![]() |
Don't Use the Tube
In that we are only talking about an access point, what's the problem with an escalator down-and-up, or a moving walkway underground, between Leicester Square and Covent Garden? There's plenty of space in the Square itself for a new access point. Please submit draft plans, with due consideration of other sub-level constructions and approximate costings. Also price up a publicity campaign designed to remind travelers that there are alternative convenient routes. |
Don't Use the Tube
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
... In that we are only talking about an access point, what's the problem with an escalator down-and-up, or a moving walkway underground, between Leicester Square and Covent Garden? There's plenty of space in the Square itself for a new access point. Please submit draft plans, with due consideration of other sub-level constructions and approximate costings. Also price up a publicity campaign designed to remind travelers that there are alternative convenient routes. You're not comparing like with like: the first is a proper solution to the problem, the second is a workaround which avoids the problem. But I take your point: a proper solution would be seriously expensive. Mind you, a station entrance in the market and/or the foyer of the Opera House and/or in the entrance to the London Underground museum would be very nice if cost wasn't an issue :-) |
Don't Use the Tube
In message , Roland
Perry writes The current booking hall is tiny. It's basically a corridor around the liftshaft, at street level. Very similar to Russell Square, or Goodge St. Certainly that's currently the case. But looking from the outside, the original Leslie Green station building appears to be one of his largest - a corner site, with three big bays on the Long Acre side and an even longer facade (three bays separated by infills) on the James Street side. However, don't I recall that LU rent out some of this space for shops/kiosks? I'm sure I recall a bureau de change stuck in one of the James Street bays. I wonder if they add to the congestion? There's no spare footprint for the top of a set of escalators. Absolutely true. -- Paul Terry |
Don't Use the Tube
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes But I take your point: a proper solution would be seriously expensive. Mind you, a station entrance in the market and/or the foyer of the Opera House and/or in the entrance to the London Underground museum would be very nice if cost wasn't an issue :-) I've just happened upon Westminster City Council's action plan for Covent Garden that outlines the intentions on page 16: http://www.westminster.gov.uk/enviro...-PlanFINAL.pdf Short term: promotion of "alternative stations with spare capacity (including Holborn, Embankment, and Charing Cross), and promoting walking routes through the area" + better signage, more leaflets in hotels, etc. This must be what has already started, as reported at the beginning of this thread (including the omission of Leicester Square from the list). Medium term: "London Underground propose to improve the layout of the existing ticket hall and increase the number of ticket gates". This must be the works that LU have announced for 2007. Long term: "to work with London Underground and the Mayor to develop physical improvements to increase the capacity of the station, for example by building a second ticket hall, and the installation of more lifts or escalators. Feasibility work by London Underground is underway and options will be consulted on later this year. London Underground have a number of high priorities for congestion relief at other stations, but we are working to ensure that the need for a solution at Covent Garden is kept high on their agenda". Given the importance of Covent Garden to London tourism, perhaps we might see something in time for the 2012 Olympics? g -- Paul Terry |
Don't Use the Tube
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message ... In that we are only talking about an access point, what's the problem with an escalator down-and-up, or a moving walkway underground, between Leicester Square and Covent Garden? There's plenty of space in the Square itself for a new access point. Please submit draft plans, with due consideration of other sub-level constructions and approximate costings. Also price up a publicity campaign designed to remind travelers that there are alternative convenient routes. Should I take it that you would pay for it if I did? -- Brian "Anyway, if you have been, thanks for listening." |
Don't Use the Tube
There's no reason why the escalators can't be from a different part of
the platforms to the current booking hall, is there? The principle is OK but would depend on the distance between the platforms and the street. ... According to CULG the present lifts travel 34.3 m (112'5"). That's significantly deeper than Angel, which may be another reason why Covent Garden was never selected for conversion. If the whole distance is to be covered by a single long flight of escalators, their ends would be offset horizontally by 60 m or almost 200 feet. If the lifts are at one end of the platform, the escalators could lead to the other end, but if they're in the middle, that wouldn't work. Of course, if this was the only problem it would always be possible to avoid it by using two successive flights of escalators at different angles, like at Westminster. That has advantages and disadvantages. -- Mark Brader | "The good news is that the Internet is dynamic. Toronto | The bad news is that the Internet is dynamic." | -- Peter Neumann My text in this article is in the public domain. |
