Plans to cut Southeastern services to Charing Cross & Victoria

[tarafitness]

Hi there

I've just seen this petition, and attached consultation document, but I'm having trouble reading it on my phone.

Can anyone please elucidate further on this matter? As a regular Victoria commuter, this has left me feeling quite panicked.

Thanks! Tara.

[Jakido]

Question 17 is the relevant one.

[Zig-Zag]

This could be very detrimental to Dulwich residents....we already have terrible transport links into London, no Boris Bikes, no black cabs to hail, no tube other than Brixton...3 mile walk for me, and a bus route where i am which takes 90 mins to get into central london!

Sounds very much like they are prioritising improving longer distance commuting to London at the expense of "outer" London residents shorter commutes.

I do hope the "consultation", as far as one can call it such, gets widely circulated in Dulwich before we end up with even worse transport options

[Earl Aelfheah]

FFS. Local politicians, what say you? What is being done to address this constant chipping away at our transport infrastructure?

[KidKruger]

It is a bit pathetic. It's not like they need to CREATE infrastructure to enable us to resume getting into London within a reasonable timeframe.

27yrs ago it took 12 mins from ED to LB and 17-20 mins to Charing X (including a change at LB).

I can take the 19 mins to LB which it is now, but no Charing X link and now Victoria link under threat ?

The changes must have been on a grand plan for some time but those affected appear to be finding out way after the decision has been made. I'm not convinced by consultations, I think often they're just obligatory steps which must be demonstrated as having taken place.

What I don't under stand is, years ago the commuter hour trains were 10% as full as they are these days, so why reduce that service when demand has clearly risen ?

I don't think there's any point trying to ask sensible questions about all this, there is a common sense to it somewhere but it's not one we're privvy to and it's not one where ED's regular and speedy and consistent commute is the objective.

And yes, I know it is technically possible to cycle.

[Lowlander]

In short - the consultation does not affect services to Victoria from West Dulwich/Peckham Rye/Denmark Hill.

KK; some - not all - peak-hour trains are timed for just under 20 minutes at the moment. This is because of rebuilding London Bridge and the reduced capacity on the tracks between London Bridge and South Bermondsey. Off-peak trains are still 12 minutes, and, after 2018, peak trains should go back to taking 12 minutes.

Also, in 2018, East Dulwich will have a train every 10 minutes to/from London Bridge in both the morning and evening peaks.

You can now change for Charing Cross at London Bridge, and the interchange is way better than it was in 2014.

[KidKruger]

Cheers LL - some of that sounds like it's sorted now which is great. The 19mins for peak hour trains is understandable due to the cramming of passengers in which does add time regardless of timetable(8 carriages EVERY morning would help).

Will check-out the CX link this weekend ! Darn it, will need another conspiracy theory now you've burst this one.

[JohnL]

Lowlander Wrote:

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

> In short - the consultation does not affect

> services to Victoria from West Dulwich/Peckham

> Rye/Denmark Hill.

>

> KK; some - not all - peak-hour trains are timed

> for just under 20 minutes at the moment. This is

> because of rebuilding London Bridge and the

> reduced capacity on the tracks between London

> Bridge and South Bermondsey. Off-peak trains are

> still 12 minutes, and, after 2018, peak trains

> should go back to taking 12 minutes.

>

> Also, in 2018, East Dulwich will have a train

> every 10 minutes to/from London Bridge in both the

> morning and evening peaks.

>

> You can now change for Charing Cross at London

> Bridge, and the interchange is way better than it

> was in 2014.

Hopefully

I just don't trust Grayling.

[Earl Aelfheah]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> ...there is a

> common sense to it somewhere but it's not one

> we're privvy to and it's not one where ED's

> regular and speedy and consistent commute is the

> objective.

The objective is to make money. That is the problem with privatising a 'public service'.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I hope you're right LL - I would put money on the opportunity to quietly reduce the service (i.e. not returning it to previous levels), being taken by the train companies even post 2018, but maybe I'm a cynic.

Re. the transfer at London Bridge - I certainly don't think it's quicker than it used to be, quite the opposite. It's nicer and better for those with buggies / disabilities (so definitely overall an improvement), but it's not faster.

[Renata Hamvas]

Hi all, have gone through the document, I'm uncertain about the plans! Positively it mentions 4 an hour metro services (Dartford to Victoria is one) but I'm concerned about the idea of "consolidating" the services at Cannon Street. If this was to happen with the Victoria service, it would go to Cannon Street from Lewisham as I don't think there is a physical line from Denmark Hill to Canon Street. It took a lot of lobbying to get even spacing, the evening and Sunday Service on the Victoria route. The document is woolly.

I'll have to make some enquiries.

Renata

[Lowlander]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> I hope you're right LL - I would put money on the

> opportunity to quietly reduce the service (i.e.

> not returning it to previous levels), being taken

> by the train companies even post 2018, but maybe

> I'm a cynic.

> Re. the transfer at London Bridge - I certainly

> don't think it's quicker than it used to be, quite

> the opposite. It's nicer and better for those with

> buggies / disabilities (so definitely overall an

> improvement), but it's not faster.

There's a thread from a few months ago confirming the 2018 (i.e. back to 2012) service levels - http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1729694,1730241#msg-1730241

Surprised you don't find the new layout easier for changing to Charing Cross - under 2 minutes to walk down the stairs, across the lower concourse and up the stairs to the Charing Cross platforms? Surely that's quicker than the old layout?

[Renata Hamvas]

Hi Lowlander that thread I think was about Southern services and this is about Southeastern services. I agree Jakido, question 17 is very important.

http://www.bexleytimes.co.uk/news/south_eastern_train_services_in_bexleyheath_and_dartford_could_stop_running_to_most_london_terminals_1_4950948

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/14/first-class-could-be-axed-in-next-southeastern-rail-franchise

It's the Dartford to Victoria service via Lewisham, Nunhead, Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill which appears to be under threat to run to Cannon Street instead.

Renata

[tarafitness]

I sincerely hope this does not become a reality. There are many local people who need to travel to/via Victoria. The platform at Denmark Hill is always full in the mornings!

[Renata Hamvas]

Hi Tara,

I have contacted South Eastern Head Office directly for clarification of the proposals.

Once I have it confirmed what exactly the proposals are (they are a bit ambiguous). I will let you know.

Renata

[Earl Aelfheah]

Lowlander Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> Surprised you don't find the new layout easier for

> changing to Charing Cross - under 2 minutes to

> walk down the stairs, across the lower concourse

> and up the stairs to the Charing Cross platforms?

> Surely that's quicker than the old layout?

The footbridge had a lot fewer steps. There were no lifts before though, so obviously not great if you had a pushchair.

[mikeyonlin]

Fiona Colley went to the consultation in Lewisham I believe. I think the section that will be impacted is after Lewisham where the trains will be redirected via another route. There is a fuller explanation on the Nunhead Rocks Facebook group

[tarafitness]

Thank you, Renata.

I use both Herne Hill and Denmark Hill stations to travel to Victoria, and there are definitely fewer people at HH. Seems unfathomable that they'd want to cut such a popular service?!

[cle]

I think it means the three Dartford Loop line trains to run only to Cannon Street, not to Charing Cross. Which I can understand. Cannon St is exclusively suburban, Charing Cross longer distance.

I'm sure the Denmark Hill - Dartford trains wouldn't be included within that. They're more popular than ever.

[Lowlander]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Lowlander Wrote:

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

> -----

> > rahrahrah Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > Surprised you don't find the new layout easier

> for

> > changing to Charing Cross - under 2 minutes to

> > walk down the stairs, across the lower

> concourse

> > and up the stairs to the Charing Cross

> platforms?

> > Surely that's quicker than the old layout?

>

> The footbridge had a lot fewer steps. There were

> no lifts before though, so obviously not great if

> you had a pushchair.

Fair point; I just remember the old way being slow and grotty but maybe no difference in time. Definitely easier now with luggage/puschairs...

[jimmyraj]

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> Hi Tara,

> I have contacted South Eastern Head Office

> directly for clarification of the proposals.

> Once I have it confirmed what exactly the

> proposals are (they are a bit ambiguous). I will

> let you know.

> Renata

I think it's the Department of Transport, rather than South Eastern who would clarify, as I think the consultation document is intended to inform the next tender for the running of the service (which may not be the current franchise holders).

I do think it leaves the door open for the consolidation of services. It would be a nightmare for the commuters from Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill if the direct and regular route into Victoria was moved. Anyone who uses that regularly will be able to attest to how busy it is. All of this plays into the argument (which Grayling doesn't want to hear as it's would cede power to Sadiq Khan) that suburban metro services should all be consolidated under the running of TfL - which is run on a non-profit basis to achieve the optimum services.

Instead we'll be stuck with another joke of an operator (probably one of the existing ones like Govia-Thameslink) trying to milk it for all it's worth.

[geobz]

Some might disagree and some might find it a bit aggressive, but if I was that bad at my job like MP's for ED and Councilors for ED I'd be sucked by now.

Fortunatelly I am very good at my job.

Thing is YOU (Councilors, MPs and whoever is responsible for the complete mess in ED transport) are bad at your job.

When I see councilors in this forum asking if anyone needs a bike pole or whatever to lock his bike I CRINGE! I CRINGE HARD! Do you really think thats number 1 issue here?

Can't you just write higher up and ask tfl, gov and whoever else is responsible for the transport in ED why it sucks? I guess not because you work locally and you dont have to actually commute to your work, so who cares.

Also Councillor Renata Hamvas, you only emailed SouthEastern after someone from the public posted about petitions and plans on cutting down the service?

Isn't your job to KNOW whats going ON? What are you doing all day? Chatting with others about where you'll go for summer holidays?!

Appalling, you should be ashamed of yourself.

[rendelharris]

geobz Wrote:

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

> Fortunatelly I am very good at my job.

Hope your job doesn't require the ability to spell. Or be modest.

[geobz]

rendelharris Wrote:

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

> geobz Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> > Fortunatelly I am very good at my job.

>

> Hope your job doesn't require the ability to

> spell. Or be modest.

It actually doesn't mr Greenpeace of ED!

[rendelharris]

> > geobz Wrote:

> mr Greenpeace of ED!

What a lovely compliment, thank you!