Camberwell Bakerloo extension looking unilkely

[Vick]

The momey doesn't come from property developers to Tfl, it's the other way round

[JohnL]

Vick Wrote:

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

> The momey doesn't come from property developers to

> Tfl, it's the other way round

Not what they claimed back in 2014

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/government-funds-may-not-be-needed-for-3bm-bakerloo-line-extension-says-city-hall-9766444.html

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/tube-extensions/

"Who pays?

Whatever routeis selected, it will not be a cheap project! Extending the Bakerloo line to Hayes will cost up to ?3 billion and TfL will be consulting with the London boroughs affected to identify funding options. These could be similar to the Crossrail and the Northern Line Extension projects where funding includes contributions from new residential and commercial developments along the proposed extension."

In other words funded by Gentrification tax - although I'm sure the US Embassy was involved in Battersea - there's no embassies going to Old Kent Road.

[bil]

lol

[Sweptwind]

TFL have just published this document indicating why they're going for Old Kent Road and not Peckham. Better to get something built somewhere in South East London so it might benefit someone - rather than nothing at all (if you went via Camberwell)

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/user_uploads/bakerloo-ext---options-selection-summary-report.pdf

[bil]

Thanks Sweptwind

Fair enough; OKR opportunity area will bring in more (international) investors and wealth into the area. I wonder if the OKR stations will be zone 1 or zone 2.

If an 'opportunity area' forms the basis of the argument to support the OKR branch, what is the rationale for investing in crossrail 2 that will run through areas already well served by public transport and not opportunity areas? Why isn't crossrail 2 including OKR (or any of south east London)?

Will anyone at the new Camberwell station be able to get onto the already packed train?

Also where did the sudden Blackeahth-Bexleyheath proposals come from?

[Jeremy]

bil Wrote:

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

> I wonder if the OKR stations will be zone 1 or zone 2.

Interesting question. I noticed that the new Nine Elms station will be zone 1, and this fact features prominently on the marketing material for the new developments going up round there. I wonder if the developers insisted on the station being in zone 1 before agreeing to contribute funds?

[JohnL]

Sweptwind Wrote:

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

> TFL have just published this document indicating

> why they're going for Old Kent Road and not

> Peckham. Better to get something built somewhere

> in South East London so it might benefit someone -

> rather than nothing at all (if you went via

> Camberwell)

>

> https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-ext

> ension/user_uploads/bakerloo-ext---options-selecti

> on-summary-report.pdf

I hope they don't try and get money from new Camberwell and Peckham developments.

[JohnL]

Ahhh - I see the flaw in the analysis - no we have Thameslink.

"The Camberwell and Peckham Rye route option would, by comparison, serve more established town centres that have existing travel markets with new high frequency and fast rail services into the heart of the West End."

[Earl Aelfheah]

To be clear, the 'luxury' flats which get put up around new stations, have their value significantly increased by the huge public investment in that new infrastructure. A small amount of that increased value is levied against the cost of the infrastructure and it's spun as property development subsidising new transport links. This is backward logic. What is really happening here is that huge amounts of public money are being used to subsidise these developments. The question you need to ask is, would this station be put here without the new development? If not, then it is the station serving the development, not the development serving the station. Existing communities and taxpayers are largely ignored when it comes to transport investment, whilst developers interests are central. The flats of course, are mostly marketed to overseas investors.

[JohnL]

In the Standard

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/bakerloo-line-extension-to-bypass-peckham-but-tubes-could-reach-lewisham-by-2030-a3140041.html

"TfL has said it will seek planning permission for the work in 2020 should the proposals be given the green light BY WHOM?."

"Richard de Cani, TfL's managing director for planning, cautioned that "no final decisions have been made" on whether the extension would go ahead."

My feeling still says this isn't going to happen - there's 5 years for someone to say "forget it".

[Earl Aelfheah]

You could be right JohnL, although it's hard to see how TFL can ignore the transport needs of SE London indefinitely.

[bil]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> You could be right JohnL, although it's hard to

> see how TFL can ignore the transport needs of SE

> London indefinitely.

Somehow TfL continue to ignore SEL anyway..

Only Ken Livingstone tried to address the problems we face in this part of London..he started the London Overground orbital and extension to Croydon/crystal palace. I wonder whether we would have the river tram if he had remained as London Mayor. We know that Boris favours West and East London.

Also agree with your comments about the consultation being a waste of time (and a farce)

[bil]

maybe it was the US embassy as well ?

[bil]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> bil Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I wonder if the OKR stations will be zone 1 or

> zone 2.

>

> Interesting question. I noticed that the new Nine

> Elms station will be zone 1, and this fact

> features prominently on the marketing material for

> the new developments going up round there. I

> wonder if the developers insisted on the station

> being in zone 1 before agreeing to contribute

> funds?

