Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

Update from Sustainable Haringey Transport:

"TfL held a consultation meeting about the proposed Crossrail 2 underground line on 12th October. There are two branches in Haringey. One would come to the surface at Tottenham Hale and then serve stations along the Lea Valley. The other, remaining underground, would serve a station at Seven Sisters and then run either via Turnpike Lane and Alexandra Palace or via Wood Green. This consultation only concerned Turnpike Lane, Alexandra Palace and Wood Green. There is to be a further session to consider Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale. The timescale for the line is for construction during 2020s and to be open by 2030.

"TfL have already ‘safeguarded’ the route. This means that owners of properties within about 100 metres of the proposed line will need to notify TfL of any changes they propose to make to their property. TfL concerns are mostly to do with proposals to excavate foundations etc for large developments and should not affect smaller changes. Prospective buyers of property would need to be informed that the property is within the safeguarded area. If there is any evidence of blight as a result there is a mechanism for compensation. People within the safeguarded area have already been informed.

"TfL also have the power to compulsorily acquire property which they need to build the line. In most cases they will only require it during construction and then are obliged to restore it to its owner in its original condition. One site which is going to be used is in Ermine Road, South Tottenham, where they are storing material and digging a ventilation shaft. There might also be a need for a site in the West Green area if the Wood Green route is chosen (rather than Turnpike Lane and Alexandra Palace) but where this might be has not been decided. None of the sites mentioned appear to involve residential property.

"Attendees at the meeting were shown the work needed around the three stations:

"Turnpike Lane station would be expanded involving some changes to the bus station. It would also involve acquiring the shops on the corner of Westbury Avenue and Langham Road. It is also proposed to acquire the BHS store on the corner of the High Road and Whymark Avenue for the purpose of digging a ventilation shaft. Most of this site would be given back when the work is finished.

"Alexandra Palace station would be underneath the present main line station with an expanded entrance using the small shops and restaurants immediately to the south of the present entrance. It is also proposed to use some of Avenue Gardens for storage. ‘Most of’ Avenue Gardens would be restored after construction is finished.

"If the line serves Wood Green instead of Turnpike Lane and Alexandra Palace it is proposed to acquire the whole of the site bounded by the High Road, Buller Road, Redvers Road and Lordship Lane, including the cinema. Again most of it would be returned when work is finished.

"It’s early days yet. There is plenty of opportunity for protests and changes."

Tags for Forum Posts: crossrail 2

Views: 2969

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Or it could be a good way to move east/west without having to get off at a London terminal, get on the the tube and get on at another London terminal. I know this might be difficult to believe but not everyone actual wants to go to London, some people just want to get through it!
I reckon it looks like woodgreen will get cross rail 2 and be linked with south gate and Severn sisters and Ally pally and Turnpike Lane will lose out.

It's a clever way to save money by making one station instead of two and sits with borough strategy of woodgreen being the 'heart' of the borough.

Then all they have to do is get some early driverless Google cars taking punters up to the palace from the station.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a8eee350-7cb2-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.html...

Wood Green to Hampton court anyone ?

This latest diagram clearly indicates what a real dog's dinner this line is. Anyone with any 'feel' for transport projects knows that they should 'flow' i.e. South West > North East, North West > South East. It's obvious to me, that the extension eastwards towards Leytonstone is more of a priority than Ally Pally. Sadly, Haringey Council for whatever reason, just seems to be grateful and happy to accept 'any' investment into public transport, regardless of how badly located the station/s are. They apparently prefer a station at Wood Green, rather than one at Turnpike Lane as 'it's nearer to the shopping area' - ??, oh really??

This is all 'big pie in the sky stuff' and anyways, there'll be a new mayor new year, so don't hold your breath. Remember Boris scrapping Ken's tram plans? And, there seem to many in SW London who are also not happy with the 'Balham Bulge' or 'Tooting Twist' - not a way to run build a railway.

Turn pike lane wouldn't help make ally pally the London landmark it's being set up to become whilst building a Turnpike Lane station and an ally pally station would be expensive.

I think Wood Green could be a good compromise, one big station in the heart of the borough and the heart of one of London's key designated metropolitan areas.

You 'green laners' are used to walking anyway. ;)

And why so many branches in the South West and yet so few North of the River?

This is really the decades old 'Chelsea-Hackney Line' rump converted as means for City Hall to grab as many suburban lines as possible away from National Rail operating companies. This line, as planned, will BTW, have no interchange with the Bakerloo or Jubilee Lines. It had always been policy to connect underground lines in central London where they cross.

And apparently, Stoke Newington won't get a station because it's too expensive to build one. I don't like it at all.

@Billy

I certainly do understand your points about relief of overcrowding. But North London isn't alone in this. In fact, Haringey and Enfield already do very well as far as provision of railways. On the other hand, Hackney certainly doesn't, with no direct rail line at all to the West End (see the strength of service on bus routes 38 & 73) - apart from of course, a station at Manor House, geographically Hackney, but mostly serving Haringey.

As you say, these extensions are not cheap and I seriously think the money would be better spent on a branch through Central Hackney to Leytonstone (providing double the service to destinations north of Leytonstone) rather than a branch off on a tangent to New Southgate. And while I understand the local aspirations, to spend so much money for the provision of a 'once in summer' trip to Ally Pally, is not really a go-er. 

I've never disputed the necessity 'Lea Valley line' part of CR2 and I'm quite at ease with that idea. That alone will immediately free up space on the Victoria Line and further along, the Piccadilly Line, as there will be fewer interchange passengers at Tottenham Hale.

As regards 'flow', passenger journeys are like water, they always take the route of least resisitance.  The best example of this that I can give, is building water channels on the beach as a child. The more channels you build, the less flow and the channels dry up. This is the reason, that I disapprove so much of the New Southgate link. And also because the Thameslink service on the GN Line hasn't yet come on tap and will certainly change travelling patterns with it's much increased service.

I can also offer another city railway as an example of what I mean. München, a city I know very well (lived there for ten years), has in relation to it's population, an extremely good rail network U- & S-Bahn. Of course, I accept that all cities are different, nevertheless on München's lines U3 (orange) and U6 (blue) you can see a line/situation exactly like the proposed Crossrail 2 - SW > N & NW. The northern branch of the U3, just like the New Southgate branch of CR2, wasn't part of the original planning and was only added when the city was awarded the 1972 olympic games, in order to provide a service to the Olympic Stadium. Anyway, until the present day, the passenger levels on this branch have never been as high as elsewhere, because they continue to use and prefer direct routes to the centre with interchanges, rather than the roundabout route. In fact the line needed to be extended to increase usage, but actually still really only syphons off the flow.

Your comments on a Stoke Newington /Stamford Hill station are pretty chauvinistic .. it's alright for Tottenham to get all these lines, but not other areas. Strategically for London as a whole, I stand by my opinion that this New Southgate branch is an expensive no-no.

Well you certainly called that well, Stephen, fair play to you.

Thank you FPR, I was beginning to think that people didn't take me seriously and thought that I was just being negative or bloody minded.

In fact, I'm pro public transport wherever it is - I don't own a car, do have use of a company car and I'm also joined up with a car sharing scheme. I always have felt that this NW branch of CR2 was a publicity stunt, just to prove that money was being funnelled into Haringey ex-riots. It just never stood up as being a viable idea to me.

The proposal to connect Seven Sisters and South Tottenham is frankly wonderful. I'd personally like to see it go from SS to Ally Paly but I think the Council would like to see a station right outside its offices.

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service