|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 15, 2015 16:54:08 GMT
There seems to greater support for Camberwell than Old Kent Road although that shouldn't be ignored. As pointed out by Diamond Geezer today, there is a large area just south of the Old Kent Road which is more than a mile from any station (NR or Tube). A new station in Camberwell would not fix this - a station on the Old Kent Road would.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Jul 15, 2015 16:54:46 GMT
Is it my imagination, but I seem to have picked up the Daily Mail by mistake?
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 15, 2015 17:11:28 GMT
I've no idea what multiculturalism has to do with this pridley. It's the numbers of people that are causing the problem, not where they're from. There's multiculturalism everywhere in the UK but nowhere else suffers the same amount of increasingly monumental overcrowding you'll be swamped with down there. If, as you say, "filling London to the brim" is part of the grand plan then why on earth did you move to a run-down part of it on the off chance that it might someday get better? I don't follow the rationale. I am not saying that multi-culturalsim is a problem. If anything, the policy is not multi-cultural enough. We used to be open to immigrants all around the planet, but now block immigration from outside the EU, so I am against what appears to be a hidden aim to create a pan-European culture. Personally, I do not think numbers is too much of an issue at this stage. I am glad London is back to its 1939 population and I see marginal areas, desolate since WWII becoming improved and exciting for the first time in almost 100yrs. I am excited to see that London may have potential to keep up with the growth and become the world's most vibrant and exciting city again. Some say it already is, but you have not seen anything yet. If projections of a stupendous population rise to 12 million by 2030 happens sooner than we thought, this will come to pass. Just imagine the Lee Valley being an exciting destination, just imagine people travelling for miles to see what the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area has to offer. This cannot happen without sustained population rise. My only issue with what you said is that I think you are wrong that anybody in power has any real aim to have a cut in the increase in population numbers, both to provide a solidarity escape valve for EU woes, to gain a greater tax base and to contribute towards creating a pan-European culture. My main problem with the policies is that the authorities have not been honest about numbers, are probably panicking behind closed doors, and have not as a result put enough urgency into the required infrastructure provision.
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 15, 2015 17:24:40 GMT
There seems to greater support for Camberwell than Old Kent Road although that shouldn't be ignored. As pointed out by Diamond Geezer today, there is a large area just south of the Old Kent Road which is more than a mile from any station (NR or Tube). A new station in Camberwell would not fix this - a station on the Old Kent Road would. Could always reopen the old station on the Blackfriars line?
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 15, 2015 17:35:32 GMT
My only issue with what you said is that I think you are wrong that anybody in power has any real aim to have a cut in the increase in population numbers, both to provide a solidarity escape valve for EU woes, to gain a greater tax base and to contribute towards creating a pan-European culture. My main problem with the policies is that the authorities have not been honest about numbers, are probably panicking behind closed doors, and have not as a result put enough urgency into the required infrastructure provision. Right..... ........, I said that until the government comes to grips with the population problem in London, essentially the place is ****ed. I did not suggest or say "that anybody in power has any real aim to have a cut in the increase in population numbers" anywhere in my post. I didn't because the authorities plainly DON'T have any plan or inclination at all in this regard at the moment, anybody can see that, which IS the point of my post. Infrastructure improvements are a short term fix that can't possibly keep up with the deluge of humanity that we're seeing now. If you want the place swamped with people then be my guest. It'll become a hell-hole, and certainly not anywhere I'd want to live or visit because it'll be gridlocked, transport of all kinds totally overwhelmed.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 15, 2015 18:50:31 GMT
Could always reopen the old [Camberwell] station on the Blackfriars line? Too far away (Walworth station would be better) and the line is overcrowded as it is - with no prospect of either improving frequency or train length due to constraints at Blackfrairs, Herne Hill and Wimbledon.
