Serving Battersea and Nine Elms

[Busaholic]

Having read and commented on the Northern Line extension thread, I wondered if anyone else thought it would be worth exploring any alternative proposal NOT involving a branch off the Victoria Line but still giving a viable Underground service to these two proposed stations. I have an idea that has been developing in my mind that might be practical and do a better job overall including to one or two other areas, but before unveiling it I'd like to evaluate the interest.

 

[Panda]

I'm not following. An alternative proposal not involving a branch off the Victoria Line? What about using the Kennington loop of the Northern Line and extending the Northern line to these two stations. Oh wait...that's what the extension is about.

Rather than guessing, why not just come out and say what your ideas are, you cannot evaluate interest in something when you don't say what it actually is.

 

[Busaholic]

O.K., I'm thinking of the Bakerloo Line, once a very important line but now seemingly reduced to Cinderella status. Once with two branches, one to Watford Junction and the other to Stanmore, proposals to extend it at the southern end never getting anywhere. There was a 'definite' proposal to extend it to Peckham via Camberwell when I worked for L.T. in 1960s/1970s.
The point being that the Northern is already the most complex operationally of all Underground lines (sorry, I am too long in the tooth to refer to them all as Tube lines) and the Bakerloo probably the least and,unlike the Victoria, not at full stretch (and even less so when Crossrail opens).

My original thinking was straightforward - to extend it from Elephant to Battersea via Kennington, but the extra tunnelling etc would not appear worthwhile and the curve westwards from Elephant probably not feasible. So then I thought how about creating a separate branch south of Waterloo from approximately where Lambeth North station is: this would then allow for an extension from Elephant in the future (the full service is only needed from Waterloo northwards anyway) and could provide a much-needed new station in the Lambeth Palace/Lambeth Road area which has no underground or other station within reasonable walking distance and then burrow underground the main line out of Waterloo towards Vauxhall, perhaps doing a 'Stratford International' at the latter point and building a station box for the day when TfL feels able to invite more passengers on to the Victoria Line.

Lambeth North would probably need to be sacrificed but is very close to both Waterloo and Elephant. An added benefit would be following a service disruption at present many southbound trains are forced to turn at Piccadilly Circus because of lack of platforms at Elephant, thus missing main traffic objectives of Charing Cross and Waterloo.

Well, there it is. Anyone got anything positive to say about it?

 

[Panda]

It could solve some of the issues you mention during disruptions, but the following immediately spring to mind:

1. Would this need additional platforms at Waterloo and where would they go?
2. Travelling to the city seems a bit more of a hassle as there would be no easy links going that way.
3. The London Road depot seems to be in the way of these plans (or make them more convenient, not really sure).
4. What would this branch do for the other extension proposals on the Bakerloo line. I would imagine that it would mean less frequent trains on the other branch.

I think the main thing that feels wrong about this for me, is that it feels like it's cutting off access to east London.

 

[Busaholic]

It could solve some of the issues you mention during disruptions, but the following immediately spring to mind:

1. Would this need additional platforms at Waterloo and where would they go?
2. Travelling to the city seems a bit more of a hassle as there would be no easy links going that way.
3. The London Road depot seems to be in the way of these plans (or make them more convenient, not really sure).
4. What would this branch do for the other extension proposals on the Bakerloo line. I would imagine that it would mean less frequent trains on the other branch.

I think the main thing that feels wrong about this for me, is that it feels like it's cutting off access to east London.

Thanks for your thoughts. I'll try to answer as best as I can:

1. Don't see why it would require any extra platforms at Waterloo,all Northbound trains would be going the same way, Southbound to Elephant or Battersea.
2. Agree travelling to City would be slightly more of a hassle, London Bridge or Bank requiring a change at Waterloo rather than Kennington,but Canary Wharf would be easier.
3. Not sure of the exact topography, but the branch should avoid the depot, depending on how soon after Waterloo it swung west.
4. On all ideas I've seen for extending from Elephant, it's unlikely that more than half the existing service would be extended e.g. if it fed into the Hayes Southeastern service at New Cross, can't see any bettet than 8 trains an hour to Bellingham and 4 to Hayes.
5. I think there's danger of massive over-provision to Battersea with the Northern Line proposals, unless at least half of the Charing Cross trains turn at Kennington, and with sections of the Tube coming under ever-increasing pressure e.g. Tooting and Clapham this is unacceptable.
6. A new station (Lambeth Palace/Lambeth Walk?) would serve a useful purpose not only for the local populace but also for visitors to the Imperial War Museum, requiring only one main road to cross unlike present options

