Matters pertaining to Barking Riverside

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Transport for London.

Dear Transport for London,

1. A bridge is to be built between Handley Page road/Maxewll Lane and Crossness Road. Route EL3 will be diverted over this bridge once built. Please provide maps, plans, drawings, reports, timelines and key information about this bridge, when it will be operational, and when the EL3 will be diverted.

2. Provide any reports or information on any considered or actual new bus routes/links/diversions serving the Barking Riverside area within the last 5 years. In particular, any proposed routes between Barking Riverside and the Becton DLR branch.

3. Provide reports, information, maps, plans, timetables, working documents, key information, or other relevant data pertaining to the future Barking Riverside pier.

4. Once all parts are operational, Barking Riverside Station will be a transport hub between buses (currently EL1 and EL3), taxis, and riverboat services. Please provide future maps, plans, reports and/or drawings of this planned completed transport hub.

5. Are there any plans to divert EL2 in the future to serve Barking Riverside Station or phases 2 or 3 of the development (housing East of the station)? If so provide details. Provide any reports etc on potential new bus routes or diversions (other than routes EL1, EL2, or EL3) serving Barking Riverside.

6. Provide the route specs for buses EL1, EL2, and EL3.

7. Please provide maps/service patterns etc for the proposed future riverboat service to Barking Riverside. Please include details of any new Beckton piers if applicable.

8. Please provide any reports or similar dated within the last 5 years regarding rezoning or the allocation of zone to Barking and Barking Riverside stations. Are they're any current plans or considerations to rezone Barking Station as zone 3?

9. Please provide any stand alone and/or unpublished reports on Renwick Road Station. You can include anything relating to the consultation on the extension of the Goblin Line to Barking Riverside.

10. Are there plans for C2C trains to call at Barking Riverside as an alternative terminus, and if so on what basis (e.g. peak service, ad hoc service (as with current via Stratford services, as an engineering terminus, or a regular service). Please provide reports, emails, considerations, timetables, etc of relevance. A direct C2C service to Fenchurch Street via West Ham or Stratford or Liverpool Street via Stratford has been considered in unpublished reports and also would bring significant benefits to deprived areas. There also exists a report which references once the Elizabeth line is operational, there will be sufficient platform and track availability between Stratford/Liverpool Street to make this possible.

11. Please provide reports or maps or plans or considerations etc of any alternative services which could also utilise Barking Riverside Station, in addition to the current planned 4tph service between Gospel Oak and Barking.

12. In addition to point 11, please also provide any past maps, plans, considerations, reports etc into (a) a new branch of the Elizabeth Line Trains diverging off Forest Gate Station and then following the Overground tracks to Barking Riverside (with or without the potential to extend under the Thames to Thamesmead/Abbey Wood in the future) or (b) a London Overground route following this track towards Stratford than continuing to Liverpool Street, Tottenham Hale, or if applicable onwards, or (c) an extension of the Meridian Water line to Barking Riverside following these permanent ways as explained.

13. Are there any plans or was it considered to connect the Goblin Line to the West London Transet through Gospel Oak, and if so please provide maps, plans, drawings etc

14. Please provide reports, maps, plans, considerations etc of any new GOBLIN stations. This includes but is to limited to Highgate Road, Tufnell Park Station/Junction Road, Hornsey, Stroud Green, St Annes, Tottenham Hale, Whipps Cross (b/t Walthamstow QR and Leyton MR), Cann Hall, and Little Ilford (b/t Leytonstone HR and Barking).

15. Please provide reports, maps, plans, considerations etc of any new GOBLIN extensions. This includes but is not limited to, extensions beyond Gospel Oak Station following the tracks of the North London Line, using the tracks at the now closed Highgate Road Low Level Station to Kentish town, Kentish Town West, Kings Cross, St Pancras Etc, and existing tracks between South Tottenham Station and Stratford Station, and to Moorgate/elsewhere via Finsbury Park from the existing permanent way diverging to the west of Haringey Green Lanes Station.

16. Please provide reports, maps, plans, details, considerations etc, of the considered relocation of South Tottenham Station to the area south of Seven Sisters Station (and potentially to make an adjoining station). You are drawn to the fact that this was at least once considered in the context of Crossrail 2 and also the construction zone, and when considering the extension of platforms at South Tottenham Station to accommodate longer trains.

17. Why is Manor House station not an OSI with Haringey Green Lanes? Please provide reports etc on the matter. Haringey Green Lanes is shown as within walking distance of Manor House on tube maps but is not an OSI.

18. Why is Wanstead Park/Forest Gate stations shown as an OSI but not Manor Park/Woodgrange Park on TLF maps? They are both similar walking distance and of similar uses depending on travel routes. Service patterns do not justify such a different treatment.

19. Are there or have there been plans or appraisals of any level to make a walkway between Leytonstone and Leytonstone High Road stations, with the route following tracks of the Central/Goblin Lines? Please provide reports.

