please empty your brain below
Suggestions in the table, please.

Comments on the extension here, thanks.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 10.02.17 - 7:38 a.m. | #

So the new northern line extension doesn't connect up with anywhere useful, but they're happy for thousands of SE commuters to get off at Lewisham in the morning on their way into central London, and cram onto a Bakerloo Line train, making it full from the moment it sets off in the morning peak? Interesting...

Geofftech | 10.02.17 - 8:28 a.m. | #

Lewisham is probably too far out to make it worth the faff of getting off a London bound train and changing to the Bakerloo, New Cross will be a different matter, I suspect Overground users may use this in preference to going to Canada Water and getting the Jubilee.

Still anon | 10.02.17 - 8:49 a.m. | #

Well, we haven't managed to link Watford with other bits of Watford in my lifetime so I'm not holding my breath. It is in the GLA area though unlike Watford, I suppose.

John Styles | 10.02.17 - 8:50 a.m. | #

Maybe it's only me but the Google map appears to be your walking Crossrail version.

Bryn Davies | 10.02.17 - 9:01 a.m. | #

2014 Consultation picture isn't coming up for me...

dg writes: You probably can't see any image I posted in 2014, or earlier. An htpps issue, I fear.

Southern Heights | 10.02.17 - 9:02 a.m. | #

I live on the Hayes line. In fact, I live about as close to West Wickham station as you can get. You have no idea how badly I want it to become an underground line. Anything better than Southeastern, Southern or Thameslink in this neck of the woods would do. Anything to save us from the clutches of that lot. Southeastern treats the line like an awkward uncle because it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to its other lines, it's just sort of there. There's no good reason for them to keep it, so yes, I'd rather have an underground line in south east London at last, please.

EonLeader | 10.02.17 - 9:03 a.m. | #

Technically the Canal Bridge junction (by PC World) is at the bottom of St. James' Road, not Rotherhithe New Road.

dg writes: Fixed, thanks. And ooh, that's a possible new name now.

I still feel that a route with stops at Walworth, Camberwell, Peckham Rye, Queens Road, New Cross Gate and St. John's oh the way to Lewisham would be more useful to the local community.

Rotherhithe | 10.02.17 - 9:06 a.m. | #

Thanks for this analysis of the consultation, very handy summary.

Btw the Lewisham factsheet link doesn't go anywhere useful (just a blank new window).

dg writes: Fixed, thanks.

Darren S | 10.02.17 - 9:28 a.m. | #

I wouldn't call Elephant and Castle two stations awkwardly linked. I'd call it woefully linked. And as for the interchange with National Rail...

Andrew Bowden | Homepage | 10.02.17 - 9:59 a.m. | #

I've just noticed an oddity about that Google Map: Burgess Park isn't coloured green as parks normally are. Anyone know why?

lockedintheattic | 10.02.17 - 10:38 a.m. | #

More (proposed) transport links...but where are humble folk suppose to live? Where are the grand (truely affordable) housing projects?

Working Class Hero | 10.02.17 - 11:24 a.m. | #

@lockedin the attic; this seems to be an occasional feature of Google Maps. In Walthamstow, Lloyd Park is not shown as green,and there's been a campaign by locals to 'make it green', with no success, as far as I know Google doesn't even bother to reply.

amber | 10.02.17 - 11:55 a.m. | #

I'd thought, back when they'd already suggested that the OKR route was the preferred option, that part of the project would be pushing NR to re-open Camberwell on the Thameslink route. I don't see any mention of it though.

Chz | 10.02.17 - 12:12 p.m. | #

Google's local maps editing thingy is in retirement, to be replaced by something else. I'm in both scheme but can't be arsed as the tools are terrible. I favour the station forming part of the lower levels of the shopping centre, with smaller entrances at a variety of strategic points, especially towards the areas of redevelopment / social cleansing, where we can expect a lot of foot traffic.

Uncle Audrey | 10.02.17 - 12:33 p.m. | #

Regarding name suggestions, I thought it was TfL policy not to name stations after roads, unless the road was so well-known that it was effectively the name of an area. So Old Kent Road would be acceptable but Dunton Road or Commercial Way wouldn't.

See for example the wrangling over the name of Vicarage Road/Watford Hospital station. (Which we all hope wasn't futile.)

| 10.02.17 - 12:38 p.m. | #

As to the two "Old Kent Road" station names I suspect we'll get one of:-

1. The name of some new property development built in the area (probably ending in "Village" as seems to be normal now)
2. Some ghastly sponsored station names.

Jon Combe | 10.02.17 - 12:54 p.m. | #

That is a vast swathe of residential area either side of St George's Road that have been proposed for consideration for the new station at Elephant. I assume this will be to bounce a delay of the shopping centre and London College of Communication redevelopment to include the new station...

Jon B | 10.02.17 - 2:03 p.m. | #

@ eon leader

There are other ways of getting local services under the control of the GLA, although the current Transport Minister isn't keen.

But there are many users of the Hayes line who appreciate their direct service to and from the City and will not see having to change at Lewisham or Elephant twice a day as an improvement. Nor will replacing ten or twelve car full-size trains with 7-car tube-size trains improve capacity as much as the greater frequency would suggest.

Timbo | 10.02.17 - 8:19 p.m. | #

Could someone explain why the extension to Hayes would be prohibitively expensive, wouldn't it just be a case of running tube trains instead of big trains on existing track? Am I missing something?

Philip | 10.02.17 - 9:50 p.m. | #

@ Philip

Three main reasons.

1. Tube trains are much smaller than main line ones, and in particular the carriage floor is much closer to the ground. This would require all platforms on the line to be lowered (or the track raised). Other structures would also need modifying as Tube trains are at their maximum width lower down than main line trains are.
There are lines where both types mix, notably the other end of the Bakerloo, but they use intermediate platform heights, not the full height ones on the Hayes line.
2. Underground trains use a different electrification system - four rail instead of three - so the branch would need conversion.
3. Ditto signalling systems.

Timbo | 10.02.17 - 10:39 p.m. | #

I will bet same odds as Leicester winning Premiership last year (1000/1) that Asylum Road will not be considered by TfL.
Shame

scrumpy | 10.02.17 - 11:44 p.m. | #

Is it me, or the only thing they want to get rid of for construction is car parks and supermarkets.

I do support the extension. But with little money, I think we are lucky to see the route reach Lewisham. We are not seeing the Northern Line extension reach Clapham.

I wish the route reached Hayes though. But I doubt that is ever going to happen, even though shown on the map.

Back in 2014, funny how they proposed it to reach places like Hayes and even Bromley Town Centre, and taking over the Grove Park Line.

neyagness | 11.02.17 - 9:14 a.m. | #

There still isn't a great way to get to Greenwich from South London. It seems really silly that we still consider Greenwich to be so far from London; the artificial division created by transportation inconveniences I'm sure dissuades many tourists. (Although the Clipper is actually are pretty nice alternative for visiting relatives)

brendan | 12.02.17 - 3:14 a.m. | #

Your Google map certainly helps understand how all the bits fit together, something that is lacking in TfL's documentation. Is there any reason that you've not included the shaft at the Lewisham over-run tunnels and the associated tunnel alignment?

Betterbee | 12.02.17 - 6:18 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy