Tram

[James Barber]

Hi Zak,

Trams have lower running costs than trolley buses, attract more people out of their cars and are only marginally more expensive to construct.

Hi undisputed truth,

Lewisham Council have done more of the running over any possible Bakerloo Line extension than Southwark Council. I ensured routing it via Camberwell was in Southwark's master plan but if Southwark really wanted it it would need to do more. What kicked of Woolwich Arsenal extension was a ?60,000 study and a lot of hard work by Greenwich Council. Sadly I don't see any such level of effort by Southwark Council.

Equally TfL are talking about Chelsea-Hackney route for a new tube and not talking about Bakerloo Line extension.

IF a Bakerloo Line extension was started in 2020 the way TfL would build it would meant 2025 opening at the earliest. The proposed tram could be built within 12 months of planning approval.

[Undisputedtruth]

James,

Whilst it's true that Lewisham Council have done more of the running for the Bakerloo extension than Southwark, let's not forget previous work produced in the Kent RUS and TfL's preliminary study. I too am dismayed by Southwark's lack of effort over the Bakerloo extension.

The Chelsea-Hackney route is in fact Crossrail 2 and would allow Wimbledon rail users journeys to St Pancras and beyond. Useful knowledge in view of the current consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise.

I do have some concerns about the long term viability and strategic direction of your tram scheme despite being pro tram.

[the-e-dealer]

Any progress on this?

[James Barber]

The proposers have obtained the main planning permissions they need for their Preston Scheme.

Why is this important. Many argue against a tram in Southwark as they've yet to build a tram. So in my mind Southwakr is more likely ot happen once they've started digging up roads in Preston.

The proposers are also walking/surveying the route in detail starting Sunday 23rd.

[Bluerevolution]

Everything you need to know http://www.southwark-supertram.co.uk/index.html

[the-e-dealer]

Sorry I'm all for more public transport but This doesn't half look like the Monorail Scheme in Springfield. I believe there was a fire in Preston too when this company tried to build a system. Also the East West journeys are the worst catered for Southwark not North South.

[James Barber]

Hi the-e-dealer,

The fire according to the insurance investigation owas arson on the test prototype tram.

East-west routes across Southwark. Hmmm. Brois has made it clear he will not finance new trams - or tube routes. The East-west routes are Boris controlled roads. So if a tram is proposed along such routes - and they have just as many bus and train routes as the route proposed south-north it would stand much less chance of gaining TfL support. Also the heart of Southwakr regeneration is the Elephant & Castle which the proposers route goes via.

but if you know another private enterprise willing to build such a route as you appear to be proposing please do encourage them.

[Jeremy]

The Overground route will take you east and west of Denmark Hill (Surrey Quays one way, Clapham Junction the other).

[the-e-dealer]

Yes and the 37 but thats just about it.

[James Barber]

Hi the-e-dealer,

I really dont think the no.37 bus route will support a pribate enterprise funding a new tram route along it.

I suspect you realise that when you propose it.

Not sure why you'd suggest a spoiling alternative?

Regards james.

[the-e-dealer]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi the-e-dealer,

> The fire according to the insurance investigation

> owas arson on the test prototype tram.

How can it be Arson When

18 The RAIB examination of the tram indicated that the seat of the fire was in an under-floor compartment below the first, rearward facing, passenger seat behind and to the righthand side of the B end driving position. This compartment is constructed of plywood and houses both 24 and 650 volt electrical equipment including rheostatic brake resistors. The air to cool this compartment is drawn from a central channel that houses the traction motor.

19 There was no evidence of a defect or failure within the 650 volt power control system. The 24 volt wiring in the underfloor compartment was severely damaged and a conclusive analysis was not possible. It is probable that the fire began within the 24 volt electrical system. This view is shared by the forensic fire specialist.

20 It has also not been possible to accurately determine how long the fire had been burning before being noticed by the driver.

21 The condition of the wiring and equipment installation was not to a standard that would be acceptable for a tram carrying passengers.