Improving rail links to Watford

[A S Leib]

The thread on making the Metropolitan line part of the London Overground has turned into one about Watford's traffic, so what can be done to fix it?

Current relevant rail services in / around Watford are

• 4 tph from Watford (Met) to Baker Street (more in the peak, with some skipping Northwood Park, Preston Road and Wembley Park)
• 2 tph from Chesham to Aldgate (I don't think it's more than 3 tph in the peak due to the single line, but with some running fast between Moor Park and Finchley Road except for Harrow-on-the-Hill)
• 2 tph from Amersham to Aldgate (more in the peak, also with fast services)
• 1-2 tph from Aylesbury / Aylesbury Vale Parkway to London Marylebone via all stations to Rickmansworth, then Harrow-on-the-Hill and Marylebone (higher in the peak, some peak services skipping combinations of stations south of Great Missenden)

• 4 tph at Watford Junction between London Euston and Tring / Milton Keynes Central, all calling at Harrow & Wealdstone, Hemel Hempstead, Berkhamsted and Tring and 2 tph each from Bushey, Cheddington, Leighton Buzzard and Bletchley
• 1 tph from London Euston to Birmingham New Street via Leighton Buzzard and Northampton
• 4 tph from London Euston via Willesden Junction and Watford High Street
• 1 tph from St. Albans Abbey via all stations (1 train per 45 minutes in the peak)
• 1 tph from Clapham Junction via Harrow & Wealdstone
• Less relevant to Watford's traffic, but 8 Avanti tph through Watford Junction (3 Manchester, 2 West Midlands, 1 Glasgow fast, 1 Liverpool, 1 Chester), of which 1 tph currently stops outside a few early-morning / late evening services.

I think part of the problem is that whilst Watford Junction to St. Albans Abbey is competitive with and Watford Junction to Boxmoor (Hemel Hempstead) by train is half the time of driving, the fact that all three stations are relatively far from the town centres drags average journey speeds down by a lot. At the Watford end at least there's 4 tph to Watford High Street, and 6 tph to Bushey for those it's more convenient for, but I think it's hard to convince people to take a train for fifteen minutes then take another train for two minutes when they'd want or need to drive to the station to begin with and wouldn't have a massive* time penalty for driving all the way.

*I know that driving between Watford and Hemel Hempstead can easily be forty minutes, but if going between Hemel and Watford town centres, that isn't massively slower than by public transport.

 

[stuu]

It's a shame the Abbey line isn't a more useful service. My money no object solution would be to connect to the MML and run a Luton-Watford service

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think part of the problem is that whilst Watford Junction to St. Albans Abbey is competitive with and Watford Junction to Boxmoor (Hemel Hempstead) by train is half the time of driving, the fact that all three stations are relatively far from the town centres drags average journey speeds down by a lot. At the Watford end at least there's 4 tph to Watford High Street, and 6 tph to Bushey for those it's more convenient for, but I think it's hard to convince people to take a train for fifteen minutes then take another train for two minutes when they'd want or need to drive to the station to begin with and wouldn't have a massive* time penalty for driving all the way.

Don't forget though that most rail journeys aren't city centre to city centre, because most people don't live in city centres. They're suburb to city centre, and as St Albans and Hemel will mostly be traffic sources rather than traffic sinks the suburban location is probably fairly useful. See also why the entrance of Bletchley (if you're only having one) is on the correct side for the actual demand, which isn't *to* Bletchley, but rather *from* it, with the exception of the footy.

With regard to Watford a fair bit of the office space is between the traditional centre and the station.

 

[A S Leib]

It's a shame the Abbey line isn't a more useful service. My money no object solution would be to connect to the MML and run a Luton-Watford service

I don't know if anything will come of it yet, but it looks like the option in early stages of planning / proposal's converting the Abbey line to be part of the Herts Essex Rapid Transit, which would, if it ends up actually being built, hopefully lead to a direct link to St. Albans City, and there's a (theoretically) turn-up-and-go frequency service from there to Luton.

