Finsbury Park Station. Its very name has been known to elicit a shudder from the passengers condemned to use its narrow winding passageways, inadequate (and largely un-weatherproof) ticket offices, and grimy stairwells. That’s a lot of shudders for Finsbury Park is, by some measures, the fourth busiest station outside Zone One. For years, locals and interchanging commuters have been assured that the station would be overhauled, with the introduction of step-free access and other improved facilities. Due to lack of funding, however, these plans have been repeatedly deferred. The best that could be offered was a lick of paint and some new cladding to hide the previous mess of cables during work undertaken in 2010-11. Yet rumours have circulated for some time that a more significant redevelopment of the station could be around the corner, perhaps connected with the wider regeneration of the Finsbury Park area.
On 8 January 2013, TFL’s Projects and Planning Panel finally gave substance to these whispers with the publication of their latest Project Approvals List.
A Potted History
Most London interchange stations are the result of the gradual accruing of new lines over the decades, a process that has rarely resulted in the ideal experience for station users. Finsbury Park is a particularly striking example of this, in part due to that peculiarity of North London geography that led one local branch line to be dubbed ‘The Northern Heights’. The locality of the future station was historically known as Stroud Green (now only applied to the area north of Finsbury Park), long a marshy and disputed borderland between the parishes of Hornsey and Islington. It was crossed by the north-south Stroud Green Road, and, from the 1830s, the Seven Sisters toll-road linking Holloway and Tottenham.
When the Great Northern Railway (the modern East Coast Main Line) was driven though in the late 1840s the navvies dug out a wide cutting through the hills here, complete with the extensive drainage work that opened the area to future development. The Seven Sisters/Stroud Green crossroads, however, lies in a hollow between Highgate and Crouch Hill, and the railway had to be carried over these roads on bridges linked by a high embankment. In 1861, eleven years after the first Great Northern terminus arrived at Maiden Lane, the future Finsbury Park Station that opened atop the embankment was little more than a rural halt. It was named ‘Seven Sisters Road (Holloway)’.
Finsbury Park in 1872 (via Stanford’s 1872 map)
The station was soon surrounded by numerous goods and coal yards, and in 1867 a branch-line to Edgware was created, now the linear Parkland Walk. More significant for the station was the arrival of the Great Northern & City Railway in 1904, which ran in mainline-gauge tunnel from Moorgate to Finsbury Park. Negotiations to link this with the Great Northern failed, and the line ended in underground platforms beneath the embankment. In 1906 the Great Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway connected Finsbury Park to Hammersmith. Prior to the Victoria Line being built the what was by then the Northern City line of the underground was cut back to Drayton Park. The running lines of the Piccadilly Line were rearranged and the station tunnels reused so that when the Victoria Line opened in 1968 there was same-level interchange between the Victoria and Piccadilly Lines. A decade later Moorgate services were reconnected to Finsbury Park via the originally-intended mainline link just south of the station.
The current complex four-level layout of the station was essentially complete by this point in history. The platforms continue to be accessed by long, narrow, and oft-flooded passages from the surrounding roads, on two levels, sometimes running in parallel, replete with difficult junctions and steep stairs to the platforms. These include two narrow spiral shafts between the underground platforms and national rail above, each containing double-helix spiral stairwells. Only one stairwell per shaft remains open, and over the years one of the linking passages has been closed for use as storage. The station complex has four entrances, one small 1970s ticket hall on Wells Terrace, and some National Rail ticket booths on Station Place. The latter received a makeover and a striking roof during 2005-6 to provide some shelter from the rain.
The Future
The difficult geography and consequent labyrinthine complexity of the station have made modernisation of Finsbury Park especially challenging. The narrow entrances result in Finsbury Park being the largest un-gated station in London (though a National Rail gate-line was installed in 2011), and there is no step-free access to either the underground or Network Rail.
The current ticket barriers (photo by Nicobobinus)
In recent years a plan emerged to widen and reclad the Wells Terrace ticket hall, install gate-lines, reopen and extend the unused corridor, and install two lifts to the underground platforms. Funding for this did not materialise, and the plan was mothballed. The 8th January TFL report, however, appears to resurrect these plans in an amended form, with any “outstanding design issues dealt with”. Completion is expected by December 2014, so detailed plans will presumably emerge soon. It is likely that the existing free passage through the station from Seven Sisters Road to Wells Terrace will no longer be possible without an Oystercard or traditional ticket.
The original plans (apologies for image quality)
Tantalisingly, the report also refers to a planned Western Ticket Hall linked to the substantial City North redevelopment adjacent to (and partly above) the station.
The City North development (via skyscrapercity)
The planning permission granted by the London Borough of Islington in 2010 includes passive provision for a new small ticket hall and a new exit into the development, thereby linking onto Fonthill Road via Goodwin Street. It can be hoped that this will bring some relief to the existing entrances while providing a boost to the down-at-heel streets west of the station. Work is expected to commence in April.
City North floorplan. We’ve highlighted the provision in the green box
In addition to the new lifts to the underground platforms, step free access is also planned to those of the National Rail lines above as part of the work to re-open a disused platform on the east side of the station (of which more below); it appears that only this new platform will be accessible from the new lift though – a far from ideal solution.
The Future of Services at Finsbury Park
There are currently two separate schemes that will significantly impact services at Finsbury Park by 2018.
First, the segregation of suburban services between Finsbury Park and Alexandra Palace will allow a near-doubling of the number of trains per hour on the Hertford Loop. These services primarily terminate at Moorgate at peak times and King’s Cross in the late evening and at weekends. The recently-deferred Thameslink franchise consultation raised the possibility of a post-segregation evening and weekend service to Moorgate; this is to be welcomed as it will be a boost to the under-utilised stations at Drayton Park and Essex Road, in addition to providing useful access to the night-life of Shoreditch via Old Street, relieving the Victoria line. The Hertford Loop is sometimes mentioned as a future candidate for acquisition by London Overground, a prospect reinforced by doubts as to the suitability of retaining it within the future Thameslink franchise.
More significantly, the East Coast Mainline will be connected to Thameslink. Work to fit-out the St Pancras tunnels is now underway. While final service patterns are yet to be set in stone, it appears likely that around eight Thameslink trains per hour will stop at Finsbury Park, with most existing Cambridge, Peterborough and Welwyn services funnelling through the core to destinations as yet uncertain in the south. Brighton, Maidstone East, Three Bridges, Caterham, Tattenham Corner, and Horsham are among the names in the mix. The recent reprieve of the Wimbledon loop means that Sutton can be added to this list.
Platforms have already been lengthened to accommodate the twelve-car Thameslink sets by extending over the Stroud Green Road with widened bridges, albeit with little accounting for aesthetics – the unsightly mismatch of platform barriers and passenger shelters makes the high-level station resemble a Jewsons storage yard.
Once again, the piecemeal growth of this awkwardly-situated station, coupled with squeezed budgets, has led to a compromise solution and a suboptimal passenger experience. The presence of the East Coast mainline above means that there are significant (read expensive) engineering difficulties inherent in any substantial plan to holistically redesign Finsbury Park station as a place of open circulation spaces or easy interchange twixt surface and sub-surface services. The planned improvements are certainly welcome (and not before time), but this subterranean hamster-run is likely to remain a cramped and wearying experience for the peak-time commuter for the foreseeable future.
Do the Kings Cross-Finsbury Park-non stop-Stevenage trains use the fast lines (and call at platform 4 up 5 down) or call at the slow line platforms having switched slow-fast or vice versa north of FP)?
If its the slow lines then presumably platforms are unused in normal working and could be sacrificed to make room for additional lines
@ Savoy Circus
Anecdotally – but it is my local station and I use these services on occasion – they are known to use both 5 and 7 heading north, although predominantly the latter. These services do indeed switch to the fast lines just north of FP.
THC
Thanks
It seems when Thameslink is complete there will be 4 of these per hour (off-peak) compared to 2 now ie 2 x Cambridge Brighton and 2 x Peterborough Horsham.
If they use the fast line platforms at FP then it would be much more convenient if the up Moorgate trains could use platforms 2/3 to provide cross-platform interchange with all Thameslink and Kings Cross services calling at FP if opening doors on both sides can be allowed.
No trains are scheduled to call at Platform 5 during peak hours, with all northbound stopping trains from King’s Cross using Platform 7. The non-stop to Stevenage services then switch into the fast lines north of the station. At evenings and weekends, trains do call at Platform 5 since presumably there is enough slack in the timetable then to have trains blocking the fast lines. Going southbound, trains do regularly call at Platform 4 even in the peak, though hopefully this practice will reduce in future so as to ease interchange with Moorgate services on Platform 1. Given all Thameslink trains will have to be in the slow lines to access the Canal Tunnels, I don’t see why all those services can’t call at Platform 2. There’s little need to eliminate plaforms to create new running lines given there’s already 6 through the station plus an extra line on the Holloway Road side of the station that’s currently used for empty stock movements.
Paper and presentation about Finsbury Park improvements going to LU and Rail Panel this week. Looks like gates arrive in March but Wells Terrace ticket hall and corridor disappears in April 2015 meaning a two year walk round the streets to get into the station. New Western entrance due 2017.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/rup-20150212-part-1-item07-finsbury-park-step-free.pdf
Thanks WW. TfL & Network Rail are attending a Finsbury Park regeneration conference on the 21st, I intend to ask lots of questions about the station and perhaps write it up here.
Any suggested questions?
@ Arkady – I think my main question would be “when are you going to “drop a bomb” on Finsbury Park station and give it the rebuild that it deserves?”
Let’s be honest – all the recent work and that which is currently planned is merely tinkering at the edges to add lifts, put in gates and squeeze a bit more capacity out of the place. The place has been unable to cope in the peak for years. I’d like to see a demand projection for usage of the station – especially post Thameslink in 2018 – and to understand when the station will be deemed “unsafe” in the peaks because it cannot safely handle the volumes of passengers.
The LU station is repeatedly damaged by water ingress because the NR infrastructure at track level and below is wrecked. When I was responsible for the LU bit of F Park I lost count of the times when water related faults were a major issue. We couldn’t get NR remotely interested in fixing their part of the infrastructure. It makes the place look shabby and opening up the disused bits of the station are likely to see the problem get worse not better even though I expect mitigation works will be done. That’s a minor complaint in the scheme of things but, for me, it “sets the tone” for the entire station. No one really cares about it and no one single party is in charge of it because of the complex infrastructure ownership. It needs a radical and fundamental rebuild (which would cost many many millions) and some one needs to take a brave bill about how it is operated and maintained. Regrettably I cannot see those steps happening even though the place warrants the investment given its vast usage levels, high revenue base and importance as a key interchange node in north London. If it was in Germany it would be at least twice the size with larger platforms plus large circulation areas and escalators and lifts to and from the platforms.
@WW
“The LU station is repeatedly damaged by water ingress because the NR infrastructure at track level and below is wrecked”
Is there any charge back to NR for the LU remediation work?
The worst ingress is into the tunnel that is being demolished.
I don’t suppose a more significant redevelopment will happen until HS2 comes along and allows for temporary closure of the ECML above.
@ LBM – not as far as I know but things might have changed since I was involved. There’s still water ingress though!
Arkady has said: “I don’t suppose a more significant redevelopment will happen until HS2 comes along and allows for temporary closure of the ECML above.”
Good Lord! I knew that HS2 was the answer to all our problems, but may I ask “How and when?”
I’m very surprised to see Wells Terrace closure so soon. Given the almost total lack of consultation on this, I expect a lot of unhappy passengers. That entrance is very heavily used thanks to the packed bus routes from Crouch End and beyond.
I’m still unclear on how ticket gates will work at Station Place. I’ve read before that there will be one gate line across the LU and NR entrances. But surely there’s some mistake in that since that would enclose the NR ticket office and machines (since it’s NR it presumably won’t be closing any time soon, in fact it was renovated last year).
@strawbrick:
I think Arkady is suggesting that HS2 could take most of the fast services during such a rebuild, leaving only the local and regional stopping services. This would release capacity on the lines through Finsbury Park and make it much easier to phase a major rebuild there.
@Walthamstow Writer:
NR may simply be biding their time while they wait for some pieces to fall into place.
This is particularly the case if, as your post implies, the existing fabric is no longer fit for purpose. Reusing the viaducts won’t be an option, so a complete, ground-up rebuild will be needed. It’ll be more like rebuilding London Bridge. The logistics will be much trickier than at Reading, where NR had (literally) acres of existing railway-owned land to play with. There’s nowhere near as much space at Finsbury Park, so phasing it all will be very, very tricky.
Quite so.
@anomnibus
“NR may simply be biding their time while they wait for some pieces to fall into place. ”
Sounds more likely that pieces are going to fall off!
@ WAGN – one of the telling omissions in the presentation is the lack of consultation with bus users. There is a long list of communication activities but I think TfL are just assuming people will see posters at Finsbury Park itself. Given the level of influence that people in Muswell Hill and Crouch End can generate it strikes me as odd to not see a more proactive approach to advising people that their journeys will get longer for at least 2 years. The volumes of people is also considerable and may mean people having to queue out in the street in order to get into the station.
I am also struggling to understand how they’re going to gate the Seven Sisters Road entrance – if they can get more than three walkways in there then I’m a Chinaman. I agree with you that Station Place won’t be easy either. The implications on match days are also interesting.
These repeated references to “HS2” at Finsbury Park are puzzling me. Do you mean to refer to CR2? I’m not following why HS2 (which aiui goes the other way) would have anything to do with this area.
@AlisonW,
Because HS2 will serve Leeds and many passengers at intermediate stations are expected to switch to HS2. The East Coast Main Line does not serve many large population centres. A lot of passengers travel from quite great distances just to get to the station and may well switch to HS2.
WW
The implications on match days are also interesting.
More crushed bodies, you mean?
I’m getting more & more concerned about this, in several locations, & no-one seems to have the authority to tell DfT (Who are, AIUI, behind the gating frenzy.) to back off & get stuffed, before someone is seriously injured, at the least.
@Arkady (post 9/2 14:48 re going to regeneration meeting) My main concern at the moment is learning that the Wells Terrace entrance is closing for good in March, and the new Western entrance won’t be open until late 2016 is it?
I currently use the Wells Terrace exit every day. The station is already overcrowded and occasionally closed at peak times and I cannot believe that they have adequately modelled the likely impact of closing this exit. As others have stated it is the main entrance & exit for the busy W3, W7, 210 bus routes, plus a significant residential crowd. Also there is the large student building that proudly boasts of 750 beds opening later this year right on Clifton Terrace. At best I can see the station being closed due to overcrowding far more often, and lots of dissatisfied passengers; at worst I can see serious safety risks.
So if you could, I would like you to ask how they have assessed the impact of closing the Wells Terrace exit during this work, and whether it is truly impossible to keep this exit open for any longer (or provide an alternative during the work). They must know the peak ingress rates through Wells Terrace from the Oyster swipes (plus a % for paper tickets); it shouldn’t be difficult to have modelled the impact of moving that and distributing it between the other two entrances (mostly through the main one I expect). Are they confident they can cope? and what do the exit rates look like on Arsenal match days? Will the Wells Terrace exit be physically inaccessible or for at least part of the period could it be re-opened during an emergency? (say a tube fire). I would also ask why they have not done much more to communicate this well in advance so that people could have more chance to respond.
Thanks!
It seems to me that the “City North” development has the unfortunate consequence of densely building on the very site that would be required for a major redevelopment of the whole station. In fact many of the large sites to the West of the station have been redeveloped in recent years – you could see this as a serious missed opportunity.
Sad that, as with Clapham Junction, the lack of an overall future vision – even if money isn’t available right now – ends up constraining the site even further. Simply putting these stations in the “too difficult” pile shows a terrible lack of leadership. An outline master plan with safeguarding is all it would take – developments could still take place but, as at Paddington, with passive provision for the future station reconstruction and necessary works.
@Martin
As far as I can see from http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/rup-20150212-part-1-item07-finsbury-park-step-free.pdf the Wells Terrace entrance and most of the passageway is slap bang in the middle of the site for the City North development. I can’t see how it could realistically remain open in any way. Logistics aside, the safety issues alone of such major construction going on overhead would seem to preclude it. Given that the passage tunnel runs under the City North I’d also be curious to know what the ownership situation is. It may be that LUL’s options are limited, and they’d probably argue that by getting a new station building constructed for free by the developer they’re getting a good deal.
@Martin – I will most definitely be asking that very question. It’s not closed until 2016, it’s closed until October 2017!
@The Other Paul – It’s clear the the western/Wells Terrace entrance will need to remain closed while the tunnel is being demolished and the basement works finished. The plans suggest that will take up to one year. What isn’t clear is why they then cannot run a tunnel in hoardings out to Wells Terrace while they build the development around it – that’s exactly what happened at King’s Cross while they were building the new concourse.
As to your other point – I’m not convinced that the station needs to expand further into the surrounding area. Vast internal space could surely be claimed by opening up the tunnel arches and connecting them up as it being done at London Bridge. That would no doubt be expensive and disruptive, but doable in theory.
Re: the meeting on the 21st, please can you ask if there are any plans post station redevelopment to provide direct access to the NR platforms from the Wells Terrace bus station and/or the new Western Station Entrance? Thanks indeed
We sort-of know that already, in that the extended corridor leads to a lift up to Platform 1-2.
When they will get around to building the platform bridge linking those platforms to the others is another question, and one that I shall ask.
@Arkady
“A Tunnel in Hoardings”
Well that’s kind of why I mentioned the land ownership point. Unless we could find out the minutiae of the historic agreement between the railway and the landowner surrounding the tunnel it’s impossible to say. We don’t even know which of today’s railway entities is party to it! At Kings Cross the railway owns the entire site so the situation was much more straightforward.
I’d also say that the site strikes me as a fairly constrained place to build two towers and some other lower-rise buildings. Maintaining a busy walkway with all the requisite health & Safety requirements would complicate construction considerably. Again Kings Cross was a low-rise piece of work without the considerable concrete pours and piling that will be required for these towers.
On the other point, what I didn’t really make clear is that I meant space to allow the development to happen – for construction logistics and perhaps temporary diversions of roads or rail lines – rather than to increase the footprint of the station. London Bridge is more or less surrounded by roads, some of which have been closed to form the construction site. Without this site being available at Finsbury Park the logistics of something similar happening there are all the more tricky. St Pancras would have been a lot more difficult to do without the construction area to the North of the British Library and the Reading station work – where the footprint of the station has actually increased – was largely made possible by the existence of the adjacent vacant site.
That said, my personal crayon redevelopment of Finsbury Park would include two large retail-lined passageways extending straight from under the platforms out across the City North site. One to Wells Terrace and the other to a new pedestrian/cycle boulevard constructed between Seven Sisters Road and Wells Terrace perpendicular to the end of Goodwin Street. And a development opportunity above them. I’m thinking the clean lines of the new Rotterdam Centraal’s passageways with a better implemented pedestrian boulevard than Brussels Midi.
@Arkady:
The only way to open up the space under the viaducts is to demolish them. Some of the photos in the London Reconnections Photo Pool (see links on home page and below) show the scale of the work: when they rebuilt the terminating platforms, they didn’t just peel off the platforms themselves: they dug right down through to ground level. The entire structure beneath each and every platform is being ripped out and replaced entirely with modern replacements that take up a lot less room and allow the concourse to be relocated beneath the tracks.
London Bridge is big enough that this kind of work can be phased without too much disruption to services. Where possible, some services were simply rerouted to other termini, like Blackfriars, via Elephant & Castle.
This is one of the few occasions when the South London rail network’s maze of interconnected lines has proved an advantage, but the network to the north of London is much more segregated, limiting diversion options. You can’t just divert all Stevenage or Hertford trains into St. Pancras or Liverpool Street as neither terminus has the capacity to cope with all those extra trains.
If Network Rail also want to reconfigure the platform layout at Finsbury Park, the phasing is going to be even more difficult: it means closing at least two platforms at the same time, to rebuild just one. I don’t envy the project lead who takes this on.
But could not be opened up in a less interventionist way? In the way that the arches under LB used to be? Yes it would free up less space, but it would still be more than now. There are many arches that are currently used for shops at either end, or not used at all.
@Arkady: “When they will get around to building the platform bridge linking those platforms to the others is another question, and one that I shall ask.”
I believe the answer to this question is “never”. Slide 5 of the Tfl Rail + Underground panel presentation says: “LU and NR lifts all coming off ‘passageway 4’… Developing a ‘joint’ lift on NR platforms 5/6 down to LU southbound platforms.” Personally I think this will be a much better solution than taking the lift to Platform 1/2 and then another lift up to a bridge and then another lift down to your platform of choice.
I’d completely missed that. It’s a vastly superior solution.
So there’s the existing lift to platform 1/2. The document points to two new lift shafts, one of which is to 5/6 and the other appears to be to 7/8. The picture also shows what I *think* is the disused lift-shaft to 3/4 which presumably will be brought back into use?
So, 5/6 will also serve the Southbound underground platforms. Will there be a fifth (?) lift that serves the northbound platforms, or will that remain stairs-only?
This sort of thing (I suspect the ones under FP are rather less grand): https://twitter.com/TLProgramme/status/568685334898331648/photo/1
Ooops: http://www.islingtontribune.com/news/2015/feb/snub-talks-new-look-finsbury-park-developers-tfl-and-art-framers-miss-conference-area%E2%80%99
Arkady
I see Haringey have included the Network Rail yard at 12-20 Stroud Green Road in their potential residential developments from 2020.
One does wonder why the buś routes that terminate in Wells Terrace can’t be diverted to serve the other side of the station and then run empty to Wells a Terrace bus Station?
The recent extension of route 263 to Highbury has left a spot near the Nags Head where one maybe two the routes could be extended to until these works are finished.
It seems mainline to tube via lifts will only be Southbound only . Wonder if they don’t trust passengers travelling Northbound ?
So what happens if Kings Cross Station is closed by an incident given the chaos after XMAS !
Perhaps Finsbury Park Station needs a Crossrail solution with new tunnels taking Thameslink trains from North of Finsbury Park underground ? Extension of Northern City Line from Drayton Park in tunnel maybe !
@Melvyn – it’s hardly realistic to build back up infrastructure against the possibility that disruption will occur somewhere; logically,that would end in the construction of a complete second – redundant – transport system… And as for extensing the GN&C – a sconcing offence, surely?
Melvyn
One does wonder why the buś routes that terminate in Wells Terrace can’t be diverted to serve the other side of the station and then run empty to Wells a Terrace bus Station?
Because, err, there’s a LOW BRIDGE in the way, under which double-deckers cannot go.
http://www.instantstreetview.com/@51.566083,-0.10697,108.23h,5p,1z
Like THAT ….
Sorry forgot about that. So simply divert / extend routes to other nearby turning points .
Your photo shows how many problems at Finsbury Park there are and the difficulty of overcoming them.
Closed from 20 April. Now THREE years, not merely two and a half, until Western Ticket Hall opens.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2015/march/finsbury-park-station—new-entrance-and-step-free-access
What are the three “tube” stations outside Z1 that are busier than FP I wonder?
Stratford presumably is one ….
Greg.
Brixton,at a hazarded guess.
Canary Wharf?
@Greg Doesn’t have 2014, but: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/multi-year-station-entry-and-exit-figures.xls
54.50 Stratford
50.05 Canary Wharf
29.29 Hammersmith (Dis)
27.22 Brixton
27.07 Finsbury Park
(25.15 Vauxhall)
22.87 Shepherd’s Bush (Central)
22.52 Camden Town
22.40 North Greenwich (surprising)
(21.27 Earl’s’ Court)
@ Tom H – North Greenwich is not too surprising given it has a largeish car park, growing office and housing developments, the O2 brings regular event crowds and there are frankly ludicrously busy bus links from South East London. The growth rate of patronage on those bus routes is staggering in recent years. The last time I travelled through there I was on a 108 bus travelling contra peak and the bus was well loaded and picked up nearly 10 people at the Peninsula stop one stop away from NOG station. That volume of boardings so close to the station was a real surprise to me given buses run very frequently on that section.
Interesting
The close almost mirror-images of Stratford & Canary Wharf are amusing.
Vauxhall is busier than Camden Town, but Camden Town is the one that has to be closed because of overcrowding ….. [ Which is another discussion-thread ]
I always forget Brixton – I often go as far as Stockwell – from Walthamstow, but I think I’ve only ever been on to Brixton in the week it opened …
Walthamstow Writer,
Regarding bus loadings at North Greenwich and people making short journeys…
Only the other night I heard that this causes quite a problem with the local MP complaining of people being unable to catch a bus because it doesn’t stop because the downstairs is full. There are seats upstairs but no-one want to go upstairs for 3 or 4 stops and then be at the back of the crowd when everyone gets off at North Greenwich.
Of course bendy buses on the nice wide roads around North Greenwich would have solved this. Or maybe instead have some nice new buses that have two staircases. A suitable scheme to give buses some priority could help. One could call it Greenwich Waterfront Transit to make it seem modern.
I’m deeply sceptical of any numbers given for Finsbury Park. I bet it leaps right up the list once it’s gated. Streams of travelcard holders pour past the card-readers at peak times. There simply are’t enough of them at the moment (and several of those that do exist are poorly positioned), and if everyone stopped to tap their card there would be queues up the street.
Hopefully the new gatelines will have more gates than there currently are card-readers. Still, with the closure of one of the busiest entrances, I still predict chaos.
These numbers also don’t factor in the huge numbers of people transferring between National Rail and the TfL.
