|
Crossrail under way
On Fri, 15 May 2009, MIG wrote:
On 16 May, 02:05, Tom Anderson wrote: On Fri, 15 May 2009, Richard J. wrote: Paul Scott wrote on 15 May 2009 19:38:46 ... Or will they stick with three totally separate Canary Wharf stations, and have a pretty confusing set of 'outerchanges'? Probably. *Do you have a better naming plan? Canary Wharf West, Canary Wharf Market, and Canary Wharf Main Line! There'll be as many as Actons before we know it, Anyway, in keeping with Maidstone, And Dulwich. the one furthest north should be called Canary Wharf East, and in keeping with Canterbury, And Finchley. the one furthest south should be called Canary Wharf East. This will avoid confusion. A flawless plan. tom -- Science runs with us, making us Gods. |
Crossrail under way
"Robert" wrote
Probably. Do you have a better naming plan? Canary Wharf West, Canary Wharf Market, and Canary Wharf Main Line! There'll be as many as Actons before we know it, Anyway, in keeping with Maidstone, the one furthest north should be called Canary Wharf East, and in keeping with Canterbury, the one furthest south should be called Canary Wharf East. This will avoid confusion. If the Canary Wharf were to be found west of London, then one would certainly be Canary Wharf General... It's important not to mislead the commuters, so they'll probably go for "City Crossrail"; this would avoid confusion in later years when the route becomes "FirstCapitalDissect. -- Andrew |
Crossrail under way
In message , at 15:04:13 on Sat, 16
May 2009, John Rowland remarked: http://tinyurl.com/q8spkt Very revealing. Four floors of retail, then ticket hall below that and the platforms below that. I was wondering why they needed such a long building if the trains were below the surface. RETAIL! Maybe they wouldn't be allowed to have platforms below water. They are below water, just like the Jubilee line station. Having built on every scrap of land they are now building on the old docks - so inconsiderate for someone to have dug them in the first place. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail under way
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:04:13 on Sat, 16 May 2009, John Rowland remarked: http://tinyurl.com/q8spkt Very revealing. Four floors of retail, then ticket hall below that and the platforms below that. I was wondering why they needed such a long building if the trains were below the surface. RETAIL! Maybe they wouldn't be allowed to have platforms below water. They are below water, just like the Jubilee line station. The Jubilee Line station looks like it's entirely below ex-water to me. |
Crossrail under way
John Rowland wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:04:13 on Sat, 16 May 2009, John Rowland remarked: http://tinyurl.com/q8spkt Very revealing. Four floors of retail, then ticket hall below that and the platforms below that. I was wondering why they needed such a long building if the trains were below the surface. RETAIL! Maybe they wouldn't be allowed to have platforms below water. They are below water, just like the Jubilee line station. The Jubilee Line station looks like it's entirely below ex-water to me. In fact, IIRC they had originally planned teh Jubilee station to be beneath water except for the two entrance pods, but H&S had kittens and they were forced to turn the area between the pods into a park. |
Crossrail under way
In message , at 17:19:56 on Sat, 16
May 2009, John Rowland remarked: Maybe they wouldn't be allowed to have platforms below water. They are below water, just like the Jubilee line station. The Jubilee Line station looks like it's entirely below ex-water to me. I can assure you that the top half of the escalators down to the booking hall, and the canopies over the entrances, are above water! -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail under way
In message , at 12:06:12
on Sat, 16 May 2009, remarked: Having built on every scrap of land they are now building on the old docks - so inconsiderate for someone to have dug them in the first place. Why? It's not as if the docks are required for shipping any more. They are part of the landscape. If not, why didn't they just fill them in when they started building the area - it would have been so much simpler. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail under way
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 12:06:12 on Sat, 16 May 2009, remarked: Why? It's not as if the docks are required for shipping any more. They are part of the landscape. If not, why didn't they just fill them in when they started building the area - it would have been so much simpler. Having scanned a few of the many press releases now, some of the excavated material from this site is being used to backfill the dock outside the piling, up to the minimum depth 'at the access routes' - which I take to mean the top cill at the entrance locks. I assume this reduces the pressure against the lower levels of the concrete walls? Another point I've just spotted is there are other station names that are supposedly provisional - they quote Liverpool St and Farringdon for instance, as they link to Moorgate and Barbican respectively. To save searching can anyone remember where the other ends of the Bond St and Tottenham Court Rd stations are - IIRC they aren't near existing stations though. Paul S |
Crossrail under way
On May 16, 8:47 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: Another point I've just spotted is there are other station names that are supposedly provisional - they quote Liverpool St and Farringdon for instance, as they link to Moorgate and Barbican respectively. Looking at street names I think "Smithfield" might be a reasonable name for the Farringdon/Barbican Crossrail station, if you didn't want to name it one of those, or possibly Charterhouse. Given Liverpool Street's prominence as a terminus, I can't imagine them going for "Finsbury Circus"... -- Abi |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk