Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs. This means that certain carriages get far more heavily
loaded than others (because people aren't waiting to board all the way
along the platform) and the crowd is even more in the way of passengers
wanting to get off than is usual. What's the reason for having no roof?

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

NANOG makes me want to unplug everything and hide under the bed
-- brian d foy

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:19:53 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote:

Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs. This means that certain carriages get far more heavily
loaded than others (because people aren't waiting to board all the way
along the platform) and the crowd is even more in the way of passengers
wanting to get off than is usual. What's the reason for having no roof?


The answer to both questions is that the station was paid for by the
developer of the adjacent Westfield shopping mall.

No developer wants to spend more than the absolute minimum on items
that do not generate rental income, hence the cheap station. Perhaps
more money will be spent in future as the station appears to be
getting significantly more use than expected.

David Cantrell wrote on 02 September 2009
12:19:53 ...
Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

.... apart from the Overground tracks which you'd have to run the tunnel
underneath in order to serve the southbound Overground platform. Then
where does the tunnel end up in the Central Line station? Half way down
the escalators? Unless you invest in extra escalators/lifts, it
wouldn't be very convenient. It doesn't look very cost-effective to me.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.

I entirely agree with you there. To have a brand new "country halt"
type of station in the middle of London is absurd.

This means that certain carriages get far more heavily
loaded than others (because people aren't waiting to board all the way
along the platform) and the crowd is even more in the way of passengers
wanting to get off than is usual.

At least the new trains have wide gangways, so the crowds in the crowded
carriage will be able to disperse along the train.

What's the reason for having no roof?

Poor negotiation by someone when agreeing with Westfield what
constitutes an acceptable 21st century station. (Not sure if at the
time it was TfL or Network Rail or Hammersmith & Fulham council.)

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On Sep 2, 4:19*am, David Cantrell wrote:
Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? *Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? *Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs. *This means that certain carriages get far more heavily
loaded than others (because people aren't waiting to board all the way
along the platform) and the crowd is even more in the way of passengers
wanting to get off than is usual. *What's the reason for having no roof?


Wow, I am amazed that NR and TfL chintzed out on this one. I realize
that it was paid for by the developers of the adjacent retail
development. But, this is potentially a very useful interchange.

Many years back I lived in Shepherds Bush. IMHO West London is poorly
served by several good rail lines. The problem is wasted interchange
opportunities. And, where lines do have interchanges they are too
often inconvenient.

West Ruislip would be a case in point. To change from the Central
subway line to, what is now, Chiltern always involves using stairs.
This is due to the pitiful layout of the station.

David Cantrell wrote:
Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like
at Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground
and the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short
tunnel, and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried
infrastructure there.


I think the biggest issue is the relative geometry of the existing Central
Line platforms. Access is 'end fed' onto the two separate platforms at the
west end, (entry on one platform and exit from the other) but the two
running lines are effectively alongside each other by the far east end; so
the space available for additional stairs and a lift to/from the level of an
interchange passageway is reducing, the further to the east you get.

There was a plan somewhere online of how they'd provide interchange access
to the platforms but I wonder if it was binned because they couldn't make a
silk purse out of a pig's ear. I believe a future capacity upgrade may be
necessary but could mean serious rebuilding - with one or other platform
relocated outside the tracks, in a similar way to some of the Northern line
'islands'.

There were capacity issues on the day the shopping centre first opened IIRC,
but I guess it has settled down now - unless anyone knows differently of
course...

Paul S

On Sep 2, 4:19 am, David Cantrell wrote:
Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

But the interchange works very well as it is - far better than most NR to
underground interchanges, especially those at the London NR termini. I can't
imagine Westfield sponsoring a tunnel whose only benefits are that you could
avoid getting wet when it's raining, and can avoid the entrance to their
shopping centre altogether.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.
I agree that the station is taking minimalism rather too far, but it's on a
very cramped site.

D A Stocks

On Sep 4, 11:55*pm, "David A Stocks" wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:19 am, David Cantrell wrote: Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

But the interchange works very well as it is - far better than most NR to
underground interchanges, especially those at the London NR termini. I can't
imagine Westfield sponsoring a tunnel whose only benefits are that you could
avoid getting wet when it's raining, and can avoid the entrance to their
shopping centre altogether.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.

I agree that the station is taking minimalism rather too far, but it's on a
very cramped site.

D A Stocks

I don't see that a cramped site has any bearing on providing a roof
over a platform.
It's the ridiculous cost that Network Rail seems to incur with any of
their projects.
I 'm too lazy to do the sums but simply put if a roof cost £100,000
and served 100,000 pax p.a.
then cost is £1 per pax per annum. With life of 25years then cost is
25p per pax p.a.
Does their charging system not get at least this amount back hand over
fist?
JohnG

On 4 Sep, 23:55, "David A Stocks" wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:19 am, David Cantrell wrote: Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

But the interchange works very well as it is - far better than most NR to
underground interchanges, especially those at the London NR termini. I can't
imagine Westfield sponsoring a tunnel whose only benefits are that you could
avoid getting wet when it's raining, and can avoid the entrance to their
shopping centre altogether.

It's better than a lot of LU to LU interchanges as well. The use of
the distance indicator on the map is presumably because it involves
going across a street, but it's still easier than say, Charing Cross,
Waterloo (Jubilee to others), Bank, Euston, Kings Cross (tube to Met)
or Green Park.


Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.

I agree that the station is taking minimalism rather too far, but it's on a
very cramped site.

D A Stocks

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, wrote:

On Sep 4, 11:55*pm, "David A Stocks" wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:19 am, David Cantrell wrote: Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

But the interchange works very well as it is - far better than most NR to
underground interchanges, especially those at the London NR termini. I can't
imagine Westfield sponsoring a tunnel whose only benefits are that you could
avoid getting wet when it's raining, and can avoid the entrance to their
shopping centre altogether.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.

I agree that the station is taking minimalism rather too far, but it's on a
very cramped site.

I don't see that a cramped site has any bearing on providing a roof over
a platform. It's the ridiculous cost that Network Rail seems to incur
with any of their projects. I 'm too lazy to do the sums but simply put
if a roof cost ?100,000 and served 100,000 pax p.a. then cost is ?1 per
pax per annum. With life of 25years then cost is 25p per pax p.a.

4p per passenger per annum!

tom

--
Please! Undo clips before opening handle.

On Sep 5, 12:30*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, wrote:
On Sep 4, 11:55*pm, "David A Stocks" wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:19 am, David Cantrell wrote: Why is there no in-station interchange (perhaps via a gateline, like at
Richmond) using a tunnel at Shepherds Bush between the Overground and
the Central line? Cost, I suppose, but it would be a very short tunnel,
and I can't imagine that there's lots of buried infrastructure there.

But the interchange works very well as it is - far better than most NR to
underground interchanges, especially those at the London NR termini. I can't
imagine Westfield sponsoring a tunnel whose only benefits are that you could
avoid getting wet when it's raining, and can avoid the entrance to their
shopping centre altogether.

Second, why no roof over the platforms? Both platforms are pretty much
entirely exposed to the elements, so when it's raining people wait on
the stairs.

I agree that the station is taking minimalism rather too far, but it's on a
very cramped site.

I don't see that a cramped site has any bearing on providing a roof over
a platform. It's the ridiculous cost that Network Rail seems to incur
with any of their projects. I 'm too lazy to do the sums but simply put
if a roof cost ?100,000 and served 100,000 pax p.a. then cost is ?1 per
pax per annum. With life of 25years then cost is 25p per pax p.a.

4p per passenger per annum!

tom

--
Please! Undo clips before opening handle.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks. Just testing everyones maths!
JohnG