20. Why is the OSI between Leytonstone High Road and Leytonstone station not shown on TfL maps?

21. Please provide OSI data for such interchanges between stations on the GOBLIN lines and connecting OSI stations for the last 5 years.

22. Please provide maps, heat maps, usable data, reports or other such information on the start and end locations of journeys made on the Goblin Line (whether the journeys start at, end at, or pass through the Goblin line).

23. Please provide reports, details, maps, drawings of any considerations of opening platforms on the Overground tracks passing above Brixton Station, or any potential new station to serve the Brixton area. This may include the reopening of East Brixton Station, which closed in 1976.

24. Have C2C (or another franchise) enquired, considered, or discussed using the tracks currently under construction between Renwick Road and Barking Riverside. If so please provide details.

25. Please provide TfL’s reports, consideration, memos, or key information regarding the provision of transport in light of the Corporation of London’s plan to open a combined market in Barking Riverside/Dagenham at the site of the old power station.

26. What are the transport funding arrangements, plans, discussions, negotiations etc between the Corporation of London and TfLs. Are there any 106 agreements signed, planed, memorandum of understanding, agreed in principle etc relating to this?

27. Please provide your drawings, maps, plans, etc of a potential future extension of the Goblin line under the thames to Thamesmead/Abbey Wood. You have shared these with the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and London Borough of Bexley.

28. Please provide any reports, plans, considerations, proposals of the DLR serving any part of Barking Riverside post the shelving of the DLR extension from Gallions Reach to Dagenham Dock (or curtailed). You can scope out responses to consultations on the Goblin line extension. Was there a consideration to open a station at Creakmouth on the DLR current extension proposals to Thamesmead/Abbey Wood?

29. HS2 passes directly under Barking Station. Are there any considerations to open platforms there at any stage of the consideration? What is the latest situation in respect of Eurostar stopping at Stratford International Station?

29. Are there any recent proposals or plans etc to extend the DLR to Barking from the Becton Branch? Provide reports or details.

30. Are there plans of any sort or discussions or requests for part of the tilbury loop to transfer from the c2c franchise to the overground.

31. Are there any material plans or porposals to the Overground service between Romford and Upminster?

32. Will toilet facilities be available at Barking Riverside station.

33. The Dagenham market used to provide a free shuttle bus on Sundays between the market and Barking station with an intermediate stop. It is understood that TfL prevented the continuation of this service because it took revenue from route EL1.Please provide details, reports, etc.

34. Are there plans to offer cycle hires in Barking Riverside/at Barking Riverside station in the future, especially given the new cycle ways to be built between Barking Riverside and Ilford, which connects to a Cycle Superhighway that currently ends on Alfreds Way/River Road.

35. It was originally considered that the East London Transet, could be delivered as trams. What is the current status of this? Will East London Transit consider as busses? Please provide any reports on the matter in the last 5 years.

36. Please provide plans, proposals, reports etc for potential new transport links (including route changes) which links East London between Barking Station and the M25, and the river Thames and Romford, in a general North South direction.

37. Both Barking and Dagenham and Bexley have shown strong support for an Overground extension to Thamesmead/Abby Wood. Have any of these entities, or anyone else, committed, proposed, or suggested they might fund such an extension (outside of s106 agreements). If so provide details.

38. Technical plans currently exist for a potential, albeit far in the future extension of the London Overground from Barking Riverside to Thamesmead/Abbey Wood. Please provide those plans and explain if the plans allow for a foot crossing, cycle crossing, road crossing etc. Please also state how the Barking Riverside extension, currently being built, has been built to reduce disruption to service should this extension ever proceed (as the flyover that delivers the extension to Barking Riverside is not compatible with the extension, and a graded slope from elevated track to cutout to tunnel is required. How have TfL planned to minimise future costs?

39. The current elevated track between Renwick Road and Barking Riverside was chosen as it is most cost effective whilst not cutting the Barking Riverside development in two. Given point 38, why was a cut-out permanent way not chosen, with foot/road bridges at ground level passing over the permeant way. This will also reduce noise pollution and unsightly tracks. Ground works (pipes, gas, electric, etc) had to be relocated anyway with the current viaducts.

Yours faithfully,

John Smith

FOI, Transport for London

Dear John Smith

 

Our ref: FOI-3945-1920/GH

 

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 25
March 2020 asking for information about Barking Riverside.

 

The Government has announced a series of measures to tackle the
Coronavirus. It is essential for London, and in particular for all
critical workers, that we continue to provide a safe transport network
that enables them to make the journeys they need to.

 

In current circumstances, we are not able to answer FOI requests readily
and we ask that you please do not make a request to us at present.

 

Answering FOI requests will require the use of limited resources and the
attention of staff who could be supporting other essential activity. In
any event, please note that our response time will be affected by the
current situation and so you may wish to reconsider the timing of this
request. Please notify us as soon as possible if you would like to
withdraw your request at the current time.