Don't forget though that most rail journeys aren't city centre to city centre, because most people don't live in city centres. They're suburb to city centre, and as St Albans and Hemel will mostly be traffic sources rather than traffic sinks the suburban location is probably fairly useful. See also why the entrance of Bletchley (if you're only having one) is on the correct side for the actual demand, which isn't *to* Bletchley, but rather *from* it, with the exception of the footy.

With regard to Watford a fair bit of the office space is between the traditional centre and the station.

That's fair, although I think almost all of Hemel's population's to the northeast of the WCML, which doesn't help make eastern Hemel to Watford by train attractive.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Watford sold its soul to the car in the last century - the centre is ringed by pervasive roads ! - but the whole area is basically not far of motor gridlock. It is around an hour from St Albans to cross Watford (my wife dreads doing the journey to the hospital for example , and has sought local employment within the NHS quite succesfully) - bus links are really not bad , but badly messed up by traffic.

I have long thought that a Luton to Watford rail link would be excellent - but costly and a bit tricky.

 

[mr_jrt]

In an ideal world, the DC lines would dive under the WCML just north of Radlett Rd. and pop up again by the telephone exchange (though it might feel a bit like a rollercoaster!) and then continue on to St Albans. That might then focus minds on the Croxley link, as it would then offer a decent orbital link between several regional centres. I'd imagine LO would continue to terminate at Watford Junction, with the orbital service from Aylesbury/Chesham continuing on to St Albans.

A variation that might be interesting would be for the line to continue descending from under the WCML to pass under Orphanage Rd., with a pair of underground platforms accessed by steps down from an extension of the existing subway, with the line running in a cut and cover trench through the car park/redevelopment area and rising back up to the surface to the current level along the line of the route.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I have long thought that a Luton to Watford rail link would be excellent - but costly and a bit tricky.

The best way to do that seems to be to tunnel north from St Albans Abbey for approx a mile and a quarter north (very expensive, but necessary to clear Verulamium Park) and then a course close to the Redbourn Road to a Redbourn Parkway station on the bypass, with the line continuing on to the Flitch line trackbed towards Harpenden.
You'd need a north facing curve on the MML there as well, but there appears to be enough land for one.
The only other major issue would be MML capacity then - perhaps some form of in-cab signalling would be in place to increase capacity on the slower lines.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The problem with Watford is not with its rail service but the fact that it is really too geographically small for its population and economic activity. The entire borough is only 8 square miles and several of the 12 council wards are amongst the most densely populated areas in the entire country.

When, in the 1960’s, it did have control of its own roads, it proposed an extensive dual carriageway system and ring road to deal with the traffic but that only got partially built before HCC took over in 1974 and killed that scheme off. Since then it has been very hard to get into, through and out of the town, increasingly so as the town changed from being a semi-industrial town into one relying on retail and services. The M1 link road and it’s relatively recent pseudo “extension” to the Hospital has, however, been a good move for ambulances.

Closure of major local employers (it had two major national print works, a lorry factory, a paper mill, a brewery and a helicopter engine plant inside or on its boundaries, to name but a few) and several local schools means there are a large amount of people travelling from the borough to outside to work or school and vice versa and then add in the several thousand terrace houses (an unusually high amount for a County Town), parking is a big issue, as are conflicting traffic movement in the peaks.

With relatively easy access to the M25, M4, M40, M1, A41 and A1M, you can live in Watford and take jobs many miles away, if you own a car. It has become more popular for rail commuting and when it works, the journey into London from the Junction is a really good service. Could do with a few more 12 cars instead of 8 at times, though. The Met line has a decent service and is reasonably well used, despite the walk into town but the St Albans line really could do with a loop at Bricket Wood but time and again, even when the Capex was forthcoming, the DfT wouldn’t pay for the additional unit and the resultant Opex.

The earthworks and cost of doing anything at the St Albans or Watford ends of the Abbey line means that any plans to push it further at either end are a complete non-starter. It has been looked at.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The problem with Watford is not with its rail service but the fact that it is really too geographically small for its population and economic activity. The entire borough is only 8 square miles and several of the 12 council wards are amongst the most densely populated areas in the entire country.

