View Single Post
  #27   Report Post  
Old April 1st 09, 10:47 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Jamie Thompson Jamie Thompson is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 48
Default Broad Street station

On 31 Mar, 12:48, wrote:
Nick Catford seems to have added a shed load more photos of broad street
as was. Quite interesting not just for the railway itself but because you
can see the slow change in the City as the towers go up during the 70s.

If Broad street was still open today would it be a useful way of relieving
passenger and train congestion on other lines and termini? I assume when it
was demonlished it wasn't serving much useful purpose but then back then
the city had less people working in it. Would they be able to get away with
demolishing it today?

B2003


I've mentioned this idea before elsewhere, but as a tangent for the
discussion, what I think would've been a good use of the site would've
been to demolish Broad St. (sadly, it was pretty redundant), but to
use the site to expand Liverpool Street eastwards, offering more
platforms. by using the right of way north and that of the Bishopsgate
site, you could have fitted at least another pair of tracks at least
to Bethnal Green Junction, giving the WAML route it's own dedicated
set of lines and platforms.

Running with that idea, with dedicated slow lines to Bethnal Green,
resurrecting the old link to the Metropolitan (probably doubling it)
could be possible, with the H&C taking over the WAML urban services,
further increasing the platforms available for suburban and intercity
services both on the WAML and GEML.

The tower blocks could then still have been built using the air rights
of the station site and right of way, and the site would still have
been able to offer a valuable transport service. This would've been
much more impractical with Broad Street's old layout due to it's
elevation.