Potential South London improvement ideas?

[Mr. SW]

Yes. Your idea corresponds to position C in my notes (more or less)

(Aerial Photograph of Lines in Brixton. The blue pins are the major bridges, the lines here are almost entirely on brick-built viaducts)
A is Nursery Road: Its is too far from from being any sort of interchange.
B and C are the most likely scenarios, although they both have problems, especially B.
D is a very long shot, and would involve installation of a double crossover and resulting in conflicting movements.
E is the site of the old East Brixton Station which is just too far away from everything.
The Orange pin marked "Hump" is where the - er- Hump is. The Tube station is marked.

When checking over this it occured to me there may be an engineering solution and I came up with this.

(Picture of same area are showing an elevated railway idea)
The line over the existing viaduct is singled, leaving the Westbound track. The Eastbound is diverted onto a viaduct. The line rises to pass over the Atlantic lines before running through a new-build Eastbound platform. The line then descends to re-join the old formation at Barrington Road just off the image to the right.
Here is a detail.

(Detailed aerial shot showing Brixton Station)
The downside of this scheme is that there would be a tall viaduct running through a busy part of town with land acquisition and demolition. But this also needs to be tempered with the fact that there are no buildings of any particular merit here, save the Art Deco M&S on Brixton Road, however, with clever design, this will be by-passed. But any demolition here could be combined with new development. There are two interchange passages shown, both about 35 metres in length. And just in case you hadn't noticed, the Westbound platform is more-or-less contained within the bounds of the viaduct, so will be super-cheap. Also, both platforms are comparatively narrow, but not unduly so (ca. 4m/13ft).

This idea is somewhat based on urban Japanese ideas, together with the developments at Borough Market.

Now, where did I leave that 60 million pounds?

 

[SE%Traveller]

If I'm reading this right i fear this would leave all down/eastbound Overgound and Freight traffic from the West London Line crossing the Chatham Mainline on the flat! South London has a lack of grade separated junctions with as it is, there's quite a lot of freight on this route. With my 60 million I'd tinker around eastbound so that said said freight can get from down Atlantic to down Catford without conflict, this would allow for possibilities in general in the area

 

[MarkyT]

Here's my concept.
100m platforms sit on the hump where vertical curvature creates a virtual level spot.
Brixton Rd bridge reconstructed as neccessary.
Wide double deck footbridge provided over Atlantic Rd.
- Lower deck (blue) leads directly from the up SE platform to the new station complex mezannine level wich passes under Windrush Line.
- Upper deck connects the down SE platfrom to the Windrush eastbound platform level.
Red 'cores' contain vertical circulation (stairs/escalators/lifts) and also street entrances with ticket halls, gatelines etc where appropriate.
Blue mezzanine level also connected downstairs to Victoria Line concourse and upstairs to westbound Windrush.
Existing street entrances to SE platfroms remain.

 

[NCT]

Can't you just have prefabricated platform bridges sitting astride the Chatham Main Line? With the platform bridges structurally independent from the railway viaduct?

 

[hwl]

Here's my concept.
100m platforms sit on the hump where vertical curvature creates a virtual level spot.

Why just 100m platforms? The Southeastern Victoria - Lewisham and beyond services use those tracks too hence 160m would be really useful and reduce the need to interchange at Denmark Hill etc. to get to Brixton from those services. (It should also be much quicker to get on to the Victoria Line at Brixton from SE services than changing at Victoria these days)

 

[cle]

Why just 100m platforms? The Southeastern Victoria - Lewisham and beyond services use those tracks too hence 160m would be really useful and reduce the need to interchange at Denmark Hill etc. to get to Brixton from those services. (It should also be much quicker to get on to the Victoria Line at Brixton from SE services than changing at Victoria these days)

Agree, these should be 8 car length. It might also be a Gillingham/Dover contender.

Brixton is absolutely the only way of guaranteeing a spot (forget a seat) on a Victoria line train. Stockwell feeds in a ton, Vauxhall even more... etc. Victoria is a bust. I could see this being hugely popular. Plus Brixton also being a destination in itself.

 

[Mr. SW]

The platforms on my idea are 120m. You shouldn't really go below that in any serious manner. You could lengthen them: westbound will be easy, eastbound maybe more complicated due to space, structural and gradient issues.

If I'm reading this right i fear this would leave all down/eastbound Overgound and Freight traffic from the West London Line crossing the Chatham Mainline on the flat!

It's all on a viaduct so it will be passing clear over everything. There is no alternative to this. Urban railways should be built/modified to avoid potential conflict.

By the way, in case you didn't know, the area bounded by the two viaducts to the east of the existing station surrounding Popes Road is up for development. The buildings immediately adjacent to the station appear to be empty. I don't think anyone will miss Sports Direct either. Only the M&S on Brixton Road is of any particular architectural merit.

Any station design and build should be coupled with any new development, even only in passing. There maybe some money in it. Hopefully.

One additional point regarding my viaduct idea is that the gradient to the east of the eastbound platform maybe a little steep, but that can be dealt with as it favours the normal direction of operation, and the speeds in this area on any line are not high.

 

[stssts1985]

Proposed Brixton Station at Nursery Lane

I think Nursery Lane is by far the best location for a new Brixton interchange.



In my diagram:

A = South-Eastern platforms (which I’d move here from their current site)

B = South London Line platforms

C = New escalators to the opposite end of the Victoria Line

D = Existing South-Eastern platforms (to be replaced)


The red-shaded area is the station building, sitting between A and B with the interchange concourse in the middle.


---

Why this works:

The proposed entrance is just 118 m from Brixton High Street — exactly the same distance as the current station, so it’s not “out of the way.”

The site is surrounded by light industrial land, making redevelopment far easier and less disruptive than building above Brixton’s retail centre.

The viaducts are lower here, which means simpler, cheaper, and better-integrated construction.

New escalators at C would spread passenger flow across both ends of the Victoria Line platforms, easing congestion.

As an extra bonus, slower services (like those to Gillingham or Lewisham) could stop here — something that isn’t possible with the current layout.



---

In short:
Compact, accessible, and better connected — the Nursery Lane site would deliver a true interchange for Brixton without the disruption or cost of building in the heart of the town centre.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

Now, where did I leave that 60 million pounds?

That's the beauty of armchair planning haha

 

[mr_jrt]

The primary issue with doing things over by Nursery Lane is that you're stopping trains after the Catford Loop and the Chatham mainline have merged. Doing things further east means you have separate platforms, meaning you can timetable faster services to pass whilst still serving Brixton. I'm mindful of the ever-present risk of scope creep, but retaining the ability to reinstate platforms on the Catford Loop lines would seem to be a benefit you would want to keep, and might actually be worthwhile as part of a large rebuild of the station as a whole.

 

[hwl]

The primary issue with doing things over by Nursery Lane is that you're stopping trains after the Catford Loop and the Chatham mainline have merged. Doing things further east means you have separate platforms, meaning you can timetable faster services to pass whilst still serving Brixton. I'm mindful of the ever-present risk of scope creep, but retaining the ability to reinstate platforms on the Catford Loop lines would seem to be a benefit you would want to keep, and might actually be worthwhile as part of a large rebuild of the station as a whole.

You hit the nail on the head there - most of the proposals above don't stand up to 15 seconds of scrutiny because many people have not idea how things work for timetabling and capacity.
Only @MarkyT proposal shows any understanding of capacity constraints including fast services and freight - it just needs the platforms extending by 60m further to the east so the SE Victoria - Lewisham and beyond services can call.

Any TfL thinking will be in line with MarkyT so others should probably put their crayons away now.

 

[stssts1985]

just needs the platforms extending by 60m further to the east so the SE Victoria - Lewisham and beyond services can call.

How would extending the existing platforms 60m further east achieve that - the catford loop has already split from the Chatham line by the point at which the platforms appear! That makes no sense; if you go on satellite view of Google you can see the track layout

 

[hwl]

How would extending the existing platforms 60m further east achieve that - the catford loop has already split from the Chatham line by the point at which the platforms appear! That makes no sense; if you go on satellite view of Google you can see the track layout

Try re-reading what I wrote more carefully, there is no mention of "existing" in front of "platforms". Platforms refers to the new ones proposed by MarkyT (who also wasn't proposing changes to any existing ones.

Extend the eastern extent of the "new" 100m platforms on the Atlantic Lines proposed by MarkyT so they are 160m platforms not 100m platforms so 8 car SE stopping service that use those tracks can also stop there no just 5 car LO services. Is that clearer?

 

[stssts1985]

Is that clearer?

Not really - why would you need to extend platforms that don't already exist?

At Brixton you basically have 3 pairs of lines, the south London line, the Chatham line and the catford loop.

If your refering to proposed new platforms on the south London line, I've rarely seen the 8-car Gillingham semi-fasts via Denmark hill and the Lewisham and beyond stoppers use the south London line, they use the lines which branch off on the lines towards catford. I did see someone mention platforms on this line (1 already sort of exists). Freight often uses the SLL and important to keep. You can see it on satellite view. Hope it makes sense?

 

[hwl]

Not really - why would you need to extend platforms that don't already exist?

I was referreing to MarkyT's proposal which only talk about new platforms and because I think MarkyT's proposal of 100m of new Atlantic Lines platforms is too short they should be 160m so SE stopping services Victoria - Lewisham and beyond that also use the Atlantic lines could also call.

At Brixton you basically have 3 pairs of lines, the south London line, the Chatham line and the catford loop.

Technically you have the Atlantic lines, Chatham Lines and Catford Loop. (Professionally I have a very good idea of what happens here...)

If your refering to proposed new platforms on the south London line, I've rarely seen the 8-car Gillingham semi-fasts via Denmark hill and the Lewisham and beyond stoppers use the south London line, they use the lines which branch off on the lines towards catford. I did see someone mention platforms on this line (1 already sort of exists). Freight often uses the SLL and important to keep. You can see it on satellite view. Hope it makes sense?

I was not suggesting anything should be done regarding the 8car SE Gillingham semi-fasts which normally use the Catford Lines (you can quickly check this as any services on these tracks will appear at P3&4 at Denmark Hill (along with TL Catford loop services) in any open data system (or even NRE)) . The SE Lewisham stopping services normally use the Atlantic Lines along with the LO and Freight services (you can quickly check this as any services on these tracks will appear at P1&2 at Denmark Hill in any open data system (or even NRE)).

Edit to Add:
Westbound SE services from Lewisham virtually always go via the Atlantic lines, Eastbound go via Atlantic lines in the peak but can go eastbound via the Catford Loop lines off peak. Hence there can be some asymmetry between eastbound and westbound flows off-peak.

 

[mr_jrt]

Essentially, I think we can all maybe agree that 5-car SLL platforms would likely end up on the "hump" adjacent to the tube station, and extending them for 8 cars would then have to extend either eastwards or westwards? In my opinion, starting at the High St. and extending eastwards give the better interchange with the existing NR platforms, but there is a lot of merit to MarkyT's proposal to extend westwards over the High St. and have a second entrance there. Let's just do both and have nice future-proof 12 car platforms

*cough*andrebuildplatformsontheCatfordlines*cough*

 

[hwl]

Essentially, I think we can all maybe agree that 5-car SLL platforms would likely end up on the "hump" adjacent to the tube station, and extending them for 8 cars would then have to extend either eastwards or westwards? In my opinion, starting at the High St. and extending eastwards give the better interchange with the existing NR platforms, but there is a lot of merit to MarkyT's proposal to extend westwards over the High St. and have a second entrance there. Let's just do both and have nice future-proof 12 car platforms

MarkyT's proposal extended eastwards by 65m get you to Popes Road. Going longer and further east is problematic due to gradient limits on platforms.

*cough*andrebuildplatformsontheCatfordlines*cough*

On the italics - the main issue is that Brixton Jn pretty much requires trains on the Catford Loop lines to pass at reasonable speed so as not to impact junction throughput.

 

[mr_jrt]

Obviously you would need to do proper calculations, but presumably assuming the viaduct could take the additional load, that you could raise the tracks slightly to level things off through the platform area and re-profile eastwards as needed to make the gradients gentle - there's no junctions to the east for a very long distance that would prevent that.

Interesting about Brixton Junction. Is the issue is purely the eastbound services as they will be slowing and blocking the junction whilst doing so, or are the westbound Catford services also a problem as they briefly conflict with eastbound Chatham services whilst accelerating away? Would a potential solution there be a third track south of the existing pair to effectively move the eastbound junction westwards? i.e.

Handily, the M&S building seems to have a tailor-made shape for this sort of thing

 

[MarkyT]

Obviously you would need to do proper calculations, but presumably assuming the viaduct could take the additional load, that you could raise the tracks slightly to level things off through the platform area and re-profile eastwards as needed to make the gradients gentle - there's no junctions to the east for a very long distance that would prevent that.

Interesting about Brixton Junction. Is the issue is purely the eastbound services as they will be slowing and blocking the junction whilst doing so, or are the westbound Catford services also a problem as they briefly conflict with eastbound Chatham services whilst accelerating away? Would a potential solution there be a third track south of the existing pair to effectively move the eastbound junction westwards? i.e.
View attachment 192107
Handily, the M&S building seems to have a tailor-made shape for this sort of thing

The main constraint is the position of the signal 114 at the east end of the up main line platform. This is less than 20m from the junction clearance point so when a train is running in, the junction must be locked by the overlap to prevent another train passing too close across its bow before it has timed out to a stop in the platform. Similarly, if there's already an up movement signalled from the Catford Loop line across the junction, an up arrival from Herne Hill must wait at the previous signal 122 untiL the Catford train has cleared the junction. Since there's no public platform to align with on that line, Signal 112 protecting the junction from the Catford loop is set back some 60m from the clearance point so some form of free overlap should always be available for approach at any time (likely a restricted type with a delayed yellow warning route optionally selectable from the previous signal).

If the bridge over Brixton Rd and the viaduct either side was widened for 3 tracks, a better option may be to move the up trailing points further east WEST so the platform has a free overlap available for approach at any time. However, work to widen here would be very expensive I think, and the limitations, while not ideal, are manageable with the characteristics of the service. Unfortunately its not easily possible to slip a diverted up express or freight out from the Catford line immediately in front of a main line stopping train.

- it just needs the platforms extending by 60m further to the east so the SE Victoria - Lewisham and beyond services can call.

I suggest extending platforms ~60m west from my base proposal to Nursery Rd bridge. That would likely affect fewer sensitive buildings. It could be evaluated for cost and benefits against an eastern extension.

With Gillingham via Lewisham trains usually on the Atlantics, it might be worth reinstating connections at Battersea Park so they could run into Victoria via the Brighton slows, with some freights switching over to the Chatham Mains at Factory Junction, particularly those going east, whose junction conflicts at Brixton would be less onerous. If terminus capacity was a concern, there has been an aspiration for many years to transfer one of the underutilised shorter eastern side platforms at Victoria (#8, I think) into the central complex. Today you can depart #8 to the Brighton slows but not arrive, so the concept would need an additional crossover at least in the throat.

 

[mr_jrt]

The main constraint is the position of the signal 114 at the east end of the up main line platform. This is less than 20m from the junction clearance point so when a train is running in, the junction must be locked by the overlap to prevent another train passing too close across its bow before it has timed out to a stop in the platform. Similarly, if there's already an up movement signalled from the Catford Loop line across the junction, an up arrival from Herne Hill must wait at the previous signal 122 untiL the Catford train has cleared the junction. Since there's no public platform to align with on that line, Signal 112 protecting the junction from the Catford loop is set back some 60m from the clearance point so some form of free overlap should always be available for approach at any time (likely a restricted type with a delayed yellow warning route optionally selectable from the previous signal).

If the bridge over Brixton Rd and the viaduct either side was widened for 3 tracks, a better option may be to move the up trailing points further east so the platform has a free overlap available for approach at any time. However, work to widen here would be very expensive I think, and the limitations, while not ideal, are manageable with the characteristics of the service. Unfortunately its not easily possible to slip a diverted up express or freight out from the Catford line immediately in front of a main line stopping train.

Thank you for your excellent insight.

Whilst poking around, I got suspicious, and read up on the history - seems the SLL tracks through Wandsworth Rd and Clapham High St. are the original lines (and accordingly, are the straightest), and read that when the LC&DR widened the railway, they added three new tracks (down main, up main, and up metropolitan - why not four? - shame!) almost all the way to where the SLL and Chatham lines come together just west of Brixton:


The third line was cut back to west of Clapham High St. at some point, (presumably as part of improving the track geometry by removing all the platforms on the Chatham lines), but in theory if one were to widen the viaduct from Brixton Junction to the point where the lines come together (and come up with a solution for Clapham High St that retains the down SLL platform and current speed limits!), then you would have 3 tracks all the way from Victoria to Brixton junction. How much use that would be is up for debate, but I thought it interesting enough to bring up.

 

[30907]

Brixton to Factory Jn was built by the LCD who provided tracks for the LBSCR (who built for both companies the section east of Brixton). The LCD platforms were closed in 1916 and demolished at an early date. The third LCD track wasn't electrified until 1959 (it was useful for keeping freight out of the way), and it was shortened in two stages, the first as part of Victoria resignalling around 1980 (which integrated the two separate routes) and the second for Eurostar (IIRC) in the early 90s.

 

[BRX]

The sensible place for a new station on the SLL in this area is to reopen Brixton East. That would not require lots of complicated engineering to build platforms alongside high viaducts & bridges and then all the additional infrastructure that would be needed to connect them to street level and the other Brixton Platforms.

It seems to me that everyone comes at this trying to solve the wrong problem. Yes, if you look at the network map it's frustrating that there's not a nice interchange between the SLL and the underground. But ultimately so what? If you are travelling on the SLL and want to get into central London, you already have the opportunity to get onto the tube at Clapham, or change at Denmark Hill or Peckham onto Thameslink services into Blackfriars and through the core. Or onto SE trains into Victoria. Or at Peckham for trains into London Bridge. Or Canada Water for Jubilee line.

The main purpose of the SLL is to enable east-west journeys across South London, that otherwise are very slow-going. When the Overground started and the SLL services were changed to run to Clapham Junction instead of Victoria, this purpose was reinforced. There were downsides of losing the Victoria link... but if you live in south London you know that being able to get a train from Clapham Junction to say Denmark Hill or Peckham made that journey (very slow by bus) much much easier. And at the other end the redirection into East London instead of London Bridge opened up a whole other bunch of connectivity.

The big flaw in the SLL/Overground as it stands is not lack of an interchange at Brixton. It's the giant gap between Denmark Hill and Clapham High Street with no stations. If you live in or near Brixton, the SLL is largely useless to you. If you want to get to Clapham or Peckham, you get a bus. Re-opening Brixton East fills that gap. There's a large population within walking distance of there who would be given east/west travel opportunities that they don't have now. Yes, perhaps ideally the stop would be in central Brixton, but it would make much more sense to focus on providing a station where it wouldn't be so hugely expensive and therefore actually feasible in the real world.

Loughborough Junction (which is where I live, so of course I'm biased) is a less significant centre than Brixton but it has the same issue: this very handy east/west line passing overhead but no way to access it (other than walking to Denmark Hill). It's essentially impossible to provide an Overground station at Loughborough Junction because you'd be trying to fit platforms to two tracks on the same side of a 4-track viaduct.

If you look at this issue from the point of view of people living in the area the line crosses (rather than an abstract idea of what would look neat on the map) then what's needed is a station roughly halfway between Clapham High Street and Denmark Hill, that can serve the people of Brixton and Loughborough Junction. And the old Brixton East is exactly that. It's in walking distance to both town centres and it has bus routes passing right by.

(Perhaps someone will raise some reason that resinstating & lengthening platforms at Brixton East is more difficult than I understand it to be, in which case I am willing to be corrected.)

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps someone will raise some reason that resinstating & lengthening platforms at Brixton East is more difficult than I understand it to be, in which case I am willing to be corrected.)

If it’s where I think it is, ie east of Barrington Rd, I don’t see how you could get suitable platforms in there without dhiftign tracks and therefore viaducts. Buteven if you could, it still means land take for the station.

 

[cle]

The big flaw in the SLL/Overground as it stands is not lack of an interchange at Brixton. It's the giant gap between Denmark Hill and Clapham High Street with no stations. If you live in or near Brixton, the SLL is largely useless to you. If you want to get to Clapham or Peckham, you get a bus. Re-opening Brixton East fills that gap. There's a large population within walking distance of there who would be given east/west travel opportunities that they don't have now. Yes, perhaps ideally the stop would be in central Brixton, but it would make much more sense to focus on providing a station where it wouldn't be so hugely expensive and therefore actually feasible in the real world.

I somewhat agree with you here - I don't think Brixton would become a huge interchange, any more than it already is between modes. The Victoria line will remain the main thing, and be fed by multitudes of buses.

But as a destination, it's incredibly popular - and a LO link would see a lot of demand. I'm not sure many would travel from the ELL and change onto the Victoria line, or SE services to Victoria. Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye already have that, as all those services go to Victoria.

SE services (Orpington slows) onto Clapham Junction? Maybe. But I see it more as an O/D station - still a hub.

 

[BRX]

If it’s where I think it is, ie east of Barrington Rd, I don’t see how you could get suitable platforms in there without dhiftign tracks and therefore viaducts. Buteven if you could, it still means land take for the station.

It looks to me like platforms would broadly be feasible in these areas. Each of these is about 140-150m long.

I don't think it would require any land that isn't already "railway" land. I know it's all leased to the Arch Co now... but I believe that in principle Network Rail is allowed to requisition it. It seems a lot less complicated than what would have to happen on the high level viaduct over the existing Brixton station.

Photos of the old station are here and this map shows where the platforms were:

 

[30907]

View attachment 195340


It looks to me like platforms would broadly be feasible in these areas. Each of these is about 140-150m long.

Photos of the old station are here and this map shows where the platforms were:


View attachment 195341

The problem is that East Brixton is in a largely residential area, rather than the urban centre of Brixton. Even when its trains were every 20min in the peak and ran to 2 London termini, it was very quiet.A 15min service to Clapham Jn (or even 6tph) and the ELL wouldn't be that much of an attraction.

 

[Bald Rick]

it means oversailing others’ property, and that means acquisition.

Also, you need more than just platforms - it needs primary access to each platform (including step free), secondary escape, and space for station facilities. That probably means acquisition too.

 

[BRX]

it means oversailing others’ property,

Where? I believe it's very likely all Network Rail property leased to the arch co.

 

[Mr. SW]

Reinstating East Brixton would probably recreate the conditions that got it closed in the first place. I suspect TfL/LO/Network Rail and others have all looked at this and said "Nah!"

 

[BRX]

The problem is that East Brixton is in a largely residential area, rather than the urban centre of Brixton. Even when its trains were every 20min in the peak and ran to 2 London termini, it was very quiet.A 15min service to Clapham Jn (or even 6tph) and the ELL wouldn't be that much of an attraction.

Living within 10 minutes walk of it and having known the area pretty well for 20+ years now, I beg to differ. I don't think a comparison with the 1970s usage of the station is very useful; the nature of the surrounding area has changed a lot since then, and continues to see more high-density development. It's also only 5 minutes walk from the centre of Brixton.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2026 ==

By the way this isn't some crazy idea I've pulled out of thin air - it's been raised repeatedly over the past couple of decades. In 2014 and 2016 Lambeth council commissioned feasibility reports looking at reopening East Brixton. I can't now find any copies of those online, only the spec for the contract here.

I think the conclusion of those studies was basically that it would be less expensive than building a station in central Brixton, but that its distance from Brixton centre made it harder to justify (my opinion is that the usefulness of the location is generally underestimated). Things have changed since 2016 though and I think it's something that should be revisited periodically.

 

[Mattplans]

Night tube/London services

• Night tube extended beyond New Cross Gate to West Croydon
• Night Thameslink calls additionally at New Cross Gate to improve connections - call removed at Norwood Junction where calls happen