Bakerloo extension - Lower Sydenham transformed

[Tim Lund]

Full story here

I wonder in what other ways Sydenham will have changed by 2040.

Hope to be around to refer back to this post ...

[robbieduncan]

Is this actually going to go through Lower Sydenham station?

[maestro]

Is this actually going to go through Lower Sydenham station?

You can see from the map that it does if you can manage to identify Southend Lane, this seems to be the preferred route of the three options that were considered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakerloo_l ... Camberwell

[Tim Lund]

Looks very much like it to me. If you google it, you'll find plenty of suggested routes, all of which appear to envisage a connection with Lower Sydenham.



Source Forest Hill Society, 2012

AFAIK the map in the OP is the first official suggestion, ahead of an official consultation period. Many groups have been lobbying for this, not least LB Lewisham and the Forest Hill Society.

[Eagle]

2040. As 65 at present doubt if still around . However good move for the area I guess.


As mainly on existing hayes line track why on earth would it take 26 odd years. I think the Chinese built the Great Wall in less time.

[JRobinson]

Funding isn't available yet - lots of other improvements, etc in progress before, like Crossrail 2, HS2, etc.

[Tim Lund]

Funding isn't available yet - lots of other improvements, etc in progress before, like Crossrail 2, HS2, etc.

Is funding the constraint, or the supply side - e.g. that there are only so many firms which can manage this sort of project, and currently they are booked up? The UK could easily borrow this amount, and a case be made for the payback in terms of increased economic activity, taxes, etc.

[JRobinson]

There are probably many reasons why it will take at least this long.

[alywin]

As mainly on existing hayes line track why on earth would it take 26 odd years. I think the Chinese built the Great Wall in less time.

Quite. I mean, they managed to build both the Beck Junc-Birkbeck tramline and convert the Overground in a lot less time than that. Wonder whether it will actually go ahead 25 years down the line?

[parker]

As usual this unloved part of London never seems to get the necessary upgrades until at least neighbouring SW London gets additional upgrades, despite already having more tube lines in the first place. We get the Overground here so Clapham Junction, Wandsworth Road get an extention too...? Why didn't they focus on this Bakerloo extension first? Clapham Junction et al already have their fair share.

Why do Lewisham, Bromley and Bexley see minimal additions to the tube infrastructure when Merton, Richmond and Wandsworth are already connected? Even at this moment in time it's taking decades to put any project forward that benefits SE London.

[Jules]

This is excellent

[Tim Lund]

This is excellent

What - the idea of a Bakerloo line extension, or Parker's account of why SE London gets neglected?

I don't know about the latter, but I wonder if ideological divisions between True Blue Bromley and Labour Lewisham get in the way of the obvious partnership to promote the Bakerloo Line extension with the GLA and HM Treasury.

[robbieduncan]

The consultation has opened: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/b ... -extension

One thing I did not realise before ist that if implemented the Bakerloo extension from Lewisham to Hayes would replace the existing national rail lines. Is this is a good thing? I expected this would open Lower Sydenham to more transport choice not less...

[Tim Lund]

The consultation has opened: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/b ... -extension

One thing I did not realise before ist that if implemented the Bakerloo extension from Lewisham to Hayes would replace the existing national rail lines. Is this is a good thing? I expected this would open Lower Sydenham to more transport choice not less...

What it says is:

If the proposed Bakerloo line extension runs as far as Hayes, it would replace the existing National Rail line between Lewisham and Hayes. It would also utilise the current link to Beckenham Junction. A Tube stop at Beckenham Junction would be in addition to the National Rail station at this location.

Currently, six trains per hour use the Hayes line to London Bridge. An extended Bakerloo line to Hayes could mean up to 15 trains per hour could serve this route. It also means that up to 50 per cent more people may be able to use the line to access central London and the Docklands - via DLR at Lewisham

So not exactly less choice

[Eagle]

Great prospect but doubt whether I will be around to use it.

It is amazing how infrastructure takes so long in UK. Especially as most on existing track.

[robbieduncan]

What it says is:

If the proposed Bakerloo line extension runs as far as Hayes, it would replace the existing National Rail line between Lewisham and Hayes. It would also utilise the current link to Beckenham Junction. A Tube stop at Beckenham Junction would be in addition to the National Rail station at this location.

Currently, six trains per hour use the Hayes line to London Bridge. An extended Bakerloo line to Hayes could mean up to 15 trains per hour could serve this route. It also means that up to 50 per cent more people may be able to use the line to access central London and the Docklands - via DLR at Lewisham

So not exactly less choice

Currently you can get a train from Lower Sydenham to Hayes in one direction and Charing Cross or Canon Street in the other. If this goes ahead you will be able to get a tube to Hayes or Lewisham only. Less choice. More frequency but if you want to go into the centre of London you'll have to change at Lewisham. Would be better to integrate the running into the existing services to allow them to be retained.

Edit: before my stupidity is pointed out to me the new trains won't terminate at Lewisham and you'll still be able ot go to Charing Cross, it'll just take longer. So I conceed the point:not really less choice.

[leenewham]

It would be good to hear from our local cllrs about this.

I know Liam supports it as he has started a Facebook page supporting the Bakerloo extension.

I've just filled out the consultation. One option is that it stops at Lewisham. I expect ALL our local cllrs to fight for it to come to Lower Sydenham and beyond and not just terminate at Lewisham Station, irrespective of what their party dictates. I know this hasn't always been the case, as with the library.

This is Liams page:
https://www.facebook.com/BakerlooExtension?fref=photo

[leenewham]

Why would you have to change at Lewisham, Robbie?

[robbieduncan]

Why would you have to change at Lewisham, Robbie?

See my edit above about my stupidity

[stuart]

I am still at a loss Robbie why it would take longer to Charing X? It goes most of the way on the same track, stopping at the same stations. It would have more modern stock probably improving on timings with regenerative braking and stuff.

Then it goes underground on dedicated twin tracks without being held for traffic crossing or joining the existing track and being 'held' outside London Bridge or awaiting a platform at Charing Cross. Without seeing the 2030 timetable (and more importantly actual performance) I think you are making a long call there.

That's before you take into account the increased frequency means less waiting time. All in all door to door the majority of timings from most points in central London to/from Lower Sydenham are going to be the same or much improved. Yes you may find the odd one at a slight disadvantage but should we let these tails wag the dog?

That's before the better timings for other people in SE London & Kent who can use the capacity donated by this plan.

Stuart