We are trialing a dedicated East Dulwich COVID-19 Area on the forum here - please keep it useful.

Forum Sponsors

All Round Renovation

http://www.iyouall.com

www.stevenvaughan.co.uk

Advertise here

The East Dulwich Forum
Which pubs, bars, restaurants and take-aways do you avoid?
messageBakerloo extension
Posted by rcast1989 March 15, 05:42PM

With Bakerloo extension now finalised to completely miss Camberwell/ East Dulwich, do we as residents not feel it is time to get a petition together to start another extension our way.

I was so disappointed that with population here that the line went the way it did. In the evenings we are still stuck with no way of getting to the city or home other than changing to underground/bus at Oval or Vauxhall?!
I tis even worse getting south to such places as Balham, bus again to Oval and then down, seems silly.

Surely with a station in Brixton, an extension towards Camberwell/ East Dulwich and south to connect or branch out from the Northen line.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by Underhook March 15, 06:26PM

I think it is fair enough. If you read the first paragraph of the consultation I think it says it all:

“We are considering extending the Bakerloo line to improve transport connections in southeast London and to enable growth in homes and jobs.“

Extending to Peckham/ED wouldn’t help as much as for other areas. The train services from ED aren’t the end of the world either

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by doogsey March 15, 07:04PM

I would sign any petition which seeks to improve transport in SE London.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by DulwichGlobetrotter March 15, 07:05PM

There’s no need for a tube line extension. I can hop onto trains to London Bridge, Victoria, Brixton, Blackfriars, Clapham Junction, Farringdon and Kings Cross/St Pancras from the stations nearby. Dulwich is extremely well connected.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by KidKruger March 15, 08:06PM

I was told in 1990 by TFL that the tube would be in ED within 11yrs.
This part of London is not on anyone’s priority list for tube extension, there’s no large scale developments going on to coerce developers into footing (part of) the bill either.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by DulwichFox March 15, 08:23PM

DulwichGlobetrotter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There’s no need for a tube line extension. I can
> hop onto trains to London Bridge, Victoria,
> Brixton, Blackfriars, Clapham Junction, Farringdon
> and Kings Cross/St Pancras from the stations
> nearby. Dulwich is extremely well connected.

Totally agree. In addition Forest Hill to East Croydon then on to Gatwick Airport..

DulwichFox,

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by SpringTime March 16, 12:49AM

The lack of Tube in East Dulwich helps retain its character. So I'm out!

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by JohnL March 16, 09:17AM

I don't think this will happen (Peckham/Camberwell or OKR). Levelling up means priority goes to northern areas for a few years.

The issue will be promises made to developers.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by JohnL March 16, 09:18AM

KidKruger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was told in 1990 by TFL that the tube would be
> in ED within 11yrs.
> This part of London is not on anyone’s priority
> list for tube extension, there’s no large scale
> developments going on to coerce developers into
> footing (part of) the bill either.

Well the Orange line came to Peckham Rye (thats one h*ll of a push though)

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by Ghlpc March 16, 09:20AM

East Dulwich to London Bridge in 13 minutes.

Denmark Hill to Victoria or Canada Water in less than 15 minutes.

176 to Central London.

Pretty good connections already to me!!

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by wulfhound March 16, 09:28AM

A more realistic ask - and one that has been proposed in the recent past - is for the Overground to take over the suburban South London slow lines from Southern. How much they'd actually be able to improve the service (train size, punctuality, reliability, frequency) without significant investment is less clear. Seems most likely that the rush hour service wouldn't get that much better, but off peak and weekends would improve - as TfL sees public transport as a social good, whereas for Southern it's all about money.

Rebuilding Brixton East station on the Overground, and Camberwell on the Blackfriars viaduct, are also in the expensive-but-not-totally-unrealistic category.

After the Bakerloo, the next big project for London's tube is Crossrail 2 which won't help us at all, in any case there are doubts about that getting funded with the government's stated intent of redirecting infrastructure funding to the North.

Perhaps time to dust off Ken Livingstone's plan for the Cross River Tram? It was planned to run as far as Peckham, and could have run further south - being a surface scheme, it would have cost a fraction of anything involving tunnels. There's a strong case to argue that the eastern arm (which lacks Tube connectivity) would have been of far greater benefit than the western arm which paralleled the Victoria and Northern lines.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by clive March 16, 09:48AM

We could also focus on much lower cost connectivity between existing public transport. For example, the oft discussed extension of the 63 bus route over the hill to Honor Oak Park.

Clive

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by exdulwicher March 16, 09:50AM

wulfhound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps time to dust off Ken Livingstone's plan
> for the Cross River Tram? It was planned to run as
> far as Peckham, and could have run further south -
> being a surface scheme, it would have cost a
> fraction of anything involving tunnels.

Cancelled by Boris when he became Mayor due to funding issues. It was mooted again when Khan became Mayor but they did a review and he stated it would never be revived.

The Tube going to Old Kent Road is because of its designation (by Boris in about 2008 when he was Mayor) as an Opportunity Area - essentially a nice way of saying it's a dump and needs redevelopment. After that, the options of Camberwell got more or less taken off the table.

They do keep talking about re-opening Camberwell Station though - summary of that on Wikipedia [en.wikipedia.org]).
If that ever happens, the argument for putting a Tube line in there becomes much stronger.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by girlelectric March 17, 10:40AM

We are pretty well connected down here but commuting during rush hour is usually pretty hellish since the trains are no way near as frequent as the tube. A tube leaves Brixton every 90 seconds whereas if i miss my train at Denmark Hill 7:25, I have to wait 30 minutes for the next one which is ridiculous for zone 2 London.