Finally. as a South East Londoner, although currently in exile, I'd never suggest anything which would lead to a dimunition of service to that area, unlike Boris and other politicians!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Sorry, conflated lines through Catford in above, should have read 8tph to New Beckenham, then 4 to Hayes and 4 into bay platform at Beckenham Junction, similar to Overground arrangement at New Cross. Should have remembered my years of misery travelling from Catford Bridge to Hayes for cross=country running when at school!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

O.K., I'm thinking of the Bakerloo Line, once a very important line but now seemingly reduced to Cinderella status. Once with two branches, one to Watford Junction and the other to Stanmore, proposals to extend it at the southern end never getting anywhere. There was a 'definite' proposal to extend it to Peckham via Camberwell when I worked for L.T. in 1960s/1970s.
The point being that the Northern is already the most complex operationally of all Underground lines (sorry, I am too long in the tooth to refer to them all as Tube lines) and the Bakerloo probably the least and,unlike the Victoria, not at full stretch (and even less so when Crossrail opens).

<snip>

this would then allow for an extension from Elephant in the future (the full service is only needed from Waterloo northwards anyway) and could provide a much-needed new station in the Lambeth Palace/Lambeth Road area which has no underground or other station within reasonable walking distance and then burrow underground the main line out of Waterloo towards Vauxhall, perhaps doing a 'Stratford International' at the latter point and building a station box for the day when TfL feels able to invite more passengers on to the Victoria Line.

My (rather vague, and open to correction) understanding is that:

1. TfL are still working on the idea of separating the Northern Line into - effectively - two lines: Edgware via Charing Cross, and High Barnet/Mill Hill East via Bank (in part because avoiding the conflicting moves at Camden Town would allow higher frequencies). That presumably would address the issue of the operational complexity that you refer to.
2. The idea of extending the Bakerloo line SouthEast-wards isn't dead, so much as on hold, but still in TfL's long term radar as something that's desirable.
3. Once CrossRail2 is built (nothing definite yet, but the plans seem to be coming on nicely), Vauxhall is likely to become somewhat less well used (although still important) as an interchange, since fewer mainline trains will stop there, and many of the people who currently change to the Victoria line there will find it more convenient to just stay on CR2 into central London anyway.

I would also imagine that *if* the Bakerloo line was extended southeast, the problem of half-empty trains south of Waterloo would immediately be solved, and you'd have no trouble finding enough passengers to justify running all current trains as far as Peckham/Camberwell/Lewisham (depending on the precise route).

 

[telstarbox]

Regarding the Bakerloo line extensions, in 2011 the benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) were 1.4 for the route via Lewisham and Hayes, and 1.9 for the route via Old Kent Road.

See Modern Railways article here - http://www.jrc.org.uk/PDFs/Bakerloo Line extensions MR article.pdf (PDF)

 

[Busaholic]

My (rather vague, and open to correction) understanding is that:

1. TfL are still working on the idea of separating the Northern Line into - effectively - two lines: Edgware via Charing Cross, and High Barnet/Mill Hill East via Bank (in part because avoiding the conflicting moves at Camden Town would allow higher frequencies). That presumably would address the issue of the operational complexity that you refer to.
2. The idea of extending the Bakerloo line SouthEast-wards isn't dead, so much as on hold, but still in TfL's long term radar as something that's desirable.
3. Once CrossRail2 is built (nothing definite yet, but the plans seem to be coming on nicely), Vauxhall is likely to become somewhat less well used (although still important) as an interchange, since fewer mainline trains will stop there, and many of the people who currently change to the Victoria line there will find it more convenient to just stay on CR2 into central London anyway.

I would also imagine that *if* the Bakerloo line was extended southeast, the problem of half-empty trains south of Waterloo would immediately be solved, and you'd have no trouble finding enough passengers to justify running all current trains as far as Peckham/Camberwell/Lewisham (depending on the precise route).

Take all of what you say onboard. Realise TfL would like to split the Northern into two lines but, in the end, whether it happens or not will probably be a 'political' decision. L.T. Underground management in the days of the Cope brothers, Charles and John, also wanted to do it and, I daresay, Frank Pick before that but no-one ever felt bold enough to do it.

I'd be very glad if TfL advanced their plans to extend the Bakerloo s.e.wards
(North Peckham is crying out for a station) but I don't feel that a Battersea branch taking at most half (or, more probably,one third) of the service need obviate this.

Feel Crossrail 2 is so long off that it can't really be considered, but if what you say is true then perhaps good reason to make provision for a station at Vauxhall, just as was done at Pimlico for the Victoria Line extension.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Regarding the Bakerloo line extensions, in 2011 the benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) were 1.4 for the route via Lewisham and Hayes, and 1.9 for the route via Old Kent Road.

See Modern Railways article here - http://www.jrc.org.uk/PDFs/Bakerloo Line extensions MR article.pdf (PDF)

This is probably a discussion for another thread. Old Kent Road (or North Peckham as I described it) is certainly crying out for a tube then southeastwards to a combined New Cross Gate/New Cross station, as in Paris, wouls also seem obvious, but then? I wasn't advocating Hayes just mentioned it as TfL had obviously been considering it.

 

[CNash]

Just my unqualified opinion as a commuter based in the southeast, but more capacity southeastwards (either just to Lewisham or further eastwards towards Dartford) would be very welcome, as would being able to bypass London Bridge for City commuters - they'd use Elephant instead as an interchange onto the Thameslink route.

 

[Busaholic]

Just my unqualified opinion as a commuter based in the southeast, but more capacity southeastwards (either just to Lewisham or further eastwards towards Dartford) would be very welcome, as would being able to bypass London Bridge for City commuters - they'd use Elephant instead as an interchange onto the Thameslink route.

How about Deptford Bridge (interchange with DLR), Greenwich Park(southside), Blackheath Standard, somewhere close to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich Arsenal then proper penetration of Thamesmead? Or with Crossrail coming to Woolwich and Abbey Wood could this be considered over-provision for the area? An alternative could be Lewisham, Grove Park then over the branch line to Bromley North.

 

[CNash]

How about Deptford Bridge (interchange with DLR), Greenwich Park(southside), Blackheath Standard, somewhere close to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich Arsenal then proper penetration of Thamesmead? Or with Crossrail coming to Woolwich and Abbey Wood could this be considered over-provision for the area? An alternative could be Lewisham, Grove Park then over the branch line to Bromley North.

I think any new development around the North Kent line will be compared negatively to Crossrail - as you said, over-provisioning somewhat. I'd steer clear of the river; from QE Hospital (Woolwich Common), continue east through Falconwood or Welling, then south to Sidcup, essentially "bridging" the Dartford lines. I'd like a spur towards Bexleyheath, to give it a new station in a more central location to the current one, but I fear that I'm biased in terms of what would be convenient for myself (or commuters from my area) rather than seeing the big picture. Which, of course, is why I'm not in charge of planning things like this!

For penetration of Thamesmead, a rather fanciful proposal would be to extend the DLR eastwards from King George V or Gallions Reach, with a tunnel or bridge over the river. It would then roughly follow the path of Eastern Way, terminating at Belvedere or Erith. (Or, even more pie-in-the-sky, another river crossing and terminate at Rainham?) Of course, new above-ground construction brings its own problems, whereas this Bakerloo extension would be a combination of new tunnels and sharing existing track.

Edit: the DLR bit might not be so fanciful, my idea seems to be similar to the currently-proposed Dagenham Dock extension!

 

[Busaholic]

I think any new development around the North Kent line will be compared negatively to Crossrail - as you said, over-provisioning somewhat. I'd steer clear of the river; from QE Hospital (Woolwich Common), continue east through Falconwood or Welling, then south to Sidcup, essentially "bridging" the Dartford lines. I'd like a spur towards Bexleyheath, to give it a new station in a more central location to the current one, but I fear that I'm biased in terms of what would be convenient for myself (or commuters from my area) rather than seeing the big picture. Which, of course, is why I'm not in charge of planning things like this!

For penetration of Thamesmead, a rather fanciful proposal would be to extend the DLR eastwards from King George V or Gallions Reach, with a tunnel or bridge over the river. It would then roughly follow the path of Eastern Way, terminating at Belvedere or Erith. (Or, even more pie-in-the-sky, another river crossing and terminate at Rainham?) Of course, new above-ground construction brings its own problems, whereas this Bakerloo extension would be a combination of new tunnels and sharing existing track.

Edit: the DLR bit might not be so fanciful, my idea seems to be similar to the currently-proposed Dagenham Dock extension!

I think you're right about leaving the North Kent line out of it. I'm only an ex- S.E. Londoner, born and brought up in Eltham, so have my own prejudices too but do feel that for too long the area has been the poor relation in transport terms: even the improvements that have taken place have been mostly to either aid access to Canary Wharf or the folly formerly known as the Dome, rather than to help the local populace. Blackfen could do with a station, so Falconwood down to Sidcup would achieve that. Bexleyheath would certainly benefit from a more central station, but not sure how that could realistically be achieved. An extension of Crossrail from Abbey Wood would be too much to hope for!?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

For penetration of Thamesmead, a rather fanciful proposal would be to extend the DLR eastwards from King George V or Gallions Reach, with a tunnel or bridge over the river. It would then roughly follow the path of Eastern Way, terminating at Belvedere or Erith. (Or, even more pie-in-the-sky, another river crossing and terminate at Rainham?) Of course, new above-ground construction brings its own problems, whereas this Bakerloo extension would be a combination of new tunnels and sharing existing track.

Edit: the DLR bit might not be so fanciful, my idea seems to be similar to the currently-proposed Dagenham Dock extension!

Thamesmead does need something - it's quite a substantial rail desert at the moment - which I'm sure must contribute a fair bit to congestion nearby. But I would suggest that with CR, coming, you don't really need more radial routes towards central London. On the other hand, a big problem in that part of London is lack of orbital routes: If you want to make orbital journeys, the car is almost the only option.

My own preferred scheme would be to extend the Goblin. Something like:

• Barking
• Barking Riverside (new station)
• Thamesmead (new station)
• Abbey Wood
• Brampton Road (new station)
• Bexleyheath
• Bexleyheath Town Centre (new station)
• Crayford
• Dartford
• Blue Water (new station)
• then possible continuation to the new town at Swanscombe if it's built

That would solve several of the issues you identify, allow some orbital journeys, give a rail option for getting into Bexleyheath, and also give much better connections to CrossRail.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How about Deptford Bridge (interchange with DLR), Greenwich Park(southside), Blackheath Standard, somewhere close to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich Arsenal then proper penetration of Thamesmead? Or with Crossrail coming to Woolwich and Abbey Wood could this be considered over-provision for the area? An alternative could be Lewisham, Grove Park then over the branch line to Bromley North.

I like the idea of running the Bakerloo to Bromley North. I'd also suggest tunnelling through to Bromley South and possibly Hayes. That would all increase connectivity in that area and provide a service in the rail desert SE of Elephant and Castle. And it would give a relatively straight Bakerloo extension. The only problem is, although it gives better connectivity at Lewisham, it won't do anything to relieve the bottleneck for SouthEastern trains there.

 

[DJL]

Thamesmead does need something - it's quite a substantial rail desert at the moment - which I'm sure must contribute a fair bit to congestion nearby. But I would suggest that with CR, coming, you don't really need more radial routes towards central London. On the other hand, a big problem in that part of London is lack of orbital routes: If you want to make orbital journeys, the car is almost the only option.

My own preferred scheme would be to extend the Goblin. Something like:

• Barking
• Barking Riverside (new station)
• Thamesmead (new station)
• Abbey Wood
• Brampton Road (new station)
• Bexleyheath
• Bexleyheath Town Centre (new station)
• Crayford
• Dartford
• Blue Water (new station)
• then possible continuation to the new town at Swanscombe if it's built

That would solve several of the issues you identify, allow some orbital journeys, give a rail option for getting into Bexleyheath, and also give much better connections to CrossRail.

Bexleyheath to Dartford is hardly orbital
Why not continue on:
[*]Bexleyheath Town Centre (new station)
[*]Bexley
Surface run near to North Cray Road
[*]Foots Cray (new station)
Tunnel
[*]St Mary Cray
[*]Petts Wood
[*]Bromley Common
[*]Hayes
Then probably follow the existing line back towards London or Croydon if there is spare capacity on this line, which actually I'm not sure if there is.

Declared interest: I do live near to this route and have family across the river.

I have no idea how many people would use such a route but it does connect a number of otherwise unconnected (except via central london) lines - which should be the aim of an orbital route.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Bexleyheath to Dartford is hardly orbital

lol, very true. I'd put that on as a useful end to what was orbital for the rest of the way.

Why not continue on:
[*]Bexleyheath Town Centre (new station)
[*]Bexley
Surface run near to North Cray Road
[*]Foots Cray (new station)
Tunnel
[*]St Mary Cray
[*]Petts Wood
[*]Bromley Common
[*]Hayes
Then probably follow the existing line back towards London or Croydon if there is spare capacity on this line, which actually I'm not sure if there is.

Declared interest: I do live near to this route and have family across the river.

I have no idea how many people would use such a route but it does connect a number of otherwise unconnected (except via central london) lines - which should be the aim of an orbital route.

I think that's a pretty good route actually. You're right that will will connect a lot of places. To get the maximum connectivity I'd probably route it Orpington High Street -> Orpington -> Locksbottom rather than Petts Wood -> Bromley Common, but otherwise it looks good to me.

In terms of usage. Population density in outer London is a less than inner London, and I'd imagine it would take a few years for usage to build up to success levels, as people change their commuting to adjust to the line. It probably wouldn't have the instant overcrowding-level-success of the overground. And I suspect, getting funding for the amount of tunnelling required would be difficult. But in the long term, just looking at the population and connections, I could see a line like that being successful, and taking some traffic off the roads.

This has gone way off topic for 'Serving Battersea and Nine Elms'!

 

[Busaholic]

Gospel Oak to Barking was an unloved, unpublicised and therefore underused line for decades: now look at it, bursting at the seams with passengers. Similarly with East London/North London Lines now Overground,and South London Line could have survived and prospered with some thought and money (perhaps after the redevelopment of London Bridge a version of it might return).

An outer orbital route would be a godsend and, with London's population expanding so rapidly, an absolute necessity in years to come. I think this lies outside the scope of this thread, because the Bakerloo could only provide a very small part of it (if that) but if anyone wants to start one I'd be very happy to contribute some thoughts and ideas and would love to hear what anyone else had to say. Some of my thoughts would be based on orbital bus/ coach routes that used to exist and in some cases were very popular buf had to be abandoned because of traffic congestion causing great unreliability.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

OK, good idea. I'll start a suitable thread.

EDIT: Done. The new thread is Do We Need an Outer London Orbital Rail Line?

 

[Busaholic]

With Boris's attentions now being devoted to getting a safe parliamentary seat for himself in time for next May will this tube extension plan go onto the backburner, perhaps to allow priority to much more pressing schemes, in particular the Bakerloo extension so desperately needed into S.E. London? Exactly how far advanced is the Northern Line bifurcation as to things happening on the ground, legal approvals etc?

 

[swt_passenger]

With Boris's attentions now being devoted to getting a safe parliamentary seat for himself in time for next May will this tube extension plan go onto the backburner, perhaps to allow priority to much more pressing schemes, in particular the Bakerloo extension so desperately needed into S.E. London? Exactly how far advanced is the Northern Line bifurcation as to things happening on the ground, legal approvals etc?

Do you really think Boris, or even Ken before him, actually sits at a desk planning transport upgrades? He has staff to do all that, they are called TfL...

 

[Busaholic]

Do you really think Boris, or even Ken before him, actually sits at a desk planning transport upgrades? He has staff to do all that, they are called TfL...

No, what I do think having worked for London Underground and immediately afterwards for a London borough council where a certain young councillor called Ken Livingstone was starting to make a swift ascent up a greasy pole (which assured that I would never vote for him in an election, any more than I would for Boris) is that people at the top who often, especially if they are politicians, have little grasp of the day-to-day reality of the organisation that sits beneath them, get an idea and then charge their underlings to research it. The reason for their 'idea' may well be that they've been to a dinner party where another guest has said 'you really must do something about the trains to Rickmansworth' or, if they are the mayor, they say 'I've had ameeting with a chancer who's promised to redevelop Battersea Power Station and provide a few flats costing less than a million each, so vastly affordable, as long as we provide a ready-made tube station for him, so, there's a good chap, run along and sort out the necessary: oh, by the way, in order to help him market these flats to his rich foreign friends, make sure the station comes within Zone 1'. I may have paraphrased somewhat...

Then among the myriad schemes that the minions at TfL are working on, some desperately needed, comes another one that must get top priority now, and when the recommendations for action i.e. money go to the top to get the approval of the Mayor, woe betide if this 'scheme' is not amongst them, even if not no. 1. The Mayor will make the decision and if the top professionals don't like it (cf bendybuses & 'New Routemaster') he will doubtless explain to them that he was empowered to make such decisions. If there's only the money available for one scheme and it's the Mayor's favourite no end of cost/benefit analyses will persuade him that the money would be better spent elsewhere and TfL better jolly well get behind it. So of course Boris won't have been working on anything, even Battersea, and the Old Kent Road will only be the lowest-priced property on the Monopoly board to him, so of no consequence.

i
If this doesn't accord with your way of thinking, then tough.

 

[Chris125]

With Boris's attentions now being devoted to getting a safe parliamentary seat for himself in time for next May will this tube extension plan go onto the backburner, perhaps to allow priority to much more pressing schemes, in particular the Bakerloo extension so desperately needed into S.E. London?

The extension is pivotal for the redevelopment around Battersea and Nine Elms and Boris will remain Mayor for the rest of his term anyway, so nothing relevant has changed - IIRC a decision on the TWAO is expected in the near future with work starting early next year.

Chris