When, in the 1960’s, it did have control of its own roads, it proposed an extensive dual carriageway system and ring road to deal with the traffic but that only got partially built before HCC took over in 1974 and killed that scheme off. Since then it has been very hard to get into, through and out of the town, increasingly so as the town changed from being a semi-industrial town into one relying on retail and services. The M1 link road and it’s relatively recent pseudo “extension” to the Hospital has, however, been a good move for ambulances.

Closure of major local employers (it had two major national print works, a lorry factory, a paper mill, a brewery and a helicopter engine plant inside or on its boundaries, to name but a few) and several local schools means there are a large amount of people travelling from the borough to outside to work or school and vice versa and then add in the several thousand terrace houses (an unusually high amount for a County Town), parking is a big issue, as are conflicting traffic movement in the peaks.

With relatively easy access to the M25, M4, M40, M1, A41 and A1M, you can live in Watford and take jobs many miles away, if you own a car. It has become more popular for rail commuting and when it works, the journey into London from the Junction is a really good service. Could do with a few more 12 cars instead of 8 at times, though. The Met line has a decent service and is reasonably well used, despite the walk into town but the St Albans line really could do with a loop at Bricket Wood but time and again, even when the Capex was forthcoming, the DfT wouldn’t pay for the additional unit and the resultant Opex.

The earthworks and cost of doing anything at the St Albans or Watford ends of the Abbey line means that any plans to push it further at either end are a complete non-starter. It has been looked at.

I'm sure that pushing it further at either end would be very costly - however IF a lot of new housing was built in the vicinity of e.g. Redbourn, that may change the equation?

 

[stuu]

I don't know if anything will come of it yet, but it looks like the option in early stages of planning / proposal's converting the Abbey line to be part of the Herts Essex Rapid Transit, which would, if it ends up actually being built, hopefully lead to a direct link to St. Albans City, and there's a (theoretically) turn-up-and-go frequency service from there to Luton.

Has that been revived again? I thought that was abandoned years ago

The best way to do that seems to be to tunnel north from St Albans Abbey for approx a mile and a quarter north (very expensive, but necessary to clear Verulamium Park) and then a course close to the Redbourn Road to a Redbourn Parkway station on the bypass, with the line continuing on to the Flitch line trackbed towards Harpenden.
You'd need a north facing curve on the MML there as well, but there appears to be enough land for one.
The only other major issue would be MML capacity then - perhaps some form of in-cab signalling would be in place to increase capacity on the slower lines.

There was a link from Park Street to the MML which you can still see on aerial maps. Rebuilding that would be relatively easy, unless the new freight terminal is being built over it. It would need a flyover at the MML end but would still be a lot cheaper than anything involving tunneling

 

[AlastairFraser]

There was a link from Park Street to the MML which you can still see on aerial maps. Rebuilding that would be relatively easy, unless the new freight terminal is being built over it. It would need a flyover at the MML end but would still be a lot cheaper than anything involving tunneling

Issue then is capacity on the MML though.
I think in-cab signalling will come on the slow lines at some point to reduce headways anyway, but running all the way from Napsbury on the MML is a lot more mileage than running from north of Harpenden station.
It's definitely something that would only get improved if there was a large contribution from housing somewhere along the line.

 

[A S Leib]

Has that been revived again? I thought that was abandoned years ago

According to my county councillor when I asked, updates were delayed due to district council governance changes, with more news possibly coming this year.

 

[The Planner]

Issue then is capacity on the MML though.
I think in-cab signalling will come on the slow lines at some point to reduce headways anyway, but running all the way from Napsbury on the MML is a lot more mileage than running from north of Harpenden station.
It's definitely something that would only get improved if there was a large contribution from housing somewhere along the line.

I doubt the MML will get ETCS in the medium term, ECML and the north end of the WCML to do first.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I doubt the MML will get ETCS in the medium term, ECML and the north end of the WCML to do first.

I'm surprised - I thought the south end of the MML was one of the most congested in the UK?

 

[Mgameing123]

It's a shame the Abbey line isn't a more useful service. My money no object solution would be to connect to the MML and run a Luton-Watford service

Or provide a free shuttle bus from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City station.