 

Should you wish to proceed with the request we will aim to issue a
response by 24 April 2020 in accordance with the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 and our information access policy. We publish a substantial
range of information on our website on subjects including operational
performance, contracts, expenditure, journey data, governance and our
financial performance. This includes data which is frequently asked for in
FOI requests or other public queries. Please check
[1]http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar... to see if this helps you.

 

We will publish anonymised versions of requests and responses on the
[2]www.tfl.gov.uk website. We will not publish your name and we will send
a copy of the response to you before it is published on our website.

 

In the meantime, if you would like to discuss this matter further, please
do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar...
2. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/
3. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

FOI, Transport for London

Dear John Smith

 

Our ref: FOI-3945-1920/GH

 

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 25
March 2020 asking for information about Barking Riverside.

 

The Government has announced a series of measures to tackle the
Coronavirus. It is essential for London, and in particular for all
critical workers, that we continue to provide a safe transport network
that enables them to make the journeys they need to.

 

In current circumstances, we are not able to answer FOI requests readily
and we ask that you please do not make a request to us at present.

 

Answering FOI requests will require the use of limited resources and the
attention of staff who could be supporting other essential activity. In
any event, please note that our response time will be affected by the
current situation and so you may wish to reconsider the timing of this
request. Please notify us as soon as possible if you would like to
withdraw your request at the current time.

 

Should you wish to proceed with the request we will aim to issue a
response by 24 April 2020 in accordance with the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 and our information access policy. We publish a substantial
range of information on our website on subjects including operational
performance, contracts, expenditure, journey data, governance and our
financial performance. This includes data which is frequently asked for in
FOI requests or other public queries. Please check
[1]http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar... to see if this helps you.

 

We will publish anonymised versions of requests and responses on the
[2]www.tfl.gov.uk website. We will not publish your name and we will send
a copy of the response to you before it is published on our website.

 

In the meantime, if you would like to discuss this matter further, please
do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transpar...
2. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/
3. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

FOI, Transport for London

1 Atodiad

Dear John Smith

 

Our ref: FOI-3945-1920/GH

 

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 25
March 2020 asking for information about Barking Riverside.

 

Your request has been considered under the requirements of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 and our information access policy.

 

I can confirm that we do hold the information you require. However, to
provide the information you have requested would exceed the ‘appropriate
limit’ of £450 set by the Freedom of Information (Appropriate Limit and
Fees) Regulations 2004.

 

Under section 12 of the FOI Act, we are not obliged to comply with
requests if we estimate that the cost of determining whether we hold the
information, locating and retrieving it and extracting it from other
information would exceed the appropriate limit. In this instance, we
estimate that the time required to answer your request would exceed 18
hours which, at £25 per hour (the rate stipulated by the Regulations),
exceeds the ‘appropriate limit’.

 

You have asked 39 questions, many of which are broad and would require
searching for all the information held, in some circumstances for a five
year period. Many of these individual questions would individually take up
a huge amount of our resources, and your request in full would easily
exceed the appropriate limit.

 

To help bring the cost of responding to your requests within the £450
limit, you may wish to consider refining your requests to concentrate on
matters which are important to you.

 

Although your request can take the form of a question, rather than a
request for specific documents, TfL does not have to answer your question
if it would require the creation of new information or the provision of a
judgement, explanation, advice or opinion that was not already recorded at
the time of your request. If you have specific questions relating to these
topics we may be more easily able to respond to these than to a request
for any information held.

 

The Government has announced a series of measures to tackle the
Coronavirus. It is essential for London, and in particular for all
critical workers, that we continue to provide a safe transport network
that enables them to make the journeys they need to.

 

In current circumstances, we are not able to answer FOI requests readily
and we ask that you please do not make a request to us at present.

 

Answering FOI requests will require the use of limited resources and the
attention of staff who could be supporting other essential activity. In
any event, please note that our response time will be affected by the
current situation.

 

If you are not satisfied with this response please see the attached
information sheet for details of your right to appeal.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

Dear FOI,

Please provide an update.

Yours sincerely,

John Smith

Gadawodd Neal Dodge anodiad ()

They’ve responded and denied your request, as they put in their reply on the 17th April.

FOI, Transport for London

Dear John Smith

 

Our ref: FOI-3945-1920/GH

 

On 17 April we replied advising you that your request has been refused on
cost grounds. We suggested that you may wish to make a refined request
which could be answered without exceeding the cost limit.

 

As we have not received a refined request from you there is no further
update.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Graham Hurt

 

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/

Dear FOI,

Please provide a response to the points of your choosing within the scope of your cost limitations.

Yours sincerely,

John Smith

FOI, Transport for London

Dear Mr Smith

We are unable to choose to answer only some of your points. The Freedom of Information Act allows us to answer your request in full, or, as in this case, refuse it if it exceeds the cost limits. We do not know which points are of most importance to you, and therefore you should consider submitting a refined request.

A lot of information is already published, so we suggest you look at this information in the first instance:

https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/im...

Yours sincerely

Graham Hurt

FOI Case Officer
FOI Case Management Team
General Counsel
Transport for London

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir