Transport for London's Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 2012-13
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Southern Railway Stations in South London
Southern Railway stations in South London The south London area stations of Southern Region of British Railways and its constituents tend to be somewhat neglected, perhaps due to the prevalent suburban electric services, but comprised some fine examples of former company architecture. The following pictures were all taken in August 1973; a few of the sites have since disappeared, many others surely much modernised by now, and some have even been nicely restored...... First, we look at the former South Eastern Railway branch line from Purley to Caterham. Here is Kenley, whose cottage-style station house with very steep-pitched roof and gothic detailing is now a listed building, but privately owned. It dates from the construction of the Caterham Railway in 1856 and is by architect Richard Whittall. Below is Whyteleafe, (left) down side waiting room and footbridge, and the signal box and level crossing at Whyteleafe South...... The signalbox nameboard shows that the station had been re-signed with modern British Rail white enamel plates; in late 1972 I found one of the much more attractive 1950-era station nameplates for sale in an antique shop near Paddington station, for the pricely sum of £2.50p. In contrast the teminus station building at Caterham still displayed its “Southern Electric” enamelware...... Here are two more views at Caterham, with the SE&CR wooden signalbox at right...... Moving on to Anerley, this is an ex London Brighton & South Coast Railway station on its line from London Bridge to West Croydon, just to the north of Norwood Junction. At least part of the main building is thought to date from the line opening in 1839. -
The London Congestion Charge
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 20, Number 4—Fall 2006—Pages 157–176 The London Congestion Charge Jonathan Leape y the 1990s, the average speed of trips across London was below that at the beginning of the twentieth century—before the car was introduced (New- B bery, 1990, p. 35). Traffic speeds in central London had fallen more than 20 percent since the 1960s, from an average 12.7 mph for the morning peak period in 1968 (and a high of 14.2 mph in 1975) to 10 mph in 1998. Even in the larger area of inner London, drivers in 1998 spent almost 30 percent of their time stationary during peak periods and more than half their time traveling at speeds of less than 10 mph (Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, 1998). By 2002, the all-day average travel speed in central London was just 8.6 mph (14.3 km/hour), compared to an uncongested (night-time or “free flow”) average speed of around 20 mph (32 km/hour). Congestion, measured in terms of minutes of delay per mile compared to uncongested conditions, averaged 3.7 minutes/mile (2.3 min/km) (Transport for London, 2003a, p. 11). With more than one million people entering central London between 7:00 and 10:00 a.m. on an average workday, and more than one-quarter of those by road, the cost of congestion was clearly considerable. Public concern over levels of traffic congestion was high. An independent survey in 1999 identified public transport and congestion as the two most “impor- tant problems requiring action”—selected by 46 and 33 percent of London resi- dents, respectively, compared to 20 percent for crime or law and order. -
The Operator's Story Appendix
Railway and Transport Strategy Centre The Operator’s Story Appendix: London’s Story © World Bank / Imperial College London Property of the World Bank and the RTSC at Imperial College London Community of Metros CoMET The Operator’s Story: Notes from London Case Study Interviews February 2017 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a permanent record for the researchers of what was said by people interviewed for ‘The Operator’s Story’ in London. These notes are based upon 14 meetings between 6th-9th October 2015, plus one further meeting in January 2016. This document will ultimately form an appendix to the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’ piece Although the findings have been arranged and structured by Imperial College London, they remain a collation of thoughts and statements from interviewees, and continue to be the opinions of those interviewed, rather than of Imperial College London. Prefacing the notes is a summary of Imperial College’s key findings based on comments made, which will be drawn out further in the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’. Method This content is a collation in note form of views expressed in the interviews that were conducted for this study. Comments are not attributed to specific individuals, as agreed with the interviewees and TfL. However, in some cases it is noted that a comment was made by an individual external not employed by TfL (‘external commentator’), where it is appropriate to draw a distinction between views expressed by TfL themselves and those expressed about their organisation. -
Investigation Into Reliability of the Jubilee Line
Investigation into Reliability: London Underground Jubilee Line An Interactive Qualifying Project submitted to the Faculty of WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science By Jack Arnis Agolli Marianna Bailey Errando Berwin Jayapurna Yiannis Kaparos Date: 26 April 2017 Report Submitted to: Malcolm Dobell CPC Project Services Professors Rosenstock and Hall-Phillips Worcester Polytechnic Institute This report represents work of WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its web site without editorial or peer review. For more information about the projects program at WPI, see http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Projects. Abstract Metro systems are often faced with reliability issues; specifically pertaining to safety, accessibility, train punctuality, and stopping accuracy. The project goal was to assess the reliability of the London Underground’s Jubilee Line and the systems implemented during the Jubilee Line extension. The team achieved this by interviewing train drivers and Transport for London employees, surveying passengers, validating the stopping accuracy of the trains, measuring dwell times, observing accessibility and passenger behavior on platforms with Platform Edge Doors, and overall train performance patterns. ii Acknowledgements We would currently like to thank everyone who helped us complete this project. Specifically we would like to thank our sponsor Malcolm Dobell for his encouragement, expert advice, and enthusiasm throughout the course of the project. We would also like to thank our contacts at CPC Project Services, Gareth Davies and Mehmet Narin, for their constant support, advice, and resources provided during the project. -
Oyster Conditions of Use on National Rail Services
Conditions of Use on National Rail services 1 October 2015 until further notice 1. Introduction 1.1. These conditions of use (“Conditions of Use”) set out your rights and obligations when using an Oyster card to travel on National Rail services. They apply in addition to the conditions set out in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, which you can view and download from the National Rail website nationalrail.co.uk/nrcoc. Where these Conditions of Use differ from the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, these Conditions of Use take precedence when you are using your Oyster card. 1.2 When travelling on National Rail services, you will also have to comply with the Railway Byelaws. You can a get free copy of these at most staffed National Rail stations, or download a copy from the Department for Transport website dft.gov.uk. 1.3 All Train Companies operating services into the London Fare Zones Area accept valid Travelcards issued on Oyster cards, except Heathrow Express and Southeastern High Speed services between London St Pancras International and Stratford International. In addition, the following Train Companies accept pay as you go on Oyster cards for travel on their services within the London National Rail Pay As You Go Area. Abellio Greater Anglia Limited (trading as Greater Anglia) The Chiltern Railway Company Limited (trading as Chiltern Railways) First Greater Western Limited (trading as Great Western Railway) (including Heathrow Connect services between London Paddington and Hayes & Harlington) GoVia Thameslink Railway Limited (trading as Great Northern, as Southern and as Thameslink) London & Birmingham Railway Limited (trading as London Midland) London & South Eastern Railway Company (trading as Southeastern) (Special fares apply on Southeaster highspeed services between London St Pancras International and Stratford International). -
Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945
University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--History History 2016 Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945 Danielle K. Dodson University of Kentucky, [email protected] Digital Object Identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.13023/ETD.2016.339 Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Dodson, Danielle K., "Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945" (2016). Theses and Dissertations--History. 40. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/history_etds/40 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the History at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--History by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. -
Congestion Charges for Urban Transport
GOOD PRACTICES IN CITY ENERGY EFFICIENCY London, United Kingdom – Congestion Charges for Urban Transport Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) reports are published to communicate the results of ESMAP’s work to the development community. This document has not been prepared in accordance with the procedures appropriate to formal documents. Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report are entirely those of the author(s) and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, or its affiliated organizations, or to members of its board of executive directors for the countries they represent, or to ESMAP. London Transportation Case Study August 2011 Project title London Congestion Charges for Urban Transport Sector Urban Transport Type of project Congestion Charges City and country London, United Kingdom City population 8.59 million (in 2008) Capital Cost US$242.8 million (Phase 1, 2002/3) US$189.5 million (Phase 2, 2006/7)1 Annual % of energy reduction 3% (44-48 million liters annually) Project status Ongoing; Phase 1 completed 2003, Phase 2 completed 2007 Project Summary In February 2003, London, the capital city of the United Kingdom (U.K.), introduced a daily congestion fee for vehicles travelling in the city’s central district during weekdays. This fee was meant to ease traffic congestion, improve travel time and reliability, and make central London more attractive to businesses and visitors. According to analysis by the City, the program has largely met its objectives. After four years of operation, traffic entering the charge zone was reduced by 21 percent; congestion, measured as a travel rate (minutes per kilometer), was 8 percent lower; and annual fuel consumption fell by approximately 44-48 million liters or about 3 percent. -
London Underground Public Private Partnerships
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts London Underground Public Private Partnerships Seventeenth Report of Session 2004–05 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 9 March 2005 HC 446 Incorporating HC 783-i, Session 2003–04 Published on 31 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £13.50 The Committee of Public Accounts The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine “the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit” (Standing Order No 148). Current membership Mr Edward Leigh MP (Conservative, Gainsborough) (Chairman) Mr Richard Allan MP (Liberal Democrat, Sheffield Hallam) Mr Richard Bacon MP (Conservative, South Norfolk) Mrs Angela Browning MP (Conservative, Tiverton and Honiton) Jon Cruddas MP (Labour, Dagenham) Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon) Mr Ian Davidson MP (Labour, Glasgow Pollock) Rt Hon Frank Field MP (Labour, Birkenhead) Mr Brian Jenkins MP (Labour, Tamworth) Mr Nigel Jones MP (Liberal Democrat, Cheltenham) Jim Sheridan MP (Labour, West Renfrewshire) Mr Siôn Simon MP (Labour, Birmingham Erdington) Mr Gerry Steinberg MP (Labour, City of Durham) Mr Stephen Timms MP (Labour, East Ham) Jon Trickett MP (Labour, Hemsworth) Rt Hon Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) The following was also a member of the Committee during the period of this inquiry. Ms Ruth Kelly MP (Labour, Bolton West) Powers Powers of the Committee of Public Accounts are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 148. -
Informing You Every Stop of the Way
London Buses iBus Informing you every stop of the way MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London London Buses London Buses informing you every stop of the way The most important priority for London Buses is to provide the best possible bus service for its 6.3 million daily bus passengers. By introducing a £117m state-of-the-art Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) technology system and comprehensive telecommunications across London, millions of bus passengers are soon to benefit from a more reliable, consistent bus service and will have access to real time passenger information (RTPI) at bus stops, on board buses and from SMS text messaging. With an 8000-strong and increasing bus fleet, Try the new bus travelling London Buses’ existing radio communications experience systems can no longer cope. iBus - one of the largest projects of its kind in the world - will Imagine having real time bus service revolutionise how services are delivered and information at your fingertips. A typical monitored. bus journey could be like this: A wealth of journey time data will be available You receive an up to the minute SMS text to analyse and improve on, and three of the message on your mobile as you walk out of same number buses arriving at once at a bus your house. As you arrive at the bus stop you stop will be a thing of the past, as every bus can confirm on the Countdown display that will be tracked and monitored ensuring an your bus will arrive in an accurately predicted efficient service on all routes. -
London Guide Welcome to London
Visitor information Welcome to London Your guide to getting around central London on public transport and making the most of your visit. tfl.gov.uk/visitinglondon Tube and central London bus maps inside #LondonIsOpen Welcome to London Paying for your travel Public transport is the best way to get There are different ways to pay for your around London and discover all that the travel. For most people, pay as you go - city has to offer. This guide will help you paying for the trips you make - with a plan how to get around the Capital on contactless payment card, an Oyster card or public transport. a Visitor Oyster card, is the best option as it If you have just arrived at an airport and are offers value, flexibility and convenience. looking for ways to get to central London, go to page 11 in this guide. Getting around London London’s transport system is iconic. With its world famous Underground (Tube) and iconic red buses, travelling around the Capital is an experience in itself. But London is much more than just the Tube or the bus; our vast network of transport services includes: Contactless payment cards If your credit, debit, charge card or wearable device has the contactless symbol above you can use it for pay as you go travel on London’s public transport. Android Pay and Apple Pay are also accepted. Benefits of contactless • It’s quick and easy – there’s no need to queue to buy a ticket • It offers great value – pay as you go with contactless is better value than buying a single ticket and you can benefit from both Night Tube daily and weekly capping (see page 5) • 14 million people have used contactless Night Tube services run on the to travel in London – including customers Jubilee, Victoria and most of from over 90 countries the Central and Northern lines all night on Fridays and Saturdays. -
Crime on Public Transport March 2016
Police and Crime Committee Crime on public transport March 2016 ©Greater London Authority March 2016 Police and Crime Committee Members Joanne McCartney (Chair) Labour Jenny Jones (Deputy Chair) Green Caroline Pidgeon MBE (Deputy Chair) Liberal Democrat Tony Arbour Conservative Jennette Arnold OBE Labour Kemi Badenoch Conservative Andrew Dismore Labour Len Duvall Labour Roger Evans Conservative Role of the Police and Crime Committee The Police and Crime Committee examines the work of the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and reviews the Police and Crime Plan for London. The Committee can also investigate anything that it considers to be of importance to policing and crime reduction in Greater London and make recommendations for improvements. Contact Janette Roker, Scrutiny Manager Email: [email protected] Contact: 020 7983 6562 For media enquiries: Mary Dolan, External Relations Email: [email protected] Contact: 020 7983 4603 2 Contents Chair’s foreword ................................................................................................. 4 Executive summary ............................................................................................. 5 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 8 2. Types of crime committed on public transport .......................................... 9 3. Tackling crime and anti-social behaviour on public transport ................. 13 4. Policing the 24 hour city .......................................................................... -
Ticket Office Review
Board Date: 15 December 2016 Item: London Underground Ticket Office Review This paper will be considered in public 1 Executive Summary Decision required The Board is asked to note the paper and approve the action plan Previous The terms of reference of the review were previously circulated to Consideration Members. Sponsoring Contact Officer: Mark Wild Director Number: 020 3054 4308 Email: [email protected] Information Public classification Summary 1.1 The Mayor published London TravelWatch’s independent report examining the customer impact of ticket office closures on 2 December 2016. 1.2 The review, as promised by the Mayor in his manifesto, considered a range of evidence to determine the customer impact of the ticket office closure programme and other changes to London Underground’s station operating model. London TravelWatch’s report identifies a number of areas requiring improvement. 1.3 In response, we have prepared an action plan to address the recommendations in the report. Work to deliver the plan has commenced immediately and will be adjusted, if necessary, to take into account any feedback from the Board. 1.4 Planned changes include: • clearer focal points for customers seeking help from staff; • changes to uniforms to make staff more visible; • additional ticket machine functionality; and • measures to improve accessibility, including improvements to the “turn up and go” process and a trial of portable hearing loops. 1.5 While not a part of the terms of reference for the review, the action plan will also review staffing numbers and deployment. 1.6 We will provide the Customer Service and Operational Performance Panel with regular updates on the progress of the action plan.