|
Euston Station
In article ,
Chris Johns wrote: On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Stephen Furley wrote: Just about every American station I've seen, and I admit I haven't seen very many, is horrible at track level. At Newark Penn the tracks are at an elevated level, and the platforms are terrible; the edges are breaking up in places, and have been roughly repaired by thick plates of some sort of thick material fixed over the worst places, and providing something for people to trip over. At EWR airport station, built just a few ears ago, the platforms are very narrow, I would say dangerously so, where there are buildings on them. New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal are both much worse than Euston at platform level, though they are nice at concourse level. Poughkeepsie (I'm not even sure how to pronounce that) is a nice smaller station. I think it's somehting like "Pur-kip-see". I didn't get off the train at Newark, but from the window it did look like it was falling down. NYP reminded me was a bit like a big Liverpool Street (modern looking busy but not that exciting above the track level, and dark and dingy down by the trains) and Grand Central Terminal has a really nice big hall, but is truly awful at platform level. Boston South was the best of a bad bunch at track level of the ones I went to. Yep. Boston South seemed the best of the bunch on the eastern corridor when I last did the trip (gosh, about 10 years ago...). Would have liked it to have had a circulating area as nice (and as warm) as Grand Central (or Euston), mined. It was damned cold last time I was in Boston. -- Andy Breen ~ Speaking for myself, not the University of Wales "your suggestion rates at four monkeys for six weeks" (Peter D. Rieden) |
Euston Station
In article ,
Tom Anderson wrote: On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Andrew Robert Breen wrote: In article , Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2009, Neil Williams wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:39:11 -0000, "solar penguin" wrote: That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains. I find it claustrophobic compared with Euston's high-ceilinged Great Hall, which is certainly deserving of the name. Hmm. Big Hall, possiby. There's nothing very Great about it. ? In fact, boggle. The Great Hall at Euston is a glorious space. With some of the retail clutter cleared away (as I hear it has been - can't wait to see the results) it should be the magnificent, uplifting space it should be. Lovely bit of architecture - and the materials used were superb. It's a featureless cuboid. Well, so's the golden ratio.. It absolutely does the job of being a station, but apart from that, it does nothing at all. Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._concourse.jpg (now minus some of the shops) ? Yep. That's the place. A real gem. -- Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) |
Euston Station
In article ,
Neil Williams wrote: On 2 Feb, 14:02, Tom Anderson wrote: Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_station_con... Yep. Spacious, airy, practical and warm. Everything that a number of other main termini are not. King's Cross, you mean? Also gorgeous architectually, but a brute of a place to actually use.. -- Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) |
Euston Station
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2 Feb, 15:01, Mark Goodge wrote: Which food outlets? The Pasty Shop, and I forget what was on the other side. They've moved outside the station into temporary units. Where the number of food places has increased - there's now also a sausage-in-a-bun shop (small sausages, large prices, didn't seem to be doing a roaring trade) and some other things. tom -- Tubes are the foul subterranean entrails of the London beast, stuffed with the day's foetid offerings. -- Tokugawa |
Euston Station
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2 Feb, 14:02, Tom Anderson wrote: Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_station_con... Yep. Spacious, airy, practical and warm. Everything that a number of other main termini are not. Interesting, no, but then that's not what it's there for. Yes, i'd agree with that. It's functional - especially now the shops have been thinned out - but nothing more. I think the layout could be better - heading into or out from the underground station, i often get caught in flows heading the wrong way, and have to fight my way across them. A problem i never have at Liverpool Street, Victoria, etc. On top of that, the station could be much prettier, and make better use of the land, but those are merely icing on the cake of functionality. (now minus some of the shops) All 3 of the "teepee" like ones around the pillars visible on the photo above have gone. Makes quite a difference. Yes, it felt like almost a different place when i first went there after the rearrangement. tom -- Tubes are the foul subterranean entrails of the London beast, stuffed with the day's foetid offerings. -- Tokugawa |
Euston Station
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Andrew Robert Breen wrote:
In article , Tom Anderson wrote: On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Andrew Robert Breen wrote: In article , Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2009, Neil Williams wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:39:11 -0000, "solar penguin" wrote: That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains. I find it claustrophobic compared with Euston's high-ceilinged Great Hall, which is certainly deserving of the name. Hmm. Big Hall, possiby. There's nothing very Great about it. ? In fact, boggle. The Great Hall at Euston is a glorious space. With some of the retail clutter cleared away (as I hear it has been - can't wait to see the results) it should be the magnificent, uplifting space it should be. Lovely bit of architecture - and the materials used were superb. It's a featureless cuboid. Well, so's the golden ratio.. Well, no it isn't, it's a dimensionless irrational number, but IKWM, but then it's also not a building. You can use the golden ratio in the making of aesthetically pleasing buildings, but you need much more than that. The idea that you only need geometry was tried out fairly thoroughly between the 30s and 60s, and the fairly emphatic conclusion was that that that doesn't work. It absolutely does the job of being a station, but apart from that, it does nothing at all. Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._concourse.jpg (now minus some of the shops) ? Yep. That's the place. A real gem. Well, de gustibus non est disputandum, but i can assure you that you're utterly wrong. :) tom -- Tubes are the foul subterranean entrails of the London beast, stuffed with the day's foetid offerings. -- Tokugawa |
Euston Station
In message , at 20:30:00 on Sun, 1
Feb 2009, Sarah Brown remarked: a windswept 1950's loo-wall structure built entirely outside the original station, and a route-march from the rest of humanity. Windswept is good, given the diesel fumes. Not when the wind is blowing driving rain onto the platform! -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
In message , at 21:49:03 on Sun,
1 Feb 2009, Neil Williams remarked: [1] It's a pity that M&S Food[2] seem to have an almost-monopoly on station supermarkets, though. A small Tesco or Sainsbury's would be a lot more useful That's unlikely because the M&S Food shops at major stations are actually a franchise operated by the same people as operate almost all the other food outlets, and appear to have a monopoly. -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:08:56 +0000, Andrew Robert Breen put finger to
keyboard and typed: In article , Neil Williams wrote: On 2 Feb, 14:02, Tom Anderson wrote: Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_station_con... Yep. Spacious, airy, practical and warm. Everything that a number of other main termini are not. King's Cross, you mean? Also gorgeous architectually, but a brute of a place to actually use.. Kins Cross suffers badly from a combination of the split between the main and suburban train sheds and creeping retailisation on the concourse. The new concourse ought to improve both of those, at least a bit. It does seem that TPTB have woken up to the idea that filling every available bit of floor space with retail units isn't actually a good idea - they get in the way of people who don't want to use them, and at busy times the crowds of travellers get in the way of those who do want to use them. Mark -- A Miscellany Of Good Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk http://namestore.good-stuff.co.uk http://news.good-stuff.co.uk |
Euston Station
"Mark Goodge" wrote in message house.net... It does seem that TPTB have woken up to the idea that filling every available bit of floor space with retail units isn't actually a good idea - they get in the way of people who don't want to use them, and at busy times the crowds of travellers get in the way of those who do want to use them. That is certainly apparent at Waterloo. A fairly large number of food outlets have disappeared with the barrier project, and you can see the trains again. I haven't noticed any major delays in getting a coffee etc though, so they must have been a bit overprovisioned previously. Paul S |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 15:14, Tom Anderson wrote:
I think the layout could be better - heading into or out from the underground station, i often get caught in flows heading the wrong way, and have to fight my way across them. A problem i never have at Liverpool Street, Victoria, etc. That's true. I think it would be improved substantially by removing the TfL "box" that stands opposite the Tube entrance, if I'm visualising things right. Neil |
Euston Station
In message , at
19:56:54 on Sun, 1 Feb 2009, Arthur Figgis remarked: They could raise the money to make it look finished by charging a quid to everyone who says "yes, the old bit looks nice, but when are they going to put something permanent in place of that temporary bit where the MML/EMT/Thameslink/FCC on a weekend go from?" Yes, and when MML was operating from what are now the Kent Domestic platforms, the management did indeed give the impression that the extension was temporary. They also didn't say that the eventual home for the MML platforms was going to be *even further* away (from civilisation). The last time I was playing "hunt the snorbans train" I was surprised to find there are no ticket machines around the MML platforms, you have to go downstairs. They have now got two or three ticket machines near the MML buffers on the rather empty MML concourse (although a few seats have also appeared). -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... Before advocating Zaha Hadid as an architect for any project, check out the analysis done by a Real Firefighter (tm) on her Fire Station (in Germany IIRC). I'd love to. Could you supply a URL, or even some slightly more specific information? I had a trawl on the web, and the first one that came up was this: http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/vitrafire/index.htm -- Tim http://tim-fenton.fotopic.net/ |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 16:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
Kins Cross suffers badly from a combination of the split between the main and suburban train sheds and creeping retailisation on the concourse. The new concourse ought to improve both of those, at least a bit. I still think the ideal situation when they redevelop KX would be to demolish the suburban shed and the somewhat ugly GN Hotel and build another full-length train shed span next to the existing two. Failing that, I never could understand why TPTB claimed more suburban platforms were too expensive....KX used to at one point have several more adjacent to the current shed (3+ more?) |
Euston Station
|
Euston Station
On Feb 2, 4:56*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:
Before advocating Zaha Hadid as an architect for any project, check out the analysis done by a Real Firefighter (tm) on her Fire Station (in Germany IIRC). I'd love to. Could you supply a URL, or even some slightly more specific information? I had a trawl on the web, and the first one that came up was this: * *http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/vitrafire/index.htm ....which says that the building was attractive and functionally successful, before being made obsolete by changes to the way in which fire provision worked in the district, and now has been repurposed into a museum. That suggests that Hadid did a pretty good job... -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Euston Station
"John B" wrote in message ... Before advocating Zaha Hadid as an architect for any project, check out the analysis done by a Real Firefighter (tm) on her Fire Station (in Germany IIRC). I'd love to. Could you supply a URL, or even some slightly more specific information? I had a trawl on the web, and the first one that came up was this: http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/vitrafire/index.htm ...which says that the building was attractive and functionally successful, before being made obsolete by changes to the way in which fire provision worked in the district, and now has been repurposed into a museum. That suggests that Hadid did a pretty good job... There were dozens more URLs I could have posted. What they would have told us I don't know: this one had a photo of the structure. However, the firefighter who analysed the building was not impressed - for instance, there were sharp (acute) corners along the corridors where firefighters would have been running to get to their appliances. And, no, I don't recall the channel or documentary strand. -- Tim http://tim-fenton.fotopic.net/ |
Euston Station
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2 Feb, 15:14, Tom Anderson wrote: I think the layout could be better - heading into or out from the underground station, i often get caught in flows heading the wrong way, and have to fight my way across them. A problem i never have at Liverpool Street, Victoria, etc. That's true. I think it would be improved substantially by removing the TfL "box" that stands opposite the Tube entrance, if I'm visualising things right. That wouldn't hurt. But really, it needs either a second (well, third) exit from the underground station (ideally, one entry and one exit), or for the exit to be made a lot wider. tom -- Tubes are the foul subterranean entrails of the London beast, stuffed with the day's foetid offerings. -- Tokugawa |
Euston Station
"Jamie Thompson" wrote I still think the ideal situation when they redevelop KX would be to demolish the suburban shed and the somewhat ugly GN Hotel and build another full-length train shed span next to the existing two. Failing that, I never could understand why TPTB claimed more suburban platforms were too expensive....KX used to at one point have several more adjacent to the current shed (3+ more?) There were at one time 7 platforms in the suburban and local stations - 17 16 - the platform used by trains from Moorgate via the Hotel Curve 15 and 14 - added in 1924 on teh site of a former loco yard 13, 12, and 11 - the current 11 - 9 Until the 1970s the platform numbers in the main shed omitted 4 and 9, so the original main departure platform was No. 10. The problem with adding more longer platforms on teh site of the suburban station is that this part of the station does not align well with the Gas Works Tunnels, so a good track layout in the throat would be difficult to achieve. Peter |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 21:35, "Peter Masson" wrote:
Until the 1970s the platform numbers in the main shed omitted 4 and 9, so the original main departure platform was No. 10. That's interesting. Don't suppose you know the reasoning for that? IIRC there were originally only 2 platforms (which is why the bridge only caters to 1 & 8), arrival (on the eastern side, hence the cab road), and departure on the west side (hence the waiting rooms). The centre roads being used as stock sidings until the centre platform (current 4&5) were added over them, and finally the other two. I cold be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that's how it worked. I seem to recall a old map online somewhere showing the KX area with many more platforms...I'll see if I can find it again. The problem with adding more longer platforms on teh site of the suburban station is that this part of the station does not align well with the Gas Works Tunnels, so a good track layout in the throat would be difficult to achieve. Bring back the eastern bore, then have the tracks running primarily diagonally from the mouths to the platforms. Perhaps move some of the pointwork to the maiden lane opening. I guess if you wanted to be drastic...you could even contemplate opening up some of the gasworks tunnels. |
King's Cross Station
"Jamie Thompson" wrote ...