 

[stuu]

Issue then is capacity on the MML though.
I think in-cab signalling will come on the slow lines at some point to reduce headways anyway, but running all the way from Napsbury on the MML is a lot more mileage than running from north of Harpenden station.
It's definitely something that would only get improved if there was a large contribution from housing somewhere along the line.

10tph on the slow lines in the peaks, of which 4 terminate at St Albans, so it's not that bad.

Or provide a free shuttle bus from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City station.

Traffic in rush hour in St Albans is terrible, it would be quicker to walk

 

[ChiefPlanner]

10tph on the slow lines in the peaks, of which 4 terminate at St Albans, so it's not that bad.


Traffic in rush hour in St Albans is terrible, it would be quicker to walk

The walk of course , can involved a rather steep trudge up the Holywell Hill to the city centre ! - but there are more pedestrian friendly back street routes. For several years I did this walk every day. There are plenty of passing buses , and there was a special bus link from the City station to the Abbey station and was very little used unfortunately.

The "Park Street" link has , to my mind , always been a runner - especially in providing this much desired link from Luton to Watford - there is a bit of space in the formation where Napsbury station was , to help out - but the development of the new terminal kyboshes this option.

We are , where we are.

 

[AlastairFraser]

10tph on the slow lines in the peaks, of which 4 terminate at St Albans, so it's not that bad.

Ah, alright, so my tunnel towards Redbourn based proposal makes even more sense as there will potentially be more free slots to squeeze into, joining north of Harpenden.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Ah, alright, so my tunnel towards Redbourn based proposal makes even more sense as there will potentially be more free slots to squeeze into, joining north of Harpenden.

Plus the odd freight train on the slow lines - not many , to be honest from observation , and they move quite fast.

Anyway , all hypothetical - it will not happen.....

 

[Bald Rick]

The best way to do that seems to be to tunnel north from St Albans Abbey for approx a mile and a quarter north (very expensive, but necessary to clear Verulamium Park) and then a course close to the Redbourn Road to a Redbourn Parkway station on the bypass,

That means tunnelling through the aquifer, and a tunnel portal in the middle of a residential area.

Rebuilding that would be relatively easy, unless the new freight terminal is being built over it.

The freight terminal is being built over it.

I think in-cab signalling will come on the slow lines at some point to reduce headways anyway

Its the station stops that limit capacity on the slow lines, not headway.

Traffic in rush hour in St Albans is terrible, it would be quicker to walk

Sometimes it’s quicker to walk, sometimes quicker in the car (I did by car it in 5 minutes an hour ago). But both would almost always be quicker than the bus when you include waiting for the bus at the origin station.

 

[Richardr]

Or provide a free shuttle bus from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City station.

Given the Abbey line is just hourly, for much of the hour it is quicker to get a bus the whole way.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

How much money on new infrastructure are we allowed to spend? I doubt that much can be done in the short term without building something. Although once HS2 is built, you'd probably be able to stop a lot of Avanti trains at Watford Junction, which would help a lot.

1. The quickest/cheapest win might be to extend the Bakerloo line to Watford Junction (or make the Lioness line run more frequently), since I'm guessing all that would really need is more trains + 4th rail electrification. If you had a turn-up-and-go service between Watford High Street and Junction, that might also make commuting into Watford by train more attractive.
2. Next up on my list would be to extend the Euston-Tring trains to Milton Keynes (or maybe Northampton), giving much better links between Watford and Milton Keynes, with connections to the North there.
3. Then I'd look at a passing loop to allow the Abbey line to go half-hourly
4. Next - and now we're into the serious money - sort out rerouting the Metropolitan line to Watford Junction, along with providing a Watford-Aylesbury service.
5. And finally - as others have mentioned - reroute the Abbey line into St Albans City, and extend to Luton.

 

[biggerisbetter]

If there were a fair bit of money available (which I accept there is not) alongside HS2 I would:

1. As part of the forthcoming Local Government reorganisation merge Three Rivers and Watford and include as an additional London Borough. Identify Watford as a Metropolitan Centre and opportunity area for housing growth.

