London's mayor wants to start putting major roads into tunnels

Before and after: the A13 at Barking. Image: TfL.

Roads! Everyone loves roads, right? With their cars and their tarmac and their air pollution and that. Vroom vrooooooooooooom.

One man who has definitely decided we should be building more roads is London mayor Boris Johnson. This week he's in Boston and New York, because reasons, and has decided now is the perfect time to announce a clever plan to start burying bits of London’s trunk roads.

This is not as a crazy and idea as it might initially sound. They did it in Boston, byreplacing a six-lane elevated highway with an eight-line underground one. They're doing it in Hamburg, where the autobahn is being replaced with a park. They did it in that episode of Pigeon Street, too.

Sticking big roads in the ground has a number of advantages. It can reconnect neighbourhoods currently severed by main roads. It can make cities more attractive, if only because almost anything is more attractive than a great big bloody motorway.


And it can free up land for other uses – housing, office space, parkland, and so on. That, we suspect, is one of the reasons London's government is currently leaping on the idea. Not only does this mean more space to cope with London's population growth, but, with land values so high, the development opportunities will make any project a lot easier to pay for.

This morning City Hall said in a press release that it had examined "more than 70 locations... where the introduction of tunnels, fly-unders and decking could deliver benefits". That number looks a bit optimistic, though, and only five have been identified as "suitable for further feasibility work"; and several of these don’t sound terribly ambitious.

Nonetheless, here they are:

1) "Decking or a mini-tunnel" over the North Circular in New Southgate;

2) Turning the Hammersmith flyover on the A4 into the Hammersmith tunnel;

3) A "small fly-under" on the A316 at Chalker's Corner, where it meets the South circular near Mortlake;

4) "Decking of the A3 in Tolworth";

5) "A mini tunnel of the A13 in Barking Riverside", to connect one of London's biggest potential housing developments with something that resembles civilisation.

Here's a map, on which we've essentially highlighted the proposed developments in red crayon. (In an attempt to make them visible, our versions are almost certainly bigger than the real thing would be.)

To give a sense of the full scope of Boris' petrolhead ambitions, we've also included the three proposed East London river crossings: the Silvertown Tunnel, and Gallion's Reach and Belvedere bridges.

The really big one, though, is one Johnson has been talking up for a year: the proposal to create a whole new ringroad underground at a cost of £30bn.

What that would look like is not exactly clear. This is the version that was floating around when TfL first broached the idea last spring...

Image: TfL.

...but that doesn't seem to fit with TfL's response to a Freedom of Information request made by the blogger known as Boris Watch. That suggested the tunnel would be 70km long – roughly twice the length of the network shown in the map above. It also lists 10 junctions, including one labelled A10/A503, and another A23/A205, which strongly suggests that the loop would go as far north as Seven Sisters and as far south as Streatham Hill.

If that's accurate, then it seems likely the final tunnel would look a lot more like this. (We've labelled the junctions included in the modelling.)

The bottom line is that we don't actually know; neither, we suspect, does Transport for London.

But what is clear is that, for the first time in a generation, expanding London's road network is seriously back on the agenda – for better or worse.

 
 
 
 

Here are eight thoughts on TfL’s proposed cuts to London’s bus network

A number 12 bus crosses Westminster Bridge. Image: Getty.

In 2016, the urbanism blog City Observatory had a modest proposal for how American cities could sort out their transport systems: “Londonize”.

Its theory, the name of which referenced another popular urbanism blog, Copenhagenize, was that the key plank of Transport for London’s success was something that even transport nerds did not consider very sexy: its buses.

Though the Tube might get more glamorous press, London’s bus service really is impressively massive: It carries roughly 2.3bn passengers per year—much more than the Tube (1.3bn), close to the New York City subway (2.8bn), and nearly half as much as every bus service in America combined (5.1bn), while serving a population roughly 1/35 as large.

How has TfL done this? By making its bus network high frequency, reliable, relatively easy to understand and comprehensive. We rarely talk about this, because the tube map is far more fun – but the reason it’s so difficult to fall off the transport network in Greater London is because you’re never that far from a bus.

Given all that, we should probably talk about TfL’s plans to rethink – and in most cases, cut – as many as 36 different central London bus services over the next few months.

I’m not going to rehash details of the changes on which TfL is consulting from next month: there are just too many of them, and anyway it’s someone else’s scoop. The story was originally broken by Darryl Chamberlain over on 853 London; there’s also some fascinating analysis on Diamond Geezer’s blog. You should read both of those stories, though preferably not before you’ve finished reading this one.

Before offering my own analysis of the proposed changes, though, I should offer a few examples. More than a dozen routes are facing a trim: the 59 from King’s Cross back to Euston, the 113 from Oxford Circle to Marble Arch, the 171 from Holborn all the way down to Elephant & Castle and so on. A couple – the 10, the 48, the C2, and at most times the special routemaster version of the 15 – are being withdrawn altogether.

On, and one new route is planned – the 311, from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus. This will help plug some of the cuts to the 11, 19 and 22.

So, what does all this mean? Some thoughts:

1) This might not quite be as awful as it initially sounds

TfL says that demand for buses has fallen by around 10 per cent in London in recent years. It predicts it’ll fall further when Crossrail opens, as passengers switch to the new line, or to the tube routes relieved by the new line. So: the idea of taking some unwanted capacity out of the system is not, in itself, terrible.

Striping out unnecessary buses should also improve air quality in some of London’s worst pollution hot spots, and improve traffic flow, hopefully speeding up journeys on those buses that remain. 

A map from the presentation in which TfL explained its plans, showing the reduction in bus numbers on key arteries. Hilariously, notes Darryl Chamberlain, “It no longer produces its own maps, so has had to use one prepared by a bus enthusiast”.

The plans might even free up buses and staff to increase frequencies in outer London where demand hasn’t fallen – though these plans won’t be unveiled until next year and, for reasons I’ll come to below, I’ll believe it when we see it.

2) For many bus users, a lot of these changes will pass almost unnoticed

By my count, I use nine of the affected routes with any regularity – but only three of the changes are things that I’m likely to be at all inconvenienced by. Most of the changes either affect a part of the route I don’t take, or one where there are easy, and pain free, alternatives.

This is anecdotal, obviously – perhaps I’m just lucky. But my suspicion is that a lot of these changes will go unnoticed by most passengers. It’s only the sheer number of them happening at once that makes this look like a big deal.

3) The Hopper fare makes this easier...

Once upon a time, if you had to switch buses, you had to pay a second fare. This isn’t true of journeys on the tube or railways – and since bus passengers have, on average, less money than tube passengers, it amounted to a pretty unfair tax on poorer Londoners.

But in January, in what is probably his most notable policy achievement of his two years in office so far, London’s mayor Sadiq Khan changed the rules. Now you can take as many buses as you want within an hour, for a single fare: that means you can switch buses without paying a penalty.

That will have made it easier for TfL to cut routes back: replacing a direct bus journey with one that requires a change no longer means imposing a financial penalty on passengers.


4) ...but not that easy

That’s about where the good news stops, though – because there are reasons other than cost why people prefer direct bus routes. Needing to change buses will be difficult for anyone with any form of mobility impairment, for example. Even for those of us lucky enough not to fall into that category, it’ll be annoying: it’s just easier to stay in one seat for 40 minutes than to get turfed off and have to fight for a new one halfway through.

More than that, from the passengers’ point of view, excess capacity feels quite good a lot of the time: it means your bus may well be nice and empty. Reducing the number of buses along those key corridors will also make those that remain more crowded.

5) The motive is almost certainly financial

Another of Sadiq Khan’s big policy promises was to freeze fares. He made this promise at a time when central government is massively reducing the financial support it gives TfL (the work, Chamberlain notes, of Evening Standard editor George Osborne, back when he was chancellor). And the Hopper fare, while a great idea in many ways, means a further reduction in income.

So: TfL is scrambling for cash: this is why I remain cynical about those new outer London bus routes. I would be amazed if money wasn’t a motivation here, not least because...

6) TfL thinks no one will notice

Any attempt to reduce tube frequencies, let alone close a station, would result in uproar. Hashtag campaigners! Angry people pointing at things in local newspapers! Damning reports on the front of the Evening Standard from the bloke who made it happen!

Buses, though? Their routes change, slightly, all the time. And do you really notice whether your local route comes every 10 minutes or every 12? That’s not to mention the fact that bus passengers, as previously noted, tend to be poorer – and so, less vocal – than tube passengers.

So cuts, and the savings they bring, are much easier to sneak through. TfL probably would have gotten away with it, too, if it hadn’t been for those meddling bloggers.

Although...

7) Scrapping the C2 might be a mistake

The C2 runs from Parliament Hill, through Kentish Town and Camden to Oxford Circus. In other words, it links north London, where a lot of journalists live, to the offices of the BBC and Buzzfeed.

As occasional New Statesman writer James Ball notes, this is probably not the easiest route to quietly shelve.

8) None of this is set in stone

The consultation doesn’t even begin until next month and then will run for six weeks – so all these plans may yet be forgotten. We shall see.

Anyway – here’s Darryl Chamberlain’s original scoop, and here’s some detailed analysis on Diamond Geezer. Please support your local bloggers by reading them.

Jonn Elledge is the editor of CityMetric. He is on Twitter as @jonnelledge and on Facebook as JonnElledgeWrites.

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.