometimes omitting it from line guides etc.

Crayonista solution: Build track from Cambridge Heath to Whitechapel and
run them to New Cross.
r***@ntlworld.com
2017-08-10 15:32:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Paul Corfield
I know what the report says. TfL have had plans for extra peak hours trains between Seven Sisters and Enfield Town to try to resolve the high demand on that flow because of the large scale of interchange. Obviously Liverpool St trains are still busy and pick up many more people further south. I have seen no suggestion at all that the current 4 tph peak / 2 tph off peak Enfied - Liv St service would be diverted anywhere.
The extras can't run to LST as there aren't the paths nor any effective intermediate turnbacks. This leaves only a couple of options as to what you do with the trains once they reached Seven Sisters. You either try to reverse on the chord or you run through South Tottenham and reverse them there or on the connecting tracks towards Stratford / Clapton or you send them eastwards on the GOBLIN. Given the GOBLIN is forecast in the future to have continued levels of overcrowding, even with longer electric trains, between Barking and Blackhorse Road I can see the attraction to TfL of trying to add some extra peak frequency on this section. Anyway this is all a fair number of years away given funding constraints. I only mentioned it in the first place as an interesting snippet from the report.
Another option is to send the extras from Enfield to Stratford.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire! They'd impede the flow
of traffic to and from Tottenham Hale which, we're always told,
is so intense that additional tracks are required.
David C
2017-08-18 12:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Paul Corfield
I know what the report says. TfL have had plans for extra peak hours trains between Seven Sisters and Enfield Town to try to resolve the high demand on that flow because of the large scale of interchange. Obviously Liverpool St trains are still busy and pick up many more people further south. I have seen no suggestion at all that the current 4 tph peak / 2 tph off peak Enfied - Liv St service would be diverted anywhere.
The extras can't run to LST as there aren't the paths nor any effective intermediate turnbacks. This leaves only a couple of options as to what you do with the trains once they reached Seven Sisters. You either try to reverse on the chord or you run through South Tottenham and reverse them there or on the connecting tracks towards Stratford / Clapton or you send them eastwards on the GOBLIN. Given the GOBLIN is forecast in the future to have continued levels of overcrowding, even with longer electric trains, between Barking and Blackhorse Road I can see the attraction to TfL of trying to add some extra peak frequency on this section. Anyway this is all a fair number of years away given funding constraints. I only mentioned it in the first place as an interesting snippet from the report.
Another option is to send the extras from Enfield to Stratford. This
would allow them to be 8-car, and it would give Enfield-Seven Sisters a
service that might be useful for a fair number of commuters (although
it's possible that Docklands than via Stratford might be slower than
changing at Liverpool Street for Crossrail, or even walking from Bethnal
Orange to Whitechapel). But obviously that doesn't help with predicted
crowding on the Goblin.
Do they not think that the Crossrail interchange at Wanstead Park /
Forest Gate will suck a lot of the interchange out of Blackhorse Road?
They seem to be ignoring it, sometimes omitting it from line guides etc.
Crayonista solution: Build track from Cambridge Heath to Whitechapel and
run them to New Cross.
Interchanging from Forest Gate to Wanstead Park 'tis not that easy.

There's a busy road to cross, narrow pavements & a climb up to
Wanstead Park platforms.

If I want to change from c2c to AGA I use the Upminster - Romford
shuttle.

DC

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

Jarle Hammen Knudsen
2017-08-08 08:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
How many trains are there today on the Essex Thameside (Tilbury Loop)
Line east of Barking?
--
jhk
Loading...