2. Croxley Rail Link to divert Met line services to Watford Junction.

3. Post HS2, add calls to a larger number of residual WCML fast services to maximise the number of paths.

4. As part of Bakerloo line extension and improvements, extend the line from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction*. Would have something like 10tph from Watford Junction to Hayes, 10tph from Harrow and Wealdstone to Beckenham Junction and an extra 10tph peak only Queens Park to Lewisham.

5. Convert the Abbey Line to a tram with a turn up and go service (4-6tph) and extend on street from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and from Sopwell to St Albans City.

* Associated with this I would withdraw Lioness Line services and extend 4tph Windrush Line services from Highbury and Islington to Queens Park via a redoubled Camden Road, Chalk Farm, South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road. Would also bring back into use the Queens Park WCML platforms and utilise these for the Tring stoppers and Southern service.

 

[swt_passenger]

* Associated with this I would withdraw Lioness Line services and extend 4tph Windrush Line services from Highbury and Islington to Queens Park via a redoubled Camden Road, Chalk Farm, South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road. Would also bring back into use the Queens Park WCML platforms and utilise these for the Tring stoppers and Southern service.

The Southern service doesn’t go through Queens Park, it only joins the WCML a fairly long way north of Willesden Junction…

 

[Sad Sprinter]

No one has mentioned finally extending the Northern Line from Edgware. I'm sure the planned housing development for the Bushey Heath extension could be of great value during today's housing crisis. Such a route could snake under Watford calling at: Watford High Street, Watford Central and Watford Junction. Of course, land was put aside for a Metropolitan terminus in the centre of Watford. Which conceivably, had the Watford and Edgware Railway been built, would of housed Northern Line trains too.

 

[duncombec]

Or provide a free shuttle bus from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City station.

It has been tried before, I believe most recently in 2017/early 2018, when the SC1 was operated by Lucketts - timetable was typed out in this post here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/watford-st-albans.143894/#post-2929529., but broadly every 45 minutes.

I believe it carried a lot of fresh air and not a lot of humans.

 

[A S Leib]

The quickest/cheapest win might be to extend the Bakerloo line to Watford Junction (or make the Lioness line run more frequently), since I'm guessing all that would really need is more trains + 4th rail electrification. If you had a turn-up-and-go service between Watford High Street and Junction, that might also make commuting into Watford by train more attractive.

That might help; I think the Overground normally uses one platform at Euston, so four at Watford Junction should be enough for a higher level of service. I think another thing which could help would be including the fare from Watford Junction to Watford High Street in tickets to Watford Junction, although I don't know how effective that would be.

1. As part of the forthcoming Local Government reorganisation merge Three Rivers and Watford and include as an additional London Borough. Identify Watford as a Metropolitan Centre and opportunity area for housing growth.

The UK already has far larger local government districts than any other OECD country bar South Korea (average populations of 155,000 in the UK, 220,000 in ROK, next highest is 148,000 in Ireland if you don't count municipal districts then 74,000 in Japan). I think merging councils is going in the wrong direction to begin with. Greater London also needs to end somewhere, and I think extending it all the way to the end of its current urban area would make it too large.

5. Convert the Abbey Line to a tram with a turn up and go service (4-6tph) and extend on street from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and from Sopwell to St Albans City.

Agreed. Ideally I think it should go further, at least as far as Hatfield, although that adds a lot more cost in.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

That might help; I think the Overground normally uses one platform at Euston, so four at Watford Junction should be enough for a higher level of service. I think another thing which could help would be including the fare from Watford Junction to Watford High Street in tickets to Watford Junction, although I don't know how effective that would be.

Is there a Watford stations group for ticketing purposes? If there isn't, it feels a bit like there should be - then most tickets that are currently to either station could be to the group. I think that would achieve what you are suggesting.

No one has mentioned finally extending the Northern Line from Edgware. I'm sure the planned housing development for the Bushey Heath extension could be of great value during today's housing crisis. Such a route could snake under Watford calling at: Watford High Street, Watford Central and Watford Junction. Of course, land was put aside for a Metropolitan terminus in the centre of Watford. Which conceivably, had the Watford and Edgware Railway been built, would of housed Northern Line trains too.

