Don't Use the Tube
 

These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that that
station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken could
introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.

Kevin

Don't Use the Tube
 

wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that that
station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken could
introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read the
article and to understand it.

Don't Use the Tube
 

Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that that
station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken could
introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read the
article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served by
lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms of
travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

Kevin

Don't Use the Tube
 

wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you laugh?

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you laugh?


I would imagine he's laughing at the irony of London Underground (sic:
that's what the news story says) saying "don't use one of our own stations
at busy times" - although, I agree it's for very good reasons. Really it's
admission that the Covent Garden market area is so popular that the
out-of-date lifts (as opposed to escalators) in the station can't cope.

Leicester Square is probably the closest station to Covent Garden market
after CG station itself, so the fact that it's not mentioned suggests that
it is also very busy, though it has escalators rather than lifts, IIRC, so
at least it can handle the number of people better. Don't give Ken ideas
about financial penalties to discourage people-congestion at busy stations
;-)

The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the fact that the lifts
have survived so long is an indication that the site isn't suited to the
extra horizontal space required for escalators and that conversion would be
seriously costly in terms of the building/tunnelling work involved.

Don't Use the Tube
 

Martin Underwood wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you
laugh?


I would imagine he's laughing at the irony of London Underground (sic:
that's what the news story says) saying "don't use one of our own
stations at busy times" - although, I agree it's for very good
reasons. Really it's admission that the Covent Garden market area is
so popular that the out-of-date lifts (as opposed to escalators) in
the station can't cope.

Leicester Square is probably the closest station to Covent Garden
market after CG station itself, so the fact that it's not mentioned
suggests that it is also very busy, though it has escalators rather
than lifts, IIRC, so at least it can handle the number of people
better. Don't give Ken ideas about financial penalties to discourage
people-congestion at busy stations ;-)

The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the fact that the
lifts have survived so long is an indication that the site isn't
suited to the extra horizontal space required for escalators and that
conversion would be seriously costly in terms of the
building/tunnelling work involved.

That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be located
elsewhere in the vicinity.

Don't Use the Tube
 

Martin Underwood wrote:

The ideal solution

would be to rename Leicester Sq Covent Garden and Covent Garden Ripoff
Central.

M.

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
...

The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the
fact that the lifts have survived so long is an indication
that the site isn't suited to the extra horizontal space
required for escalators

Covent Garden was so quiet in the 1930s that it was considered for closure
at the same time as York Road and Brompton Road. It only became busy since
the 1970s or 1980s, by which time there had been no lift-escalator
conversions on the Underground for decades. The only subsequent
escalator-lift conversions have been part of bigger projects, such as
getting rid of the narrow platform at Angel, which is one of the stations
with the highest proportion of blind users.

and that conversion would be seriously costly
in terms of the building/tunnelling work involved.

Yes, I think money is the issue rather than any unique properties of this
site.


--
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

Don't Use the Tube
 

Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you laugh?
So why shouldn't that make me laugh. Do we need to get the permission
of the Newsgroup police to find soemthing amusing now.
No comment then on a situation where passengers are being expected not
to use the closest public transport due to, well erh, congestion.
Really inspires confidence that we have the Olympics in 7 years time.

Kevin

Don't Use the Tube
 

wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you
laugh?
So why shouldn't that make me laugh.

Given that it's a simple request to avoid a particular station that has
restricted capacity and offers some alternatives I'm trying to work out how
it makes the "joke of the week" list, or may be you're one of these loons
who laughs at everything?

Do we need to get the permission
of the Newsgroup police to find soemthing amusing now.

So you are paranoid as well as finding everything amusing, an interesting
combination.

No comment then on a situation where passengers are being expected not
to use the closest public transport due to, well erh, congestion.

If you drive a car and hear a radio report saying that a particular area is
congested do you also find that amusing or do you find another route?
Presumably you would also find it amusing if the station became so
overcrowded that people got hurt?


Really inspires confidence that we have the Olympics in 7 years time.

Absolutetly, it shows that the people responsibler are taking note of
problems and doing something about it, beyond killing themselves laughing at
other people's discomfort..

Don't Use the Tube
 

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 12:15:47 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Angel, which is one of the stations
with the highest proportion of blind users.

Old Street I can understand. But why Angel, I wonder? Where does
this statistic come from?

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...


The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the fact that the
lifts have survived so long is an indication that the site isn't
suited to the extra horizontal space required for escalators and that
conversion would be seriously costly in terms of the
building/tunnelling work involved.

That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located
elsewhere in the vicinity.

Erm, how about Leicester Square.

(Here we go round again).

:-)

--
Brian
"Anyway, if you have been, thanks for listening."

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 12:15:47 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Angel, which is one of the stations
with the highest proportion of blind users.

Old Street I can understand. But why Angel, I wonder?

Perhaps it's the nearest station to RNIB?

--
Brian
"Anyway, if you have been, thanks for listening."

Don't Use the Tube
 

Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume that
that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope. Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to read
the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to use
Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment and
Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people to
reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you
laugh?
So why shouldn't that make me laugh.

Given that it's a simple request to avoid a particular station that has
restricted capacity and offers some alternatives I'm trying to work out how
it makes the "joke of the week" list, or may be you're one of these loons
who laughs at everything?

Do we need to get the permission
of the Newsgroup police to find soemthing amusing now.

So you are paranoid as well as finding everything amusing, an interesting
combination.

No comment then on a situation where passengers are being expected not
to use the closest public transport due to, well erh, congestion.

If you drive a car and hear a radio report saying that a particular area is
congested do you also find that amusing or do you find another route?
Presumably you would also find it amusing if the station became so
overcrowded that people got hurt?


Really inspires confidence that we have the Olympics in 7 years time.

Absolutetly, it shows that the people responsibler are taking note of
problems and doing something about it, beyond killing themselves laughing at
other people's discomfort..
If I had said this ironic rather than this makes me laugh would you
have been happier. I agree that it is hardly joke of the week, but now
I am paranoid, I think that that can be better aimed in your direction.
Can you give an explanation as to why Leicester Sq isn't listed as an
alternative or come to that Tottenham Court Rd or Temple. Both the
latter are equi distance to Holborn or Embankment.
What are Tfl doing about other chronically overcrowded stations such as
Camden?
Who are you to suggest that I would take pleasure in people getting
hurt in an overcrowded station.
Now who is a pratt.

Kevin

Don't Use the Tube
 

Brian Watson wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...


The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the fact that the
lifts have survived so long is an indication that the site isn't
suited to the extra horizontal space required for escalators and
that conversion would be seriously costly in terms of the
building/tunnelling work involved.

That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located
elsewhere in the vicinity.

Erm, how about Leicester Square.

(Here we go round again).

:-)

Just far enough away to be annoying, from the point of view of someone who
has difficulty walking.

Don't Use the Tube
 

wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
wrote:
These sort of things make me laugh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4227212.stm

Strangely enough it doesn't mention Leicester Sq so I assume
that that station is equally overcrowded and can't cope.
Perhaps Ken
could introduce a congestion charge or even pay for escalators.


You'd make yourself look less of a prat if you had bothered to
read the article and to understand it.
Ok my understanding is that TfL are encouraging passngers not to
use Covent Garden tube at the weekend due to overcrowding.
Covent Garden is the busiest tube station that is exclusively
served
by lifts.
TfL are encouraging passengers to use Charing Cross, Embankment
and Holburn (but strangely not Leicester Sq).


The opening paragraph states "Transport chiefs are urging people
to reduce congestion at Covent Garden Tube station by using other
forms
of travel".

Is my understanding ok, what have I not understood?

If your level of understanding is such why does the story make you
laugh?
So why shouldn't that make me laugh.

Given that it's a simple request to avoid a particular station that
has restricted capacity and offers some alternatives I'm trying to
work out how it makes the "joke of the week" list, or may be you're
one of these loons who laughs at everything?

Do we need to get the permission
of the Newsgroup police to find soemthing amusing now.

So you are paranoid as well as finding everything amusing, an
interesting combination.

No comment then on a situation where passengers are being expected
not
to use the closest public transport due to, well erh, congestion.

If you drive a car and hear a radio report saying that a particular
area is congested do you also find that amusing or do you find
another route? Presumably you would also find it amusing if the
station became so overcrowded that people got hurt?


Really inspires confidence that we have the Olympics in 7 years
time.

Absolutetly, it shows that the people responsibler are taking note of
problems and doing something about it, beyond killing themselves
laughing at other people's discomfort..
If I had said this ironic rather than this makes me laugh would you
have been happier. I agree that it is hardly joke of the week, but now
I am paranoid, I think that that can be better aimed in your
direction.
Can you give an explanation as to why Leicester Sq isn't listed as an
alternative or come to that Tottenham Court Rd or Temple. Both the
latter are equi distance to Holborn or Embankment.

I would suspect that Leicester Sq being the next station hasn't been
mentioned becase it's blindingly obvious to most sensible people.

What are Tfl doing about other chronically overcrowded stations such
as Camden?

Trying to get planning permission to rebuild them.

Who are you to suggest that I would take pleasure in people getting
hurt in an overcrowded station.

No such suggestion was made. If you read it carefully you'll notice it was a
question, or perhaps you don't understand the "?" symbol.

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message ,
Martin Underwood writes

The ideal solution would be escalators. I presume the fact that the lifts
have survived so long is an indication that the site isn't suited to the
extra horizontal space required for escalators and that conversion would be
seriously costly in terms of the building/tunnelling work involved.

The TfL 5-year plan announced "major works to relieve congestion" at
Covent Garden "by 2007" - but didn't say what these will be. It won't be
escalators, given the time-scale. My guess is that it will be to enlarge
the street-level ticket hall by converting adjacent property (or perhaps
by reviving the old plan of a second hall on the north side of Long
Acre, possibly with additional lifts). This would be worthwhile, since
the present ticket hall is far too small and adds considerably to the
congestion around the lifts.

I have often thought that the rebuilding of the opera house and the
entire north-west quarter of the piazza in the late 1990s would have
been an ideal time to have added escalators to the tube station - a new
station entrance could quite possibly have been included on the corner
of James Street and the new development.

But I'm sure cost is the real issue - if the £500M for the Victoria
redevelopment is any guide, putting in escalators at Covent Garden would
probably cost more than the entire redevelopment of the Opera House (and
that was astronomic!).

--
Paul Terry

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message ,
Brimstone writes

Brian Watson wrote:

Erm, how about Leicester Square.

Just far enough away to be annoying, from the point of view of someone who
has difficulty walking.

Exacerbated by the fact that the vast amount of pedestrian traffic in
Long Acre means frequently stepping out into traffic. I suspect this
street-level congestion may be why TfL are no longer advertising
Leicester Square as an alternative for Covent Garden (although it still
appears on many signs).

--
Paul Terry

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message , at
12:30:28 on Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Brimstone remarked:
What are Tfl doing about other chronically overcrowded stations such
as Camden?

Trying to get planning permission to rebuild them.

"Failing to get" I think.
--
Roland Perry

Don't Use the Tube
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
12:30:28 on Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
What are Tfl doing about other chronically overcrowded stations such
as Camden?

Trying to get planning permission to rebuild them.

"Failing to get" I think.

I seem to recall reading something about Camden Council refusing planning
permission for rebuilding the station.

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
12:30:28 on Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
What are Tfl doing about other chronically
overcrowded stations such as Camden?

Trying to get planning permission to rebuild them.

"Failing to get" I think.

I seem to recall reading something about Camden Council
refusing planning permission for rebuilding the station.

They refused permission for the particular scheme that was proposed.

--
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

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message , at 16:08:15 on Fri,
9 Sep 2005, John Rowland
remarked:
I seem to recall reading something about Camden Council
refusing planning permission for rebuilding the station.

They refused permission for the particular scheme that was proposed.

Which London Underground said was the only possible scheme that would
make sense. I detect deadlock here.
--
Roland Perry

Don't Use the Tube
 

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 16:44:33 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

I seem to recall reading something about Camden Council
refusing planning permission for rebuilding the station.

They refused permission for the particular scheme that was proposed.

Which London Underground said was the only possible scheme that would
make sense. I detect deadlock here.

I got the impression that LU only said that to discourage rejection of
the plans in favour of a watered-down version not involving
demolishing half of Camden so they could build a shopping centre.

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message , at 17:29:57 on
Fri, 9 Sep 2005, asdf remarked:
I seem to recall reading something about Camden Council
refusing planning permission for rebuilding the station.

They refused permission for the particular scheme that was proposed.

Which London Underground said was the only possible scheme that would
make sense. I detect deadlock here.

I got the impression that LU only said that to discourage rejection of
the plans in favour of a watered-down version not involving
demolishing half of Camden so they could build a shopping centre.

But LU still said it.
--
Roland Perry

Don't Use the Tube
 

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Brian Watson wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located
elsewhere in the vicinity.

Erm, how about Leicester Square.

(Here we go round again).

Just far enough away to be annoying, from the point of view of someone who
has difficulty walking.

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.

--
Brian

Don't Use the Tube
 

Brian Watson wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Brian Watson wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located
elsewhere in the vicinity.

Erm, how about Leicester Square.

(Here we go round again).

Just far enough away to be annoying, from the point of view of
someone who has difficulty walking.

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.

For those not sure of the geography Leicester Sq station is east of
Leicester Sq in Charing Cross Road and Covent Garden Station is in the
opposite direction from the square itself..

But to answer your substantive question. Probably nothing more than money
and whatever is already underground. More of the former will overcome
problems caused by the latter.

Don't Use the Tube
 

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Brian Watson wrote:

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 12:15:47 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Angel, which is one of the stations
with the highest proportion of blind users.

Old Street I can understand. But why Angel, I wonder?

Perhaps it's the nearest station to RNIB?

No, that's King's Cross; it says so in the station announcement on one of
the lines ("The next station is King's Cross St Pancras; alight here for
the Royal National Institute of the Blind."). I'm not sure which line that
is; ISTR it's a subsurface line, probably the Met, BICBW.

tom

--
That's the problem with google. You can usually find what you're looking
for with a fairly simple search. It's knowing *which* fairly simple search
out of the millions of possible fairly simple searches you need to use to
find it ;-) -- Paul D

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message ,
Brimstone writes
That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located elsewhere in the vicinity.
There's no reason why the escalators can't be from a different part of
the platforms to the current booking hall, is there?
--
Clive

Don't Use the Tube
 

Clive wrote:
In message ,
Brimstone writes
That's my understanding also, the surface building would need to be
located elsewhere in the vicinity.
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. There is also the question of creating overloaded areas of
the platform and hence the train.

Don't Use the Tube
 

In message , at 13:06:40 on Sat,
10 Sep 2005, Clive remarked:
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 current booking hall is tiny. It's basically a corridor around the
liftshaft, at street level. Very similar to Russell Square, or Goodge
St.

There's no spare footprint for the top of a set of escalators.
--
Roland Perry

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