@ Tom Hawtin
When you add in the DLR and main lines volumes at Stratford and interchange flows there – please bear in mind that every many ‘entries and exits’ at Stratford may actually be transfers to other lines/operators eg DLR/LOROL/Abellio, so we are talking journey stages not complete journeys – then Stratford is now the 6TH BUSIEST station and interchange in the whole of Britain. Respect. Also maybe some quality improvements needed – ever enjoyed waiting on the West Anglia platforms?
Stratford now exceeds, for example, the combined volume at Euston main line/Euston tube/Euston Square sub-surface. It’s also busier (just) than the Paddingtons + Lancaster Gate, and lots busier than Charing Cross ML and tubes and Embankment combined. Looking ahead, the OOC designers are anticipating 200 million+ plus per annum eventually, putting that alongside Waterloo.
Conclusion: a station passenger volume map of London, now and in 2050, would be far more revealing than a nominal tube map.
@Greg
“Vauxhall is busier than Camden Town, but Camden Town is the one that has to be closed because of overcrowding ….. ”
Those stats only measure entry and exit through the gates: and therefore interchange traffic at Vauxhall is measured but intechange traffic at Camden Town is not. Busy though Vauxhall is, (and narrow though the stairs from the SWT platforms are), I’m pretty sure Camden Town is busier, and the corridors narrower. Many SWT passengers are also switching to bus at Vauxhall, to travel further into London on a Z2+ travelcard valid on buses in Zone 1 but not on trains and tubes.
@Arkady
0815-0915 (max peak hour) volumes at Finsbury Park, based on 2012 LUL data:
combined Access, Exit and Interchange: 16,400 journey stages (also available in detail for every type of interchange and entry/exit including the main line).
All day volumes: 149,100 journey stages.
Based on a x331 multiplier for weekday to annual (2011 LUL data for Finsbury Park), then the annual equivalent gross volumes of passengers handled would be roughly 49.4 million journey stages.
Of course that includes much cross-platform transfer between the Vic and Pic lines. On an equivalent annual basis, the annual cross-platform flows were 18.7 million journey stages in 2012 (so presumably divide by 2 for actual journeys), while the ‘up and over’ tube flow eg Wood Green to Walthamstow was 1.2 million journey stages.
That leaves you with about 29.5 million journey stages heading to/from exits or main line interchange, to/from all lines including the main line.
That’s all an LUL estimate. I find their numbers more reliable than ORR’s in the London area, as they have had to assess large volumes of complex flows. As you say, we shall find out the hard way what the complete user volumes are in due course.
@timbeau
Since I’m currently in information mode, the same 2012 data for Camden Town and Vauxhall, as for Finsbury Park, is as follows:
Camden Town entry+exit flows at the LUL station, weekdays: 58,200 passengers.
Vauxhall, same basis: 71,700 passengers.
So Vauxhall is 23% busier then.
However that is not true at weekends.
There, LUL 2013 data shows 2.9m entries and exits over a year at Vauxhall, combining Saturdays and Sundays, but 7.1m at Camden Town. Indeed, at Camden, Saturdays are 37% busier overall than weekdays, although hourly flows are closer than that for equivalent peaks.
When you combine those volumes with the limited circulating space both upstairs and downstairs at Camden, close to the escalators, then one can understand that Camden Town can feel busier, and is certainly a harder station to manage safely on some days of the week.
Jonathan – fascinating. What are the top four outside zone 1 under the LUL figures, and where does FP come if it it’s not in the top four?
@ Greg – are you unaware of the huge queues at Brixton in the AM peak because of the escalator works? The station is jammed solid from the gatelines, across the entire ticket hall, up the stairs and then there are crowd control barriers right up Brixton Road almost to Lambeth Town Hall. The queue is several people wide. I’ve seen plenty of photos of this and people are immensely “fed up” (to be polite) with what’s going on. Apparently it is impossible to board buses in Brixton heading towards Stockwell in the AM peak due to the volumes of being trying to avoid the Brixton queue. Similarly there have been photos showing commuters jammed from the Vic Line gateline at Vauxhall all the way into the NR station at peak times. This is partly because of the ticket hall works being done at Vauxhall.
@PoP – while I am sorely tempted to take your bait I’ll simply say that things are so bad on the approaches to North Greenwich that TfL have had to break their own rules and add in single direction AM peak short journeys on the 472 between Charlton and NOG. That’s the only way people can get on buses between Charlton and NOG – everything else is full and properly full. No empty seats upstairs nonsense on those routes. They’re simply jam packed based on what people tell me. I’ve only seen the jam packed PM Peak buses leaving NOG and they’re horrendous.
@ Arkady – I share your concerns. I am deeply sceptical that Finsbury Park can be gated at SS Road and Station Place and somehow work and that’s with existing patterns of use. If they were workable why haven’t they been gated years ago? I think that LU has decided to gate now because it gives them the means to restrict entry in the peaks when Wells Tce closes. I expect that there will be enormous queues right round the block – cue “Horror of Finsbury Park queues returns to haunt travellers” headlines in 4 weeks time. The other element is what happens to the Great Northern side of the station as they have gates (assuming they’re still there) at platform level. If Station Place entrance isn’t gated on the GN side then people can evade the gates by using the spiral stairs down to LU from the intermediate level.
@ J Roberts – interesting Stratford stats and I agree about the passenger facilities in parts of the station. They’re dreadful. I’ve never had to wait long for a Lea Valley train but wouldn’t fancy a long wait on a cold, wet day. I’m pleased you picked up on the key fact at Camden Town which is the weekend flows and passenger behaviour – makes it one of the harder stations to plan for because so much of the “M-F peak hour orthodoxy” for planning purposes just doesn’t apply.
WW – “I think that LU has decided to gate now because it gives them the means to restrict entry in the peaks when Wells Tce closes”
This, yes exactly this. I’ve had the Islington Gazette on the blower again today, so the headlines may be sooner rather than later.
“If Station Place entrance isn’t gated on the GN side then people can evade the gates by using the spiral stairs down to LU from the intermediate level.”
Plans are elusive, but the old ones showed a gateline covering both the TfL and NR entrances, running in an arc under the projecting roof.
Now Victoria trains are more frequent they are pushing huge crowds through the stations. I remember when Warren Street was a backwater by central London standards but on Thursday morning there was a queue at the bottom of the escalators even though both of them were going upwards. Maybe Central passengers have switched while Tottenham Court Road is shut; it might have been me when I was living in Woodford.
@ TFB, TFO – Warren St’s escalators have overloaded for years in the AM peak. When I used to change from Vic to Nor the knack was to be off the s/b Vic line train ASAP and hope a n/b hadn’t just arrived so you could get on the escalator without a massive queue. The same applies at the north end of the Vic Line where people are well trained in which door aligns to the platform exit. Misjudge it and your journey can be minutes longer because of queues for the escalators. If you’re on a tight connection for a train or bus then your journey might get very much longer! All the stations need their central stairs replaced with escalators. Why this is not being done as part of rebuilding Tottenham Hale I don’t understand – the place is chronically overloaded now and will be much worse in the future. It’s ludicrously short sighted to plonk a much bigger, more attractive station in place and then have to come back years later to replace the stairs with an escalator (as they will surely have to do). The growth in local journeys at the north end of the line is just adding to the capacity pressures.
Gates are now installed, but not commissioned yet at the Seven Sisters Road exit. They have installed one wide gate and two standard gates.
There are proposals/plans for a new (larger) bus station at North Greenwich. It will involve a longer walk as it will occupy part of the car park space.
The real problem with the station is that it is Zone 2 and people travel long distances on buses (free with a Zone 1/2 Travelcard) to save money.
@Chris Patrick – but a long way from FP, surely?
@ Matt D – looks like they’ve installed all that is physically possible at that entrance rather than do something to enlarge the entrance. I’m gobsmacked that so few gates pass any sort of throughput / evacuation test for the numbers using that entrance (it’s the one I use the most at FP). If the plan (as per your usenet post) is to only switch on on 20 April when Wells Tce closes then there’s going to be a problem. Combining two “learning curves” on one day is not really good practice when you’ve reduced capacity. Far better to switch the gates on a week before hand, even though Wells Terrace won’t have them, so people get used to them and start telling people that they’ll be walking round the block in a week’s time.
Can’t wait to see the massive queues at the gates, especially on football days! I also wonder what will happen to the TSGN gates at platform level because you can’t have two exits or two entries in a row (e.g exit at platform level and the again at Station Place or vice versa) with Oyster’s checking logic on PAYG. That’s why the interchange gateline was taken out at Stratford.
WW
If that is correct, then how come we have the (IMHO completely potty) back-to-back lines at the E end of WaterlooEast / W end of Southwark?
Or the about-to-be-installed gates at Walthamstow Central, for that matter?
And the already installed gates at Tottie Hale?
Or am I being dumb, somewhere – do all of these count as exit – entry, even though, in the first case there is no way out between the gatelines, to anywhere at all ….
@ Greg:
I wish they would add a normal exit there. I was out at a bar in the arches above Southwark station and thought it was ridiculous that I was expected to walk all the way to Blackfriars/Waterloo road to get to W/loo East….
The gates at Waterloo East/Southwark count as exit/entry and the system can presumably cope with single journeys that include balanced exit/enter pairs during the journey, as there are several places where that happens (The old layout at Kings Cross comes to mind).
And I agree it’s completely potty and there should be a normal exit. Especially now given that Southwark station is overloaded with people leaving Waterloo East that way as it’s less busy than London Bridge or Canon Street.
The problem at Waterloo East/Southwark, which I thought had been resolved, was that although Oyster will allow you through three barrier lines to get to or from the platforms at Southwark from/to the entrance at Waterloo East, without charging you extra (the no-mans-land counting as an OSI) this is of no help if you are travelling on a London terminals ticket. Unless it has been changed recently, these will not let you through the barriers to or from the Southwark station side.
At best, this can leave you having to walk from the entrance to Waterloo East along Brad Street to the entrance to Southwark station, or vice versa – particularly annoying if you were at the country end of the incoming SE train.
At worst, if you were using a single ticket you can be stuck in no mans land after the SER machine has eaten it.
One solution is to use your Oyster, if you have one, to cross the concourse of Southwark station. But this will cost you a Zone 1 tube fare.
@ Greg – in all the examples (barring Southwark) you cite you either simply enter or exit the respective “side” of the interchange and can reach the street or a platform and then you have an option to enter the other “side” of the interchange. OSIs work on the principle of having “sides” within the defined interchange. The logic for a journey from Amersham to Chingford could be
Enter Amersham
change at Kings Cross (no OSI Met to Vic anymore)
Exit Walthamstow Central LU (one side of the OSI)
Enter Walthamstow Central NR (other side of OSI)
Exit Chingford
Alternatively
Enter Amersham
Exit Marylebone NR (one side of the OSI)
Enter Marylebone LU (other side)
Change Oxford Circus
Exit Walthamstow Central LU (one side of the OSI)
Enter Walthamstow Central NR (other side of OSI)
Exit Chingford
Or finally
Enter Amersham
Exit Liv St LU (one side of the OSI)
Enter Liv St NR (other side)
Exit Chingford
You get the general idea of interchanges have “sides” to them. There is even a Non Zone 1 fare interchanging West Hampstead LU to West Hampstead Overground with “pink” touch at Highbury and Islington. That f are option also allows Finchley Rd / Finchley Road and Frognal as a valid interchange too. Strangely there is no “via West Hampstead, Gospel Oak, Blackhorse Rd, Walthamstow C” route nor a similar version but changing between WW Queens Rd / WW Central.
Provided the OSIs are properly configured and people touch in and out there’s no great issue. Southwark is (IMO) a palpable nonsense given no exit to the street between the gatelines and I’m amazed it got past the safety people in LU or South Eastern or the ORR or the Fire Brigade. Your basic moan about gating what were previously “open” interchanges between NR and LU is a separate issue where your views are well known and I don’t have anything to add given it’s decades since I had any involvement in gating plans.
WW
I have actually, been in correspondence in the past with ORR about the internal double gate-line @ Waterloo E.
The response was: “It’s perfectly safe, because, when the gates are operative (i.e. “closed”) there will always be a gate attendant to help” (!)
Of course, if they did away with said gates they could save two salaries + gateline maintance …..
AT WHC, ORR have come back & told me that they have required TfL to undertake mitigation measures to the new “trapping cage” that has been designed (?) for people coming out of the tube. Mirrors, cctv camears, & one particular very narrow gate, with projections on it will have to go.
I just hope it will be enough to avoid the crowd-crush accident that I was/am afraid of. My local MP has also been copied in on this, I’m glad to say.
Of course, very soon after all of this goes into operation, we will have to go “out & “in” to proceed from one TfL service to another ( Underground / Overground ).
The [Snip. Logic is a more polite word. LBM] of this arrangement is left as an exercise for the reader to judge ….
@Greg
Whilst safety is important, the point is the need to pay an Oyster Zone 1 Tube fare simply to exit Waterloo East onto Blackfriars Road, without going on an Underground train at all.
………..(assuming of course that you actually have an Oyster, which someone coming up from Dover may well not have!
@ Greg – I am well aware of your letter writing about WHC.
WW
Yes, but I want to make sure that it’s in “the public domain” just in case I was correct, as I would much rather not be, & something goes ‘orribly worng.
@timbeau 15:57 (and subsequent discussions) – your London Terminals ticket will get you through the Waterloo East/Southwark gateline.
At present. It’s part of the arrangements for the London Bridge non-stopping. So enjoy it while you can. It won’t be lasting.
Indeed, once you’ve done that, you can get the Jubbly back to London Bridge and exit there. And all sorts of other places. See here.
@MikeP good points. But since passing on foot through Southwark station is not explicitly mentioned in the site you reference, it is possible that with a London Terminals ticket you might not be allowed out of the exit gate at the east end of Southwark station. If this is the case, you could always try out the reference to “staff will use a common-sense approach”. (Which is a phrase to which I always add a mental “probably, except on Tuesdays”).
Malcolm – Southwark is explicitly mentioned on the page MikeP refers to as a station that holders of all NR ticket types can use without being charged (in the list of stations just below the diagram) , so no common sense required!
The Station Place gateline is being installed today: https://twitter.com/messages/media/582570047903793152
And here’s the Seven Sisters gateline:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CAzWW75W8AAFuIb.jpg:large
@Mike P etc
A usueful map, and I hadn’t realised entry/exit at Southwark was allowed (although it makes sense as the easiest way to get from London Bridge to Blackfriars during the closure) The map is wrong though to suggest the 17, 381 and RV1 pass Southwark station.
It is now almost possible, with a London terminals ticket, to walk entirely from the north bank of the Thames at Blackfriars to Waterloo under cover, with just a brief dash in the rain from Blackfriars (south bank) to Southwark.
WW
You have referred to a ““pink” touch at Highbury and Islington”.
What on earth is that, and when am I supposed to use / do it?
And where are the posters telling me where and why I should?
@Strawbrick
http://citytransport.info/Digi/P1120721a.jpg
http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/route-validators-pink-readers/
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/oyster/using-oyster/pink-card-readers
It is essentially a “dummy OSI” ,and is provioded so you can prove to the system what route you took, but is made available at places where you can interchange without actually leaving the station. It proves that (in this case) you went via H&I rather than via Zone 1 (although in this specific example the touch in at West Hampstead LO station would, I should have that, be enough. But it would prove e.g Richmond to Walthamstow was done via H&I rather than via Victoria (neither route requiring an OSI so no other way of proving you did one or the other).
@ Strawbrick – I was referring to the route validators that have a pink coloured touch pad (target) rather than a yellow one. Timbeau has provided a decent explanation and good links. I would add two further bits of relevant info.
1. There is a general emphasis that it is PAYG users who have to touch their card on a route validator. That is not correct. Anyone using PAYG or who has a non Zone 1 travelcard on Oyster who is travelling on a journey which avoids Zone 1 *must* touch on the identified route validators for the route they are taking. You may only take a route that has been specified by TfL in the Single Fare Finder. If you fail to touch your Oyster Card at the prescribed place or take a route avoiding Zone 1 that isn’t in the Fare Finder you are likely to be whacked with an extension fare charge for a via Zone 1 journey. For me it’s the “non Z1 travelcard” holders I feel sorry for because TfL’s info does NOT scream this requirement from the rooftops. I dread to think how many people get surcharged without knowing why or how to avoid the charge. When I was using a non Z1 Travelcard I had to make sure I checked my route options in advance to avoid being hit with an extension fare. I only really understood what to do because I asked an expert at LU some detailed questions before I left LU and had to pay fares. It was only my ongoing interest in Oyster that made me realise that I needed to ask the questions in the first place! Sometimes geeky levels of knowledge are a benefit.
Again I doubt many people really understand the link between the Single Fare Finder and the route validator concept and how they make journeys on the rail network. People using contactless bank cards for non Z1 journeys also *have* to touch their bank cards on route validators and also *have* to comply with the routes set out in the Single Fare Finder.
2. TfL did improve the wording on the notices on the route validators but it’s still not clear enough (IMO, of course). TfL have also introduced little video clips on Youtube to try to explain the various Oyster concepts and while they’re very pretty they don’t have quite the right level of detail (again that’s my view). They’re also out of date and don’t reflect the recent changes to daily caps. I did tweet TfL about this but got zero acknowledgement of my feedback.
I happened to watch the recent Transport Committee webcast which featured TfL talking about ticketing. Shashi Verma of TfL was quite adamant that while the TfL fare structure is complex people can find their way through it with ease. He also failed to see the point in providing “big thick booklets” for passengers. I have to say I really do not agree but I’m a bit of “detail monster” so perhaps I’m happy with “big thick booklets”. The fact that the Oyster-Rail website gets regular traffic and the site owner answers a never ending torrent of Oyster and fares related questions shows there is a knowledge gap for passengers and that people cannot find what they need from TfL. I’ve lost count of tweets recently from people who cannot find the prices of Travelcard seasons on the TfL website. I keep giving them the same reply and pointing them at the relevant pdf file. I don’t think that’s a very satisfactory state of affairs but, again, I’m probably in a minority of one yet again.
The gate installation has led to some debate on Twitter
https://twitter.com/search?q=finsbury%20park%20barriers&src=typd
No sign of any change at the Station Place National Rail entrance as yet..
While FP gets gates I noticed tonight that H&C entrance at Liverpool Street gates have been taken out of use for Crossrail works with passengers using Oyster needing to use standalone readerś.
Counting usage at FP at present is also complicated by use of tunnel to simply cross through the station without boarding or alighting any trains something the closure of Station Place will mean only those wanting a train will enter the station while the rest will just get wet when it rains , especially if they want a bus in Station Place bus station … When it comes to bad publicity ahead of a election Finsbury Park Station could be it ..
@ Matt D – as I’m a cynical old so and so I think we can see that F Park might just have a bit of a fare dodging problem given that Twitter reaction. Alternatively there is something in “yoof” culture about ticket gates that has passed me by. 😉 Also interesting to note the problems from a couple of years ago when FCC installed their gates.
Re WW,
Looks like the barriers will ” pay” for themselves fairly quickly given the reaction on twitter. Well worth TFL and TOCS putting a copy of that feed in the evidence file to used to justify the next gating schemes.
@ngh – absolutely. The shrieking from the fare-dodgers is amazing. I suspect that once gated official numbers will rise, but despite that the station will feel quieter!
I attended the first steering group meeting of a prospective Finsbury Park Station User Group last night. The TfL rep was quite convincing – they’ve done their numbers. Most interesting, though, is that they have tried and so far failed to convince NR to gateline *their* Station Place entrance, so the underground platforms will still be accessible via the spiral staircases for those who want to avoid a gateline.
Unless & until Spurs are playing Arsenal & people get crushed – those gates are narrow.
Transitting Southwark is free on Oyster, and costs 10p (last time I heard) for a paper ticket…
@ Arkady – so let me get this correct. Wells Tce closes, half of Station Place is gated on the LU side but NR is not gated there. SS Road is gated. TSGN are keeping their gates on their platforms and the need to intermediately validate, if using PAYG / contactless, at the top of the spiral stairs remains? And there is still open access, albeit a bit convoluted, to the LU platforms via NR stairs and the spirals? What an unmitigated mess. It’ll take the fare dodgers 20 seconds to work out how to avoid their fares with that set up.
Someone needs shooting or there needs to be serious “bashing of heads” to get a proper solution. If nothing else this proves my long held view that gating Finsbury Park is not feasible on its current physical layout as well as my shorter held view that some TOCs really don’t know how to do ticket gates. Sigh!
NR platforms 1 and 2 (the main southbound platforms) were built ungated in 2013, so interchange from there into the Tube and the wider world will remain free. If they weren’t going to put a gateline outside, why didn’t they put one on those new platforms (which are as wide or wider than the platforms that do have gates)? The lack of a proper strategy for this station is comical.
@WR & WAGN – yep, that’s about it. It does seem to be NR who are mostly at fault here. I suppose they do have something of a challenge, as an exterior gateline won’t cover interchanging passengers, but would mean that commuters entering at FP station would have to go through two gatelines. That doesn’t explain why some platforms are gated and others aren’t. I’d guess that if the Northern City Line and Hertford Loop were taken over by London Overground then you would see more platforms gated.
I wonder whether they will end up gating the spirals. At the moment a real injustice could be created – the station could end up being closed because the platforms are overloaded, with that overload being disproportionally being caused by freeloaders using the spirals while honest commuters are held at gatelines. This could result in people flooding into the NR entrance to try for the spirals, blocking the interchange. Maybe this will encourage NR to gate their Station Place entrance?
I suppose TfL could always gate the top of the spiral staircases….
Re WW, MD & Arkady
How about some part time enforcement of the gap LO style with staff and handheld Oyster readers. Best started a little while after the gates are in operation so those that do avoid have adjusted their habits so the avoidance can be calculated for future reference to show the value of properly sorting the gap?
Arkady
Probably because there are gates at the top of most of the stairs on the NR platforms, installed not so long ago …..
So, if you wanted to put gates in at the perimeter, you would want to take the “upstairs” ones, out, wouldn’t you?
WW
Agree every word & then some …..
The “obvious” way of sorting this problem is an arc of gates, away from the cross-tunnel entrance & similar outside the NR entrance(s) & no internal gates, but some “pink readers” or equivalent as well.
That way you avoid crowding & crushing in the tunnel mouths & free flow inside the station.
I suppose it’s much too sensible to be implementd?
@Greg – problem with removing the platform-level gates, as desirable as that might be, is that you no longer catch people interchanging between TfL & NR using the spirals.
I saw a plan once that showed a large arching gateline under the Station Place roof, covering both the TfL and NR entrances. There are obvious problems with this (they couldn’t be easily secured at night) but it would have been great for an inflow/outflow perspective. I suspect that this is another example of the difficulty in attaining TfL/NR agreement when they have different funding and strategy issues.
To add to the fun – I’ve just been told that NR engineers have just told FP staff that the new lifts will emerge at NR platform level exactly where the NR gatelines are now, so they will have to come up with an alternative gateline plan anyway!
” problem with removing the platform-level gates, as desirable as that might be, is that you no longer catch people interchanging between TfL & NR using the spirals.”
And why do we have to “catch” such people? Can’t Oyster work out from an entry at Bowes Park and an exit at Oxford Circus that the said passenger has used TfL and NR?
As I’m sure I’ve said before I dragged some very expensive consultants round Finsbury Park station over 20 years ago to explain the issues with gating the place and with doing smart ticketing. I said it wasn’t possible back then on the physical layout and it isn’t now. The new proposed ticket hall will help matters as it adds capacity but even that doesn’t look big enough to me. You simply cannot gate the “gap” between the top of the spiral stairs and the stairs to the NR platforms – there is no holding area for people needing to queue in the event you get a ticket or card reject and that means queues on spiral stairs which must be unacceptable in normal operation. There is definitely a lot of fare evasion at FP and that makes it all the more irksome that the constrained site makes it so hard to gate it effectively.
It is worth saying that Oyster’s PAYG logic of “in” then “out” validations does not allow people to face two entry or two exit transactions in a row. One of those would end incurring a maximum fare. Therefore if you gate the perimeter then you cannot have gates on the NR platforms. I understand why they are there as it’s an attempt by TSGN / FCC to reduce evasion given the real problems with gating the stations north of F Park. However it’s a very one sided view of things and makes a mockery of dealing with the larger prize of gating Finsbury Park as a whole. If things continue as they currently area then you will never get FP fully gated at its perimeter even with the new western ticket hall. I note Arkady’s last post about the MIP lift positions – perhaps that might force a small outbreak of sanity.
It’s a shame that there seemingly isn’t the money to improve and expand capacity at Haringay, Hornsey and Ally Pally stations to allow larger ticket halls or upper circulating areas to allow gates to be installed there. That would help reduce evasion but clearly needs significant spend and other benefits to justify such expenditure.
@Malcolm
“Can’t Oyster work out from an entry at Bowes Park and an exit at Oxford Circus that the said passenger has used TfL and NR”
And what if they got on at Stevenage? Or Peterborough? Or changed at Stevenage off a train from Aberdeen?
They have the same issue at Wimbledon, hence the regular ticket blitzes there.
@ Malcolm – clearly you do not *have* to gate interchanges. Oyster is perfectly capable of working from an origin / destination pair even if there is an open interchange between rail systems on the journey. It had to be capable of working like that because it was and remains impossible / unaffordable to gate every interchange between rail systems. You can’t gate cross platform interchanges such as Stratford, Highbury or Farringdon. To pick up on Timbeau’s “Stevenage / Edinburgh” point there will always be openings / gaps in the system that allow people in or out without needing to pass a ticket gate. You only get full gating if you build new and design it in from the start.
I’m guessing but there seems to have been a policy change to try to regulate validation at some interchange points which are set out as an OSI within the station. Walthamstow Central is one such place. I am unclear where the policy initative has stemmed from – LU / TfL or the TOCs / DfT.
All
This was (one of the) problem(s) @ Stratford, with internal gate-lines, apart from the point repeated by WW about two entry-or-exits in a row.
If it can be done there, because it had to be done, why not elsewhere?
And WHC, also as mentioned by WW once we are past 1st June (approx) this year, when you will have to go through a double gateline & a tortuous course to … get from one TfL service to another …..
Seriously, having an outer gateline + pink readers is the way to go, & not just at FPK.
It’s simpler, cheaper to operate, & will validate the great majority of journeys.
Trying to catch everybody reaches the point of diminishing returns, very quickly, but someone/the authorities do not seem to have noticed this yet.
[minor editing for tone PoP]
@ Greg – you do not routinely need route validators at interchanges. They are only at those points where there is key non zone 1 interchange where several lines meet that can give you a valid non zone 1 route. Walthamstow Central doesn’t count – if it did it would have had them installed years ago. It is also worth saying that sometimes the non zone 1 route is the default fare in the system anyway and does not require specific “en route” validation. This is why people should always check their route options!
Stratford’s interchange gateline was removed when PAYG was extended to National Rail. It was also unique on the LU system. People should not confuse OSIs and the interchange gateline concept. Sorry to repeat this but there are limits to how far you can “flex” the system design.
Oh yes, the ramifications of an oyster system with gatelines (sometimes open and unstaffed), gate-free validators, the pink ones, OSIs etc are endless and they are beginning to make my brain hurt. I suppose the thing I hadn’t properly appreciated is that adding gatelines will typically make things harder for cheats, and tend to be justified on those terms.
I do not want to know what manner of thing is “an OSI (out of station interface) within a station”, so I am not asking for such a thing to be explained. Nor am I asking why you can optionally pass thru a gateline at Wimbledon without triggering any nasties (if you came off a tram), but it can not be arranged for people to pass through a second gateline on your way out of Finsbury Park. I think the four colour map theorem proof might be marginally easier to understand!
@Malcolm – through,through
… nor am I asking what Graham’s doubtless kindly meant pair of prepositions is supposed to signify. After spending a day on the A2, I don’t think there is room in my head for the answer anyway. (And I hope it does not involve sconcing, another one of life’s mysteries).
@ Malcolm – your head’s going to hurt I’m afraid.
OSI in a station – the simplest example is the old arrangement at Kings Cross. You had to exit the tube side to the unpaid area and then re-enter the Sub Surface side if changing lines. All within Kings Cross but the two ticket halls were separate. Now no longer necessary because the station has been remodelled. More relevant examples with Oyster are where people change from LU to NR at say Victoria. There is also an OSI within Victoria NR between the South Eastern and South Central sides of the station. There are clearly legitimate journeys that can be made by interchanging between the two halves of the NR station.
Wimbledon – I won’t do the detail. What I will say is that the checking logic is set up to allow you out if the last transaction on the card was an entry validation at a Tramlink stop. That’s easy. Going the other way all that happens is that your entry at the Wimbledon gateline is cancelled (and any PAYG deduction on entry is reversed) when you touch in on the tram validator and replaced with an entry transaction for Tramlink. This stops people being charged maximum fares. The basic logic checks to do this are straightforward even if people are bamboozled by the concept at Wimbledon.
@Malcolm – rather than thru, I fear. No excuse at all for that…
I do have an excuse for my fingers opting for the American spelling without my brain noticing, it’s quite simple, I’ve travelled the length of the M2 six times today.
I do not have any excuse, however, for not knowing what you meant by your gentle chiding. I re-read my comment, but my inner subeditor was evidently still dormant.
@Malcolm – Blimey! Even your average drugs importer doesn’t use the M2 that much!
TfL’s stats on why they think the pavement under Seven Sister’s Road has sufficient capacity, and their station entry modelling, can be seen here:
http://s974.photobucket.com/user/Redarkady/media/Stats.jpg.html
@Matthew Dickinson, Walthamstow Writer, Arkady:
You lot are rather prescient. https://twitter.com/ChizeaR/status/584078522857218049
@ Pseudonymous – not prescient just laden with cynicism about some people’s motivation having been involved with revenue protection issues for a decent number of years. You can also add a “geek” level of interest in revenue matters pertaining to F Park going back 20+ years. 😉
As a similar example I rode on the first NB4L which was on route 38 back in Feb 2012. On a peak time journey some locals boarded at Dalston and chatted to the conductor and worked out within 60 seconds that it was possible to board the bus and not pay or touch an Oyster Card. I dare say that thought pattern has repeated itself thousands of times as people encounter NB4Ls in use elsewhere in London even if TfL are saying the instance of revenue loss of NB4L routes is not significantly higher than normal OPO routes. Some people will always spot the loop hole.
Oh dear – TfL have just tweeted the following.
“Finsbury Pk: planned works for Mon 20 April postponed until further notice. Wells Terr remains open. Touch in & out on readers as normal”
Wonder what’s transpired?
@ WW
You’re quick! I’ve just received an email from TfL saying that the developers of the adjacent property (CityNorth?) had notified TfL that they were not in a position to proceed with work at this time and so the Wells Terrace entrance would remain open indefinitely.
THC
Wow. I attended the ‘meet the manger’ event yesterday and they were very confident that this was all going ahead. a lot of work has gone into it. They’ve had loads of extra staff leafleting the station in recent days. TfL are going to be seriously pissed off.
@ Arkady / THC – I’ve received the same TfL EMail plus Tom Edwards of the BBC has tweeted about it. I am quite surprised that this has been postponed at such a late stage. I understand the commercial negotiations about the west ticket hall have been “involved” (shall we say) and are obviously a factor in some of the delay to date. Given all that it’s a real surprise to have City North say they’re not ready. I agree TfL cannot be very happy about this at all given they forked out money, will have changed staff rosters, planned on the ticket office at Wells Terrace closing etc etc. Not good.
The press are on it. City North have some questions to answer. What could it be? last minute funding collapse? Contractors gone under? I’m guessing that ‘bad publicity about the disruption’ isn’t the answer.
@ Arkady – I appreciate we have to be cautious but I have been having similar thoughts to you. This doesn’t feel right but I must confess to having long standing doubts about the City North scheme which may be colouring my views. The scheme is utterly out of scale for Finsbury Park – we can surely do better than another monstrous skyscraper block. I also feel it creates too much of a constraint on further improving the station and interchange and I’d rather nothing happened in the short term so a proper scheme that transforms the station could be brought forward and if it has to have some related “railway lands” development on top or alongside then so be it. Finsbury Park has the potential to be a mini Stratford if people plan it properly but I fear there’s no vision for that. Still I’m fed up with gentrification so I’d be happy to see Finsbury Park and Crouch Hill retain its character.
Is it appropriate to “horse-laugh” here?
After all, it’s so well-known that private initiatives are always so much better & more efficient than the “state” at planning & execution ….
Ask the IEA [Institute of Economic Affairs, a UK free-market think-tank. LBM] if you don’t believe me.
/snark
WW
Agree fully about this offering a golden chance for a better outcome, however, like Earl’s Court & the S end of Blackfriars’ Bridge, it’s only too likely that the chance will be thrown away, more’s the pity
Further funding has been approved to progress the step free works at Finsbury Park LU station. Note that the Estimated Final Cost is now projected to be over £1m higher than project authority. See the paper within the Projects Monitoring paper below.
https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/fpc-20150730-part-1-item07-project-monitoring.pdf
No mention of delays or issues related to the development project!
Interesting. City North’s contractors fell through, so they’ve gone back out to tender.
@ Arkady – I wasn’t aware that the contractors had gone tits up. Probably just as well they hadn’t actually started on site and then gone bust.
By way of a small diversion here’s a shot of a commuter train at Finsbury Park in times past.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/66289212@N07/19921284036/
Amazed at the condition of the platform surface. Presumably works were underway prior to the class 313s entering service.
@WW
The DMU appears to be in platforms 6 and 7 and the surfacing works underway on the 7 and 8 island. I vaguely remember there was a lot of station housekeeping before GNE Moorgate services were introduced. After the trains went to Morrgate, Hertford Norths usually left from platform 8 (which became 6 and is now 8 again).
Just idle curiosity,really,but are there plans to re-instate Platforms 9/10 (the Down equivalents of the recently re-built 1/2)?
…wasn’t that the next stage of upgrading the goods lines to passenger status?
