Treasury Holdings Begin Northern Line Battersea Consultation
Treasury Holdings, the company which effectively owns Battersea Power Station developers REO, have begun a public consultation their plans to redevelop the Battersea Power Station site and to see the Northern Line extended to Battersea.
Back in October 2009, a planning framework for Battersea and Nine Elms was published by Wandsworth, the Mayor’s Office and the developers which effectively concluded that any development of the site would require the extension of tube services into the area. This is something that developers REO have long indicated would be their goal, should they succeed in redeveloping the Battersea site, and represented a further cementing of it in print.
At the same time, an agreement was reached between the Borough and Mayor that any Crossrail funding raised within that area could be diverted to support such a project should it take place. Such funding would obviously be insufficient to pay for any extension completely, but would provide an option for “topping up” any funds raised either by the developer or by other means (Tax Increment Funding has been another option suggested).
Treasury Holding’s current consultation looks to bring four route options to the attention of the general public, and to solicit comments on them.
The options suggested are as follows (apologies for the image quality), and we have included Treasury Holdings’ summary of the route option beneath each image:
ROUTE 1: Kennington – Battersea Power Station (Direct)
Route Option 1 is likely to be the easiest route option to deliver in engineering terms, involving a 3km direct tunnel from Kennington to the Battersea Power Station site, with no mid-station. As a result, the route would be likely to:
– have the lowest capital cost; and
– provide the fastest journey time to the Power Station and western end of VNEB.
However, this route option would not improve access to a significant part of the Nine Elms Opportunity Area and existing residential areas.
ROUTE 2: Kennington – Battersea Power Station (via South Nine Elms)
Route Option 2 involves a 3km tunnel from Kennington to Battersea Power Station with a mid-station in south Nine Elms. As a result, the route would:
– improve accessibility to most of the key development sites in the Nine Elms Opportunity Area via new pedestrian links under the railway viaduct;
– provide a new tube station in an area currently only served by buses; and
– reduce crowding at Vauxhall and on the Victoria Line.
However, the building of this route option could result in short term disruption to existing retail, commercial and residential activities in the vicinity of the mid-station location.
ROUTE 3: Kennington – Battersea Power Station (via Vauxhall Station)
Route Option 3 involves a 3km tunnel from Kennington to Battersea Power Station with a mid-station next to Vauxhall Underground station.
As a result, this option would:
– provide additional public transport capacity and route options at Vauxhall; and
– provide an interchange between the Northern and Victoria Lines and overground railway at Vauxhall.
However, the route option has some complex engineering issues, would probably have the highest capital cost and would be the most difficult to construct and deliver. It may also exacerbate crowding issues on the Victoria Line and at Vauxhall, and may limit growth opportunities near
ROUTE 4: Kennington to Battersea Power Station (via North Nine Elms)
Route Option 4 involves a 3km tunnel from Kennington to Battersea Power Station with a mid-station in north Nine Elms. As a result, this option would:
– improve accessibility to the planned US Embassy development and several other key development sites in the Nine Elms Opportunity Area; and
– offer a reasonable interchange with the public transport facilities at Vauxhall.
However, building this route option would be complex, particularly in relation to integration with existing Network Rail infrastructure, and would probably have a relatively high capital cost. Also, while it would serve some new developments, it would not serve existing residential areas particularly well.
Obviously this consultation should not be seen as an indication that the project is now certain to go ahead, with the developer’s intentions almost certainly being to bring the Battersea development back into the eyes of both the public and financial worlds.
It does, however, suggest that we may be about to witness an increase in the efforts to bring the redevelopment of the area to fruition. The published routes also give a nice insight into what the developer’s work behind the scenes have indicated is possible, and in that regard are worth consideration alone.
UPDATE: Have now got the full leaflet, which includes a freepost questionnaire and email contact details. Have uploaded it here for anyone who wants it. – JB]
Thanks to Captain Kidd for the spot.