Bakerloo Line extension petition through Camberwell and Peckham

[cle]

Have signed.

Problem with Camberwell is the 90 degree turn (admittedly not a first for the Bakerloo!) - so sadly I could it being cut. The cost isn't in tunnelling these days, but in station construction.

All need lifts, escalators, and the Jubilee ones usually natural light too. The simplest new underground stations are Bermondsey and Southwark. I'd be interested to know how expensive they were, and usage compared to projected Walworth and Camberwell costs and projected usage.

[James Barber]

Hi cle,

Jubilee line is a test case in how not to build a tube line. Way over budget. Edinburgh is the same for trams.

The DLR extension to Woolwich Arsenal is a much better and recent example. ?180m everything twin bores (for bigger DLR trains) with two stations 2.5km extension. Allowing for inflation since then, lower borrowing costs, longer trains it would cost around ?250m to extend to Denmark Hill station it being one of three extra stations - Camberwell Green, Walworth Road/Burgess Park (original proposal was Westmoreland Road) - and 2.5km from E&C.

[cle]

Thanks James. DLR projects always seem to be on-time and on-budget, why are tubes so gold-plated? The new Northern line extension seems ridiculous at 1 billion... and you're right about train size. A line to Denmark Hill would be ideal as it interchanges with three overground lines. I'd assume a Peckham line would be along the high st and not at PR station.

How would this justify a similar spend without a huge ticket 'regeneration' (read: developer flats) project? Not including Elephant of course, as it's already well connected itself.

[Renata Hamvas]

HOPone

Camberwell-Peckham-a couple of stops between, depends where it joins rail lines, Lewisham and on towards Bromley appears to be the current most likely route with trains coming above ground some point after Peckham. So definitely plans to go past Peckham. I've not heard any plans for a branched line.

The petition for this is still running, almost 2,300 signatures now:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/extend-the-tube-to-camberwell-peckham/

Renata

edited to sort out link.

Thanks H.

[Huguenot]

To make the link live, copy and paste with the http:// prefix.

[HopOne]

Renata,

Am in favour of any practicable extension, wherever it goes at this stage, but am curious to know where this route comes from. The 3 routes I linked to previously were from a TfL study IIRC. The route you describe sounds similar to a Lewisham Borough proposal "B4+B5 Beyond Peckham Towards Lewisham":

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2010/bakerloo-extension-a-report-to-lewisham-council/

which states "Specification:

- standard tube railway characteristics as far as Lewisham (surface alignment unlikely to be achievable)"

So you have a surface alignment in mind - do you have a source?

[James Barber]

The bit E&C-Camberwell-Peckham I get. The bit Lewisham-Bromley I don't get. To make this work would require replacing subiurban trains with tube trains. Replacing quick train journeys with slower tube journeys. So it's likely to mee fierce resitance the closer it gets to reality. it also only provides extra capacity in half of the extension and replaces almost like for like the outer half.

Eitherway, we need to reserve Southwark land now before its built on to ensure it happens.

[HopOne]

Quite. Not only would it meet fierce resistance but sending a tube frequency service through Lewisham on surface routes that are already at capacity would also mean an unreliable tube service.

So, reserving land in Southwark is an excellent idea. Getting the route right outside of Southwark is also essential.

[Renata Hamvas]

Sorry Hopone,

I have no extra info, no magic source! This has come from the recent press(mayor) and other stuff that's widely available. I did say current most likely route! Also, I've seen nothing firming up where underground joins overground, except past Peckham. I agree, this does seem to be a mixture of previously published potential routes. I am too in favour of any extension through South East London.

Renata

[James Barber]

But Bromley and Beckehham are tory and extension to them appear to result in replacing fast trains for them with slow tubes.

As tory heartlands they'll try and kill this.

I would hope Southwark argues that a short extension sooner rather than later will being urgrnelty needed benefits and that the ultimate end route be decided later. That then seperates out the tory london borough risk of killing this.

[GEEKASAURUS]

From Green councillor

am writing to let you know that the Mayor of London has provided a response to the formal question Darren Johnson AM tabled on your behalf at the March Mayor?s Question Time meeting. Please see below for the response.

Bakerloo line extension

Question No: 814 / 2013

Darren Johnson

The popularity of the London Overground in south east London demonstrates the demand that exists for better transport links between central and south east London. Can you update me on the work TfL have done on options to extend the Bakerloo line and can you confirm whether TfL are developing a timetable to take these proposals forward?

Written response from the Mayor

I am committed to carry out a further review of the potential for a southern extension of the Bakerloo line in my Transport Strategy and I am keen to progress this as quickly as possible. TfL has already completed a strategic assessment of a range of potential transport schemes for south-east London. The culmination of this work was the South-East London Rail Access Study, which identified a possible corridor for a future extension from Elephant & Castle to Hayes via Lewisham, amongst other schemes, as being the most closely aligned with the objectives of the Transport Strategy. However, further analysis is needed before any firm proposal can be developed and funding would need to be secured for the scheme.

TfL is doing a piece of work with the London borough of Southwark to look in detail at what development would be needed around the route to both justify the economic case for the extension and fund it.

[healey]

So the Burgess Park route that completly bypasses Camberwell currently has favour? Seems a complete waste of time to me. A Burgess Park stop is great for the residents there of course but it's not serving a notable town.

I think Camberwell has to be included to make this fly, otherwise it'll be little different to a commuter belt train.

[James Barber]

AS predicted Bromley council are dead against the extensino going there. LArgely becuase it replaces a fast suburban trains with the same number of smaller slower tube trains.

Sadly this hasnt yet been thought through.

[lane lover]

A good option would be to take it from E&C to Camberwell via a Walworth Rd station (or 2) ... then to existing Peckham Rye, a stop at Peckham Rye Common and through to the existing Honour Oak Park station, where it would terminate. From there, passengers have the option to switch to fast trains, thereby not cluttering capacity.

[Penguin68]

AS predicted Bromley council are dead against the extensino going there. LArgely becuase it replaces a fast suburban trains with the same number of smaller slower tube trains

Tubes swap speed with frequency. Speed makes sense when journey start times are very predictable (e.g. commuting to and from work) - frequency when start times are unpredictable - if you assume that the biggest use, from Bromley, will be for commuting for work into town (or other predictable, not spur of the moment, journeys), then Bromely's position is entirely rational, and indeed if I lived there I would be supporting it.

Of course those places between Bromley and Town may well be seguing from predictable to spur of the moment travel choices, so making the slower, but more frequent (less waiting time when you are not planning your journeys) tubes more attractive.

Younger people (this is a huge generalisation) tend to live more in inner city than suburban areas, so their 'go when I want to go' (particularly through the evening and weekends) will make tube frequency more attractive - as does the simple interchanges once in the tube network.

The more settled (and dull and boring) you are, the more quick but less frequent travel is desirable. That's Bromley all over! (sorry, Bromely readers, couldn't resist)

[GEEKASAURUS]

The London reconnection a pages have several in depth analyses of routes and implications, far more detailed than I had previously considered and well worth a read. From reading these pages I also get the impression that a route via the common and honor oak then catford benefits most people with minimal implications for existing fast services.

James can you provide more detail on the work that Boris states he/TFL is doing with southwark at present?

[youandiaredominoes]

We don't need this extension. It's nice being cut off from the tube - that's why some of us live round these parts!

[healey]

youandiaredominoes Wrote:

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

> We don't need this extension. It's nice being cut

> off from the tube - that's why some of us live

> round these parts!

It's never going to come anywhere near East Dulwich proper, but it should certainly include a key town such as Camberwell.

[Nigello]

I think it should continue from E and C to Walworth Road (perhaps at Burgess Park) then to Camberwell Green, Peckham Rye, Rye Common, then HOP and beyond. Camberwell really needs public transport other than buses.

[edhistory]

I would like tunneling engineers to do a north to south survey along our valley.

This would locate the NW to SE Dulwich Fault which crosses our valley.

Problem is that the fault would probably mean the route would be discarded.

John K

[MarkE]

A transport industry contact got in touch with me this morning to say that "TfL have just released a tender for reviewing the planning scenarios in Southwark, Lewisham and Bromley that could support the Bakerloo line extension".

I believe this to mean that a consultancy will be picked to review a wide range of transport issues in the area, and make various recommendations/options for addressing them, from which then further negotiations with TfL and consultations with councils, business and the public take place. It'll all be behind closed doors until any real plans are formed, which could well be years away yet.

From what I've been able to squeeze out of my contact, the ballpark cost of a Bakerloo Line extension is quoted at ?2bn, and that the current economic situation doesn't support that expenditure. The various possible routes were reviewed in 2012 and the benefit:cost ratio favoured one via the Old Kent Road rather than into Camberwell and Peckham.

[James Barber]

Southwark Council is given ?100,000 every year to spend on transport in any transport way they see fit.

For several years I've been suggesting they do what Greenwich do - they funded a ?50,000 report into the viability of extending the DLR to Woolwich Arsenal. The feasiblity study unlocked a long thought good idea into a live real project.

This week Southwark Council announced that they've allocated ?50,000 of the ?100,000 this year to fund such a study via TfL.

Routes. The councils preferred option involves replacing an existing surburban train srevice running 5 times an hour with a Bakerloo train 6 times per hour. So understandably Bromley are against this route. It would be purgatory for those commuters to have a dramatically longer journey time.

Hope that helps MarkE.

[9Pence]

'The various possible routes were reviewed in 2012 and the benefit:cost ratio favoured one via the Old Kent Road rather than into Camberwell and Peckham.'

Now let's all guess which one they'll go with.

This is not rocket science. My ?50k says Camberwell won't be getting a tube station.

Not now.

Not never.

Not ever.

Sorry Camberwell.

[James]

I think via Camberwell & Peckham then terminating at Lewisham would be the best option. Does anyone know if this would be feasible?

Bromley has a long history of sticking two fingers up at the rest of London and pretending it is a Middle England market town. This is deluded, it is an anonymous suburb devoid of anything of significance. I think it should stay isolated if that's what the people of Bromley want. Save the investment for vibrant places that will thrive on it like Southwark and Lewisham.

[JohnL]

but .. what about gentificationism?

9Pence Wrote:

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

> 'The various possible routes were reviewed in 2012

> and the benefit:cost ratio favoured one via the

> Old Kent Road rather than into Camberwell and

> Peckham.'

>

>

> Now let's all guess which one they'll go with.

>

>

>

> This is not rocket science. My ?50k says

> Camberwell won't be getting a tube station.

>

>

> Not now.

>

> Not never.

>

> Not ever.

>

> Sorry Camberwell.