Bakerloo Line extension: Catford via Peckham is TfL's preferred route

Discussion in 'Public Transport' started by SE Steve, Jul 12, 2011.

  1. SE Steve

    SE Steve Super-South-Easter

    From the old forum:

    Latest news is that TfL's preferred option to extend the Bakerloo underground line is said to be the Catford route, taking over the Hayes National Rail line southwards from the Catford Loop, thereby missing Lewisham town centre completely, but going via Peckham or Old Kent Road. So, from Elephant & Castle, either:

    Camberwell - Peckham Rye - Honor Oak Park - Catford. ("Peckham" route).
    This seems the most popular alignment when looking at TfL's plans. Interfaces with the Catford Loop and DLR at Catford, ELL at Honor Oak Park, and with ELL Phase 2 (amongst others) at Peckham Rye.

    Old Kent Road - Peckham - Brockley - Catford. ("Old Kent Road" route).
    This gives connections with Hayes, Catford Loop, DLR (extended to Catford), the ELL at Brockley (which desperately needs better connections), and the ELL Phase 2 extension at an interchange on Queen's Road (which would likely get an entrance on the Old Kent Road). From there, it's up the OKR before heading west to E&C. This bypasses Camberwell.

    More info at London Reconnections.
  2. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy South East Crusader

    Treat with caution.... That was the thinking a few years ago. It's very much in the "other projects" box at the moment. No funding and may not incorporate other rail/dlr plans. Will defo be huge advantage for SE London but it's in the £bn+ 20yr away category.
  3. Stuart

    Stuart South East Crusader

    If TfL can get the Northern line extension underway to Battersea via a combination of borrowing through Tax Increment Financing and some government grants then expect the Bakerloo line to go the same way. In that case Old Kent Road will be chosen as the route to Catford instead of Peckham. Look at Google Maps and all those industrial estates waiting to be converted to high rises, plenty of developer funds there.

    And I can't see a Bakerloo extension heading to Lewisham and then east or southeast rather than to Catford which would be the other reason to build the DLR down to Catford. For a start not one of the 3 route suggestions in the Mayor's transport strategy go that way. The Hayes option just seems so obvious . . .
  4. Rational Plan

    Rational Plan Member


    I had the exact same idea - the Old Kent Road is ideal for finance from redevelopment.
  5. Danja

    Danja Respected Local

    The biggest bit of that - next to the gasholders - has just been redeveloped - as the massive new Southwark/Veolia waste recycling/transfer station which looks nearly ready to open its doors.

    The central bit includes the newish Asda and its car-park. Good luck shifting them.
  6. Michael_FH

    Michael_FH Lives for South East London

    There is a conflict between the desire to extend the DLR to Catford Bridge and any route of the Bakerloo line that makes use of the Hayes line. The DLR extension to Catford makes sense to me, connecting Ladywell and Catford Bridge directly to Canary Wharf, but extending it any further is unlikely to have an positive impact until DLR trains are extended beyond four carriages per train (currently up to 3 carriages).

    But rather than using the Hayes Line for the Bakerloo line TfL should be looking at using the Nunhead-Crofton Park line for the Bakerloo line, going out to Bromley North. This is likely to be opposed by freight operators who seem to make good use of the Crofton Park line and cannot easily be integrated into high frequency tube services. Alternatively they could take a longer route underground. My preference would be to come through Camberwell, East Dulwich, South Peckham, Forest Hill and Bell Green. With Bell Green acting as an interchange between DLR, Netional Rail and Bakerloo.

    Unlike the Battersea extension to the Northern Line, the cost of tunnelling under a significant section of South London (to Peckham, Old Kent Road, or Bell Green) is not going to be met by developers. The Battersea extension is relatively short by comparison. But thinking 30 years ahead it would be a huge waste not to have the Bakerloo line opening up connections across South East London and further it goes underground the greater the increase in capacity by avoiding taking over existing Network Rail capacity.

    Whichever route the Bakerloo line eventually takes through South London it should be something that should be welcomed by all SE Londoners as it will make a big difference to capacity and perceptions of SE London, just as the ELL extension and DLR have already started to do. But I maintain that the further out the Bakerloo line goes, the better it will be in the long term for all of SE London.
  7. Nick Barron

    Nick Barron Admin Staff Member

  8. EdHammond

    EdHammond South Eastern Guru

    That's certainly my reading of the relevant section.
  9. nunheader

    nunheader South East Crusader

    That link no longer works Nick!

    So if TfL are (allegedly) favouring a route that (wisely?) avoids Lewisham and goes via either Camberwell/Old Kent Road and Peckham, and Network Rail "support" a route that makes no mention of those areas (at least according to the map below that you published last month at Brockley Central) but includes Lewisham then what does this mean? Who gets their way in the (very) long run?

  10. Rational Plan

    Rational Plan Member

    Sorry, I don't think he said it would avoid Lewisham. Currently all maps show it either going down Old Kent Road all the way to Lewisham or diverting via Peckham.

    I've found a map of all the currently desired extensions, which was published in a report on step free access.

    It shows: HS2, Crossrail extensions, Northern line, Bakerloo line, the three DLR extensions and 4 Tramlink extensions.

  11. nunheader

    nunheader South East Crusader

    The OP here taken from London Reconnections avoids Lewisham in both of the options listed. Something to do with too much rebuilding or realigning tracks or something?

    Thanks for the map, what is the MTS?
  12. EdHammond

    EdHammond South Eastern Guru

    Mayor's Transport Strategy (presumably)

    The comparison with the Battersea extension is interesting - the Battersea extension is profoundly unstrategic, by is being funded by developers - any SE London Bakerloo extension is highly strategic but no developer will want to pay anything for it.

    Using the Nunhead/Crofton Park surface line is a nice idea but where would the portal be? You'd probably have to do some major infrastructure works in the Denmark Hill area. And, as mentioned, the Nunhead line has some of the highest number of available freight paths of any line in the country - all the Channel Tunnel freight goes this way.

    I had always assumed tube running to Camberwell, top of Rye Lane, Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross Gate then on to Lewisham. You'd have to have the tunnel portal further on from Lewisham station though presumably because the track layout, particularly the DLR, is so complicated around there.
  13. Michael_FH

    Michael_FH Lives for South East London

    Has any consideration been given to extending the ELL New Cross branch down to Lewisham and Catford Bridge?
    This would seem like a highly cost effective way to add an additional 4 trains per hour to the Catford / Lewisham route, using most of the same tracks as the existing Hayes services to Charing Cross. If rail capacity exists for such an extension then it would seem like a simple way to increase frequency from Catford and Lewisham.
  14. Rational Plan

    Rational Plan Member

    As you can see from the map they are not talking about using the Crofton Park line to Bromley, It's the Hayes Lines from Ladywell.

    The Battersea line is not going far at the moment, but it can be extended along the Windsor lines to Putney, which would relieve a big crush on the inner services there. That won't happen though until Camden is rebuilt and they can fully separate the Northern Line.

    Yes there have been several options for the Bakerloo, but it increasingly looks like a line down the OKR to New Cross Gate and Lewisham, then to Hayes, it may deviate off the OKR near Burgess Park towards Peckham and then to New Cross Gate, but this seems to be current thinking. I think the Bakerloo has a better chance than before because this allows some trains to be diverted away from Charing Cross. Though we'd be lucky if construction started by 2020.

    There is little chance of the Overground to Lewisham as the lines are full, certainly for little 4 car trains. To extend the Overground to Lewisham would require a tunnel and they won't do that unless at least 20 trains an hour would be running down it.
    0ur0 likes this.
  15. DKZ

    DKZ South East Crusader

    Interesting map, though could do with some more detail re potential stations involved. I'm assuming the northernmost end of the Tramlink is the rumoured extension to Brixton? So its not going via Peckham after all then?

    Back to Bakerloo, and if it were extended to Peckham Rye via a new station on the Aylesbury Estate, Southwark council would surely make a lot more money from developers by way of the the 2000+ new homes being constructed there.

    Also, to reduce costs wouldn't it be better to employ the old cut and cover construction rather than conventional contemporary tunnelling through Burgess Park and along the old Surrey Canal spur to Peckham? This stretch would be almost half of the entire new section from E&C to Peckham Rye:

  16. Stuart

    Stuart South East Crusader

    The article I posted a while back only mentions going as far as Crystal Palace. I thought Boris hated trams anyway. :rolleyes:
  17. Rational Plan

    Rational Plan Member

    They have just bought six more for tramlink.
  18. 0ur0

    0ur0 Regular

  19. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy South East Crusader

    On Cut and cover, the very reason it was abandoned is because new, cheaper, less disruptive, and quicker ways were developed. What if your route cuts across housing? Tunneling under is far better, not always but doing that in London now would cost a fortune for no advantage.
  20. Stuart

    Stuart South East Crusader

    I've been told many times that one of the main reasons South East London didn't get the Tube is that it has a high water table compared to the rest of the city. The lovely lady who gave us the splendid 'Open House' tour around Dulwich College yesterday also repeated it. Is that true? Would explain a lot if so.

    Having said that, a 2010 report on the Bakerloo commissioned by the Borough of Lewisham suggests that "it might be possible to widen the Catford Loop line to accommodate parallel Bakerloo Line tracks at surface level from east of Nunhead Junction to Catford, though this would incur disruption and environmental impact."

Share This Page