Bakerloo Line extension petition through Camberwell and Peckham

[Medley]

Well so he has.

Not just Bakerloo line extension, but also the idea of a South London Metro.

Consultation doc and presentation and consultation form all here https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/vision-and-strategy/infrastructure-plan-2050?source=vanityurl

[JamesViktor]

The route between Beckenham Junction and Bromley North is beyond pointless!

[edcam]

Yes, the 2040 thing does rather detract from the excitement.

[Nigello]

New Nation Rail station at Camberwell? This was in the document too:

There are already some key capacity constraints on inner London rail and bus services and some connectivity gaps which will need to be addressed. Significant additional investment will be required. The scale of this in relation to other requirements will depend on the extent to which the strategy to accommodate London?s population growth is through densification in inner London.

Some examples of the types of scheme to help address these issues are an upgrade of the London Overground network

to provide 6 car trains and new stations on existing lines,

eg at Camberwell, that can plug connectivity gaps and act

as development nodes.

[michael_FH]

JamesViktor Wrote:

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

> The route between Beckenham Junction and Bromley

> North is beyond pointless!

Possibly quite clever; as it takes the trains to a sensible terminus. It would be unlikely that there would be enough space at Beckenham.

Unfortunately this scheme will run mainly above ground, taking over existing capacity. Longer term longer tunnels would have been better and would provide much more additional capacity than taking over existing lines. Despite this I will support any route for the Bakerloo line extension through South East London as the area really needs it and the 3:1 benefit rating is massive for transport projects, which makes it more likely to happen sooner rather than later.

[healey]

nxjen Wrote:

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

> Boris Johnson has launched a public consultation

> for a London Infrastructure Plan that includes

> proposals for an extension to the Bakerloo line

> ... for the year 2040.

>

> http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/7757

Nice that it is being proposed but 2040 is simply ridiculous.

[JamesViktor]

michael_FH Wrote:

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

> JamesViktor Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The route between Beckenham Junction and

> Bromley

> > North is beyond pointless!

>

> Possibly quite clever; as it takes the trains to a

> sensible terminus. It would be unlikely that there

> would be enough space at Beckenham.

>

> Unfortunately this scheme will run mainly above

> ground, taking over existing capacity. Longer term

> longer tunnels would have been better and would

> provide much more additional capacity than taking

> over existing lines. Despite this I will support

> any route for the Bakerloo line extension through

> South East London as the area really needs it and

> the 3:1 benefit rating is massive for transport

> projects, which makes it more likely to happen

> sooner rather than later.

I see that but why bother calling at any of the stations? For passengers it is useless!

[LD929]

What a let down -- 2045??? My guess is by then OKR will no longer be an "opportunity area", the southeast will be really ballooning by then.

Anyways, interesting that the document doesn't say much about buses.

[Jeremy]

I would have thought that areas like Bromley and Beckenham primarily need fast (i.e. national rail) links to central London with few stops. The tube is better for shorter journeys, isn't it?

[cle]

Camberwell would be by The Bear, correct? Would both DH and LJ lines stop there?

Might be useful for many in the immediate area. That stretch is very nippy up to Elephant...

[Earl Aelfheah]

This is lame. There is huge investment in transport infrastructure going on in London and SE should get it's share. Investment all seems to be in areas which are already well served.

[Nigello]

Cle,

I'd've thought the sensible place for a new station (or new-old) station would be at the road where The Bear is. It's shameful that there is no rail link there. The buses are better, especially because Walworth Road is generally more passable these days, but a Camberwell station is not asking too much.

[cle]

It's called Camberwell Station Road after all, rather tantalisingly. Might help the appalling traffic if more people took the train and (yes, again) buses to Elephant were looked at correspondingly...

[JamesViktor]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> I would have thought that areas like Bromley and

> Beckenham primarily need fast (i.e. national rail)

> links to central London with few stops. The tube

> is better for shorter journeys, isn't it?

The problem with national rail is that it is shit.

[Zebedee Tring]

A massive overstatement. Although it is expensive and shouldn't been privatised in the first place, it is much better than it was, say, 10 years ago. That is not to say that there couldn't be further improvements.

And before anyone steps in to say that privatisation has worked, there have also been big improvements in the publicly run TfL. The reason for the improvements in both networks - much more money invested in the industry.

[michael_FH]

JamesViktor Wrote:

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

>

> The problem with national rail is that it is shit.

Included in the GLA document is a plan for TfL to take over the management of metro services - so many of the Southern services in South London would come under the control of TfL and probably be integrated into Overground (which is much more reliable and well respected than Southern).

[antantant]

I miss the SLL. I really think of the Overground a bit like Ryanair, not really going where you want it to, and with padded out slowed down schedules. I know there are a lot of fans but it just doesn't work for me except on the occasional weekend it's not undergoing engineering works.

[monkeylite]

It is only undergoing engineering work so as to introduce capacity. It isn't like it is going to be permanent. I like the Overground as it takes me exactly where I want to go, or change. Problem is Canada Water interchange wasn't build for this level of demand. A new interchange at New Cross Gate for Bakerloo Line will help.

Sadly we will all be dead by the time they decide on any Bakerloo Line extension. Hopefully my great grandchildren's children might be able to see it build one day.

[AnMKing]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

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

>

> And before anyone steps in to say that

> privatisation has worked, there have also been big

> improvements in the publicly run TfL. The reason

> for the improvements in both networks - much more

> money invested in the industry.

Apart from the tube, TfL's services are effectively privatised, different structures to National Rail but all run by private organisations (or foreign public ones).

[Jeremy]

Having had my morning train cancelled twice this week - and enduring trainless weekends for >10 years - I can confirm that national rail is indeed shit. But that doesn't mean that extending the tube out to the Kent borders is the right thing to do, in terms of a scalable infrastructure.

Being "on the tube" might give you the impression of being closely connected to London, but in reality sitting on a tube from Barnet or Harrow right into the centre is a pretty bloody unrewarding experience. When you're that far out, what you ideally need is fast/frequent trains with fewer stops.

[Medley]

Harrow is nearly three times as far from central London as ED, so not really an apt comparison.

But let's look on the bright side - if the Bakerloo is extended by around 2040, there can be a nice centenary aspect to the opening ceremony. I.e. it'll be a century or so since they first started digging beyond E&C to Camberwell.

[Jeremy]

Medley Wrote:

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

> Harrow is nearly three times as far from central London as ED, so not really an apt comparison.

Sorry, I was talking about Bromley... should have clarified that one. Areas like ED, Peckham, Camberwell have a stronger case.

[Medley]

But is anyone talking about the Tube to Bromley really? Surely more realistic to take the Bakerloo to Beckenham type distance at most?

Anyway, hopefully SE London ends up with both fewer stop/longer distance services and all-stations stop Tube (although you can, as with the Met line, sometimes have a blend of both).

[egoode]

The Evening Standard had an article last Friday that a consultation on the extension to the Bakerloo line will start next month. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/plans-for-bakerloo-line-extension-for-southeast-move-step-closer-9671863.html

Hopefully this is the first step towards it becoming a reality, even if I'm not around in 2040 when they currently have it proposed for.

[Medley]

Agreed!