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 15, 2015 20:35:45 GMT
Could always reopen the old [Camberwell] station on the Blackfriars line? Too far away (Walworth station would be better) and the line is overcrowded as it is - with no prospect of either improving frequency or train length due to constraints at Blackfrairs, Herne Hill and Wimbledon. Well you've sorted that one then
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 15, 2015 21:29:57 GMT
There seems to greater support for Camberwell than Old Kent Road although that shouldn't be ignored. As pointed out by Diamond Geezer today, there is a large area just south of the Old Kent Road which is more than a mile from any station (NR or Tube). A new station in Camberwell would not fix this - a station on the Old Kent Road would. Yes, but Camberwell Green is over half-a-mile away from a station. Which is Denmark Hill. So called because it's on a hill. Fine to walk down to it in the morning. Not so fine walking back up from it in the evening, especially when wet. Also, the Aylesbury Estate is the only bit in that Bermuda Triangle on DG's site with habitation-most of the rest is Burgess Park. Camberwell Green is surrounded on all sides by housing.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 15, 2015 21:43:26 GMT
If you want the place swamped with people then be my guest. It'll become a hell-hole, and certainly not anywhere I'd want to live or visit because it'll be gridlocked, transport of all kinds totally overwhelmed. Obviously, I have no control over it, so frankly my opinion doesn't matter. I guess that I am just aligning myself to ride the wave, aware of what is going on. Even the what I see to be conservative projections of the population rising to 11 million by 2030 will just be overwhelming. This is almost a 50% rise. So for everybody standing in that tube next to you, double them. WTF?! I guess I am just trying to see the positive side, and got here to brainstorm how the infrastructure will "cope" and whether there is any realistic chance of improving things.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 15, 2015 21:56:37 GMT
Yes, but Camberwell Green is over half-a-mile away from a station. Which is Denmark Hill. So called because it's on a hill. . It's at the bottom of Denmark Hill. Looking at the contours, the street outside Denmark Hill station is on the 20metre contour, 15 metres higher than Camberwell Green. Given that the track is in a cutting at Denmark Hill and on a viaduct at Camberwell, the difference in height between the actual track levels will be even less.
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 15, 2015 22:07:56 GMT
Yes, but Camberwell Green is over half-a-mile away from a station. Which is Denmark Hill. So called because it's on a hill. . It's at the bottom of Denmark Hill. Looking at the contours, the street outside Denmark Hill station is on the 20metre contour, 15 metres higher than Camberwell Green. Given that the track is in a cutting at Denmark Hill and on a viaduct at Camberwell, the difference in height between the actual track levels will be even less. Trust me, it's a long drag one way or the other to Camberwell Green from Denmark Hill. As it was even when I was younger & fitter & used to feed the RED squirrels (true) in Ruskin Park maltesers-probably why they died off I think there's also more bus routes through the Aylesbury Estate than pass Denmark Hill. But, the first two schemes for putting the Bakerloo through to Camberwell both had an additional station. The 1920's scheme had the Camberwell station at Denmark Hill with a Wandsworth Road station, then, post-war, Camberwell Green & Albany Road came up instead. Would have thought Albany Road could also get one as well as Camberwell?
|
|
|
Post by astockfan101 on Jul 18, 2015 12:07:42 GMT
Camberwell's only station at the moment is Loughborough junction but what about two branch's, one going to Camberwell and the other though old Kent road to Hayes.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 18, 2015 12:26:05 GMT
Camberwell's only station at the moment is Loughborough junction but what about two branch's, one going to Camberwell and the other though old Kent road to Hayes. It has been suggested, but it would cost more than twice as much (in particular because of the extra junction) for less than twice the benefit (lower tph on each branch, and it will benefit less than twice as many people (because the catchments overlap).
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 16:50:26 GMT
My work involves me in things that expose me to inside knowledge of this. There will be no Camberwell link. It is there for political reasons. Neither TFL nor Southwark want anything to do with rejecting Camberwell, so they are leaving it up to the Treasury.
They may get a Thameslink station at the old Camberwell Station as a sop, plus, it is possible that Overground will interchange with Bakerloo at Old Kent Road. That is all. Old Kent Road is the route that will happen if Bakerloo goes forward because nowhere else facilitates so much housing, and developer contributions will be needed to fund the tunneling. There is a desire to create something like what has happened at Canary Wharf, with it likely that building heights will be taller than Elephant and Castle. Heights are restricted there due to protected viewing corridors.
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Jul 19, 2015 10:38:05 GMT
If it does end up going down Old Kent Road, do you think Old Kent Road station would reopen? For those who don't know, Old Kent Road station was situated north of Queens Road Peckham. If that weere the case it could serve as a useful interchange with London Overground as well as form a substitute for trains serving Peckham Rye
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jul 19, 2015 11:32:35 GMT
If it does end up going down Old Kent Road, do you think Old Kent Road station would reopen? For those who don't know, Old Kent Road station was situated north of Queens Road Peckham. If that weere the case it could serve as a useful interchange with London Overground as well as form a substitute for trains serving Peckham Rye The useful place for the station would be near Tescos on the Old Kent Road. The line could then run to Camberwell preferably a double ended station for Kings College Hospital and then head for Peckham and Lewisham.
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Jul 19, 2015 12:10:09 GMT
That is one of the actual proposed sites, where Burgess Park station is to be.
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 19, 2015 13:34:43 GMT
If it does end up going down Old Kent Road, do you think Old Kent Road station would reopen? For those who don't know, Old Kent Road station was situated north of Queens Road Peckham. If that weere the case it could serve as a useful interchange with London Overground as well as form a substitute for trains serving Peckham Rye I doubt it, to be honest. It will be seen as an extra station stop on an already-busy line vide LO. The thinking seems to be, if you add an extra station, you need a good number of passengers to use it, but, the more that do, the more you may need more frequent trains, and you can't guarantee that easily! It's also nowhere near Peckham Rye, but that's unimportant, because there's a good bus service past the old station site, which dates from trams being replaced by buses in 1952, the trams being the primary reason OKR went west/belly-up in the first instance in 1916.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 19, 2015 14:16:55 GMT
If it does end up going down Old Kent Road, do you think Old Kent Road station would reopen? For those who don't know, Old Kent Road station was situated north of Queens Road Peckham. If that weere the case it could serve as a useful interchange with London Overground as well as form a substitute for trains serving Peckham Rye It's possible, but I doubt LO would want another station so close to Queens Road (not to mention Surrey Canal Road), so it might be at the expense of that station. I would also expect the two stations on OKR to be more evenly spaced between E&C and New Cross than would be possible if one of them were at the point where the Overground crosses. Don't forget that the Bakerloo will in nay case connect with the Overground at New Cross Gate, and Peckham Rye already has a connection to the Bakerloo via E&C - I would hope that the extension works would include inprovement of that interchange!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 19, 2015 17:33:33 GMT
If it does end up going down Old Kent Road, do you think Old Kent Road station would reopen? For those who don't know, Old Kent Road station was situated north of Queens Road Peckham. If that weere the case it could serve as a useful interchange with London Overground as well as form a substitute for trains serving Peckham Rye Anything is possible but what might appear "ideal" in transport terms won't happen on the Bakerloo Line extension. Every time you add a station you add hundreds of millions of pounds to the capital cost and then incur lifetime operation and maintenance costs. While there would be revenue it's unlikely to be enough to fund a multi level interchange station at Old Kent Road. You'd also have issues about capacity on the lines into London Bridge if you add another stop. In our new upside down world of development being the sole determinant of where transport infrastructure goes then expect the bare minimum number of new stations and those that are built will be those with developer funding plus wherever the terminal station is. The only exception to my musings is probably Lewisham because it's a major traffic mode and the developers are already destroying the town centre and preventing redevelopment of the main line station so little scope for more developer contributions there but TfL could never justify NOT having a station there. As pridley says the political demand from Southwark Council is to serve both Old Kent Rd and Camberwell *and* to get stops on Thameslink. They won't get all of that despite the fact it would make a great deal of sense. Camberwell won't be served because there's next to no opportunity to build to the skies. I think the residents in Southwark are going to get one heck of a shock whenever a decision does emerge about the Bakerloo extension and I predict there will be a lot of upset and annoyed people. The council are going to have a job on their hands managing the fall out. I'm not even convinced the Treasury will agree to fund the extension and also take CR2 forward. TfL will be forced into a choice and CR2 will win out because of the need to do something about HS2 demand at Euston. That's the killer factor in all of this with Lea Valley development and Waterloo lines capacity coming down the list somewhat.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Jul 19, 2015 18:09:36 GMT
snoggle - I dare say your analysis will turn out to be right politically, but may I enter a plea against the fixation with the impact of HS2. If every one of the 20 tph that HS2 can carry runs full, that's less than 20000 extra (maybe some will be transfers from classic services and so not at all extra) punters per hour. Now deduct those who will depart by bus, foot and taxi - probably about 2000, then deduct those who want to go to the West End (not served by CR2) - 5000?,and those who want to go to the City (also not served by CR2) - another 5000? - and you are left with about 8000 (5000 new ?) punters max. Hardly a serious load for CR2 - 5tph's worth.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 19, 2015 21:49:27 GMT
snoggle - I dare say your analysis will turn out to be right politically, but may I enter a plea against the fixation with the impact of HS2. If every one of the 20 tph that HS2 can carry runs full, that's less than 20000 extra (maybe some will be transfers from classic services and so not at all extra) punters per hour. Now deduct those who will depart by bus, foot and taxi - probably about 2000, then deduct those who want to go to the West End (not served by CR2) - 5000?,and those who want to go to the City (also not served by CR2) - another 5000? - and you are left with about 8000 (5000 new ?) punters max. Hardly a serious load for CR2 - 5tph's worth. Well yes but the issue is that the Mayor and TfL have alighted on HS2 at Euston as being both the nightmare scenario and a potential saviour for CR2. It's all political arm twisting when push comes to shove and it will be telling to see who wins. The Mayor is on his way out and you have to ask what sway he holds with Osborne if the recent events with Mrs May are any indication of cabinet level sentiment. If the numbers are as you suggest then someone possessed of half a brain at HS2 should be able to point out the flaw in TfL's case.
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 19, 2015 21:59:39 GMT
snoggle - I dare say your analysis will turn out to be right politically, but may I enter a plea against the fixation with the impact of HS2. If every one of the 20 tph that HS2 can carry runs full, that's less than 20000 extra (maybe some will be transfers from classic services and so not at all extra) punters per hour. Now deduct those who will depart by bus, foot and taxi - probably about 2000, then deduct those who want to go to the West End (not served by CR2) - 5000?,and those who want to go to the City (also not served by CR2) - another 5000? - and you are left with about 8000 (5000 new ?) punters max. Hardly a serious load for CR2 - 5tph's worth. Well yes but the issue is that the Mayor and TfL have alighted on HS2 at Euston as being both the nightmare scenario and a potential saviour for CR2. It's all political arm twisting when push comes to shove and it will be telling to see who wins. The Mayor is on his way out and you have to ask what sway he holds with Osborne if the recent events with Mrs May are any indication of cabinet level sentiment. If the numbers are as you suggest then someone possessed of half a brain at HS2 should be able to point out the flaw in TfL's case. Purely on the politics of it, both of them are contenders for next PM. A cynic might ask whether the wallpaper magnet might pass up the chance to shaft the exiled Russian aristocrat and give him what he doesn't want. On the railway issue, I fear you both may be right. There is little development at OKR as yet to even justify thinking about starting towards there in the next ten years & then the question becomes how much further than Camberwell could you go in ten years time? If the answer is not much at all, then it becomes difficult to justify a short extension starting soon on cost grounds. I did say on another thread as we've waited since 1912 for a Tube station in Camberwell, I wouldn't hold my breath about this one-finally did something sensible, it seems.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 20, 2015 9:20:56 GMT
On the railway issue, I fear you both may be right. There is little development at OKR as yet to even justify thinking about starting towards there in the next ten years & then the question becomes how much further than Camberwell could you go in ten years time? If the answer is not much at all, then it becomes difficult to justify a short extension starting soon on cost grounds. I did say on another thread as we've waited since 1912 for a Tube station in Camberwell, I wouldn't hold my breath about this one-finally did something sensible, it seems. The Mayor has established a development zone (I forget the precise term) on OKR so there is a potential attraction for developers. It may look uninspiring now but we don't know what's going on in the background. Ah here we are - www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/7327I do feel we are in particularly unfortunate circumstances due to timing of political events - General Election just gone, Spending Review and Autumn Statement due in a few months, Mayoral Election next year, Transport Commissioner gone and likely to be replaced by new Mayor. No guarantee that Mike Brown will move from temporary to permanent Commissioner either. London is less able to fight its corner at present because of political and policy uncertainty increasing as we approach the Mayoral election. It'll be even worse in 2020 when the General and Mayoral elections are on the same date.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Jul 24, 2015 19:14:11 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 1:57:26 GMT
If this extension ever gets the go ahead a new depot would need to be built somewhere between Lewisham and Hayes as London Road and Stonebridhe Park couldn't cope with the additional trains needed for the service.
|
|