Don't Use the Tube
In message , at 20:04:45 on Sat, 10
Sep 2005, Mark Brader remarked: According to CULG the present lifts travel 34.3 m (112'5"). That's significantly deeper than Angel, which may be another reason why Covent Garden was never selected for conversion. If the whole distance is to be covered by a single long flight of escalators, their ends would be offset horizontally by 60 m or almost 200 feet. If the lifts are at one end of the platform, the escalators could lead to the other end, but if they're in the middle, that wouldn't work. Of course, if this was the only problem it would always be possible to avoid it by using two successive flights of escalators at different angles, like at Westminster. That has advantages and disadvantages. There are escalators at Leicester Square - where the line will be essentially the same depth under the surface. I don't remember the layout, but presumably there's two flights with a circulating area between, like at Holborn. That doesn't require the two sets of escalators to be under one another [1], the unusual arrangement at Westminster being because of the available footprint for the station I guess. [1] But if they were, and the escalators were split 50:50, you'd end up underneath where you started. -- Roland Perry |
Don't Use the Tube
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:34:19 +0100, "Martin Underwood"
wrote: You're not comparing like with like: the first is a proper solution to the problem, the second is a workaround which avoids the problem. Is that bad? |
Don't Use the Tube - Covent Garden
Roland Perry wrote: There are escalators at Leicester Square - where the line will be essentially the same depth under the surface. I don't remember the layout, but presumably there's two flights with a circulating area between, like at Holborn. That doesn't require the two sets of escalators to be under one another [1], the unusual arrangement at Westminster being because of the available footprint for the station I guess. The escalator layout at Leicester Square is different to that at Holborn. At Holborn the ticket hall is at street level, with a bank of four escalators down to a concourse. From that concourse access to the Central line is by a level passageway and short flights of stairs down to each platform - which are separate and not directly linked by cross-passages. Access to the Piccadilly line from the concourse is by another bank of three escalators, then by passageways and stairs going both down and up depending on platform, because of the unusual history and unique layout of the Piccadilly line station. Interchange traffic thus uses the concourse, as there is no other link between the lines. At Leicester Square the ticket hall is immediately beneath the road junction, and accessed by stairs, with two banks of three escalators in a v-angle, each leading to a concourse. Before Angel had escalators, the Piccadilly line bank at Leicester Square was the longest on the Underground. Access to each of the lines from the concourses is then by passageways and stairs. There are further low-level connections between the two lines, meaning that interchange traffic does not use the escalators. Both lines have conventional back-to-back inner platforms, with common staircases. Westminster's escalator layout is indeed because of the restricted footprint: almost all passenger access to the Jubilee line is contained within a huge excavated box with internal structural support, whereas the other two stations have traditionally excavated escalator shafts. Covent Garden's platform layout is similar to Leicester Square, and as it is so close to Leicester Square with similar elevation any escalator scheme would indeed have very long vertical travel to overcome, probably requiring surface building relocation for a one-bank scheme. However, IMO given the layout of the current ticket office it would be best to relocate it entirely rather than have a two-bank scheme - otherwise the station would be closed for the duration of the works. It's difficult to work out what would be the best option if they did decide to rebuild - perhaps a sub-surface ticket hall immediately to the north of the market buildings, with several surface entrances (similar to Leicester Square). Escalators would then lead down in a northerly direction to a long concourse parallel but above and to the south of the platform tunnels. From there perhaps three or four new passageways and staircases down to the platforms, as well as incorporating the existing two staircases. One thing is for su it would be a very expensive station rebuild, for what is essentially existing leisure traffic. There would be more people using Covent Garden station, but I don't think there would be a significant number of extra passengers for the Underground overall. |
Don't Use the Tube - Covent Garden
wrote in message
oups.com... It's difficult to work out what would be the best option if they did decide to rebuild - perhaps a sub-surface ticket hall immediately to the north of the market buildings, with several surface entrances (similar to Leicester Square). Escalators would then lead down in a northerly direction to a long concourse parallel but above and to the south of the platform tunnels. From there perhaps three or four new passageways and staircases down to the platforms, as well as incorporating the existing two staircases. Wheelchair access would be legally required. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk