DOCSLIB.ORG

13 Responses from Stakeholders

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
13 Responses from Stakeholders 13 Responses from stakeholders 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 This chapter presents a summary of the responses submitted by stakeholders. As outlined in Chapter 2, stakeholders were classified by type according to their area of interest / influence. Section 13.3 identifies the different types of stakeholders represented in the questionnaire and free-format response data. 13.1.2 The most frequent type of stakeholders is business representatives. These account for over half of all stakeholder questionnaire responses (69 responses). A number of residents’ / community groups (13%), political stakeholders (8%), transport users (8%) and health stakeholders (5%) also participated in the consultation by completing the questionnaire. 13.1.3 TfL received free-format responses in the form of letters and emails from 41 different stakeholders. These responses were ‘free-format’ in the sense that they did not directly address the questions in the online questionnaire. 13.1.4 A number of political stakeholders (including MPs, councillors and political parties) responded via free-format response (18), as did London boroughs (six). Four transport groups and three campaign groups are also represented in the free-format summaries. 13.1.5 This chapter presents the analysis of stakeholder responses to the closed questions in the online questionnaire and a summary of the free-format stakeholder responses. 13.2 Closed questionnaire responses 13.2.1 As shown in Figure 13-1, the majority (95%) of stakeholders expressed support or strong support for the principle of extending the Bakerloo line into southeast London from its current end point at Elephant & Castle (Question 5). 13.2.2 The majority (86%) of stakeholders stated that they support the extension on the basis that it would enable new development in southeast London. Eight percent of stakeholders disagree (i.e. answered ‘no’ to Question 7) while 5% answered ‘maybe (Figure 13-2). 13.2.3 Just over half of all stakeholders (53%) support/strongly support the principle of extending the Bakerloo line via the Old Kent Road (Option 1a). Around a quarter (27%) stated that they neither support nor oppose this route option, while a fifth (20%) are opposed/strongly opposed (Question 9). 13.2.4 Stakeholders expressed a slightly higher level of support for extending the Bakerloo line via Camberwell and Peckham Rye (Option 1b). Overall, 59% of stakeholders support/strongly support this route option, while 30% neither support nor oppose it and 9% are opposed/strongly opposed to Option 1b (Question 11). 13.2.5 Stakeholder opinions on terminating the extension at Lewisham are polarised: while 31% support/strongly support this option, 38% are opposed/strongly opposed and 29% neither support nor oppose it (Question 13). 13.2.6 Stakeholders are more supportive of the extension terminating at Beckenham Junction and Hayes: 58% support/strongly support this option, while 26% neither support nor oppose it and 14% are opposed/strongly opposed (Question 15). 157 13.2.7 Stakeholders expressed a similar level of support for the extension going beyond Beckenham Junction to Bromley town centre in a new tunnel: 57% support this option, while 33% neither support nor oppose it and 10% are opposed/strongly opposed (Question 17). Figure 13-1: Summary of stakeholder responses to closed questions (excluding Question 7) Figure 13-2: Stakeholder responses to Question 7 13.3 Free-format responses 13.3.1 Forty-one different stakeholder organisations submitted responses to the consultation in the form of letters and emails. These responses were ‘free-format’ in the sense that they did not directly address the questions in the online questionnaire. The submissions have been analysed and their key points have been summarised in Section 13.4. 158 13.3.2 Stakeholders were classified by type according to their area of interest/influence. Table 13-1 shows the different types of stakeholder represented in the summaries presented in this chapter. The summaries capture the views of a number of political stakeholders (including MPs, councillors and political parties), London boroughs, transport stakeholders and campaign groups. Table 13-1: Breakdown of consultation responses by stakeholder type (free format responses) Stakeholder Number of respondents Political stakeholders 18 London boroughs 6 Campaign groups 3 Transport stakeholders 4 Heritage, environment and water / waste stakeholders 3 Residents / community / amenity groups 2 Health stakeholders 1 Businesses (incl. landowners) 1 Housing stakeholders 1 District councils 1 Partnership groups 1 Total 41 13.4 Stakeholder (free-format) summaries 13.4.1 The summaries of the free-format stakeholder responses are set out in the following sections, organised by stakeholder category. Please note that stakeholders that responded via the online questionnaire, including London TravelWatch, are not summarised in the following section. 13.4.2 Political stakeholders Fiona Twycross, London wide Assembly Member (Labour), Greater London Authority ■ Supports the proposals and the potential regeneration benefits and welcomes the development and delivery of both routes. States that while either route would bring considerable benefits to local communities, the two-route option would future proof and enhance the offer. Supports improved transport connectivity further south to Bromley and Hayes to ensure that the benefits of the improved Underground network are realised across the entire sub-region. ■ In regards to the Camberwell and Peckham route: highlights the current congestion, reliance on buses, and the potential to maximise transport connectivity. ■ In regards to the Old Kent Road route: highlights the area being a designated Opportunity Area and hence the increase in residential and employment provision will justify considerable improvements to transport connectivity. ■ The reallocation of train paths (to London Bridge from Hayes) is mentioned and the response also requests the retention of existing train services to central London. 159 Caroline Pidgeon, Chair of the London Assembly Transport Committee ■ Strongly supports the proposal to extend the Bakerloo line as it makes use of its extra capacity to connect southeast London and alleviates crowding on other routes. ■ The Committee does not exert a preference over Option 1a or b and notes that, ideally, both areas would be served by an extension as both routes would provide significant benefits to local residents. ■ Expressed concern that Options 1a and b are presented in the consultation documents as ‘zero- sum’ options which do not consider complementary transport schemes. Calls for the extension to be part of a coordinated strategy for transport improvements in southeast London, e.g. by developing the proposal to re-open Camberwell station for Thameslink services as it is strongly linked to the Bakerloo line proposals. ■ States that an extension of the London Underground to Hayes and Beckenham Junction would bring many benefits along the route. Notes that it is not presented as an option in the consultation documents which suggests that TfL considers this to be a necessary part of the extension. ■ States that there is an overall lack of detail and clarity in the consultation documents in order to provide an in depth response, particularly in regards to alternatives within a wider plan and cost breakdowns. ■ Supportive of the extension to Hayes, however, requests TfL further researches the withdrawal of National Rail services and does not disadvantage these passengers. ■ Supports Option 2 to Bromley town centre in principle, but states that further detail in the proposal is required. ■ Requests TfL to continue investigating other options such as Tramlink extensions to improve connectivity for southeast London residents. Valerie Shawcross, London Assembly Member for Lambeth and Southwark ■ Supports the proposals to extend the Bakerloo line. ■ Supports both Options 1a and 1b, stating that both areas would benefit from the regeneration opportunities and enhanced infrastructure. ■ States that the availability of readily re-developable land may result in Option 1b being chosen. ■ Requests that TfL commit to improving transport options for whichever route is not chosen for the extension, as both require capacity improvements. ■ Requests that, in the short term, TfL investigates improving bus service capacity, especially during the morning peak period. ■ States that regeneration opportunities and capacity relief on the National Rail network in southeast London is necessary. ■ Requests that TfL ensures that any replacement of services by the Bakerloo line does not disadvantage Hays line users. ■ Supports the Option 2 extension to Hayes and Bromley via Beckenham. ■ States that the extension is not the last solution for public transport issues in southeast London and asks that TfL investigates further connectivity plans i.e. Tramlink and Overground. Simon Hughes, MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark ■ Strongly supports the extension of the Bakerloo line in principle and the prospects of regeneration that it may bring to Bermondsey and Old Southwark. ■ Supports both Options 1a and 1b and states that both areas are in need of connectivity, regeneration and alleviation of congestion. States that 97% of respondents to a survey he 160 conducted with businesses on the Old Kent Road agree. States that while building both route options would be more expensive, the economic benefits would make up for the additional costs. ■ States that the area is poorly served by the Underground
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Agenda for a Meeting of the Policy, Resources and Performance
    Agenda AGENDA for a meeting of the ENVIRONMENT, PLANNING AND TRANSPORT CABINET PANEL in the ASHBOURNE ROOM at County Hall, Hertford on WEDNESDAY 2 NOVEMBER 2016 at 10.00AM ___________________________________________________________________ MEMBERS OF THE PANEL (11) (Quorum 3) D Andrews (Vice-Chairman), D A Ashley (Chairman), D J Barnard, N Bell, H K Crofton, A S B Walkington, N A Hollinghurst, M D M Muir, S J Taylor, R Sangster, R H Smith Meetings of the Cabinet Panel are open to the public (this includes the press) and attendance is welcomed. However, there may be occasions when the public are excluded from the meeting for particular items of business. Any such items are taken at the end of the public part of the meeting and are listed under “Part II (‘closed’) agenda”. The Ashbourne Room is fitted with an audio system to assist those with hearing impairment. Anyone who wishes to use this should contact main (front) reception. Members are reminded that all equalities implications and equalities impact assessments undertaken in relation to any matter on this agenda must be rigorously considered prior to any decision being reached on that matter . PART I (PUBLIC) AGENDA 1. MINUTES To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 September 2016 (attached). 2. PUBLIC PETITIONS The opportunity for any member of the public, being resident in or a registered local government elector of Hertfordshire to present a petition relating to a matter with which the Council is concerned, and is relevant to the remit of this Cabinet Panel, containing 100 or more signatures of residents or business ratepayers of Hertfordshire.
    [Show full text]
  • London Borough of Lewisham Response to the GTR 2018 Timetable Consultation
    London Borough of Lewisham Response to the GTR 2018 Timetable Consultation Changes to train services Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) has launched an extensive consultation which sets out proposed changes to the timetable which will be operated by GTR in 2018, following completion of the Thameslink Programme. The Council welcomes proposals to increase frequency on some lines; however, these benefits are presented alongside reductions in frequency and connectivity which the Council wish to object to. Many Lewisham residents rely heavily on train services in order to manage work, family and social life, to a greater extent than residents in many other London boroughs. It has been clear for some time that train services for the Borough are in need of substantial improvement. One example is the currently unacceptable infrequent service on trains serving Crofton Park, Catford, Bellingham and stations beyond, which has been highlighted by the 'Cinderella Line' campaign and Vicky Foxcroft MP. Our impression is that the changes to the Catford Loop services do not go far enough, nor do they align sufficiently with wider train services. Furthermore, other changes proposed, such as on the Sydenham line, have a sharply detrimental effect on residents. The Council’s response is set out according to the specific questions posed in the consultation. 14. Do you support proposals to approach engineering works differently? Please select all options you support. Whilst the focus on later services at weekends would align with the Night Tube and London’s night time economy, this should not be achieved at the cost of shorter operating hours during the week.
    [Show full text]
  • GTR 2018 Timetable Consultation – Results (Phase One)
    GTR 2018 Timetable Consultation – Results (phase one) Date issued: Monday 26 June 2017 Our consultation – setting new industry standards An industry first Earliest a train operator has gone out to consultation in advance of major change. Phase one September to December 2016 detailing proposed structure, calling patterns and Two –phased frequency followed by phase two launching late spring / early summer 2017 detailing full approach weekday and weekend timetables one year prior to start of the May and December 2018 for further comment. Consulted the We sought expert views from Transport Focus, London Travelwatch, Transport for London, Network Rail and select independent user group representatives to evaluate the process consultation process ensuring it would be fit for purpose. All suggestions were implemented prior to launch. Range of Good press coverage at the start and throughout, social media, station and on train communication announcements, posters and announcements at every station affected, stakeholder channels meetings, MP briefings, London Assembly briefings prior and during the process. Fully accessible to all. 89 hard copies, one large print copy, one braille copy distributed. Met Accessible with disability groups to explain the consultation and potential impact. Opportunity for stakeholders and passengers to shape their future train service. All feedback Real and genuine will be considered prior to finalising timetable structure however not all suggestions will be possible. Once in a generation Opportunity to have open and honest transparent conversations about what the train service timetable change should be in the future addressing weaknesses in the current timetable structure. Consultation Demographics Consultation in numbers . 5845 responses to our survey site (94% from individual passengers) .
    [Show full text]
  • Waterlink Way (Lower Sydenham to Greenwich)
    Waterlink Way (Lower Sydenham to Greenwich) 1st walk check 2nd walk check 3rd walk check 22nd April 2019 Current status Document last updated Monday, 22nd April 2019 This document and information herein are copyrighted to Saturday Walkers’ Club. If you are interested in printing or displaying any of this material, Saturday Walkers’ Club grants permission to use, copy, and distribute this document delivered from this World Wide Web server with the following conditions: • The document will not be edited or abridged, and the material will be produced exactly as it appears. Modification of the material or use of it for any other purpose is a violation of our copyright and other proprietary rights. • Reproduction of this document is for free distribution and will not be sold. • This permission is granted for a one-time distribution. • All copies, links, or pages of the documents must carry the following copyright notice and this permission notice: Saturday Walkers’ Club, Copyright © 2019, used with permission. All rights reserved. www.walkingclub.org.uk This walk has been checked as noted above, however the publisher cannot accept responsibility for any problems encountered by readers. Waterlink Way (Lower Sydenham to Greenwich) Start: Lower Sydenham Station Finish: Cutty Sark DLR Length: 9.7 km (6.0 mi) Ascent: negligible For a shorter or longer walk, see below Walk options. Time: 2 ¼ hours walking time. Transport: Lower Sydenham station is located in Zone 4 and served by Southeastern trains on the Mid-Kent line, which branches off from the South Eastern Mainline at Lewisham and leads to Hayes. Some trains start at Cannon Street (via Lewisham), others at Charing Cross (by-passing Lewisham).
    [Show full text]
  • Govia Thameslink Railway
    Govia Thameslink Railway Annual stakeholder conference Wednesday 14 June 2017, etc. venues, Eastcheap, London Agenda 1000 - 1010 Introduction 1010 - 1025 Charles Horton, GTR Chief Executive Officer 1025 - 1055 Performance - Nick Brown GTR Chief Operating Officer & John Halsall, Network Rail Route Managing Director 1055 - 1115 Q&A 1 1115 - 1140 Coffee break 1140 - 1205 Fleet update with Q&A - Gerry McFadden GTR Engineering Director Thameslink readiness - Stuart Cheshire Passenger Services Director Thameslink/Great Northern & George 1205 - 1225 McInulty GTR Service Delivery Director 1225 - 1245 Group session 1245 - 1305 Q&A 2 1305 - 1400 Lunch Customer Experience Improvement, Kerri Ricketts, Head of Customer Experience & Angie Doll Passenger 1400 - 1425 Services Director Southern/Gatwick Express 1425 - 1430 Customer Experience & Transport Focus - Linda McCord Transport Focus 2018 timetable - Phil Hutchinson Head of Strategic Planning & Jane Cobb Timetable Consultation Project 1430 - 1450 Manager 1450 - 1505 Stakeholder Communications update - Gavin Bostock GTR Head of Public Affairs & CSR 1505 - 1530 Q&A 3 1530 - 1535 Final remarks and close 1535 - 1600 Market place stands GTR annual stakeholder conference Charles Horton, Chief Executive Officer Why franchise was set up Where we’ve progressed on the journey 2014 Franchise starts 2015 London Bridge blockade starts Three Bridges depot commissioned New C387s on TL & GX New BML timetable 2016 Start of C700s on TL Oyster extension to Gatwick Complete new fleet on GX New concourse at London Bridge
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Options for Bakerloo Line Extension Towards SE London
    Lewisham Council Sustainable Development JRC Jonathan Roberts Consulting Select Committee 14 September 2010 Integrated Transport - Bakerloo Line Extension Appendix B – JRC report Potential options for Bakerloo Line extension towards SE London September 2010 Jonathan Roberts Consulting JRC Ltd , Bridge House , BA4 4TE 07545 641204 · www.jrc.org.uk ©JRC JRC2010/Bakerloo SE extensions report 1 Table of contents Map: SE London rail network in 2012 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 3 Map: Potential Bakerloo Extension options ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 5 Headline comments on potential Bakerloo Extension options ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 7 General comments ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 7 Potential extensions in Inner London ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 10 B1 Elephant – Old Kent Road – Surrey Quays – Canary Wharf ................................ ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Route Specifications 2016 South East South East Route March 2016 Network Rail –Route Specifications: South East 02
    Delivering a better railway for a better Britain Route Specifications 2016 South East South East Route March 2016 Network Rail –Route Specifications: South East 02 Route A: Kent and High Speed One (HS1) Route B: Sussex In 2014, Network Rail merged the Kent and Sussex SRS A.01 Victoria Lines 4 SRS B.01 London Victoria - Windmill Bridge Junction 65 Route into South East Route. Kent and Sussex becoming Areas within the Route. SRS A.02 Otford - Sevenoaks 8 SRS B.02 Windmill Bridge Junction - Brighton 69 SRS A.03 London - Chislehurst 12 SRS B.03 London Bridge - Windmill Bridge Junction 73 To reflect this change, this document consists of Kent SRS A.04 Chislehurst - Tonbridge 16 SRS B.04 Three Bridges - Arundel Junction 77 and Sussex Areas in separate sections. SRS A.05 Chislehurst - Ashford 20 SRS B.05 Brighton - Havant 81 SRS A.06 Tonbridge - Hastings 24 SRS B.06 Brighton/Wivelsfield - Seaford/Hastings 85 The South East Route: Sussex Area Route Study Draft SRS A.07 Dartford lines to Gravesend & Hayes Branch 28 SRS B.07 South Central Inner Suburban 89 for Consultation was published in 2014 so this document will be updated in Summer 2015 when the SRS A.08 Bromley North Branch 32 SRS B.08 South Central Sutton Lines 93 Final document has been published. SRS A.09 Gravesend/Swanley - Margate 36 SRS B.09 Dorking - Horsham 97 SRS A.10 Sheerness Branch 40 SRS B.10 Hurst Green - Uckfield 101 SRS A.11 Strood - Paddock Wood 44 SRS B.11 Tattenham Corner and Caterham Lines 105 SRS A.12 East Kent Routes 48 SRS B.12 East Grinstead Line 109 SRS A.13 Hastings
    [Show full text]
  • Train Simulator Chatham Main Line Londongillingham Route Addon Download Utorrent Kickass
    Train Simulator: Chatham Main Line - London-Gillingham Route Add-On Download Utorrent Kickass Download >>> http://bit.ly/2QSNWk7 About This Content Just a stone’s throw from Dovetail Games’ HQ, the Chatham Main Line is one of the main arterial routes from central London through the heart of Kent via the Medway towns, towards the Kent Coast – and you can now discover this picturesque route in Train Simulator. The line was originally built by the London, Chatham and Dover Railway (LC&DR), starting at London’s second busiest terminus, London Victoria. The station originally opened in October 1860 as the eventual terminus for the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway; however, two years later an expansion to the station was built for the LC&DR. Running from London Victoria, the line passes the famous Battersea Power Station and criss-crosses lines to south London stations such as Clapham Junction. After Wandsworth Road and Clapham High Street, the line diverges through Herne Hill, West Dulwich, Penge East and Beckenham Junction; services can also take the Catford Loop Line, which passes through Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye and Catford. The lines merge again at Shortlands and head into Kent, crossing the South Eastern Main Line (which serves other London termini such as Charing Cross or Cannon Street) and the main line between Ashford and Swanley. Between Farningham Road and Longfield, the Chatham Main Line crosses the junction previously used by Eurostar trains from Waterloo International to pick up High Speed One. Although the line still exists, it is reserved for emergency use only by Class 395 ‘Javelins’.
    [Show full text]
  • London Assembly Transport Committee
    London Assembly Transport Committee Submissions to Broken rails: a rail service fit for passengers transport investigation and additional notes November 2018 Organisation Page The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen 1 Association for Consultancy and Engineering (ACE) 8 Clapham Transport Users Group 17 Crossrail to Ebbsfleet Officer Working Group 26 East Surrey Transport Committee 35 Hertfordshire County Council 41 HS1 Ltd. 46 London Borough of Bromley 49 London Borough of Enfield 52 London Borough of Islington 60 London Borough of Redbridge 65 London Borough of Sutton 67 London TravelWatch 74 Love Wimbledon Business Improvement District 81 National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers 82 Network Rail 97 Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation 102 Rail Delivery Group 107 Railfuture 115 Transport for All 118 Transport for London 121 Submissions from members of the public 135 Call for evidence: London Assembly investigation on Future Rail July 2018 The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF) is the UK’s largest train driver’s union representing approximately 20,000 members in train operating companies and freight companies as well as London Underground and light rail systems. ASLEF is pleased to have this opportunity to input to the London Assembly Transport Committee’s investigation into how rail capacity, frequency and reliability can be improved, and what infrastructural developments are needed to ensure that London’s rail services are fit for purpose. 1. Currently, what are the main challenges for London's rail network? Overcrowding on busy services is currently a major challenge for London’s rail network. The Mayor's Transport Strategy states that without further action, 67% of travel on National Rail in the morning peak would be in crowded conditions by 2041.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Title
    The voice of transport users A London TravelWatch report Response to TfL’s consultation on the potential extension of the Bakerloo line further into South East London November 2014 Published by: London TravelWatch 169 Union Street London SE1 0LL Phone: 020 3176 2999 www.londontravelwatch.org.uk 2 London TravelWatch is the official body set up by Parliament to provide a Extending the Bakerloo Li Extending the Bakerloo voice for London’s travelling public, including the users of all forms of public transport. We are supported by and accountable to the London Assembly. Our approach We commission and carry out research, and evaluate and interpret the research carried out by others, to ensure that decisions on transport policy and operations are based on the best possible evidence ne We investigate complaints users have been unable to resolve with service providers – we get more than 6,000 enquiries a year from transport users and in 2013-14 we took 1,100 cases up with the transport operator because we agreed that the response the complainant had received to their original complaint was not satisfactory We monitor trends in service quality as part of our intelligence-led approach We regularly meet and seek to influence the relevant parts of the transport industry on all issues which affect the travelling public and work closely with a wide range of public interest organisations, user groups and research bodies to ensure we remain aware of their experiences and concerns We speak for passengers and the travelling public in discussions with opinion formers and decision makers at all levels, including the Mayor of London, the London Assembly, the Government, Parliament and local councils.
    [Show full text]
  • Beckenham Place Park (Ravensbourne to Beckenham Hill)
    Beckenham Place Park (Ravensbourne to Beckenham Hill) 1st walk check 2nd walk check 3rd walk check 01st October 2020 Current status Document last updated Thursday, 16th April 2020 This document and information herein are copyrighted to Saturday Walkers’ Club. If you are interested in printing or displaying any of this material, Saturday Walkers’ Club grants permission to use, copy, and distribute this document delivered from this World Wide Web server with the following conditions: • The document will not be edited or abridged, and the material will be produced exactly as it appears. Modification of the material or use of it for any other purpose is a violation of our copyright and other proprietary rights. • Reproduction of this document is for free distribution and will not be sold. • This permission is granted for a one-time distribution. • All copies, links, or pages of the documents must carry the following copyright notice and this permission notice: Saturday Walkers’ Club, Copyright © 2020, used with permission. All rights reserved. www.walkingclub.org.uk This walk has been checked as noted above, however the publisher cannot accept responsibility for any problems encountered by readers. Beckenham Place Park (Ravensbourne to Beckenham Hill) Start: Ravensbourne Station Finish: Beckenham Hill Station Length: 4.9 km (3.0 mi) Ascent/Descent: 70/82m Time: 1 ¼ hours walking time Rating: 1 out of 10 Transport: Ravensbourne and Beckenham Hill are stations on the Catford Loop Line, a branch line off the Chatham Main Line, providing a suburban stopping service from Central London via Elephant & Castle to Sevenoaks, operated by Thameslink.
    [Show full text]
  • Neg N° Date Type Place Description
    Neg N° Date Type Place Description 1 26/09/1946 Coach Nunhead 1044 and 1102 SEC 8cpt + 10cpt 3rds 2 26/09/1946 Coach NXG yard 1645 S LBSC balloon auto 3rd bke ex 3833, SR D.191 3 26/09/1946 Dept NXG yard 241 S LCD 6w birdcage gds. van,ex van394 in 6/29, D.878. 4 26/09/1946 Wagon & coach NXG yard 45923 SR ferry box van and 3426 SEC 8cpt 3rd bke birdcage SR D. 160 5 26/09/1946 Coach NXG yard 5466 SEC lav cpo (1LW) SR D.316 6 26/09/1946 Coach NXG yard 3498 SEC lav 3rd bke birdcage SR D.162 7 29/09/1946 Dept S Croydon 1510 S SEC 6w guards van, end lookouts,ex van 529 in 11/39, D884. 8 01/10/1946 Dept Stewarts Lane 01209 S LSW 10T box van sliding doors and 166 S SEC 6w van with end compartment, stores van. 9 17/10/1946 Coach Crystal Palace High level 6621, 5236 and 5365 part set 516 10 17/10/1946 Coach Crystal Palace High level 5264 and 3273 part set 516 11 17/10/1946 Dept Norwood Loco 235 S,SEC Birdcage Lav bke,B,33L3 ,ex 3293,SR.D. 148 12 18/10/1946 Dept Wimbledon,platform 5 1449 S,LSW GPO coach,ex 4947,part ARP insruction train, SR D.1202 13 18/10/1946 Dept Wimbledon,platform 5 1448 S,SEC GPO coach,ex 4911,part ARP instruction train, SR D. 1184 14 18/10/1946 Body Feltham station yard 7642,LBSC ,elliptical cor first,SR, D522, 0W 15 19/10/1946 Dept Bricklayers Arms Loco Depot 727 S,LCD coach , Lav third,ex 862,SR,D38 in 11/33, orig cpo 333L111 16 20/10/1946 Coach Westerham Set 482,ex SEC railcars 17 22/06/1946 Dept Wimbledon 529 S,LSW Box van,Weighing Machine Van 18 22/10/1946 Dept Wimbledon Ironworks 300 S,SR bogie corridor luggage van.Bridge Testing Van, ex 2297, SR D.
    [Show full text]