Bring back the eastern bore, then have the tracks running primarily diagonally from the mouths to the platforms. Perhaps move some of the pointwork to the maiden lane opening. I guess if you wanted to be drastic...you could even contemplate opening up some of the gasworks tunnels. When they open the 'new' platform on the taxi road, are they still planning to call it "Platform Y", or have they come to their senses and agreed to renumber the existing platforms. I think there was a fear of confusing the signals folk - apparently they could re-sign the platforms, but they'd run out of dymolabels to sort out the signals diagrams ... .... or something equally stupid, unbelievable and Totally British Rail. -- Andrew |
Euston Station
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... They have now got two or three ticket machines near the MML buffers on the rather empty MML concourse (although a few seats have also appeared). Have they been clever enough not to mount the seats at an angle on the sloping bit? Paul |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 22:30, Jamie Thompson wrote:
I seem to recall a old map online somewhere showing the KX area with many more platforms...I'll see if I can find it again. Ah, here we go: http://british-railways.org/_wp_gene...cd62e12_0f.jpg Looks like you're right, I count 17. |
Euston Station
"Adrian" wrote in message ... I think it's somehting like "Pur-kip-see". "Pick-upsy", IIRC Although I travelled through Poughkeepsie a few years ago the train wasn't scheduled to stop so there was no announcement. So my only reference is from the TV series Friends episode "The Girl from Poughkeepsie" where it's pronounced "Pur-kip-see" as Adrian says -- David |
Euston Station
"Andrew Robert Breen" wrote in message ... In article , It's probably the best circulating area in any station I've come across, with the probable exception of Grand Central in Washington. Shame they both share the problem of dark platform spaces, but that doesn't make either of the head-houses less magnificent. Washington (Union?) is pretty impressive, but my favourite station building in the US is 30th Street in Philly. I've not been there for about 8 years, but at the time it was a magnificent (if a little run-down) station. As described previously, the platforms are pretty austere - even less inviting than B'ham NS but as the platforms are only accessible from the concourse at the last minute you only spend a few seconds there before boarding the train. -- David |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 14:06, Neil Williams wrote:
Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_station_con... Yep. *Spacious, airy, practical and warm. *Everything that a number of other main termini are not. I'd rather have an ice cold beauty than a warmed up corpse. |
Euston Station
Roland Perry wrote in news:gC1qmthjsxhJFAz7
@perry.co.uk: In message , at 21:49:03 on Sun, 1 Feb 2009, Neil Williams remarked: [1] It's a pity that M&S Food[2] seem to have an almost-monopoly on station supermarkets, though. A small Tesco or Sainsbury's would be a lot more useful That's unlikely because the M&S Food shops at major stations are actually a franchise operated by the same people as operate almost all the other food outlets, and appear to have a monopoly. Paddington has a Sainsbury's in the Lawn, and it's incredibly useful. |
Euston Station
On Feb 3, 1:34*am, lonelytraveller
wrote: On 2 Feb, 14:06, Neil *Williams wrote: Let's make sure we're on the same wavelength here - are we talking about this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...on_station_con.... Yep. *Spacious, airy, practical and warm. *Everything that a number of other main termini are not. I'd rather have an ice cold beauty than a warmed up corpse. If I had a penny for every time I'd been told that ... |
King's Cross Station
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 22:57:18 -0000, "Andrew Heenan"
wrote: "Jamie Thompson" wrote ... Bring back the eastern bore, then have the tracks running primarily diagonally from the mouths to the platforms. Perhaps move some of the pointwork to the maiden lane opening. I guess if you wanted to be drastic...you could even contemplate opening up some of the gasworks tunnels. When they open the 'new' platform on the taxi road, are they still planning to call it "Platform Y", or have they come to their senses and agreed to renumber the existing platforms. I think there was a fear of confusing the signals folk - apparently they could re-sign the platforms, but they'd run out of dymolabels to sort out the signals diagrams ... ... or something equally stupid, unbelievable and Totally British Rail. I thought British Rail Cased some years ago ? |
Euston Station
On 2 Feb, 21:31, Tom Anderson wrote:
That wouldn't hurt. But really, it needs either a second (well, third) exit from the underground station (ideally, one entry and one exit), or for the exit to be made a lot wider. True. For anyone interested, by the way, here's a photo of the rather dead Euston concourse at about 5:30pm yesterday evening (really!). The extra space from the removal of the retail units (which were around the pillars in the foreground) is quite evident. http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...1&id=541566883 Neil |
Euston Station
In message , at 22:58:00 on
Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Paul Scott remarked: They have now got two or three ticket machines near the MML buffers on the rather empty MML concourse (although a few seats have also appeared). Have they been clever enough not to mount the seats at an angle on the sloping bit? I can't remember. They are in a couple of rows parallel to the tracks, quite close to the glass wall along the E* platform and I'm fairly sure they are in the gap between the departure board and the buffers (so you can't see the departure board!) Maybe that's to keep them level. -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
In message
, at 09:20:08 on Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Jamie Thompson remarked: I still think the ideal situation when they redevelop KX would be to demolish the suburban shed and the somewhat ugly GN Hotel They demolished quite a bit of shedding between the suburban platforms and the Hotel at the very start of the project. Some thought this was a prelude to extending the platform lengths, but it was not the case. The hotel stays. -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
In message , at
17:49:09 on Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Sam Wilson remarked: When I came to the end of the platforms and the giant statue I felt like some kind of intruder in a private place. Yes, it almost feels like it's a bit of "backstage" that you've been let into by accident. I know they probably wanted to keep the pub in the corner in its original position, but the new pub is characterless (and a reverse-Tardis inside) so it wasn't worth bothering. They should have just had the Eurostar buffers at the end of the shed and done something much more customer friendly with the west wall - that's now the First Class Lounge and a very uninviting-from-the-outside restaurant alongside the Champagne bar. The latter is looking like turning into the Europe's longest White Elephant, after a brief moment of pre-recession glory. -- Roland Perry |
Euston Station
"Jamie Thompson" wrote in message ... On 2 Feb, 21:35, "Peter Masson" wrote: Until the 1970s the platform numbers in the main shed omitted 4 and 9, so the original main departure platform was No. 10. That's interesting. Don't suppose you know the reasoning for that? IIRC there were originally only 2 platforms (which is why the bridge only caters to 1 & 8), arrival (on the eastern side, hence the cab road), and departure on the west side (hence the waiting rooms). The centre roads being used as stock sidings until the centre platform (current 4&5) were added over them, and finally the other two. I cold be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that's how it worked. I seem to recall a old map online somewhere showing the KX area with many more platforms...I'll see if I can find it again. The problem with adding more longer platforms on teh site of the suburban station is that this part of the station does not align well with the Gas Works Tunnels, so a good track layout in the throat would be difficult to achieve. Bring back the eastern bore, then have the tracks running primarily diagonally from the mouths to the platforms. Perhaps move some of the pointwork to the maiden lane opening. I guess if you wanted to be drastic...you could even contemplate opening up some of the gasworks tunnels. On opening in 1852 Arrival platfform I(now 1) 14 carriage roads Departure platform (now 8) 1862 new arrival platform added, full length one side (now 2) and stepped the other side, with a short bay at the outer end (later 3) and a short platform at the inner end (later 4). In 1863 connections to the Met opened. Up trains to the Met called at York Road platform. Down trains from the Met ran via the Hotel Curve, and set back into the departure platform (now 8). 1875 the Local station opened (for departures only) - 2 tracks with 3 platform faces, on site of current 9 - 11. 1878 the Hotel Curve platform (later 16) added 2nd Gas Wiorks tunnel opened, and York Road platform resited 1892 3rd Gas Works tunnel added 1893 two platforms added either side of the central wall (now 4 and 5) 1895 Local station altered to give 3 tracks and 3 platforms (now 9-11). Hotel Curve platform rebuilt and new terminal platform on its opposite face (later 17) added. 1924 new island platform added between the local station and the Hotel Curve platform, numbered 14 and 15. 