@Jeremy: I suspect that the US Embassy had some influence too

[kibris]

okr has more to offer, who wants to go to camberwell

[James Barber]

On this point. Trams have been shown in the UK to attract around 25% of car users out of their cars and onto trams. So you could expect 25% less car use. Even higher proportion of bus users. So they create more road space than they occupy. They also cost significantly less than buses to run and we know bus/TfL budgets are going to be hugely squeezed. So you can keep or increase capacity for less annual costs. They also wear roads out less so highway renewals are needed less often saving lots of capital expenditure.

picmicnic Wrote:

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

> I don't understand while a tram would bring any

> benefit.

> Surely if you bring in a tram you have to

> repurpose an existing road or railway to

> accommodate it which means no net benefit.

[James Barber]

Hi bil,

I suspect Boris favoured west London and indeed SW London a la Cross Rail 2 as core constituency. Livingstone you'd have thought would have favoured SE London being so Labour but didn't make Cross River Tram happen or Bakerloo Line extension.

We need to come up with idea to make Camberwell and Peckham as attractive as the OKR in terms of developer contributions.

[rfolgado]

From a wider london/financing perspective, yes, OKR is the natural home for a bakerloo line extension.

I think both Peckham and Camberwell would benefit greatly from improvements to the current infrastructure (in lieu of new lines) - e.g. hope the peckham rye station is rebuilt in '16, Denmark Hill station should be reinstated and the phoenix pub kicked out, the overground should stop at Brixton and at the new OKR bakerloo line stop, all the 3 stations in Elephant & Castle (train, northern, jubilee) need to be brought together (its a mess currently), more thameslink and southeastern trains stopping at our stations, including trains to Gatwick etc etc.

We don't need a multi-billion pound new line, the current facilities just need to be improved and integrated. And since we were shortchanged with the bakerloo line consultation, i'd expect the demands to be made now.

[JohnL]

rfolgado Wrote:

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

> From a wider london/financing perspective, yes,

> OKR is the natural home for a bakerloo line

> extension.

>

> I think both Peckham and Camberwell would benefit

> greatly from improvements to the current

> infrastructure (in lieu of new lines) - e.g. hope

> the peckham rye station is rebuilt in '16, Denmark

> Hill station should be reinstated and the phoenix

> pub kicked out, the overground should stop at

> Brixton and at the new OKR bakerloo line stop, all

> the 3 stations in Elephant & Castle (train,

> northern, jubilee) need to be brought together

> (its a mess currently), more thameslink and

> southeastern trains stopping at our stations,

> including trains to Gatwick etc etc.

>

> We don't need a multi-billion pound new line, the

> current facilities just need to be improved and

> integrated. And since we were shortchanged with

> the bakerloo line consultation, i'd expect the

> demands to be made now.

Still disagree on the Phoenix - there will be a better solution.

They'd probably replace it with luxury flats if they could mind :)

Suppose there will be investment opportunities for those with money on OKR.

[Jeremy]

Kick out The Phoenix and replace with what?

DH needs more gate capacity, not a large empty cavernous space...

[BrandNewGuy]

rfolgado Wrote:

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

> From a wider london/financing perspective, yes,

> OKR is the natural home for a bakerloo line

> extension.

>

> I think both Peckham and Camberwell would benefit

> greatly from improvements to the current

> infrastructure (in lieu of new lines) - e.g. hope

> the peckham rye station is rebuilt in '16, Denmark

> Hill station should be reinstated and the phoenix

> pub kicked out, the overground should stop at

> Brixton and at the new OKR bakerloo line stop, all

> the 3 stations in Elephant & Castle (train,

> northern, jubilee) need to be brought together

> (its a mess currently), more thameslink and

> southeastern trains stopping at our stations,

> including trains to Gatwick etc etc.

>

> We don't need a multi-billion pound new line, the

> current facilities just need to be improved and

> integrated. And since we were shortchanged with

> the bakerloo line consultation, i'd expect the

> demands to be made now.

Agree 99% with this - except for the Phoenix. As others have stated, it's an access and gate issue, not non-platform capacity.

[rfolgado]

Kick out the phoenix pub and reinstate a full station exit/entry - that's what it was build for. At the moment it is a mess. And give the current "shed" facing denmark hill as a quid pro quo to the phoenix leaseholders to turn into a bar if needs be.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The problem is BNG that the existing lines are all fragmented, suburban rail franchises. The chances of them being integrated and run in the interests of anyone other than Kent commuters is unlikely whilst the current model continues (if they're bought under the control of TFL then we may see them more aligned with the needs of inner London). This is why we need a high frequency, dedicated urban railway (aka the tube).

[JohnL]

What do the current residents of OKR think about "impending" gentrification and speculation.

Will people be forced out, will there be compulsory purchase ?

[Jeremy]

Doubt much residential property will be directly affected. It's mainly commercial/industrial along there, isn't it?