Funnily enough, I was tempted to add that to my list a few posts back. I didn't because I figured it was heading too far into fantasy-land. And I didn't even know that that had been a serious plan at any point: It's more like, something where I've looked at the map and in crayonista way thought that it would be very useful for connectivity to extend one of the tube lines (either the Northern from Edgware or the Jubilee from Stanmore) to Watford via Bushey Heath (but difficult because you'd need a fair bit of tunneling and I doubt the population density would be enough to support that cost)

 

[mr_jrt]

No one has mentioned finally extending the Northern Line from Edgware. I'm sure the planned housing development for the Bushey Heath extension could be of great value during today's housing crisis. Such a route could snake under Watford calling at: Watford High Street, Watford Central and Watford Junction. Of course, land was put aside for a Metropolitan terminus in the centre of Watford. Which conceivably, had the Watford and Edgware Railway been built, would of housed Northern Line trains too.

Not quite, I think.

IIRC, the Met's planned terminus was what is now the Moon Under the Water on Watford High St., with a view to later continuing under Clarendon Road towards Watford Junction, I suspect with an eye on the Abbey Line. That is why the two houses opposite the Met station are different (newer) than the rest - a gap was left for the Met branch to continue under Cassiobury Park, swinging across to pass under various playing fields and roads to reach the town centre.

The Watford & Edgware's original terminus was to be at "Watford Market", which I believe at the time was the original ancient location of the market where the large Tesco store now sits. Later additions proposed linking it first to the Watford and Rickmansworth and then another later one to form a triangular junction to reach Watford Junction.

 

[cle]

If there were a fair bit of money available (which I accept there is not) alongside HS2 I would:

1. As part of the forthcoming Local Government reorganisation merge Three Rivers and Watford and include as an additional London Borough. Identify Watford as a Metropolitan Centre and opportunity area for housing growth.

2. Croxley Rail Link to divert Met line services to Watford Junction.

3. Post HS2, add calls to a larger number of residual WCML fast services to maximise the number of paths.

4. As part of Bakerloo line extension and improvements, extend the line from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction*. Would have something like 10tph from Watford Junction to Hayes, 10tph from Harrow and Wealdstone to Beckenham Junction and an extra 10tph peak only Queens Park to Lewisham.

5. Convert the Abbey Line to a tram with a turn up and go service (4-6tph) and extend on street from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and from Sopwell to St Albans City.

* Associated with this I would withdraw Lioness Line services and extend 4tph Windrush Line services from Highbury and Islington to Queens Park via a redoubled Camden Road, Chalk Farm, South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road. Would also bring back into use the Queens Park WCML platforms and utilise these for the Tring stoppers and Southern service.

1 - I don't really have a view on. Suspect some snobbery. But maybe Watford/TR could merge, even if not an LB - as a larger UA with a larger budget. They could maybe make (2) happen without fully relying on TfL.

2 - Highly supportive of, although likely would need to have a single station (double ended) for West/Hospital/Stadium/Ascots whatever - so find a compromise location.

3 - Another Manchester call is planned I believe. Other than that, still a lot of LNR fast to Leighton Buzzard and a lot of Fasts due to skip. I think most should call at Watford.

4 - 20tph off peak would not be enough at the southern end. Even new stock will see people return to the Bakerloo, which is a laughing stock - pun intended. I would say 6tph to Watford, 6tph Harrow, 10 tph Willesden (rebuild with two islands, inner two faces turn Bakerloos) - 8 tph Queens Park - gives 30tph max which could be toggled for off peak.

5 - don't agree. I think the ideal is investment for a loop and an even 2tph shuttle, self-contained still. If integrated with anything, I'd merge it with an even 2tph to Clapham Junction, and make it LO - given the platforms/lines in question - but very risky.

* - I do think it'd be easier to have 6pth Euston-Watford DC and leave much of the tube how it is. But Queens Park is a big market and these services in times of construction do prove popular! You'd need to turn them at Willesden Junction really - which would be the rebuild if those same platforms weren't needed for the Bakerloo. Stonebridge Park has an annoying conflict - and stops short of Wembley Central which is 'booming' as it were - I think that is a better place to aim, and possibly a West Hampstead/Willesden Green srtyle turnback could be build just north before North Wembley - and turn (LO or Bakerloo) services there.