DOCSLIB.ORG

Bakerloo Line Extension – Summary of Business Case and Planning Scenario Work

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Bakerloo line extension – summary of business case and planning scenario work 3 January 2014 (updated 4 February 2014) Background The Mayor’s Transport Strategy includes a proposal to consider the feasibility of a southern extension of the Bakerloo line from Elephant & Castle. This could serve to improve transport connectivity and journey times in south-east London, and provide relief to congested national rail paths into central London. Initial feasibility work has been completed looking at alignment options, engineering constraints, the scheme’s business case and the potential impact on development and regeneration along the length of the route. The preferred solution consists of a new tunnelled section between Elephant & Castle and Lewisham, and utilisation of existing national rail lines south of Lewisham to connect with Beckenham Junction and Hayes. Two alignment options exist for the tunnelled section through LB Southwark; the first option is via Old Kent Road, and the second option is via Camberwell and Peckham Rye. This can be seen in the figure below. Elephant & Castle N Alignment Option 1 Old Kent Road New Cross Gate Camberwell Peckham Rye Lewisham Alignment Option 2 Ladywell Catford Bridge Lower Sydenham ` New Beckenham Beckenham Junction Clock House Bromley Elmers End Eden Park West Wickham Hayes Croydon Figure 1- Bakerloo line alignment options Under the preferred option national rail services would no longer operate on the Hayes line. The freed up train paths would be allocated to other national rail services in south-east London. The capital cost of the scheme is estimated at between £2.2 – 2.6 billion (outturn prices including optimism bias, assuming construction starts in 2020). There is no funding in TfL’s Business Plan to pay for the scheme and given the current financial climate and other funding commitments this is unlikely to change in the short- to medium-term. Outline business case appraisal An initial business case appraisal of the scheme was completed in 2010, and this found that the benefit cost ratio (BCR) for alignment option 1 (via Old Kent Road) was 1.9:1. This business case appraisal was updated in September 2013 to take into account updated Railplan outputs based in turn on an updated LTS demand matrix for the year 2031. Note that the LTS matrix does not take into account the 2011 census or the resulting employment and population forecasts. The Railplan modelling assumes the Bakerloo line upgrade is complete, giving a peak frequency of 27 trains per hour operated with new rolling stock. More services, up towards around 33 to 36 tph could operate if so required and be specified as part of the line upgrade. The service frequencies modelled for the extension were as follows: Figure 2 – Assumed frequencies along line in AM peak, 2031 The benefits of the options have been calculated in accordance with TfL’s Business Case Demand Manual and include the following: • Journey time savings • Ambience benefits • Highway benefits Wider economic benefits have not been captured at this stage; however these could potentially be derived from the LTS outputs going forward. This would enable a better representation of the benefits and strengthen the case for the scheme future. The capital costs of the scheme are derived from the technical feasibility study completed in 2007, updated to reflect more accurate estimates developed for the Northern line extension project. Similarly the operating costs are based on previous LU estimates but updated to reflect current estimates for the Northern line extension project. The headline results of the updated business case appraisal, taking into account the benefits and costs outlined above, can be summarised as follows: All £ millions Build + renewal Operating Revenue Net Financial Benefits Ratio Option 1 £2,174 £729 £322 £2,582 £8,472 3.3: 1 Option 2 £2,597 £816 £320 £3,094 £8,184 2.6: 1 Table 1 – Summary of benefits and costs The case for the routes down to Hayes/Beckenham Junction has increased significantly so that it is now well over the TfL pass mark of 1.5:1. This case will also be strengthened further once wider economic benefits are included in the assessment. Option 1(via Old Kent Road) remains the stronger in terms of BCR due to the higher journey time benefits (with shorter journey times to central London) and the lower costs (with shorter tunnelling route). They do both, however, present a very strong case. Planning scenarios Work has also been completed into potential planning scenarios with the Bakerloo line extension in place, in order to better understand both the impact of the scheme on development and regeneration. Three different scenarios were examined across the length of the route, split into three different land-use categories. The scenarios can be summarised as follows: • Base scenario (without Bakerloo line) – this scenario covers the scales and type of development currently planned by boroughs • High growth scenario (without Bakerloo line) – takes an optimistic view on a number of factors and opportunities that are likely to have a bearing on growth, including macro economic context, more flexibility in planning rules in town centres and high market demand • Aspirational growth scenario (with Bakerloo line) – takes into account the impact of the Bakerloo line extension in unlocking development potential due to improved accessibility and connectivity. A higher percentage uplift has been applied along the length of the proposed route. The table below shows the indicative development scenarios for each land-use category: Southwark Lewisham Bromley Total Residential Units Base 45,564 33,121 13,138 91,822 High Growth 51,506 37,303 38,422 127,232 Aspirational 54,516 38,568 38,549 131,633 Retail (sqm) Base 144,251 114,673 207,041 465,964 High Growth 178,480 126,386 228,750 533,617 Aspirational 183,500 129,117 229,439 542,056 Office (sqm) Base 743,621 177,163 147,738 1,068,522 High Growth 844,096 177,593 346,609 1,368,298 Aspirational 852,973 179,121 347,217 1,379,310 Table 2 – Development scenarios by borough These scenarios do not take into account latest proposals on development opportunities as identified within the proposed Further Alterations to the London Plan, which could potentially alter assumptions on capacities at certain town centre locations. Further work is required to understand the scope and extent of potential third-party contributions (for example through CIL) towards the Bakerloo line extension from these scenarios. Next steps It is planned that an update on this work will be provided to the Mayor within the next 2-3 months. Possible next steps for taking forward the scheme and building on the feasibility work completed hitherto are currently being scoped. .
Recommended publications
  • A Rail Manifesto for London

    A Rail Manifesto for London

    A Rail Manifesto for London The new covered walkway linking Hackney Central and Hackney Downs stations creates an interchange which provides a better connection and more journey opportunities March 2016 A Rail Manifesto for London Railfuture1 seeks to inform and influence the development of transport policies and practices nationally and locally. We offer candidates for the 2016 London Mayoral and Assembly elections this manifesto2, which represents a distillation of the electorate’s aspirations for a developing railway for London, for delivery during the next four years or to be prepared for delivery during the following period of office. Executive Summary Recognising the importance of all rail-based transport to the economy of London and to its residents, commuters and visitors alike, Railfuture wishes to see holistic and coherent rail services across all of London, integrated with all other public transport, with common fares and conditions. Achieving this is covered by the following 10 policy themes: 1. Services in London the Mayor should take over. The 2007 transfer of some National Rail services to TfL has been a huge success, transforming some of the worst services in London into some of the best performing. Railfuture believes it is right that the Mayor should take over responsibility for more rail services in London, either by transferring service operation to TfL or by TfL specifying service levels to the operator, and that this must benefit all of London. 2. Improved Services. Frequencies play an important role in the success of metro and suburban train services. We believe that the Mayor should set out the minimum standards of service levels across London seven days per week for all rail services.
  • Chapter Four – a Good Public Transport Experience

    Chapter Four – a Good Public Transport Experience

    A GOOD PUBLIC TRANSPORT EXPERIENCE 129 Chapter four – A good public transport experience London has one of the most extensive public transport networks in the world, with more than 9 million trips made every day by bus, tram, Tube, train and river boat. Use of the public transport system has increased by 65 per cent since 2000, largely because of enhanced services and an improved customer experience. An easy to use and accessible public transport system is an essential part of the Healthy Streets Approach as it gives people alternatives to car use for journeys that are not possible on foot or by cycle. By providing the most efficient and affordable option for journeys that are either impractical or too long to walk or cycle, public transport has helped to reduce Londoners’ dependency on cars during the past 15 years and this trend must continue. VERSION FOR PUBLICATION A GOOD PUBLIC TRANSPORT EXPERIENCE 131 401 As it grows, the city requires the public This chapter sets out the importance of The whole journey ‘By 2041, the transport capacity to reduce crowding a whole journey approach, where public A good public transport experience and support increasing numbers of transport improvements are an integral means catering for the whole journey, public transport people travelling more actively, efficiently part of delivering the Healthy Streets with all its stages, from its planning to and sustainably. Figure 18 shows that Approach. The chapter then explains the return home. All public transport system will need by 2041 the public transport system will in four sections how London’s public journeys start or finish on foot or by need to cater for up to around 15 million transport services can be improved for cycle, and half of all walking in London is trips every day.
  • Railway Development Society Limited Is a Not-For-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee Registered in England & Wales No.5011634

    Railway Development Society Limited Is a Not-For-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee Registered in England & Wales No.5011634

    railse no. 132 June 2016 Railfuture in London and the South East quarterly branch newsletter The independent campaign for a bigger better passenger and freight rail network Railfuture campaign wins reopened National Infrastructure Commission east London station at Lea Bridge wants Crossrail 2 hybrid bill in 2019 Between Stratford and Tottenham Hale, opened on Lord Adonis and his team of seven Commissioners 15 September 1840, closed 8 July 1985 with the end of may only have been appointed since last October, and Stratford-Tottenham Hale shuttle services, reopened the CEO since December, but their output and current 31 years later on 15 May 2016 (officially on 16 May). casework is already substantial. For London and the South East there has been last November’s Call for Evidence on London’s Transport Infrastructure, to which Railfuture responded in January, and which in March resulted in two reports: ‘Transport for a World City’ and, from an independent panel of experts, the supporting ‘Review of the case for large scale transport investment in London’ both of which include a specific focus on Crossrail 2. The NIC calls for a hybrid bill deposit in autumn 2019 for line opening in 2033, to coincide with HS2 opening to Leeds and Manchester and the need for the double- ended Euston St. Pancras station to add distribution capacity. It also advocates deferral of the £4billion New Southgate branch, noting that it would enable the proposed eastern extension to be considered when the Lea Bridge station – looking south, towards Stratford second phase of the scheme is planned. It “would be more expensive, but could bring greater overall This is the culmination of a campaign which local benefits, particularly in relation to its impacts in Railfuture members, individual and affiliated, can justly unlocking housing and economic growth in the east of claim as their own.
  • Bakerloo Line Explanatory Note

    Bakerloo Line Explanatory Note

    THE RAIL VEHICLE ACCESSIBILITY (NON-INTEROPERABLE RAIL SYSTEM) (LONDON UNDERGROUND BAKERLOO LINE 72 TUBE STOCK) EXEMPTION ORDER 2019 Explanatory Note What does the Order do? 1. The Order exempts rail vehicles operated on the line known as the Bakerloo Line by London Underground Limited (LUL) from certain requirements under the Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Non-Interoperable Rail System) Regulations 2010 (“RVAR 2010”). The Order is made by the Secretary of State in exercise of powers conferred by sections 183(1), (2), 4(b), (5) and 207(1) and (4) of the Equality Act 2010. The Secretary of State’s decision to exercise powers in section 183(4)(b) instead of powers in section 183(4)(a) of the Equality Act 2010 is because the Secretary of State thinks it is appropriate to include articles 4 to 8 in the Order which outlines conditions and time limits on the exemptions as set out below. 2. The exemptions will apply to the vehicles from 1st January 2020 until 2am on 1st January 2024 at the latest. What requirements does this exemption cover? 3. This exemption covers the requirement to provide a boarding device (e.g. ramp) between the doorway and the platform at all platforms that do not have any level boarding, the requirement for flooring at the doorways to contrast with the flooring in the saloon, the requirement for single band of colour on the floor running parallel with the door along its full width, the requirement to provide a vertical handrail on both sides of all doors, the requirement for all handrails to have a cross section with a diameter of not less than 30mm, the requirement to make ‘next stop’ audible announcements when the train is stationary at a platform, the requirement to have a public address system for visual announcements in all vehicles and the requirement to have wheelchair spaces that comply with the RVAR 2010.
  • London and South Coast Rail Corridor Study: Terms of Reference

    London and South Coast Rail Corridor Study: Terms of Reference

    LONDON & SOUTH COAST RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT APRIL 2016 LONDON & SOUTH COAST RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT FINAL Project no: PPRO 4-92-157 / 3511970BN Date: April 2016 WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff WSP House 70 Chancery Lane London WC2A 1AF Tel: +44 (0) 20 7314 5000 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7314 5111 www.wspgroup.com www.pbworld.com iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................1 2 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................2 2.1 STUDY CONTEXT ............................................................................................. 2 2.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................. 2 3 PROBLEM DEFINITION ...............................................................5 3.1 ‘DO NOTHING’ DEMAND ASSESSMENT ........................................................ 5 3.2 ‘DO NOTHING’ CAPACITY ASSESSMENT ..................................................... 7 4 REVIEWING THE OPTIONS ...................................................... 13 4.1 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.................................................................... 13 4.2 RAIL SCHEME PROPOSALS ......................................................................... 13 4.3 PACKAGE DEFINITION .................................................................................. 19 5 THE BML UPGRADE PACKAGE .............................................. 21 5.1 THE PROPOSALS ..........................................................................................
  • Travellers Rest, Kenton Road, Harrow, London Ha3 8At Freehold Development Opportunity

    Travellers Rest, Kenton Road, Harrow, London Ha3 8At Freehold Development Opportunity

    TRAVELLERS REST, KENTON ROAD, HARROW, LONDON HA3 8AT FREEHOLD DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY geraldeve.com TRAVELLERS REST, KENTON ROAD, HARROW, LONDON HA3 8AT 1 The Opportunity • Site area of approximately 1.7 acres (0.69 ha). • Located in Kenton within the London Borough of Harrow, ten miles north west of central London. • Residential development opportunity for circa 180 units (subject to planning consent), supported by a detailed feasibility study with a net saleable area of 11,271 sq m (121,000 sq ft). • Existing accommodation includes 119-bedroom hotel and restaurant, with approximately 90 parking spaces. • Excellent transport connections (London Fare Zone 4) being adjacent to Kenton Underground Station (Bakerloo Line), and Northwick Park (Metropolitan Line). • Central London is accessible in approximately 30 minutes (Kenton Station to London Paddington Station / London Euston Station), or 20 minutes from Northwick Park to Baker Street. • Hotel accommodation in this location is not protected by Local Plan or London Plan Policy. Therefore, the loss of the existing hotel would not be contrary to Policy. • None of the existing buildings are listed, locally listed or lie within a Conservation Area. 2 TRAVELLERS REST, KENTON ROAD, HARROW, LONDON HA3 8AT Location & Situation The site is located in Kenton within the London Borough of Harrow, in a predominantly residential area approximately nine miles north west of central London and within London Fare Zone 4. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character and there are a wide range of local retailers located on Kenton Road. Immediately to the south of the site is the Kenton Bridge Medical Centre and a large Sainsbury’s Superstore.
  • UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE)

    UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE)

    UK Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) - 1 - This report was compiled by the OMEGA Centre, University College London. Please Note: This Project Profile has been prepared as part of the ongoing OMEGA Centre of Excellence work on Mega Urban Transport Projects. The information presented in the Profile is essentially a 'work in progress' and will be updated/amended as necessary as work proceeds. Readers are therefore advised to periodically check for any updates or revisions. The Centre and its collaborators/partners have obtained data from sources believed to be reliable and have made every reasonable effort to ensure its accuracy. However, the Centre and its collaborators/partners cannot assume responsibility for errors and omissions in the data nor in the documentation accompanying them. - 2 - CONTENTS A INTRODUCTION Type of Project Location Major Associated Developments Current Status B BACKGROUND TO PROJECT Principal Project Objectives Key Enabling Mechanisms and Timeline of Key Decisions Principal Organisations Involved • Central Government Bodies/Departments • Local Government • London Underground Limited • Olympia & York • The coordinating group • Contractors Planning and Environmental Regime • The JLE Planning Regime • The Environmental Statement • Project Environmental Policy & the Environmental Management System (EMS) • Archaeological Impact Assessment • Public Consultation • Ecological Mitigation • Regeneration Land Acquisition C PRINCIPAL PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS Route Description Main Termini and Intermediate Stations • Westminster
  • Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 2015/16 Contents

    Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 2015/16 Contents

    Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 2015/16 Contents About Transport for London (TfL) 4 Message from the Commissioner 120 Statement of Accounts We are the integrated transport authority for London. Our purpose is 8 Year at a glance 272 Annual Governance Statement to keep London moving, working and growing, and to make life in our city better. We reinvest all of our income to run and improve London’s 10 Delivering for London 280 Commissioner and transport services. Managing Directors 12 Operational performance Our operational responsibilities include London Underground, London 282 Members of TfL (2015/16) Buses, Docklands Light Railway (DLR), London Overground, TfL Rail, 16 Keeping London moving, London Trams, London River Services, London Dial-a-Ride, Victoria working and growing 284 Directors of Crossrail Limited Coach Station, Santander Cycles and the Emirates Air Line. (2015/16) 18 Customers: the heart of our business On the roads, we regulate taxis and the private hire trade, run the 286 Membership of TfL committees Congestion Charging scheme, manage the city’s 580km red route 34 Delivery: our plans and our promises and panels (2015/16) network, operate all of the Capital’s 6,300 traffic signals and work to ensure a safe environment for all road users. 54 People: dedicated to customer service 288 TfL Members' meeting attendance (2015/16) We are delivering one of the world’s largest programmes of transport 66 Value: delivering more with less capital investment, which is building the Elizabeth line, modernising Tube 290 Remuneration services and stations, transforming the road network and making it safer, 78 Technology and data: a new especially for more vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians and cyclists.
  • Euston Express - Petition

