Metropolitan Line Extension (MLX/Croxley Rail Link)

[kwrail]

Parliamentary q&a:

Q Asked by Bob Blackman(Harrow East)Asked on: 08 December 2016
Department for TransportMetropolitan Line56736
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what representations his Department has received from (a) the Mayor of London and (b) Transport of London on the cost of the Croxley rail link; and whether the Government plans to provide additional funding to support the development of that link.
A Answered by: Andrew Jones Answered on: 13 December 2016
Since taking over management of the Croxley Rail Link in November 2015, Transport for London (TfL) has been reviewing the main work contracts. From discussions between officials in the Department and in TfL, we are aware that, as a result of prices received from the supply chain, the costs of the scheme are currently higher than the agreed budget. We understand TfL is considering how best to deal with this.
At a meeting with the Mayor on 5 December the Secretary of State for Transport re-confirmed the importance that the Government attaches to the scheme which will deliver significant transport benefits and significantly boost economic growth in Watford and the wider north west London area. Indeed, the Government, together with local councils and the Local Enterprise Partnership, has already committed substantial funding to this scheme and nearly 85% of the total budgeted cost.
Under the terms of the funding agreement in place for the scheme, TfL committed to the agreed budget of £284.4m and so agreed to meet any costs incurred over that budget. Conversely, they would retain the full amount of any cost savings. The Department will not be providing any additional funding for the scheme and expects TfL to complete it as agreed.

Thanks. This makes sense. It's basically a funding issue. TFL has committed to complete the project to an agreed budget, but has a funding gap. It would appear that they are currently reviewing costs and looking at ways of delivering the project to budget. Which in these days of austerity is probably not a bad challenge, given that the original budget was around £110 million and TFL added in a load more improvements. Just means that we might have to wait a bit longer, and Watford Met gets a stay of execution

 

[Mag_seven]

Will it ever be built? - other countries just get on with it!

 

[Busaholic]

Thanks. This makes sense. It's basically a funding issue. TFL has committed to complete the project to an agreed budget, but has a funding gap. It would appear that they are currently reviewing costs and looking at ways of delivering the project to budget. Which in these days of austerity is probably not a bad challenge, given that the original budget was around £110 million and TFL added in a load more improvements. Just means that we might have to wait a bit longer, and Watford Met gets a stay of execution

With TfL's actual and impending budgetary shortfalls, and given the stations and line concerned are outside London, I can't see the political impetus to getting this project completed, unless someone else coughs up for that shortfall. Delaying it is not going to bring the cost down - the opposite is almost certainly true.

 

[philthetube]

I wonder how much has been spent, the extra train is bought, £8.000.000, utilities have been moved, land bought and there must be other things. Also relevant is the large increase in use that the Met will get when it terminates at Watford junction and serves the high street, as this will increase revenue.

 

[bramling]

I wonder how much has been spent, the extra train is bought, £8.000.000, utilities have been moved, land bought and there must be other things. Also relevant is the large increase in use that the Met will get when it terminates at Watford junction and serves the high street, as this will increase revenue.

Have to say I can see the political will slipping away from this project. The benefits are largely local, so if the local area won't or can't pay then with the current TfL budgetary situation I can see this project coming under scrutiny.

 

[Mag_seven]

Have to say I can see the political will slipping away from this project.

Sigh.

 

[rebmcr]

LR have covered this: www.londonreconnections.com/2016/one-extensions-missing-precarious-status-croxley-rail-link/

...The removal of Taylor Woodrow from the project was the first public indication that Croxley may be facing funding issues. Such a drastic change to project is nearly always a sign of increasing costs to come. Indeed sources suggest that this is the case on Croxley and that whilst the public estimate is still £280m, current thinking within TfL is that this may perhaps rise to as much as £350m once a full post-contractor-change cost review is completed.

This leaves a sizeable funding gap that will need to be bridged before anything beyond the current enabling works can be completed.


Finding that additional funding may well prove a significant stumbling block. Not least because Andrew Jones from the DfT, seemingly in an effort to get the agency out in front of the game, finally answered a Parliamentary question on the status of Croxley this week. His answer not only confirms that there is a funding gap, but also that the DfT have no intention of bridging )....

 

[Tetchytyke]

The benefits are largely local, so if the local area won't or can't pay then with the current TfL budgetary situation I can see this project coming under scrutiny.

Sadly, I have to agree with this. The scheme is entirely outside London and doesn't benefit anywhere inside London. The benefits are for Watford, not London, and I think it will be tough for any London Mayor to justify spending much London taxpayer money on this project when the benefits do not apply to London taxpayers.

If we're talking a £70m shortfall then that's a lot of money to find. If Hertfordshire CC can't pay it- and we know they can't- then I don't see TfL using London cash to pay it instead.

It's a real shame.

 

[tsangpogorge]

Sadly, I have to agree with this. The scheme is entirely outside London and doesn't benefit anywhere inside London. The benefits are for Watford, not London, and I think it will be tough for any London Mayor to justify spending much London taxpayer money on this project when the benefits do not apply to London taxpayers.

If we're talking a £70m shortfall then that's a lot of money to find. If Hertfordshire CC can't pay it- and we know they can't- then I don't see TfL using London cash to pay it instead.

It's a real shame.

Why is it a shame? This whole project seems like very poor value and I'd even go as far as to call it a waste since it's only benefit is very local, no one will take a round trip via Moor Park on the Met line to commute into London when there are fast LM services and 4 Overgrounds per hour that even run roughly parallel to the Met route anyway. A place the size and location of Watford that also has fast, frequent links to London really doesn't need its own rapid transit system.

 

[edwin_m]

Why is it a shame? This whole project seems like very poor value and I'd even go as far as to call it a waste since it's only benefit is very local, no one will take a round trip via Moor Park on the Met line to commute into London when there are fast LM services and 4 Overgrounds per hour that even run roughly parallel to the Met route anyway. A place the size and location of Watford that also has fast, frequent links to London really doesn't need its own rapid transit system.

There are reasons to travel that aren't commuting into London, and they account for nearly all of the car traffic and resulting road congestion in places like Watford.

With prosperity and growth in population and traffic, the counties north of London really need better east-west links and this is one of the few that can be achieved at relatively low cost.

 

[yorkie]

There are reasons to travel that aren't commuting into London, and they account for nearly all of the car traffic and resulting road congestion in places like Watford.

With prosperity and growth in population and traffic, the counties north of London really need better east-west links and this is one of the few that can be achieved at relatively low cost.

Quite! The scheme really ought to go ahead. It's amazing how many people appear to think that the only purpose of transport should be to get people directly to central London and nothing more than that.

 

[tsangpogorge]

There are reasons to travel that aren't commuting into London, and they account for nearly all of the car traffic and resulting road congestion in places like Watford.

With prosperity and growth in population and traffic, the counties north of London really need better east-west links and this is one of the few that can be achieved at relatively low cost.

The only way this project will alleviate congestion on east west routes into Watford is if an additional shuttle ran to Rickmansworth which just isn't possible without laying an extra track west of the disused curve and adding a bay platform at Rickmansworth also then you're looking at costs rising into the billions. For anyone travelling into Watford city centre from the suburbs or Croxley busses are sufficient so why not just provide more of them?

 

[PeterC]

The only way this project will alleviate congestion on east west routes into Watford is if an additional shuttle ran to Rickmansworth

While changing at Moor Park is, in my view, a sub optimal solution it is still far "less worse" than changing from rail to bus at Ricky. However many extra buses you provide the road space simply isn't there in the peak.

A direct service on the North Curve doesn't require the use of the defunct bay platform at Ricky. We are getting into RIPAS territory here but, ignoring stock availibilty issues, it will be perfectly possible to run Met or Chiltern trains from Amersham or beyond.

 

[Ianno87]

Quite! The scheme really ought to go ahead. It's amazing how many people appear to think that the only purpose of transport should be to get people directly to central London and nothing more than that.

In a world where funding is constrained, I would argue that £450m (or whatever the price is now) will benefit far more people overall if spent somewhere else (not necessarily Central London).

Either that, or Croxley has to pay it's own way a little more - e.g. funded from development along the route.

 

[yorkie]

It's not just about Croxley. It opens up journeys from Metroland to the centre of Watford, and for connections from Watford Junction, to go by rail to various destinations beyond Watford Jn without having to go all the way into London and back out again.

The current Watford Met station is sited in a very sub-optimal location. The existing Watford branch would be much more productive if it went to Watford Jn.

 

[Hadders]

The only way this project will alleviate congestion on east west routes into Watford is if an additional shuttle ran to Rickmansworth which just isn't possible without laying an extra track west of the disused curve and adding a bay platform at Rickmansworth also then you're looking at costs rising into the billions. For anyone travelling into Watford city centre from the suburbs or Croxley busses are sufficient so why not just provide more of them?

Do you know how congested the roads are in Watford? Absolutely awful place for traffic.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Will it ever be built? - other countries just get on with it!

Are you sure of that? We don't generally hear much about the internal politics around what infrastructure gets built in other countries, we only normally tend to notice when projects are finally completed - so if this kind of dithering and cost overruns happen elsewhere, we probably wouldn't be aware of it. (Certainly, I know that for the one place abroad I'm familiar with, the San Francisco Bay area in California, for decades, planned extensions to their local rail network have kept getting delayed over and over again, largely because of funding issues.)

What's going on in Watford with the Met extension does seem dispiriting and frustrating, but I doubt it's unique to the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

2 words - Berlin airport!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[edwin_m]

Hasn't the Second Avenue Subway in New York been in planning and construction for over a century?

 

[Busaholic]

Do you know how congested the roads are in Watford? Absolutely awful place for traffic.

True, but absolutely no concern of TfL's.

 

[HSTEd]

True, but absolutely no concern of TfL's.

And this is why localism in areas as small as the UK is stupid.

 

[tsangpogorge]

Does anyone know if the north curve from the Chiltern main line to the Met Watford branch is currently used by anything?

 

[njr001]

On a daily basis(Monday - Saturday), there is an early morning(0512) departure from Chesham that uses the North curve.

I raised the possible use of the North curve at peak hours at one of the original Planning Meetings that TFL held in the local area many years to be met with blank faces it just had not been considered. I do believe however that the David Gaulke, the local MP, has been campaigning for the use of the North curve, although sadly the extension may now never happen in my lifetime.

 

[swt class 450]

Does anyone know if the north curve from the Chiltern main line to the Met Watford branch is currently used by anything?

The following passenger trains use it.

00:49 Watford - Rickmansworth 00:58
05:12 Chesham - Watford 05:41
06:08 Rickmansworth - Watford 06:16

It would be good to see it used more.

 

[Magicake]

I've heard a rumour today that Network Rail are starting to do some sort of preliminary work on this. Whether that's instead of TfL or purely the NR interface side I couldn't tell you but it does sound like there is at least some movement going on.

 

[Busaholic]

And this is why localism in areas as small as the UK is stupid.

TfL should be extremely concerned at the rapidly growing congestion on London's roads and attempting to find some solutions, if for no other reason than it is seriously impacting on the bus services which, up to about two years ago, were growing both in number and in passengers carried, but now are seeing droves of people deserting them in certain areas. With that in mind, Watford's traffic is absolutely nothing to do with them.

 

[simple simon]

TfL should be extremely concerned at the rapidly growing congestion on London's roads and attempting to find some solutions, if for no other reason than it is seriously impacting on the bus services which, up to about two years ago, were growing both in number and in passengers carried, but now are seeing droves of people deserting them in certain areas. With that in mind, Watford's traffic is absolutely nothing to do with them.

TfL have partly caused the problem, by licensing too many private hire vehicles. Roadworks - both by utilities and for new cycle lanes are also partly to blame.

It also does not help that many bus services that pass through the boroughs where speed limits have been reduced by a third from 30mph to snail slow 20mph have needed their timetables recasting (to allow extra time) and vehicle allocation increasing because the slower speeds extend journey times too much. I expect that more buses also means more staff... both of which increase operating costs.

Simon

 

[PR1Berske]

The omissions and carefully phrased responses certainly seem to point to the Watford scheme being postponed, but as for scrapped, surely that would require a statement confirming exactly that?

 

[Busaholic]

The omissions and carefully phrased responses certainly seem to point to the Watford scheme being postponed, but as for scrapped, surely that would require a statement confirming exactly that?

I understand that the imposition of Income Tax is still officially a 'temporary' measure.

 

[Deerfold]

I understand that the imposition of Income Tax is still officially a 'temporary' measure.

You understand incorrectly. It was initially a temporary measure but the current legislation is quite permanent and has been for well over a hundred years.