On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 04:55:37 -0800 (PST)
77002 wrote:
Does it really matter? The extension will be a benefit for the whole area=
..

Is this true? I mean the area already has several railway stations.
And there is no effort being made to integrate the new extension into
the existing transportation infrastructure.

Does it need to? I can't see anyone changing onto the northern line at
battersea and trundling through south london when they can go one more stop
to victoria and be in the heart of west end with 2 stops of the victoria line.

The Victoria Line filled a strategic gap in the subway network. Its

Shame it didn't go further south.

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.
A Thamesmead terminues as originally planned would have opened up a whole
new area along the thames.

Now we come to the Northern Line extension to Battersea. There is no
strategy. There is just a developer's perceived need to a "tube"
connection. There is no guarantee that the urban development will be
completed.

Believe me, once a tube station is built developers will be climbing over
each other to get projects approved there. Thats how london expanded in
the 1930s - Cockfosters for example used to be a quiet little village, now
look at it.

B2003

On 06/12/2012 14:09, d wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 04:55:37 -0800 (PST)
77002 wrote:
Does it really matter? The extension will be a benefit for the whole area.

The Victoria Line filled a strategic gap in the subway network. Its

Shame it didn't go further south.

It did, but not by much, the original southern terminus was Victoria.

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.
A Thamesmead terminues as originally planned would have opened up a whole
new area along the thames.

Now we come to the Northern Line extension to Battersea.

Believe me, once a tube station is built developers will be climbing over
each other to get projects approved there. Thats how london expanded in
the 1930s - Cockfosters for example used to be a quiet little village, now
look at it.

There are already approved plans for a great deal of the area. Embassy
Gardens either side of the new US Embassy, and Riverlight are in the
process of building. Nine Elms Parkside on the Royal Mail site has
planning permission.
--
Phil Cook

On 6 Dec, 15:49, Phil Cook wrote:
On 06/12/2012 14:09, wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 04:55:37 -0800 (PST)
77002 wrote:
Does it really matter? The extension will be a benefit for the whole area.
The Victoria Line filled a strategic gap in the subway network. *Its

Shame it didn't go further south.

It did, but not by much, the original southern terminus was Victoria.

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: *This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.
A Thamesmead terminues as originally planned would have opened up a whole
new area along the thames.

Now we come to the Northern Line extension to Battersea.
Believe me, once a tube station is built developers will be climbing over
each other to get projects approved there. Thats how london expanded in
the 1930s - Cockfosters for example used to be a quiet little village, now
look at it.

There are already approved plans for a great deal of the area. Embassy
Gardens either side of the new US Embassy, and Riverlight are in the
process of building. Nine Elms Parkside on the Royal Mail site has
planning permission.

So no actual TODs then.

d wrote:

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.

It provides a direct link from east to south London, starting from east
London's biggest non-interchange station. It provides much needed pressure
relief for the DLR. It regularly fills up before it first hits the Thames.
How is that not useful?

--
My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 21:39:14 -0000
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:
wrote:

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.

It provides a direct link from east to south London, starting from east

Which is probably used by no one. I suspect the vast majority of people who
get on at stratford get off at canary wharf.

London's biggest non-interchange station. It provides much needed pressure
relief for the DLR. It regularly fills up before it first hits the Thames.
How is that not useful?

I'm sure it is useful to some, but it would have been a damn site more useful
if it had opened up a whole new suburb rather than terminating somewhere
that already has more railway lines than it knows what to do with. With 3
car trains I'm pretty sure the DLR would be quite able to cope with the
loading from Stratford in the rush hour. If the tube builders 100 years ago
had thought the same way as the JLE route designers then half of north london
wouldn't exist in its present form. Cockfosters? Who wants to go there , lets
send the piccadilly line to tottenham instead. Edgware? Nothing there, we'll
terminate at Kilburn - good interchange with the Bakerloo! Etc.

B2003

d wrote:

Fast forward to the Jubilee Line extension: This one was much less
well planned, but did manage provide a useful route with some

Useful until it heads of to stratford pointlessly duplicating the DLR.

It provides a direct link from east to south London, starting from east

Which is probably used by no one. I suspect the vast majority of people
who
get on at stratford get off at canary wharf.

Not in my experience and I'm one of the many who use it for east to south
trips. Quite a lot get off at London Bridge or Waterloo whilst many others
travel further west. The same can be seen in reverse.

I'm sure it is useful to some, but it would have been a damn site more
useful
if it had opened up a whole new suburb rather than terminating somewhere
that already has more railway lines than it knows what to do with.

Lining up to such a major interchange is pretty useful already. What suburb
would you have wanted to open up instead? West Silvertown is somewhat
physically constrained and much of the rest of Newham had rail or tube or
DLR links already.

With 3
car trains I'm pretty sure the DLR would be quite able to cope with the
loading from Stratford in the rush hour.

Have you seen the size of the loadings at Stratford at that time?

If the tube builders 100 years ago
had thought the same way as the JLE route designers then half of north
london
wouldn't exist in its present form. Cockfosters? Who wants to go there ,
lets
send the piccadilly line to tottenham instead. Edgware? Nothing there,
we'll
terminate at Kilburn - good interchange with the Bakerloo! Etc.

At this stage the emphasis is largely on joining up the dots rather than
breaking new ground - the Victoria line kicked that off and the JLE followed
suit by going where the demand was.

--
My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c

The emphasis certainly should be on joining up the dots. Unfortunately
the people who make the decisions seem to be totally unaware of how
that would benefit London. The second major failing of this Battersea scheme
is that is does not link up with other routes.

My particular obsession - an extension from Kennington to Clapham Junction
- would most definitely "join up the dots" as would other obvious - to practical
people - proposals like extending the Bakerloo Line to Peckham Rye and the
Victoria Line to Leytonstone.

Robin9 wrote:

Tim Roll-Pickering;134793 Wrote:


At this stage the emphasis is largely on joining up the dots rather than

breaking new ground - the Victoria line kicked that off and the JLE
followed
suit by going where the demand was.



The emphasis certainly should be on joining up the dots. Unfortunately
the people who make the decisions seem to be totally unaware of how
that would benefit London. The second major failing of this Battersea
scheme
is that is does not link up with other routes.

My particular obsession - an extension from Kennington to Clapham
Junction
- would most definitely "join up the dots" as would other obvious - to
practical
people - proposals like extending the Bakerloo Line to Peckham Rye and
the
Victoria Line to Leytonstone.

You might want to see
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...nsion-public-c
onsultation-details/ which quotes the Tfl documents and notes

"The associated consultation documents confirm that cost and the high
passenger levels already found on the Victoria Line are the reasons why
an interchange at Vauxhall is not being pursued. Future extension to
Clapham Junction is, however, acknowledged as a possibility and the
tunnel layout is designed to support this."

--
Mark

Thank you for that link. Very interesting and very encouraging. Even
more encouraging were the posts from various enthusiasts agreeing
that an extension to Clapham Junction was a much better idea.

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:45:05 -0000
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:
Which is probably used by no one. I suspect the vast majority of people
who
get on at stratford get off at canary wharf.

Not in my experience and I'm one of the many who use it for east to south
trips. Quite a lot get off at London Bridge or Waterloo whilst many others
travel further west. The same can be seen in reverse.

Why would anyone use the jubilee from stratford to go west when they can
just get on the central line?

I'm sure it is useful to some, but it would have been a damn site more
useful
if it had opened up a whole new suburb rather than terminating somewhere
that already has more railway lines than it knows what to do with.

Lining up to such a major interchange is pretty useful already. What suburb
would you have wanted to open up instead? West Silvertown is somewhat

I already said more than once - Thamesmead.

physically constrained and much of the rest of Newham had rail or tube or
DLR links already.

There are these new fangled things called tunnels that solve that particular
issue.

If the tube builders 100 years ago
had thought the same way as the JLE route designers then half of north
london
wouldn't exist in its present form. Cockfosters? Who wants to go there ,
lets
send the piccadilly line to tottenham instead. Edgware? Nothing there,
we'll
terminate at Kilburn - good interchange with the Bakerloo! Etc.

At this stage the emphasis is largely on joining up the dots rather than

Why? The dots were already joined quite enough at stratford.

breaking new ground - the Victoria line kicked that off and the JLE followed
suit by going where the demand was.

Demand from who? By definition there won't be any demand from an area thats
not developed but sending a tube line there usually is the spur to that.
I'm sorry but terminating the JLE at stratford was down to nothing more than
money or lack thereof, don't pretend there was any great plan.

B2003