"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

What is the situation with the possible reopening of York Street, on the
Piccadilly?

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In article , ()
wrote:

What is the situation with the possible reopening of York Street, on
the Piccadilly?

Did you mean to write "York Road"?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

On Mar 17, 11:29*am, "
wrote:
What is the situation with the possible reopening of York Street, on the
Piccadilly?

The station was called York Road; I believe the road itself was also,
but was renamed York Street at some time.

There was a suggestion some years ago that the station be re-opened,
but this is unlikely to happen for several reasons:

1. The predicted number of passengers using the station was low.

2. The station is close to King's Cross, and many of the passengers
who would use it if it were to re-open would be likely to be using
King's Cross at present, so there would be little net gain in revenue.

3. The re-opening would be very expensive; a great deal of work would
be needed to create a station to meet today's requirements. Other
than the tunnels, and possibly the lift shafts it would basically be a
new station.

4. It would slow down the service on the line. This was the reason
for the closure of a number of other stations both in London and
elsewhere, 19th Street on PATH in New York for example. Early
underground railways did seem to have stations rather closely spaced
in some places.

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

On Mar 17, 9:44*pm, Stephen Furley wrote:

On Mar 17, 11:29*am, "
wrote:

What is the situation with the possible reopening of York Street, on the
Piccadilly?

The station was called York Road; I believe the road itself was also,
but was renamed York Street at some time.

York Way in fact - renamed in 1938, according to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York_Way


There was a suggestion some years ago that the station be re-opened,
but this is unlikely to happen for several reasons:

1. The predicted number of passengers using the station was low.

2. The station is close to King's Cross, and many of the passengers
who would use it if it were to re-open would be likely to be using
King's Cross at present, so there would be little net gain in revenue.

3. The re-opening would be very expensive; a great deal of work would
be needed to create a station to meet today's requirements. *Other
than the tunnels, and possibly the lift shafts it would basically be a
new station.

4. It would slow down the service on the line. * This was the reason
for the closure of a number of other stations both in London and
elsewhere, 19th Street on PATH in New York for example. *Early
underground railways did seem to have stations rather closely spaced
in some places.

There was a study done in connection with the King's Cross Central
development (though they've actually dropped the "Central" suffix now)
- see page 16 of this report about the development from LB Islington:
http://www.kxrlg.org.uk/news/LBIjan05KXCFORMALOBS.pdf

Interestingly it says "The findings indicate that potential passenger
demand would be of a similar level to that of Finsbury Park Station".
It also says that reopening of the station would be safeguarded by the
council.

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

On 17/03/2012 21:44, Stephen Furley wrote:
On Mar 17, 11:29 am,
wrote:
What is the situation with the possible reopening of York Street, on the
Piccadilly?

The station was called York Road; I believe the road itself was also,
but was renamed York Street at some time.

There was a suggestion some years ago that the station be re-opened,
but this is unlikely to happen for several reasons:

1. The predicted number of passengers using the station was low.

2. The station is close to King's Cross, and many of the passengers
who would use it if it were to re-open would be likely to be using
King's Cross at present, so there would be little net gain in revenue.

3. The re-opening would be very expensive; a great deal of work would
be needed to create a station to meet today's requirements. Other
than the tunnels, and possibly the lift shafts it would basically be a
new station.

So, what you are saying in essence is that the old York Road station is
really just a hole in the ground? I suppose.


4. It would slow down the service on the line. This was the reason
for the closure of a number of other stations both in London and
elsewhere, 19th Street on PATH in New York for example. Early
underground railways did seem to have stations rather closely spaced
in some places.

.... including Worth Street and 18th Street on the New York City Subway's
Lexington Avenue line, or 91st Street on the 7th Avenue Line.

Close distances from other stations, plus platform lengthening prompted
those stations' shuttering.

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In message , at 15:44:53 on Sun, 18
Mar 2012, " remarked:
3. The re-opening would be very expensive; a great deal of work would
be needed to create a station to meet today's requirements. Other
than the tunnels, and possibly the lift shafts it would basically be a
new station.

So, what you are saying in essence is that the old York Road station is
really just a hole in the ground? I suppose.

Most tube stations started off with lift shafts only (think Covent
Garden, Aldwych...) and while many have been upgraded (eg Angel) over
the years, it seems quite likely that if a station such as York Rd was
going to be re-opened that it might be regarded as sensible to install
escalators instead.

Which has the collateral impact that the station building itself will
have to be moved (once again, see Angel).
--
Roland Perry

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 15:44:53 on Sun, 18
Mar 2012, " remarked:
3. The re-opening would be very expensive; a great deal of work would
be needed to create a station to meet today's requirements. Other
than the tunnels, and possibly the lift shafts it would basically be a
new station.

So, what you are saying in essence is that the old York Road station is
really just a hole in the ground? I suppose.

Most tube stations started off with lift shafts only (think Covent
Garden, Aldwych...) and while many have been upgraded (eg Angel) over
the years, it seems quite likely that if a station such as York Rd
was going to be re-opened that it might be regarded as sensible to
install escalators instead.

Which has the collateral impact that the station building itself will
have to be moved (once again, see Angel).

Or not as in Caledonian Road and Holloway Road. What happened at Mornington
Crescent? That still has lifts, doesn't it?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In message , at 11:32:56
on Sun, 18 Mar 2012, remarked:
it seems quite likely that if a station such as York Rd
was going to be re-opened that it might be regarded as sensible to
install escalators instead.

Which has the collateral impact that the station building itself will
have to be moved (once again, see Angel).

Or not as in Caledonian Road and Holloway Road.

They had escalators added, but retained the original station building?

What happened at Mornington Crescent? That still has lifts, doesn't it?

And escalators?
--
Roland Perry

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
11:32:56 on Sun, 18 Mar 2012, remarked:
it seems quite likely that if a station such as York Rd
was going to be re-opened that it might be regarded as sensible to
install escalators instead.

Which has the collateral impact that the station building itself will
have to be moved (once again, see Angel).

Or not as in Caledonian Road and Holloway Road.

They had escalators added, but retained the original station building?

What happened at Mornington Crescent? That still has lifts, doesn't it?

And escalators?

My point was that all three stations remain lifts (and emergency stairs)
only.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Miles of rail line could be re-opened "
 

In message , at 13:08:00
on Sun, 18 Mar 2012, remarked:
it seems quite likely that if a station such as York Rd
was going to be re-opened that it might be regarded as sensible to
install escalators instead.

Which has the collateral impact that the station building itself will
have to be moved (once again, see Angel).

Or not as in Caledonian Road and Holloway Road.

They had escalators added, but retained the original station building?

What happened at Mornington Crescent? That still has lifts, doesn't it?

And escalators?

My point was that all three stations remain lifts (and emergency stairs)
only.

OK, so not a station that's busy enough to require escalators (something
which was suggested might be the case at a reopened York Road).
--
Roland Perry