    Euston Express - Petition

    C221-MMD-CV-REP-010-200019 |P02 | 06th May 2015 Euston Express - Petition Revision Date Issued for/Revision details Revised by P01 22/01/2015 Initial issue I Grace P02 06/05/2015 HS2 comments included I Grace Name Data MDL Ref B320 FOI / EIR HS2 to advise Document type Report Directorate London West Midlands WBS HS2 to advise Keywords Report, Template Authors ian.grace-mm Owner Mike Prosser Review Directorate HS2 to advise Employer’s Lead Reviewer HS2 to advise Authorised for use HS2 to advise INTERNAL London West Midlands Euston Express - Petition Contents Page number Executive summary ...................................................................................................... 1 1 Abbreviations and descriptions .............................................................................. 4 2 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4 2.1 HS2 scheme ............................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Euston Tunnels ........................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Petition to the Hybrid Bill scheme .......................................................................... 5 3 Petition Proposals ................................................................................................. 5 4 Operational Review ............................................................................................... 8 4.1 Overview ................................................................................................................
  • Bakerloo Line Extension

    Bakerloo Line Extension

    Bakerloo line extension Option selection summary report Date: December 2015 CONTENTS 1. Executive summary ....................................................................... 3 2. Introduction ................................................................................ 5 3. Assessing the Bakerloo line options .................................................. 7 4. Assessment results ..................................................................... 15 5. Next steps ................................................................................ 30 Appendix A – Indicative long term timeline ........................................... 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - 2014 Public consultation proposed Bakerloo line extension routes ........................ 6 Figure 2 - Stages of options assessment ................................................................................ 9 Figure 3 - Stage 2 assessment extension options ................................................................. 10 Figure 4 - Stage 3 assessment extension options ................................................................. 14 Figure 5 - Growth and transport factors along each extension corridor to Lewisham ........... 21 Figure 6 - Location map of potential New Camberwell Rail Station ...................................... 26 Figure 7 - Initial extension option and potential long-term wider region rail improvements .. 28 Figure 8 – Indicative timeline of next steps for developing the extension proposal in 2016 .. 31 Table 1 - Mayor's Transport Strategy
  • Bakerloo Line Extension Consultation Report

    Bakerloo Line Extension Consultation Report

    Bakerloo line extension Consultation Report November 2020 Contents 1. Executive summary ................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................ 6 1.2 Summary of responses received ........................................................................ 6 1.3 Summary of next steps .................................................................................... 12 2. About the proposals .......................................................................................... 13 2.1 Overview .......................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Why the extension is needed ........................................................................... 13 2.3 What we have already consulted about ........................................................... 15 2.4 Our proposals .................................................................................................. 16 2.5 Stations ............................................................................................................ 16 2.6 Tunnel alignment ............................................................................................. 16 2.7 Worksites ......................................................................................................... 17 2.8 Shafts ..............................................................................................................
  • Future Tube Projects

    Future Tube Projects

    Appendix 4 Transport Committee 17 January 2012 Transcript of Item 7: Future Tube Projects Richard Tracey (AM): You will understand, obviously because my constituency is Wandsworth and Merton, that I am extremely interested in terms of future trends in the Northern line extension to Battersea and so could I ask you first of all about that? How that is going along from your perspective and the various ramifications of the changes that have happened in Nine Elms in recent time? Michèle Dix (Managing Director of Planning for TfL): Up until recently, certainly before Treasury Holdings and Real Estate Opportunities went into administration, we were working closely with Treasury Holdings on the development of the Northern line proposal. The work that we were doing was being paid for by Treasury Holdings and there is a Section 106 agreement with them for the Battersea Power Station site for a lot of money that was associated with taking that Northern line extension through to a Transport and Works Act (TWA) by getting the powers in order to build it. We have worked closely with them and we have wanted to ensure that the approach to the work, the way that the line is laid out, the access etc, was consistent with the sorts of services that London Underground (LU) would want to see, hence the close working. This past year, we have worked more closely with them on the public consultation that took place on the options revisiting some of the consultation that was done in the previous years so that we were satisfied that the solution that came out of that was the preferred solution and, based on an assessment, was the right one to take forward.