The Railway Magazine is suggesting this month, in a small piece on p11, 
that:

"Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the 
Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."

This would seem on the face of it to conflict completely with the Route 
plan, which has platform 20 back in use by SWT this December, [in fact SWT 
have had a trains in there a few weeks ago looking at signal sighting etc] 
and the other 4 platforms returned to use during the next control period, ie 
2009 to 2014.

Now there is obviously room in the undercroft for retail, especially if the 
main concourse is reduced in depth at the suburban end, but is there any 
real likelihood of the suggestion above occuring?  Or are they talking about 
'air rights'?

Paul S

On Jul 10, 4:29 pm, "Paul Scott" 
wrote:


> The Railway Magazine is suggesting this month, in a small piece on p11,
> that:
>
> "Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the
> Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."


Do they quote a source ?


--
Nick

"D7666"  wrote in message
news:42cbbe54-8307-46f5-aeda-72b16e71c265@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 10, 4:29 pm, "Paul Scott" 
> wrote:
>
>
>> The Railway Magazine is suggesting this month, in a small piece on p11,
>> that:
>>
>> "Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the
>> Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."
>
>
> Do they quote a source ?
>

No - but I wonder if they might be couple of few years out of date on this!

Paul

On Jul 10, 9:16 pm, "Paul Scott" 
wrote:

> >> "Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the
> >> Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."



IMHO there would already have been wider reporting of this matter if
it were true, given the lag from press to print, and the way things
leak these days, so I'll go along with them being out of date for now.

--
Nick

D7666 wrote:
> On Jul 10, 9:16 pm, "Paul Scott" 
> wrote:
>
> > >> "Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the
> > >> Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."
>
>
>
> IMHO there would already have been wider reporting of this matter if
> it were true, given the lag from press to print, and the way things
> leak these days, so I'll go along with them being out of date for now.

http://www.elizabethhouseredevelopment.com/scheme_design.html
latest views on one side of the redevelopment

IMHO they look quite good but the buildings are going to be very tall
and they will really change the skyline around there

On Jul 10, 9:16 pm, "Paul Scott" 
wrote:
> "D7666"  wrote in message
>
> news:42cbbe54-8307-46f5-aeda-72b16e71c265@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 10, 4:29 pm, "Paul Scott" 
> > wrote:
>
> >> The Railway Magazine is suggesting this month, in a small piece on p11> >> that:
>
> >> "Contrary to previously announced plans, it is now understood that the
> >> Eurostar platforms and trainshed may be turned into a shopping mall."
>
> > Do they quote a source ?
>
> No - but I wonder if they might be couple of few years out of date on this!
>
> Paul

Why should they be out of date? And you shuld know that confidential
sources are never quoted by journalists for fear of discliplinary
action  - otherwise who would be able to leak stuff to the press? It's
worth pointing out that a journalist enjoys the same respect for
protecting confidentiality of an informant in the sam was as does a
doctor, lawyer, with their clients.

The DfT has done nothing (except sit on its arse) to reintegrate the
platforms with the rest of the station and has had long enough to
think about it. And is the SWT move cast in stone? Maybe not.

Mu understanding is that the cost benefit of changing the trackwork
and resignalling for more trains to access the five platforms is
astronomic, but then someone may have inflated the cost deliberately,
so that it does become a retail mall and so generate more revenue.

You also have to remember that the area is heavily populated with
office workers and tourists and so prime development land for a mall.
And the 60s style of the area makes it not that pleasant an area to
work in.

Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
capital?
But will the current economic climate lead to a revision or scaling
back of plans?

In message 
, at 
06:32:07 on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, rannochmoor@btinternet.com remarked:
>Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>capital?

Isn't the new development to the north of the station? And this is the 
station where the light is so bright no-one can read the hi-tech 
departure boards?

>But will the current economic climate lead to a revision or scaling
>back of plans?

They'll slow it down, for sure. And a 50:50 chance that a huge 1930's 
type recession means it's actually turned into a soup kitchen.
-- 
Roland Perry

wrote
>
>Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>capital?
>But will the current economic climate lead to a revision or scaling
>back of plans?

Among the ideas for Waterloo is extending track back into the concourse, as
part of a 10-car scheme for suburban services, and constructing a new
concourse at undercroft level. If this is likely to happen, it would not be
a good move to extend the existing main concourse over then low level E*
concourse.

Peter

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message 
> , at 
> 06:32:07 on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, rannochmoor@btinternet.com remarked:
>> Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>> concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>> capital?
> 
> Isn't the new development to the north of the station? And this is the 
> station where the light is so bright no-one can read the hi-tech 
> departure boards?

That's more or less solved now.


-- 
Arthur Figgis               Surrey, UK

"Peter Masson"  wrote in message 
news:l8Gdnd7Qr_3njefVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>  wrote
>>
>>Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>>concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>>capital?
>>But will the current economic climate lead to a revision or scaling
>>back of plans?
>
> Among the ideas for Waterloo is extending track back into the concourse, 
> as
> part of a 10-car scheme for suburban services, and constructing a new
> concourse at undercroft level. If this is likely to happen, it would not 
> be
> a good move to extend the existing main concourse over then low level E*
> concourse.
>

I don't think the concourse depth at the south end would gain more than 1 
car length though, presuming there'd still have to be access to the platform 
ends, which is why all the reports propose change at the other end as well.

It was originally thought the Eurostar low level concourse would be covered, 
but on the basis that that area will now be knocked through to any new 
undercroft development, I too doubt that will happen.

I suspect that's where the idea of shops comes in, where the Eurostar 
departure lounge was, to provide the station with more retail facilities to 
compensate for those removed as part of the barrier scheme.

I had a quick look at the planning stuff for the Elizabeth house area, 
although it fits in with an undercroft access on that side of the station, I 
still can't see the point of shops at the platform level, all the recent NR 
published info, such as Route plan 3 (April 08) brings the platforms back 
into use in the period 2012 - 2014, and it is still happening  in the ORR 
April report on the 2008 periodic review. The Railway Magazine article must 
date from late May or early June depending on deadlines, if true it is a 
major U-turn...

Paul S

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:21:20 +0100, Arthur Figgis wrote:

>>> Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>>> concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>>> capital?
>> 
>> Isn't the new development to the north of the station? And this is the 
>> station where the light is so bright no-one can read the hi-tech 
>> departure boards?
>
>That's more or less solved now.

More or less? Wasn't the problem only with the LCD boards, which were
replaced a while back with LED ones?

asdf wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:21:20 +0100, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> 
>>>> Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
>>>> concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
>>>> capital?
>>> Isn't the new development to the north of the station? And this is the 
>>> station where the light is so bright no-one can read the hi-tech 
>>> departure boards?
>> That's more or less solved now.
> 
> More or less? Wasn't the problem only with the LCD boards, which were
> replaced a while back with LED ones?

They were also in the wrong place, and have been moved.

-- 
Arthur Figgis               Surrey, UK

On 13 Jul, 19:31, "Paul Scott"  wrote:
> "Peter Masson"  wrote in message
>
> news:l8Gdnd7Qr_3njefVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >  wrote
>
> >>Surely the big worry is the construction of office space above the
> >>concourse cutting light to one of the grandest stations in the
> >>capital?
> >>But will the current economic climate lead to a revision or scaling
> >>back of plans?
>
> > Among the ideas for Waterloo is extending track back into the concourse,
> > as
> > part of a 10-car scheme for suburban services, and constructing a new
> > concourse at undercroft level. If this is likely to happen, it would not
> > be
> > a good move to extend the existing main concourse over then low level E*
> > concourse.
>
> I don't think the concourse depth at the south end would gain more than 1
> car length though, presuming there'd still have to be access to the platform
> ends, which is why all the reports propose change at the other end as well.
>
> It was originally thought the Eurostar low level concourse would be covered,
> but on the basis that that area will now be knocked through to any new
> undercroft development, I too doubt that will happen.


If the low-level concourse went much further south, wouldn't it come
up against the Drain as it cuts across towards Stamford Street?

"MIG"  wrote in message 
news:61e23c4e-94a6-459c-a403-a522c0248157@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On 13 Jul, 19:31, "Paul Scott"  wrote:

>> It was originally thought the Eurostar low level concourse would be 
>> covered,
>> but on the basis that that area will now be knocked through to any new
>> undercroft development, I too doubt that will happen.
>
>
> If the low-level concourse went much further south, wouldn't it come
> up against the Drain as it cuts across towards Stamford Street?

Not sure - I thought any low level concourse would be at the approximate 
depth of the Bakerloo/Northern line ticket hall, rather than the 'outside 
street' ground level.  Be interesting to see a cross section showing the 
relative heights though, accurate info seems a bit scarce...

Paul

On 14 Jul, 17:15, "Paul Scott"  wrote:
> "MIG"  wrote in message
>
> news:61e23c4e-94a6-459c-a403-a522c0248157@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On 13 Jul, 19:31, "Paul Scott"  wrote:
> >> It was originally thought the Eurostar low level concourse would be
> >> covered,
> >> but on the basis that that area will now be knocked through to any new
> >> undercroft development, I too doubt that will happen.
>
> > If the low-level concourse went much further south, wouldn't it come
> > up against the Drain as it cuts across towards Stamford Street?
>
> Not sure - I thought any low level concourse would be at the approximate
> depth of the Bakerloo/Northern line ticket hall, rather than the 'outside
> street' ground level.  Be interesting to see a cross section showing the
> relative heights though, accurate info seems a bit scarce...
>
> Paul

In my memoryI am picturing the ceilings being pretty low in the ticket
hall (or perhaps the floor being high).  Probably not suitable for a
shopping cathedral.

On 14 Jul, 17:31, MIG  wrote:
> On 14 Jul, 17:15, "Paul Scott"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "MIG"  wrote in message
>
> >news:61e23c4e-94a6-459c-a403-a522c0248157@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com..> > > On 13 Jul, 19:31, "Paul Scott"  wrote> > >> It was originally thought the Eurostar low level concourse would be
> > >> covered,
> > >> but on the basis that that area will now be knocked through to any new
> > >> undercroft development, I too doubt that will happen.
>
> > > If the low-level concourse went much further south, wouldn't it come
> > > up against the Drain as it cuts across towards Stamford Street?
>
> > Not sure - I thought any low level concourse would be at the approximate
> > depth of the Bakerloo/Northern line ticket hall, rather than the 'outside
> > street' ground level.  Be interesting to see a cross section showing the
> > relative heights though, accurate info seems a bit scarce...
>
> > Paul
>
> In my memoryI am picturing the ceilings being pretty low in the ticket
> hall (or perhaps the floor being high).  Probably not suitable for a
> shopping cathedral.-

Oops too quick on the send.  I wasn't referring to the Euro terminal
and what it might become, but the way that any new concourse would
inevitably be paid for by making it suitable for "retail outlets" and
so on.  Something with the ceiling height of the LU ticket hall would
probably be a bit claustrophobic if I am picturing it right.

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:36:26 -0700 (PDT), MIG
 wrote:

>Oops too quick on the send.  I wasn't referring to the Euro terminal
>and what it might become, but the way that any new concourse would
>inevitably be paid for by making it suitable for "retail outlets" and
>so on.  Something with the ceiling height of the LU ticket hall would
>probably be a bit claustrophobic if I am picturing it right.

You've seen New Street, now it's time for a UK version of the criminal
wrecking of Praha Hlavni Nadrazi.  I do hope not.  Waterloo is, like
Victoria or Euston, a large, open, airy station that is as a result
pleasant to use.  Let's not have another shopping-centre hovel.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.