On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, MIG wrote:

On 24 Apr, 16:54, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Apr, 16:19, MIG wrote:

On 24 Apr, 15:48, Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Apr, 15:29, MIG wrote:

Nearly as bizarre as demolishing Camden in order to accommodate the
number of people who go to Camden to visit the things that are being
demolished.

Whilst I absolutely understand where you're coming from, the plan
doesn't involve "demolishing Camden", it just doesn't.

Poetic licence, but the points are ... points.

Understood. TBH I haven't properly got my head round the plans for
Camden Town yet, but whilst my initial thoughts were along the lines of
yours, I've since come to the understanding that they are not in fact
that radical.

It's not demolition of the whole of Camden, no, but it's a bit like saying
the plan for Parliament Square isn't that radical because it's only
Westminster Abbey that's being demolished.

It probably deserves a separate thread on utl sometime soon.

Separated!

In Camden, far from the station, the Stables market at least is under
threat,

Are you sure? I've just spent some time looking through documents related
to the proposed rebuilding, and there's no mention of the Stables. How are
they related to the plan?

Bear in mind that the Lock market, which is where the good stuff is, isn't
affected, nor is the Canal market, on the east side of Chalk Farm Road
(even tackier than the Stables!), nor are the millions of conventional
shops along the streets, which are also a major part of the attraction of
Camden. I don't know if the market which bills itself as 'The Camden
Market' is affected; it's next to the Electric Ballroom, which is targeted
for termination, so perhaps. I hope so, it's horrible.

Does anyone know where i can find a copy of the Transport and Works Act
Order application that TfL made? I can find the government documents
explaining why it was rejected, but not the details of the application
itself. The best i've found is this:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/twa/ir/lon...1?page=4#a1003

BTW, if anyone is having a hard as time as me matching their mental map of
Camden up with real maps, this may be handy:

http://www.streetsensation.co.uk/camden/ca_intro.htm

Finally, on the subject of Greenwich, all i have to say is that when i was
little, i thought the famous boat was called Cutty's Ark.

tom

--
Get a ****ing hobby that isn't breathing, browsing 4chan, or fapping. --
The Well Cultured Anonymous, on Manners

On 24 Apr, 18:01, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 24 Apr, 16:05, Mizter T wrote:

Here's a 'bird's eye view' of the station buildings from Live Search
Maps:
http://tinyurl.com/5mwrqx

Blimey, didn't realise there was quite so much of it. It would make a
lot of sense to rent that out.

Though it does also show how much other out-of-use land there is
around the station.


Just to be clear, the station buildings do not include the big shed to
the right of that shot. That big shed used to house the Motorail
platforms / loading bays, but they've subsequently been filled in (you
can see this further to the right, at least it's clearer if you look
at it from a train window) and it's all used as a car park now.

But yes, the station is spacious and is pretty underutilised. I think
the plan makes sense.

"Mizter T" wrote

in
another part of the building there is a 'tunnel' where you can see the
remnants of the old ticket windows that seemingly provided for the
District line plus the few mainline passenger trains that actually
served Olympia.

Those ticket windows were operated by London Transport - though in the early
1960s on non-exhibition days the only passenger trains were the two
unadvertised departures to Clapham Junction. What is more, if you asked for
a ticket to Clapham Junction they would actually issue a London Transport
ticket to Elephant & Castle. By 1967 the Clapham Junction trains were
advertised, and were the last steam-hauled passenger service entirely within
Greater London.

peter

On 24 Apr, 16:25, Mizter T wrote:
The Imperial Wharf station project is the result of a tie-in with
developers, in fact I think it's *the result of a tie in with two
developers - the developer which was responsible for the already built
Chelsea Harbour development on the east side of the line (and who has
already paid their contribution), and the developer who wants to
develop land to the west side of the line.

I think the development on that land would make a good place for shops
- the station is on an embankment so it has very little land of its
own to work with.

Shepherd's Bush station is meanwhile the responsibility of the
developers of the new mega shopping centre north of Shepherd's Bush,
Westfield.

And it has its own row of shops, albeit on the opposite side of the
bus station.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

I don't claim any expertise on this specific operation - but is not
this a case of TfL being in the effective shoes of a Franchisee, and
Network Rail still being the freeholders? - a situation which has
destroyed the potential for less than stellar property transactions
due to there now being too many parties trying to extract both profit
and hypothecated gains within the life of a mere franchise.

LSH of course contains a large number of former railway surveyors and
what remains from the old station trading teams, so they do know what
they are doing.

Of course where the prize is larger it maybe worth a tripartite
developer / TOC / NR agreement to be entered - but that cannot be the
case everywhere and transactions have been lost that way

"Mizter T" wrote

Nothing's changed, said ticket windows are still hidden behind the
timetables in that passage (which I perhaps somewhat confusingly
described elsewhere as a 'tunnel'), and if you look up you can see the
old (and unilluminated) lightbox signs above them (different windows
for LU and main line train tickets). I'm curious as to when they were
last in use, and when the main ticket office moved into the old
Motorail lounge? Perhaps when BR attempted to reintroduce cross-London
Intercity services in the 80's, perhaps when North London Railways
(the precursor to Silverlink) started running the Clapham Jn to
Willesden Jn service in the early/mid 90's (at least I think it was
them wot did it)...

The BR ticket office moved into the Motorail Louinge for the 1980s
cross-London InterCity. I can't remember what the arrangements were then for
buying Underground tickets.

Peter

On 24 Apr, 18:48, Mizter T wrote:

Indeed. Pendar Silwood's Abandoned Stations website has an interesting
section on the West London Line he
http://www.loveplums.co.uk/Tube/West_London_Line.html

From the Addison Road - Richmond section of the same site is this map:

http://www.loveplums.co.uk/Tube/Hamm...rove_Road.html

I make that 11 stations, and then there's the original Shepherd's Bush
station on the H+C, already closed by this time, two Wood Lane
stations just off the top of the map, or possibly three if you count
the two parts of the Central station separately, as some do. Then
there's the White City station which replaced it. Just off the bottom
of the map there's the District station at Hammersmith, with Baron's
Court and West Kengsington not far away. This area of London really
does seem to have had more than its fair share of stations! I doubt
if anywhere else has as many closed stations; there's another map of
them all he

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...d%27s_Bush.png

Mwmbwls wrote:
Plans include letting the large existing station building at
Kensington Olympia station to a retailer and constructing new
passenger facilities on a smaller site nearby.

Typical. Always prioritise commercial income over uses that might
improve the utility of the station.

If they don't need the building, why not convert it into a secure
cycle park? Kenny O has poor links to the tube network, but is ideally
placed for commuters from both north and south to cycle to work in
West London.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

MIG wrote:

3) Oh look, there's loads of people attracted to the area and a shiny
new station to bring them here, so we can make money by putting a
supermarket here (for which we'll have to knock down everything else).

A new supermarket so close to the massive Camden Sainsburys? I thought they
were building offices.

I estimated that the money earmarked for rebuilding Camden Town station
would fund a 10-minute 7-day NLL service at Camden Road for a century,
removing the need for so many people to use Camden Town station.

On Apr 24, 6:57*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, MIG wrote:
On 24 Apr, 16:54, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Apr, 16:19, MIG wrote:

On 24 Apr, 15:48, Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Apr, 15:29, MIG wrote:

Nearly as bizarre as demolishing Camden in order to accommodate the
number of people who go to Camden to visit the things that are being
demolished.

Whilst I absolutely understand where you're coming from, the plan
doesn't involve "demolishing Camden", it just doesn't.

Poetic licence, but the points are ... points.

Understood. TBH I haven't properly got my head round the plans for
Camden Town yet, but whilst my initial thoughts were along the lines of
yours, I've since come to the understanding that they are not in fact
that radical.

It's not demolition of the whole of Camden, no, but it's a bit like saying
the plan for Parliament Square isn't that radical because it's only
Westminster Abbey that's being demolished.

It probably deserves a separate thread on utl sometime soon.

Separated!

In Camden, far from the station, the Stables market at least is under
threat,

Are you sure? I've just spent some time looking through documents related
to the proposed rebuilding, and there's no mention of the Stables. How are
they related to the plan?

That's what I meant about lumping together different plans. The
Stables is under threat, but not from the station rebuilding.