“Save our Services” campaign
Members of the Sydenham Society today started handing out leaflets to early morning commuters about the likely reduction of 3 trains per hour to London Bridge during the morning rush hour and two trains per hour reduction at other times when the East London Line extension comes into operation in June 2010. Planning for the new service and how it is to integrate with present services is currently being undertaken.
From 2010 there will be 8 East London Line trains per hour in each direction to and from both Crystal Palace and West Croydon through Sydenham. We understand that there will be 4 trains per hour to London Bridge and that the London Bridge/London Victoria “loop” will cease. Commuters from Sydenham to Clapham Junction and Victoria will need to change at either Crystal Palace or East Croydon.
For further information about the East London Line and how it could affect Sydenham, the campaign and what local residents can do please visit our website www.sydenhamsociety.com
Pat Trembath
Chair, Sydenham Society
East London Line extension
-
Keith Lark
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 30 Nov 2006 18:24
- Location: Homecroft Road Se26
SERVICE CHANGES : SEATING ISSUE
I think one must also consider the reduction in capacity, especially seating capacity, arising from the fact that the East London Line trains, as recently ordered, will be only 4 coaches long, due to platform constraints at some of the stations served. Also, they have been designed for a large standing capacity, seating being "tube" style, longitudinal with no seating around the doors.
I havent done the calculations but I would not be surprised that, although we may have more trains during the morning rush hour, there may well be many less seats.
I havent done the calculations but I would not be surprised that, although we may have more trains during the morning rush hour, there may well be many less seats.
Good point Keith.
Each four -carriage ELL line trains is designed to carry 500 standing passengers - in other words you, and 124 other unlucky passengers, could find yourself nose to nose in an ELL carriage come 2010!
If we were cows and sheep it would be illegal to transport us in this way and the Animal Liberation Front would be targetting our stations!
All the more reason to ensure that we retain our existing LB trains.
Each four -carriage ELL line trains is designed to carry 500 standing passengers - in other words you, and 124 other unlucky passengers, could find yourself nose to nose in an ELL carriage come 2010!
If we were cows and sheep it would be illegal to transport us in this way and the Animal Liberation Front would be targetting our stations!
All the more reason to ensure that we retain our existing LB trains.
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
"SAVE OUR SERVICES" CAMPAIGN
Tomorrow morning, Wednesday, members of the Sydenham Society will be again leafletting commuters at Sydenham Station about the likely reduction of 3 trains per hour to London Bridge during the morning rush hour and two trains per hour reduction at other times when the East London Line extension comes into operation in June 2010.
Last Thursday we leafletted commuters between 7.30 and 8.30 am. Tomorrow we shall be at the station between 8.30 and 9.30 am. The Forest Hill Society who are also supporting this campaign has set up an on-line petition and the Sydenham Society invites local residents to sign this on http://fhpetition.notlong.com
For further information about the likely effects of the East London Line extension please visit our website on www.sydenhamsociety.com
Tomorrow morning, Wednesday, members of the Sydenham Society will be again leafletting commuters at Sydenham Station about the likely reduction of 3 trains per hour to London Bridge during the morning rush hour and two trains per hour reduction at other times when the East London Line extension comes into operation in June 2010.
Last Thursday we leafletted commuters between 7.30 and 8.30 am. Tomorrow we shall be at the station between 8.30 and 9.30 am. The Forest Hill Society who are also supporting this campaign has set up an on-line petition and the Sydenham Society invites local residents to sign this on http://fhpetition.notlong.com
For further information about the likely effects of the East London Line extension please visit our website on www.sydenhamsociety.com
Survey of Rail Use
As well as completing the petition Pat mentioned above, can I encourage you to complete the short passenger survey we are running and which you can find at http://fhsurvey.notlong.com/
Michael Abrahams,
Forest Hill Society
Michael Abrahams,
Forest Hill Society
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
In addition to the 214 names registered on the on-line petition at 8.45 this morning there are also nearly 100 signatures on the "old fashioned" petition being taken to meetings by Sydenham Society.
Please continue to sign the on-line petition - link given above and, if possible, take a little time to complete the survey requested by Michael.
Many thanks
Please continue to sign the on-line petition - link given above and, if possible, take a little time to complete the survey requested by Michael.
Many thanks
East London Line Extension
I was really shocked to read that the train services from Sydenham and Forest Hill could be reduced to accomodate the East London Line! The commute is bad enough as it is in rush hour. I already choose to catch earlier trains to avoid the crush at Forest Hill, and of course it's worse at Honour Oak and Brockley.
Of course, I hadn't thought about the fact that the existing train service would have to give way to the new tube service, but I can't see how a reduction in overground trains will benefit us commuters; so few people get off the train at New Cross Gate anyway!
There has got to be MORE NOISE about this issue...surely?
Of course, I hadn't thought about the fact that the existing train service would have to give way to the new tube service, but I can't see how a reduction in overground trains will benefit us commuters; so few people get off the train at New Cross Gate anyway!
There has got to be MORE NOISE about this issue...surely?
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
SAVE OUR SERVICES Campaign
Members of the Sydenham Society were at the station again this morning handing out 750 leaflets to the early morning commuters about the likely reduction to services into London Bridge when the East London Line extension comes into operation in June 2010.
Of the 2250 leaflets we have handed out at the station since the beginning of December only 3 have been picked up on the station as litter. We believe this speaks volumes about how seriously this threatened reduction is being taken by local residents.
For further information visit www.sydenhamsociety.com A membership application form can be downloaded from this site.
An on-line petition has been set up by Forest Hill Society which is also supporting this campaign and has been leafletting at Forest Hill and Honor Oak Park stations. Please visit http://fhpetition.notlong.com and sign and encourage your neighbours to do likewise.
There is also an on-line survey which we would ask you to take a short time to complete and this can be found on http://fhsurvey.notlong.com
Members of the Sydenham Society were at the station again this morning handing out 750 leaflets to the early morning commuters about the likely reduction to services into London Bridge when the East London Line extension comes into operation in June 2010.
Of the 2250 leaflets we have handed out at the station since the beginning of December only 3 have been picked up on the station as litter. We believe this speaks volumes about how seriously this threatened reduction is being taken by local residents.
For further information visit www.sydenhamsociety.com A membership application form can be downloaded from this site.
An on-line petition has been set up by Forest Hill Society which is also supporting this campaign and has been leafletting at Forest Hill and Honor Oak Park stations. Please visit http://fhpetition.notlong.com and sign and encourage your neighbours to do likewise.
There is also an on-line survey which we would ask you to take a short time to complete and this can be found on http://fhsurvey.notlong.com
Just in case there's the odd person around SE26 who think that there just must be someone up there coordinating future rail strategy take a look at this question asked by Jim Dowd and answered by Tom Harris, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport.
"Jim Dowd: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect on the Network Rail services into London Bridge of the extension of the East London Line in 2010. [108432]
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department has worked closely with the East London Line (ELL) project team and with Network Rail to ensure that it will be possible to deliver satisfactory levels of service from south London to both London Bridge and to ELL destinations when ELL commences operations.
The direct journey opportunities offered by the extended ELL services are expected to enable significant numbers of passengers to avoid the need to travel from south to east London via London Bridge, thus easing congestion at that busy station."
So that's nice and clear isn't it. The Department of Transport haven't actually got a clue.
"Jim Dowd: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect on the Network Rail services into London Bridge of the extension of the East London Line in 2010. [108432]
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department has worked closely with the East London Line (ELL) project team and with Network Rail to ensure that it will be possible to deliver satisfactory levels of service from south London to both London Bridge and to ELL destinations when ELL commences operations.
The direct journey opportunities offered by the extended ELL services are expected to enable significant numbers of passengers to avoid the need to travel from south to east London via London Bridge, thus easing congestion at that busy station."
So that's nice and clear isn't it. The Department of Transport haven't actually got a clue.
Have these guys actually tried to figure out where people's final destinations are? I would hazard a guess that those headed for the City or West far outweigh those that head out East. It seems to me that ELL's proposed 8 trains per hour compared to London Bridge's 4 trains an hour (1 every half hour) at worst is the economics of the madhouse. I hope New Cross Gate knows is prepared for daily stampedes of people from one line to another. All of this just to make the Olympics look good and well connected. Thanks Ken.
Raymondus - You are correct. There has been no survey in the last few years as to passenger destinations - incredible when you think that one billion pounds has been sunk into the new ELL line!
To redress the balance, the Forest Hilll Society are currently carrying out an on-line survey on the new ELL.
So far the responses suggest that less than 4% of passenger travel to Canary Wharf and East London. While many Jubilee Line users may benefit from increased interchange opportunities when the ELL line arrives, most passengers will continue to use the services to London Bridge.
Satisfactory levels of service to London Bridge cannot mean a reduction in services from Sydenham to London Bridge.
There are now over 100 responses to this Survey
http://fhsurvey.notlong.com
but the FHS are waiting for more responses before they can draw any conclusions.
You can help to save our train planners from their own stupidity! Complete the survey if you haven't done so already.
To redress the balance, the Forest Hilll Society are currently carrying out an on-line survey on the new ELL.
So far the responses suggest that less than 4% of passenger travel to Canary Wharf and East London. While many Jubilee Line users may benefit from increased interchange opportunities when the ELL line arrives, most passengers will continue to use the services to London Bridge.
Satisfactory levels of service to London Bridge cannot mean a reduction in services from Sydenham to London Bridge.
There are now over 100 responses to this Survey
http://fhsurvey.notlong.com
but the FHS are waiting for more responses before they can draw any conclusions.
You can help to save our train planners from their own stupidity! Complete the survey if you haven't done so already.
The current state of NXG is nothing like ready. The current station has serious problems with narrow and decrepit staircases etc. There are however plans in the pipeline to regenerate it, one can only hope timed to coincide with the opening of ELLX.raymondus wrote: I hope New Cross Gate knows is prepared for daily stampedes of people from one line to another. All of this just to make the Olympics look good and well connected. Thanks Ken.
Goodness only knows what if any passenger demand forecasting they have done in relation to ELL/London Bridge. The thing is there is sooo much else going on at the moment transport-wise, and it is changing all the time, so it very hard to predict what the demand is going to be come from and how it is going to be distributed. The changes to Thameslink might well take people from Croydon and beyond who are currently using services though Sydenham out onto fast trains direct to London Bridge.
Also over the longer term, the transport network itself dictates where people live and work (take 'Metroland' as an example), so improving links to the East supports the regeneration of East London.
I agree that the transport network dictates where people live and work. However, in our case, some of us have already chosen to live here because of the transport links to the City and the West, only to have that potentially taken away from us.
I understand that it is very difficult to predict how things will shape up, but if that were the case, surely the sensible way to do things would be a scaled introduction of the ELL to see what the demand is like for that particular service? We already know that demand is high for the LB services - God knows we see it every morning. The unknown quantity will be the ELL, especially if those bright sparks at Southern/Network Rail/TFL have not done their homework. Doesn't logic therefore dictate that ELL should creep meekly in without disruting the LB services too much and then if ELL is well subscribed, that the service be increased, but only after it has proven itself? At that point, we can discuss the cutting of LB services.
Again, a tough one because one could argue chicken and egg - people won't use ELLX unless they know it will have "8 trains per hour" and can count on its regularity.
However, the fact of the matter is that the only new developments that are happening are north of the river (as someone has already pointed out) - the only benefit that we south of the river will experience will be that there will be no need to change trains at NXG for those that want to go East.
At the moment, if one changes trains at NXG, the ELL is pretty empty and seats can be had. If LB services to Sydenham are cut as proposed, and we have to take ELL to change at NXG to get to LB, I am sure that any train stopping at NXG on its way to LB will not be so empty and there will be many more cries of "move further inside" - at the moment, we Sydenhamites hear such cries from those trying to board at Brockley - we may find that we will be the ones uttering those very words once ELLX opens. If the reason for that is so the GLA/TfL can have a positive Olympic message about "frequent new services on London's new orbital railway" and not based on well researched empirical data (as we are beginning to suspect), they have my utter contempt.
Sorry for the ramble - it's late.
I understand that it is very difficult to predict how things will shape up, but if that were the case, surely the sensible way to do things would be a scaled introduction of the ELL to see what the demand is like for that particular service? We already know that demand is high for the LB services - God knows we see it every morning. The unknown quantity will be the ELL, especially if those bright sparks at Southern/Network Rail/TFL have not done their homework. Doesn't logic therefore dictate that ELL should creep meekly in without disruting the LB services too much and then if ELL is well subscribed, that the service be increased, but only after it has proven itself? At that point, we can discuss the cutting of LB services.
Again, a tough one because one could argue chicken and egg - people won't use ELLX unless they know it will have "8 trains per hour" and can count on its regularity.
However, the fact of the matter is that the only new developments that are happening are north of the river (as someone has already pointed out) - the only benefit that we south of the river will experience will be that there will be no need to change trains at NXG for those that want to go East.
At the moment, if one changes trains at NXG, the ELL is pretty empty and seats can be had. If LB services to Sydenham are cut as proposed, and we have to take ELL to change at NXG to get to LB, I am sure that any train stopping at NXG on its way to LB will not be so empty and there will be many more cries of "move further inside" - at the moment, we Sydenhamites hear such cries from those trying to board at Brockley - we may find that we will be the ones uttering those very words once ELLX opens. If the reason for that is so the GLA/TfL can have a positive Olympic message about "frequent new services on London's new orbital railway" and not based on well researched empirical data (as we are beginning to suspect), they have my utter contempt.
Sorry for the ramble - it's late.
As well as travelling East, the ELL might prove advantageous to people now interchange to the Westbound Jubileee Line at LB - at Canada Water there is a very short connection time between platforms for the two lines (about 30 seconds compared with about 5 mins at London Bridge) so if the trains are frequent enough on ELL this becomes a realistic alternative.
Also people might not need to continue to use the same train/underground station post-ELLX. eg - people commuting into some parts of the City might find it faster to take the ELL to Shoreditch High Street, rather than into LB and walk/tube/bus over the river.
Another thing to consider is the length of the trains on the overground services. The recent improvements in which 4-car trains have been replaced by 6-car has definitely had an impact on crowding. If we had a minimum 8 cars on the London Bridge services (not sure the platforms are long enough for anthing over 8?) then this would certainly soften the blow of a loss of services.
A lot depends which services are lost, how busy they are before they reach Sydenham, how well spaced the new services are. I'd also be interested to know what the predicted journey time would be into London Bridge would be using ELL and Jubilee Line.
Not to say I'm happy with the proposal to reduce the number of LB train services - I don't think it will help my journey at all. If we can have 12 tph then I'd sooner have 6 ELL and 6 overground rather than an 8/4 split.
Also people might not need to continue to use the same train/underground station post-ELLX. eg - people commuting into some parts of the City might find it faster to take the ELL to Shoreditch High Street, rather than into LB and walk/tube/bus over the river.
Another thing to consider is the length of the trains on the overground services. The recent improvements in which 4-car trains have been replaced by 6-car has definitely had an impact on crowding. If we had a minimum 8 cars on the London Bridge services (not sure the platforms are long enough for anthing over 8?) then this would certainly soften the blow of a loss of services.
A lot depends which services are lost, how busy they are before they reach Sydenham, how well spaced the new services are. I'd also be interested to know what the predicted journey time would be into London Bridge would be using ELL and Jubilee Line.
Not to say I'm happy with the proposal to reduce the number of LB train services - I don't think it will help my journey at all. If we can have 12 tph then I'd sooner have 6 ELL and 6 overground rather than an 8/4 split.
I do not disagree. 6 and 6 sounds eminently sensible. Or even 4/8 at first as I mention above.
The one point in your email I do disagree with is the bit about the ELL being advantageous for changeover times at Canada Water. I have taken ELL from Canada Water to New Cross Gate before and it is slow - much more than the 9 mins timetabled from NXG to LB on current services. As a result, I do not believe that Sydenham to LB jubilee line via ELL will be faster than Sydenham to LB jubilee on the current Southern service. On the brightside, if the trains are sped up (as one would expect when the whole line is down!), then may be that is not so bad.
The one point in your email I do disagree with is the bit about the ELL being advantageous for changeover times at Canada Water. I have taken ELL from Canada Water to New Cross Gate before and it is slow - much more than the 9 mins timetabled from NXG to LB on current services. As a result, I do not believe that Sydenham to LB jubilee line via ELL will be faster than Sydenham to LB jubilee on the current Southern service. On the brightside, if the trains are sped up (as one would expect when the whole line is down!), then may be that is not so bad.
East London line extension
For those who didn't attend the meeting last week, I should like to share the explantion of the thinking behind the East London Extension and its effect on Sydenham that was offered to the meeting by the Deputy Mayor.
"The object of the East London extension is the regenerate the most deprived parts of London, which are the ones through which it will pass."
"Residents of Sydenham and Forest Hill who are concerned that the effect of the reduction in services to London Bridge and the elimination of the link to Vicotria that they currently use to access the Western side of Central London will lead to gros overcrowding of ther remaining trains need not be concerned. The East London Extension is designed to allow the people who will work in the new jobs that are forecast to arrive in Canary Wharf to travel there more easily. So in future more of the traffic will be East bound rather than West Bound."
So, now you know. Sydenham will be regenerated by being linked to the poorest parts of London and the people who now commute to the Western parts of Central London, should either move elsewhere or change their employers. The transport plan is to let people who don't yet live here commute to jobs that don't yet exist. It's no accident that in place of 8 links per hour (six via London Bridge to Charing Cross and two via Victoria), we will in future have only four. Perhaps it isn't even an accident that the East London line will terminate at West Coydon, with its slow services to Victoria, no services to Gatewick and poor link with the tramway to Wimbledon, rather than to East Croydon, with its fast links to Victoria, Gatwick and interchange with the tramway. It wouldn't do to let us upset this outrageous piece of social engineering by trying to sneak West by heading South or give up entirely and fly away, other than via London City airport. We are being firmly directed East.
dframc
"The object of the East London extension is the regenerate the most deprived parts of London, which are the ones through which it will pass."
"Residents of Sydenham and Forest Hill who are concerned that the effect of the reduction in services to London Bridge and the elimination of the link to Vicotria that they currently use to access the Western side of Central London will lead to gros overcrowding of ther remaining trains need not be concerned. The East London Extension is designed to allow the people who will work in the new jobs that are forecast to arrive in Canary Wharf to travel there more easily. So in future more of the traffic will be East bound rather than West Bound."
So, now you know. Sydenham will be regenerated by being linked to the poorest parts of London and the people who now commute to the Western parts of Central London, should either move elsewhere or change their employers. The transport plan is to let people who don't yet live here commute to jobs that don't yet exist. It's no accident that in place of 8 links per hour (six via London Bridge to Charing Cross and two via Victoria), we will in future have only four. Perhaps it isn't even an accident that the East London line will terminate at West Coydon, with its slow services to Victoria, no services to Gatewick and poor link with the tramway to Wimbledon, rather than to East Croydon, with its fast links to Victoria, Gatwick and interchange with the tramway. It wouldn't do to let us upset this outrageous piece of social engineering by trying to sneak West by heading South or give up entirely and fly away, other than via London City airport. We are being firmly directed East.
dframc
I'm afraid that it's a very accurate report of what the deputy mayor said at the meeting. It a "she", by the way; her name is Heidi Alexander.
The difference between politician and ordinary mortals is that they seem to have a pre-set idea of how the world should look - usually based on a political mantra - rather than the reality of what the world is actually like. In this case the mayor has swallowed hook, line and sinker the view that ere long we are all going to be working at Canary Wharf.
Just look at the reality. Currently, less than 4% of commuters along the line between Sydenham and New Cross Gate work at CW. 66% willl continue to use the line to and from LB post 2010.
Of course CW is expanding, but so too is "old" city and the area around London Bridge. The soon-to-be constructed "shard of glass" at LB is just one example.
To say to two thirds of the local population that they have to accept a worse rail service than at present because CW is expanding is of course pure ideological rant. But this appears to be the miasma which our deputy mayor is busily arranging in her mind to avoid facing the reality of serving her constituents by pressing for a retention of existing services post 2010.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have closed this thread. You may wish to continue on this subject at this later thread: http://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1307
Admin
The difference between politician and ordinary mortals is that they seem to have a pre-set idea of how the world should look - usually based on a political mantra - rather than the reality of what the world is actually like. In this case the mayor has swallowed hook, line and sinker the view that ere long we are all going to be working at Canary Wharf.
Just look at the reality. Currently, less than 4% of commuters along the line between Sydenham and New Cross Gate work at CW. 66% willl continue to use the line to and from LB post 2010.
Of course CW is expanding, but so too is "old" city and the area around London Bridge. The soon-to-be constructed "shard of glass" at LB is just one example.
To say to two thirds of the local population that they have to accept a worse rail service than at present because CW is expanding is of course pure ideological rant. But this appears to be the miasma which our deputy mayor is busily arranging in her mind to avoid facing the reality of serving her constituents by pressing for a retention of existing services post 2010.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have closed this thread. You may wish to continue on this subject at this later thread: http://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1307
Admin