1926 new island platform added in the departure side of the main shed, numbered 7 and 8. Numbering was now 1 - 17 across the station, though No. 9 was a carriage road between 8 and 10 (now 7 and 8) 1934 platform 3 abolished and 4 extended to full length 1938 carriage road 9 abolished and 7/8 widened. These last two changes explain the omission of platform numbers 3 and 9. 1970s, in connection with suburban electrification York Road platform, and platforms 14-17, abolished. Platforms renumbered 1 - 11 in a continuous sequence. Opening up the Gas Works tunnels is not an option, as the Grand Union Canal goes over the top of them. It might, I suppose, be possible to reinstate the third tunnel, use the western one only for the suburban station (including possible longer and/or additional platforms), the middle one for platforms 5-8, and the eastern one for platforms 1-4 and 0/W/Y or whatever it will be called. However, the intended diversion of most of the FCC service into Thameslink will mean, at least with the new platform and the new concourse, that Kings Cross will have enough capacity. Perhaps though the main trainshed will be used for NXEC and the remaining FCC trains (12-car at peak times) with the suburban shed used for the shorter Hull Trains, Grand Central and Grand Northern. Peter |
Euston Station
|
Euston Station
On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:49:03 GMT, Neil Williams put finger to keyboard
and typed: [1] It's a pity that M&S Food[2] seem to have an almost-monopoly on station supermarkets, though. A small Tesco or Sainsbury's would be a lot more useful for a "get a quick shop on the way home" type diversion - which is why the latter is very welcome at Manc Picc. That's an interesting point. I've always seen station retail as catering primarily to departing travellers, and thus focussing on goods (mainly food, toiletries and reading material, plus a few over-priced gifts) that are useful to someone who is waiting to get on a train. That's certainly how I use station retail facilities, anyway - either to eat before I get on the train, or buying something to take on the train with me. By contrast, when I arrive at a station on a train, I only ever want to get out of it as soon as possible in order to complete the journey to my ultimate destination by whatever method (car/bus/tube/taxi/walk/etc) will take me there. The idea of using station retail facilities for a quick shop on the way through after arrival hadn't occurred to me. But, given that I do most of my supermarket shopping on the way home from work (by car), it's not unreasonable for rail commuters to want to be able to do the same thing when arriving home by train. The obvious locations, though, for station supermarkets would be commuter stations at the "home" end of the route, rather than the city centre destination stations. Mark -- A Miscellany Of Good Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk http://namestore.good-stuff.co.uk http://news.good-stuff.co.uk |
Euston Station
"Jamie Thompson" wrote in message ... On 2 Feb, 16:15, Mark Goodge wrote: Kins Cross suffers badly from a combination of the split between the main and suburban train sheds and creeping retailisation on the concourse. The new concourse ought to improve both of those, at least a bit. I still think the ideal situation when they redevelop KX would be to demolish the suburban shed and the somewhat ugly GN Hotel and build another full-length train shed span next to the existing two. Failing that, I never could understand why TPTB claimed more suburban platforms were too expensive....KX used to at one point have several more adjacent to the current shed (3+ more?) 'When they redevelop KX' - it's already designed and commenced last year... You have to look at the plans for the whole area though. The re-design for Kings Cross didn't need to allow for longer or more suburban platforms, because the greater proportion will be diverted to Thameslink, and lengthened to 12 car at that time. The existing platforms will see much less use then, and still be long enough for diverted 6 car trains if the Moorgate line still shuts at weekends. There is no case for spare long platforms in case of weekend engineering works on Thameslink etc either... Paul S |
Euston Station
|
Euston Station
wrote in message ... In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 09:20:08 on Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Jamie Thompson remarked: I still think the ideal situation when they redevelop KX would be to demolish the suburban shed and the somewhat ugly GN Hotel They demolished quite a bit of shedding between the suburban platforms and the Hotel at the very start of the project. Some thought this was a prelude to extending the platform lengths, but it was not the case. The hotel stays. Sort of. Doesn't the ground floor in effect become part of the station? Seems just to hold the adjacent part of the roof up, it is outside the 'curve' of the Western Concourse, and the Camden planning drawings suggest it is 'outside the scope of these applications', and the responsibility of Kings Cross Central (are they the developers of the railway lands?). Looks as if it will have no public use, indeed there is no sign of any direct access between the building and the concourse. A similar situation to St Pancras where the hotel & apartments is a separate project? Paul S |
Euston Station
On 3 Feb, 10:21, "Peter Masson" wrote:
On opening in 1852 Arrival platfform I(now 1) 14 carriage roads Departure platform (now 8) With you so far. 1862 new arrival platform added, full length one side (now 2) and stepped the other side, with a short bay at the outer end (later 3) and a short platform at the inner end (later 4). ...and I'm already skidding of the track. Oh dear. In 1863 connections to the Met opened. Up trains to the Met called at York Road platform. Down trains from the Met ran via the Hotel Curve, and set back into the departure platform (now 8). Makes sense. 1875 the Local station opened (for departures only) - 2 tracks with 3 platform faces, on site of current 9 - 11. Can't help but wonder if that would be a better arrangement then what we have now. Crowds hanging around on the platform as train loads try to get off is nicely avoided by having arrivals on one side of the train and departures on the other. Perhaps "A||D||A" or somesuch could work. If you had a full barrier line across all three that matched the platforms, you might even be able to get onto the platforms within a few minutes of a train arriving... 1878 the Hotel Curve platform (later 16) added 2nd Gas Wiorks tunnel opened, and York Road platform resited 1892 3rd Gas Works tunnel added Shame they didn't open a 4th to the west :) 1893 two platforms added either side of the central wall (now 4 and 5) Did this ever have access to the footbridge? 1895 Local station altered to give 3 tracks and 3 platforms (now 9-11). Hotel Curve platform rebuilt and new terminal platform on its opposite face (later 17) added. 1924 new island platform added between the local station and the Hotel Curve platform, numbered 14 and 15. Quite how they manage with only 3 + borrowing some from the maid shed these days is amazing. 1926 new island platform added in the departure side of the main shed, numbered 7 and 8. Is the relative youth of the platform any relation to the axle weight restriction sign on it, do you know? Numbering was now 1 - 17 across the station, though No. 9 was a carriage road between 8 and 10 (now 7 and 8) 1934 platform 3 abolished and 4 extended to full length 1938 carriage road 9 abolished and 7/8 widened. These last two changes explain the omission of platform numbers 3 and 9. Intriguing. Though in that diagram I found there are definitely 17 faces onto tracks, so unless some of them were non-platform faces, I'm a bit confused. I guess some might be parcels platforms or somesuch. They're all unnumbered on it. 1970s, in connection with suburban electrification York Road platform, and platforms 14-17, abolished. Platforms renumbered 1 - 11 in a continuous sequence. Opening up the Gas Works tunnels is not an option, as the Grand Union Canal goes over the top of them. It might, I suppose, be possible to reinstate the third tunnel, use the western one only for the suburban station (including possible longer and/or additional platforms), the middle one for platforms 5-8, and the eastern one for platforms 1-4 and 0/W/Y or whatever it will be called. You could stick the canal into an aqueduct...it bridges obstacles elsewhere with ease. Bridging the gap for the road is also (relatively speaking, of course) trivial. However, the intended diversion of most of the FCC service into Thameslink will mean, at least with the new platform and the new concourse, that Kings Cross will have enough capacity. Perhaps though the main trainshed will be used for NXEC and the remaining FCC trains (12-car at peak times) with the suburban shed used for the shorter Hull Trains, Grand Central and Grand Northern. I do have my doubts. Capacity is the sort of thing that gets eaten up very quickly. I think the diversion onto Thameslink is going to be a monumental balls up. The tube suffers with some delays with multiple branches only going out to zone 5. Thameslink is going to have route pollution from MML (from TL diagrams that use the fast lines), damn near *all* ECML services thanks to the Welwyn viaduct, not to mention the Peterborough services and the magic 3-track section, and they want to merge 24tph into the 2 platform St. Pancras Thameslink....it's all going to go horribly wrong, I suspect. That said, I do love these newsgroups sometimes. If you have somewhere to cite all that from, it'd be great to get that on Wikipedia. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk