Sunday, 20 July 2008

Shepherd's Bush Overground: Idiots!

The Good News: They've finished filling in the gap in the platform left by moving the wall back.

The Bad News: They've put those fscking street lights back in!


On the other platform they've finishing paving over the gap where the new entrance is (see the last update), but they still need to put the panes of glass over where the old one was:

There's now very little left to do other than fixing a handful of cosmetic gaps and putting up Overground signs. I've noticed the protective plywood is off the ticket barriers, so the place is on its way back from being a building site and to a railway station.

As an aside, the last issue of Modern Railways contains a brief note blaiming the narrow platform on the need to accommodate the West London Tram terminus alongside. Here's a diagram from the planning application, with the Overground platforms in orange and the tram tracks highlighted in red:
Not terribly convincing.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think it's possible that the 'tram terminus' is shorthand for the entire width requirement built up from tram tracks, carriageways, a wide pavement and FFS a taxi layby!

That last one must really have been a higher priority than a decent platform...

Paul Scott said...

I think we're flogging a dead horse regarding lighting columns - as I said in an earlier comment, it seems a national standard to have those 'hinged posts' on platforms, and everything else seems to get its own supports, such as signal telephones, car stop markers, running in boards, indeed LO roundels etc.

OTOH it really should be possible to open very soon now, after all Mitcham Eastfields wasn't exactly 100% when opened was it.

Does the worksite for the central line station allow safe access to the LO station?

Anonymous said...

I must be missing something, what's so wrong with the post mounted streetlamps that you keep belittling? Lots of stations have them, including the next one down the line at Kensington Olympia?

Mr Thant (Editor) said...

Paul: The area in front of the station has been completely dug up to build the bus station. However the steps up the side of the building (at the extreme right edge of the diagram above) are in place and available, though you'd have to go back along the temporary pedestrian walkway across the front of the building site to get over to Shepherd's Bush

Anonymous: Because a massive amount of engineering and expense was required to create those 12-18 extra inches of platform space. Sticking lamp posts in it doesn't seem the best use.

Dazz285 said...

I thought that the tram had now been scrapped ????

Anonymous said...

Remember this project is being driven by the Local Authority* – no logic will be associated with the project.

The train station will not open before the shopping centre – Westfield want everyone to know they paid for it to get the good marketing vibe. There is no point them opening a new expensive station without their shopping centre there for you to spend your money in (as it is it will be lucky if even Boots is open “by October 2008”).

A Local Authority who have consistently failed to deliver public transport infrastructure projects they campaign for in the first place (Imperial Wharf anyone).

Anonymous said...

anon above - If the platform issues hadn't arisen, the station would have opened last year, ITYF.

Paul Scott said...

Dazz - the station was practically finished last July, just before the decision to scrap* the WL tram, it's easy to forget the rumours about the platform were only just starting a year ago.

(* er.. shouldn't that be 'defer until after they see how Crossrail affects things')...

THC said...

Anonymous (3) - I work for said local authority and, despite your clearly prejudicial position, we do know what we're doing, thanks. This one wasn't down to us. Westfield were the project managers for this so your ire would be better directed at them. Ditto St George for Imperial Wharf. As private-sector companies, I'm sure they can do no wrong in your eyes though; clearly, it must be the fault of the local council.

Idiot.

THC

JBK said...

THC,

I'd have thought residents might be marginally pleased at you lot delivering a brand new tube station, two (and a half!) new rail stations, a number of bus stations and major footway infrastructure improvements.

On the other hand, perhaps 'SheBu' residents prefer living in a slum* with rubbish transport connections and you got it wrong.

I reckon, if developers shell out millions, it's only fair for us to try to accommodate them a little and let them take some glory for their substantial investment.

The post was likely written by some bitter, opposition politico who doesn't understand that transport improvements don't come for free or magically spring up overnight (a la Crossrail)

Despite a number of unfortunate setbacks, I think the officers at the local authority deserve medals and the thanks of residents. Hell, I'd even support an annual holiday in their name...

* Sadly, I live in said slum, so I'm allowed to run it down (as if I need to...) and am delighted we're getting some decent transport, even if it means 'chaos' (*yawn*) around Holland Park roundabout for a few months.

Mr Thant (Editor) said...

Anonymous #3: The station's been designed to make the platforms and entrance as far south (away from the shopping centre, nearer the community) as it possibly could be. There's a similar situation at Wood Lane. You could easily mistake it for them trying to improve transport in the local area rather than just to benefit themselves.

(Although I doubt the Overground station will open before the adjacent tube station)

Anonymous said...

THC - I've read the third anon post several times and can't figure out what the "clearly prejudicial position". Care to explain what you mean?

THC said...

@jbk - thanks, glad to know that some of our residents appreciate the efforts that go into improving our borough and our part in that. I live in W12 as well, so see it from both sides. I'm liking your suggestion of an annual holiday, too. :-)

@anon - I'd have thought that the statement "remember, this project is being driven by the Local Authority – no logic will be associated with the project" is clearly prejudicial, wouldn't you? It's in the very first sentence, just in case you missed it.

THC

Luke Peters said...

For the amount of fuss and expense that's gone into this station it would have been nice if they'd included a self-contained interchange with the Central Line.