VNEB: Development and
Transport Action Group
Newsletter Number Two:
12 July 2012
The
recent advertising campaign by TfL in support of their Northern Line Extension
project is, to say the least, wholly misleading. The selective use of
information is manipulated to look as if there is a vast majority of residents
in favour (untrue); that the Northern Line is the best transport option for the
development along the development zone (unproven, but unlikely); that the
Northern Line can cope with the added pressure of commuters (even though it is
even more overcrowded at the moment than the Victoria Line); and that it is
both affordable and funded (both untrue and unlikely).
Let’s
spell this out a bit. The DATA Group, an
umbrella organisation covering many residents associations in the area that
focuses on development transport issues, has been in touch with TfL since
January so we are in a position to speak with some clarity.
TfL claims 90% of the local population support
the NLE. But let’s see how many people this covers and what they were
agreeing to. The figures are in TfL’s NLE 2011 Consultation document (page
5). A total of 1661 responses is the
basis of the survey. Compared to the tens of thousands of residents in the
Borough this is a meaningless survey both statistically and morally: it
certainly is not enough of a positive response to make a claim that there is
majority support for the project.
Indeed, the question that is asked is not whether a Northern Line
Extension is the best transport option for the VNEB development, but:
‘When
asked if they thought the proposed scheme would bring transport benefits to the
area of Nine Elms and Battersea, 90% (1,597) either agreed or strongly agreed,
compared with only 4% (64) who strongly disagreed’
This is
hardly a decision based on an informed choice.
We wonder what the response rate would have been had the options and
consequences been spelled out: which we shall do here.
TfL is arguing that the NLE is the best
transport option for the VNEB development and that the Northern Line can
accommodate the predicted increased traffic. DATA has discussed with TfL alternative
transport options that have not been considered at all, or only in a cursory
way, including a mixed transport, staged approach that would develop ahead of
the building development curve, and be flexible enough to cope with changes
over time. A core longer term aim could be to link in with CrossRail 2 in line
with the Mayor’s vision of integrating tube and overground services. We discussed these ideas with TfL in January
and have been in email contact with them regularly since then but, despite
several reminders, we still have not been provided with information that would
take forward discussions on these points, or the follow-up meetings we were
promised on both NLE and the Vauxhall gyratory.
None of what we have discussed has been taken into account: so the claim
in the recent advertising that TfL is responding to local views is worthless. Meanwhile, our own preliminary studies of
travel density (more details soon) on the Northern Line indicate highly crowded
conditions at peak times, and the need to look at platform and surface level
capacity at Kennington, and signalling and track layout issues along the
Northern Line, before adding an extra branch line serving the VNEB
development. We challenge TfL’s curious assumption
that passengers
will only use the less crowded parts of the Northern Line. In a nutshell, we
doubt that the Northern Line is suitable for taking large numbers of additional
passengers, without evaluating the full cost of other works to the Northern
Line network as a whole.
Even TfL are cagey when they speak about funding
of the NLE scheme. In
discussion with DATA (and with resident groups with whom we share information)
TfL appears to have no clear plan at all of how they can meet the growing
funding and financing gap. Vague
discussions of additional forms of what amounts to business levy and borrowing
money from the market on the basis of fares income over the future years is
hardly reassuring given the current economic conditions. TfL told DATA in February that they were
re-evaluating the figures and would advise when they had some clearer
estimates, but nothing further has emerged.
At about the same time DATA’s investigations had revealed a funding gap
of at least £570 million, about half the projected cost. Put bluntly, there is
a huge hole in the sums. TfL does not have the money to pay for this scheme
even with virtually all of the Lambeth Council allocation of regeneration
funding (which would otherwise be spent on libraries, recreation facilities and
the like). Not only don’t they have the money for the project, but they also
have no clear plan, or realistic expectation, of how to get it.
TfL – Our message to you
is to listen to local residents and look for alternatives. Do not commit to a
huge project that will not provide the much needed transport infrastructure for
the VNEB development and that will almost certainly need a government bale out to
build and very risky, speculative financing to run. Consider also that the huge
amount of funding that Lambeth Council is scheduled to provide will take
virtually all the budget for community improvements and will leave very little
indeed for ancillary regeneration. A NLE is not, as you claim, ‘essential to
support the transformation of Vauxhall and Nine Elms’. Indeed it is likely to
do the opposite, and prevent any transformation by sucking out regeneration
funds from Lambeth’s budget. What is needed for VNEB development is an
effective and affordable transport strategy: not a tube tunnel from Battersea
to Kennington.
People of Lambeth – Our message to
you is to make Lambeth Council and TfL listen to sense. For some reason the Council is willing to
give your money to this cockeyed scheme without due diligence. Get the planning
department to open up and be transparent for all development issues, including
the NLE. We need the development fund
money to keep open our libraries, provide other community amenities, improve
our living environment, and address wider transport issues such as the Vauxhall
gyratory. If we do nothing, the Council plans to pour virtually all of the
money available for these purposes down a NLE black hole, never to be seen
again. Moreover, it plans to finance the
running of this transport project through increased business levies in the
future.
DATA
is in touch with TfL direct who know how to contact us if they want to discuss
further. We are also in touch with a
number of Lambeth Councillors, and want to engage more with Lambeth Council,
who, so far, will not take our points seriously.
Comments
and feedback to the DATA group via your residents associations please – or make
representations direct to TfL and Lambeth Council. TfL have advertised their project team
contact email in a recent misleading pamphlet as: nle@tfl.gov.uk and the new Consultation and
Engagement staff member, Brigid Burnham, at TfL recently emailed ‘stakeholders’
from: SMBNLE@tfl.gov.uk
. If you want TfL to stop and think
again before they spend all your money on a transport scheme that is not fit
for purpose, email them to say so.
