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.

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
news

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 :-)

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

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

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
news

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."

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.

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

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?

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.

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