Bakerloo extension - Lower Sydenham transformed

[robbieduncan]

I just assumed it would take longer as the tube tains to take longer than national rail. If not then so much the better!

I completed the consultation survey indicating a strong preference to the extension to Hayes.

[Manwithaview1]

I just wish these schemes would be carried out sooner rather than later. Crossrail is many billions more than it would have cost when mooted during the 1980s.

[robbieduncan]

I just wish these schemes would be carried out sooner rather than later. Crossrail is many billions more than it would have cost when mooted during the 1980s.

In real, inflation adjusted terms, or just as in £100bn is more than £1bn?

[Manwithaview1]

I just wish these schemes would be carried out sooner rather than later. Crossrail is many billions more than it would have cost when mooted during the 1980s.

In real, inflation adjusted terms, or just as in £100bn is more than £1bn?

In real inflation adjusted terms. £330,000,000 compared to £15,000,000,000

[robbieduncan]

I just wish these schemes would be carried out sooner rather than later. Crossrail is many billions more than it would have cost when mooted during the 1980s.

In real, inflation adjusted terms, or just as in £100bn is more than £1bn?

In real inflation adjusted terms. £330,000,000 compared to £15,000,000,000

Ouch!

[alywin]

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.

I thought much of the point was that you would lose the interchange with London Bridge and the route on to Cannon Street? That may matter less to Sydenhamites, who can just go to Sydenham station if they want to do that, but further down the line (and up the line, for that matter) it's going to have far more serious implications, I think. And yes, more trains per hour, perhaps, but, judging by Boris' exhibition of new rolling stock there'll be rather less chance of getting a seat on any given train. Those newish Electrostars or whatever they're called are bad enough in terms of lack of seating: if trains are coming up from Hayes, there won't be any seats left by the time they get anywhere near here, greater frequency or not. We've seen the situation with the Overground trains already: this will be minus the option to get on the trains from the equivalent of Crystal Palace and get a seat.

Lots of things to think about, that's for sure.

[Tim Lund]

I'd not realised there were efforts from Labour MPs whose constituents would not benefit from extension of the Bakerloo line south eastwards to derail these plans. According to a letter sent to the Mayor

The Labour MPs [Tess Jowell & Chuka Umunna) argue that a growing population of younger people would be served if the line goes further west instead — to Camberwell, Herne Hill and Streatham.

Mr Umunna, the Streatham MP, said: “Boris is failing in his duty as Mayor to represent the needs of all Londoners. Clearly he is so distracted by his ambition to be Tory leader he has forgotten about his actual responsibility as Mayor of London.”

Source here

It's almost comic. If you look how close Streatham is to the Northern Line



it would be more like doubling the capacity there, missing the opportunities to link up the Underground with more mainline services, and leaving outer SE London still disconnected. Somehow they spin a perfectly rational policy into Boris pandering to Tory Bromley.

Is the number of young people who would be served if the extension went further west growing any faster than the number of young people who are moving here, thanks to being just a bit less expensive than other quarters of London? I doubt it, but even if it was, it would amount to a policy for keeping the generations geographically separated within London.

More generally, I'd say, it illustrates how localism, in the sense of MPs having to be seen fighting zero sum games to the benefit of their constituents, risks making the overall game negative sum, and stupid delays and cost over runs are introduced to satisfy their grandstanding.

[Tim Lund]

Just to add to the local comedy, our own dear Cllr Liam Curran takes the opposite line to Labour MPs Tessa Jowell and Chuka Umanna, and says that the evil scheming Tories are deliberately trying to stop the Bakerloo line going to Bromley

A Lewisham councillor has branded Bromley Council "bonkers" for allegedly opposing plans to extend the Bakerloo line to Hayes.

Sydenham ward councillor Liam Curran has accused Bromley councillors of trying to deny tens of thousands of residents access to the London Underground.

Source here

Can anyone take any of these idiots seriously?

[Eagle]

Tim

I have friends in West Wickham and Hayes who are against this because they want trains to London Bridge.

Maybe not just the council . I am not sure.

Needs to be properly explained to all and sundry.

[Manwithaview1]

They could change at Lewisham.

[parker]

It's similar to the way Sydenham got the Overground to Canada Water rather than direct trains to Waterloo and Charing Cross instead. I can see what they mean. My journey is now longer for having to get on the ridiculously packed Overground to Canada Water (where most people at Brockley & New Cross Gate cannot get on the train anyway) and scram to the bottleneck of one escalator to the Jubilee Line, OR change at London Bridge and we all know how diabolical London Bridge is, especially at 5:30 in the evening (platform 13 and 14 I'm talking about you!).

I can see Bromley's reservations as the frequency of trains will not be as great and in terms of having the Bakerloo Line and potentially losing London Bridge services I've noticed any journey using the Overground is far slower than using the Southern service even on the exact same distance for example from Sydenham to New Cross Gate.

The Overground is not as good as it could be, (Bromley might be thinking this about the prospect of Bakerloo). Once London Bridge station is finished and National Rail employ train drivers that have the gumption to navigate the correct platform it might be better to have the speedier service of South Eastern like the Southern service they use currently that already gets them to Waterloo East AND Charing Cross.

They can learn from the difficulties we've seen.

[Tim Lund]

Some services may be lost - such as we lost direct services into Charing Cross, but the big picture is that far more people are commuting from Sydenham, thanks to the investment in London Overground. There is no way that overall Bromley will lose from having the Bakerloo line.

It is amazing how people lose themselves in detail. An example of this, IMHO, is the discussion on the Forest Hill Society Facebook pages. My own conclusion in there was as follows



Silly political point scoring against LB Bromley is hardly going to help sensible long term planning here.

[Eagle]

Changing train at Lewisham . Having to stand into London Bridge , does not seem appealing.

I realise Overground has benefited some in SE 26. Mainly because it goes to Docklands where many people want to go and also nearly to City.

The Bakerloo Line is in the other direction. Most people , i would guess in Hayes area , do not work there but in City or Docklands.

I certainly trust LBB do not authorise building on the green land between Lower Sydenham and New Beckenham. The very small commercial/business area certainly should remain for business only.

It is important to have some work locally.

[robbieduncan]

Those who responded to the consultation (and provided a valid email address) should have received an email on the outcomes. 95% were in favour. Hopefully it will go ahead based on the overwhelming support of the people

[alywin]

It's ironic, isn't it? I got some sort of email communication through the other day from an estate agent in the West Wickham area already telling people to buy because of the Bakerloo extension - when there is absolutely no guarantee that it will ever get anywhere near WW, or even further south than about Lewisham or so - and that not for another 20 years yet! In fact, I rather hope it doesn't: I'd rather retain what we've already got (although 6 trains an hour would be good) and have a seat (most of the time) rather than have to put up with the cattle trucks on the ELL, which are even worse than Southeastern's Electrostars. I have a disability which makes it incredibly difficult to stand on trains, so if we got the seating reduced to ELL levels I'd be virtually banished from the trains altogether, and would never be able to take a job which required commuting again. Plus I'm realist enough to know that whatever headline high frequencies are promised they're unlikely to be delivered this far out, and certainly not beyond Elmers End: after all, every time there's a problem all the trains tend to get terminated at EE, and the rest of the line is cut off completely.