Please don't say the trains are great if you're not commuting during rush hour every day!

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by rahrahrah March 17, 10:54AM

Transport should be provided for the people of London, not to enrich property speculators. The tube extensions to Nine Elms and Old Kent Road are a huge tax payer subsidy for developers looking to facilitate overseas 'investors' to launder their cash.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit was march 17, 10:58am by rahrahrah.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by rahrahrah March 17, 10:56AM

Here is a crazy idea for an alternate model. Build transport where people already live and are paying a lot of tax in part to provide transport.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by rahrahrah March 17, 10:57AM

... or continue to use taxpayers money to build 'investment vehicles' for offshore holding companies.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by rahrahrah March 17, 11:01AM

And yes, I know that at the end of it all, some low quality over priced rental properties will be created ('homes for Londoners'), but it is the most inefficient way possible of doing it. Our taxes should be used to provide better services for taxpayers.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by fishbiscuits March 17, 11:23AM

A petition is unlikely to do any good... I cannot imagine the government allocating billions to new infrastructure because 1000 people signed an online petition. These things are always subject to cost-benefit analysis (and by benefit, it's primarily economic benefit).. so please forgive my cynicism.

Saying that, I do wish that the route had gone via Queens Rd Peckham instead of "Old Kent Rd 2". The connection to the overground and national rail would have been very valuable. You could even imagine a location with one exit near Brimmington Park, and a 150m underground walkway connecting to Queens Rd. Almost no diversion of the route would be necessary.

The "money no object" solution for me would be a Victoria Line extension via Herne Hill, ED, Peckham, and joining up to the overground and Bakerloo... but hey...

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by James Barber March 17, 01:17PM

Local taxation is at the route of this.
IF an area gets better public transport and property prices rise, or incomes rise, then Transport for London does not see any of that upside as higher Council Tax or Income Tax, etc.
So the development of public transport is entirely skewed towards areas that could add huge housing volumes and the developers are required to contribute. it leads to a massive incentive for over development. In the case of thE Bakerloo Line many existing businesses are being driven out of the area or will cease trading to be replaced by massive blocks of housing.

--------------------
Regards jamesvbarber@gmail.com
former Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Dulwich Ward (2006-2018)
[www.jamesbarber.org.uk]
[twitter.com]

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by edcam March 17, 01:21PM

If the existing rail, overground and bus links ran properly and more frequently, we'd be fine.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by Townleygreen March 17, 01:25PM

rahrahrah said
"Our taxes should be used to provide better services for taxpayers."

I don't disagree, but are you happy to pay more income tax?

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by exdulwicher March 17, 01:36PM

rahrahrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... or continue to use taxpayers money to build
> 'investment vehicles' for offshore holding
> companies.

TfL is roughly half-funded from fares on its overall transport network, the remaining half comes from Congestion/ULEZ charges (plus a bit of PCN revenue), grants (which is how major projects like CrossRail are funded) and investments/borrowing.

Part of the grant includes a GLA precept which comes from all London council taxpayers and is set by the Mayor. It's been £6 million for a couple of years now.

Out of its overall yearly spend of about £10.5 billion, £6 million is a rather token gesture so paying more income tax isn't going to change anything - TfL still get the same precept of £6 million regardless of how much you pay. Ultimately, you're right, all money comes from "taxpayers" in one form or another but equally, all transport investment will ultimately end up enriching property speculators. Build a new station anywhere and house prices around it will go up.

But as @fishbiscuits and @James Barber says above ^^, sadly the "benefits" is always focused on economical rather than things like social, wellbeing and environmental which is how we end up constantly chasing "economic growth".

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by sandyman March 17, 06:23PM

When I first moved to Camberwell way back in 1984 i remember reading an article in the South London Press saying that the Bakerloo Line would be extended imminently to Camberwell. I remember the plans clearly - they even said where the station would be - in the northern corner of Camberwell Green where the Father Redcap was and because of some ancient statute protecting the size of the green they were going to extended the Green along Church Street. Still waiting...


JohnL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> KidKruger Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I was told in 1990 by TFL that the tube would
> be
> > in ED within 11yrs.
> > This part of London is not on anyone’s priority
> > list for tube extension, there’s no large scale
> > developments going on to coerce developers into
> > footing (part of) the bill either.
>
> Well the Orange line came to Peckham Rye (thats
> one h*ll of a push though)

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by mikeww March 17, 06:56PM

Think this presumes a bike? Maybe we need to be campaigning for better secure bike parking and bike lanes in the locality? Orders of magnitude cheaper and far quicker than the decades required for a new tube extension.

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by JohnL March 19, 09:04AM

sandyman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I first moved to Camberwell way back in 1984
> i remember reading an article in the South London
> Press saying that the Bakerloo Line would be
> extended imminently to Camberwell. I remember the
> plans clearly - they even said where the station
> would be - in the northern corner of Camberwell
> Green where the Father Redcap was and because of
> some ancient statute protecting the size of the
> green they were going to extended the Green along
> Church Street. Still waiting...

Ken pledged a new Camberwell station by 2026 (but he's long gone of course)

messageRe: Bakerloo extension
Posted by worldwiser March 21, 08:28PM

It's a total embarrassment that Walworth Rd with its 10s of thousands of residents gets no tube when OKR will before it sees anywhere near the same numbers. Whatever the economics of it, it's illogical and unfair. First build the infrastructure where people already live, then where they will one day.


Back to top of page
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Donate                   Terms of use                  Help & FAQs                   Advertise               RSS rss feed               Copyright 2006 - 2018 East Dulwich Forum