Surely P7/8 are already the down direction “equivalents” of P1/2, AFAICT there are four platform faces for each direction, (three tracks in each direction)?
Fair point. Just refreshed myself from Carto Metro, and as expected you’re quite correct.
@WW: obviously “trip hazard” hadn’t been invented in the 1970s!
TfL’s latest documentation indicates that the ticket gates will go live in November. More significantly, it says that before then ticket gates will be installed in the Wells Terrace entrance. It seems that TfL are not confident on the City North works starting soon.
Between 2015-18 lifts will be installed which will service all Network Rail and London underground platforms. this will involve closure of the northbound stairs for 6-9 months in early 2016, and similar for the southbound stairs in early 2017.
@ Arkady – sounds to me like TfL don’t think City North are going to proceed at all or not for a very long time. Gates will give a big payback quickly at Finsbury Park but I’ve never heard of them being installed for a matter of weeks or months before a ticket hall is demolished.
I find it most odd that they now believe they can squash in ticket gates into Finsbury Park when for years it’s been considered borderline impossible because of the crowding and lack of space. I imagine closing the Wells Terrace ticket office *might* give more space for a couple of extra gates but the demand levels have only gone in one direction and that’s upwards since I was last involved in trying to gate the place. While I half admire the “bravery” of whoever it is who believes gating will work in the current constrained physical environment I am sceptical it will work smoothly. How it can work with football traffic I simply don’t know – I guess they’ll have to leave the gates open but keep the Oyster readers live so people can touch in and out as necessary.
Thanks for the update anyway. I assume the TSGN entrance at Station Place is to remain ungated thus leaving the local fare dodgers with a bypass route?
It’s very odd. One possibility is that TfL have renegotiated the deal so that demolition of the Wells Terrace entrance comes later in the schedule of works. Then again, presumably the gates are recyclable.
TfL tell me that they will crack down hard on fare evasion by having ticket inspectors at the bottom of the spiral stairs for a few weeks when the gates are activated.
I actually suspect that it will actually make movement within the station easier – you won’t have non-passengers using the station as a cut-through, and people won’t create delays blocking the entrances as they try to get to the only card reader. And yes, TfL advised me that they would most likely leave the gates open on match days or if there is a crush risk.
Arkady
Unfortunately, that could (could, not “will”) cause serious/dangerous tailbacks up/down said staircases.
It is to be hoped not, of course.
Ticket gates are now in operation at all three tube entrances.
@ Matt D – even Wells Terrace?
That rather suggests the property deal has fallen through / is badly delayed if TfL have gone ahead putting gates into an area that was going to be demolished.
I shall have to go and observe the rush hour and how many are dodging round via the entrance that shall not speak its name. 😉
The City North development has been delayed as the original contractor fell through. The developer is currently in negotiation with TfL about a fresh agreement. TfL want to limit the time that the station has no northwest entrance after the Wells Terrace entrance is closed. There has been a lot of local pressure and press on this issue. There is still some hope that the developer can be lent on to complete the new ‘western ticket hall’ before it undertakes any other works.
The station feels half as busy as did before the gatelines. Some arguably legitimate complaints online about not being able to use the station as a cut-through, but mostly just fare-dodging whingers.
I should also mention that the work-crews currently active on the City North site are mostly TfL/NR contractors doing prep work for the step-free access works, especially the new lifts – some of which will go all the way from the NR platforms down to the LU platforms.
I’ll try to get a detailed update article up on this subject soon.
Quite a bit of work going on at track level on the NW side too ….
Looks as though the remnants of the old island platform have finally gone & beyond the railway fence is a sea of mud, as well.
When I came back, by bus, on Saturday, Woolwich Wanderers were playing at home & the gates at the main SW entrance were locked open, with plenty of police watching ….
TfL told me that the work at the old island platform site is also connected to the lift works.
Does anyone know the rationale for the complete closure of A1201 Stroud Green Road between Wells Terrace and Station Place i.e., underneath the railway bridges? This started yesterday 11th January for several weeks. Apart from a few portable road matrix signs it seems to have poorly communicated. I’ve tried searching online (including Islington road closures and TfL London register of roadworks) without success.
TfL advised me that it’s related to the piling and crane-installation works at NR platform level, which are necessary before lift-shaft excavation can commence. They need the area under the bridge for access.
@Arkady – thank you indeed
Looks like works have started at Finsbury Park.
https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2016/january/works-to-make-finsbury-park-tube-station-step-fr
Look in the notes to see the reference to the City North development and “new investment partner”.
Yep, they started end of last year, and the northbound stairs closed today.
Someone should give me a deadline to turn in an article on this. I work best under pressure. And I just finished decorating my flat, so will actually have time.
I seem to remember that original plans talked of lifts direct from mainline to tube platforms but this was dependent on TFL and Mayor providing funding etc . Otherwise separate scheme for lifts would arise,
I suppose the delay in providing lifts to mainline platforms has provided a 2nd chance to provide direct lifts . In fact if recent talk of TFL and Mayor taking control of most London rail services with Great Northern mentioned then direct lifts would not come up against ticketing issues if both were part of TFL .
The events last year still show much more needs to be done to Finsburry Park Station to make it fit for today’s demands and this might include rebuilding station including provision of escalators .
@ Melvyn – the only way you properly fix Finsbury Park is a complete rebuild. That would cost an enormous sum of money and possibly be very disruptive. There is no sign of any appetite from anyone to expend such sums in suburban locations. The works at Finsbury Park will barely provide any improvement – they might drag capacity up to the level required 20 years ago. If Thameslink proves popular then the pressure at Finsbury Park will increase substantially. I’m not decrying the benefits that lifts will bring to certain groups of passengers but it’s not material in terms of easing the vast crush at Finsbury Park.
It is reported in the Metro that Wells Terrace entrance is to close from the 18th July.
@ Matt D – as per the TfL press release with soothing commentary about how little extra effort is need to schelp round to Station Place. 😉
@WW
“schelp”?
WW has admitted to a lack of fitness in another current discussion, so I suggest he has coined a new word meaning schlep with help!
Hangs head in typo shame 🙁
@Arkady, any chance please of the Finsbury Park article you kindly suggested earlier in the year given that the Wells Terrace entrance is now permanently closed and the work is underway on the LU staircases?
Also, if not off topic, whose job is it to coordinate the multiple local road closures mostly linked to railway redevelopment including: (i) Stroud Green Road closed southbound under the ECML bridges for station works until December 2016 according to Islington or December 2017 according to the local road signs (ii) Wightman Road total closure for GOBLIN bridge replacement (iii) replacement of Highbury Corner bridge over Overground lines (iv) replacement of Upper Holloway bridge over GOBLIN line and last but not least (v) TfL’s Archway gyratory works? Thanks indeed
Mat W
Probably the same people as are in charge of the changes at “Bus stop M” by Bow Church!
[ See multiple Diamond Geezer” postings on that saga ]
@ Mat W – I am sure local traffic conditions are far from ideal but some of those works are unavoidable – Wightman Rd and Upper Holloway are both connected with GOBLIN electrification. They have to be done now or else no electric trains. As there are extremely limited opportunities for major blockades to happen (e.g. Christmas and Easter) then all the preliminary stuff has to be done in advance to allow any major lifts etc to occur on time). Network Rail have today announced that Wightman Rd reopens on 5 September as the last major physical works at the bridge take place this coming weekend. After that it’s plug the utilities back in and resurface and traffic can return.
In terms of who is in charge then TfL will have a guiding hand in several of the schemes – it’s a sponsor of the Highbury Corner, Archway and Upper Holloway works and will is part funding GOBLIN electrification although most funding is via Network Rail. It also controls Red Routes. Islington as the borough will have the other key role as they manage local roads.
It may be hell on earth for a number of months to have 4 schemes running concurrently but it’s *probably* better than having them run one after the other (even if that were possible) and inflict delays on an area for up to 3-4 years. In terms of things like altering traffic light timings and rescheduling buses it probably makes more sense to do lots of work together and cope with all the impacts together rather than the alternative.
Much as we all like “kicking TfL in the goolies” for their alleged incompetence I would say there is no such incompetence here. You have several sets of important works that have to be done and which will facilitate other major transport improvements. We can’t keep ignoring road bridges over railways that are at the end of their economic lives – they have to be replaced just as lifts and escalators, trains, tracks and signals have to be. I’m less convinced about the “need” for the gyratory works at Archway and suspect the end result will be hideous, especially for bus passengers, but that’s a whole other debate.
@ Walthamstow Writer
I think the Upper Holloway bridge replacement is due to the condition of the road bridge rather than connected to GOBLIN electrification (see https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-projects/upper-holloway-bridge). I suppose it may also be linked to the electrification project.
I share your concerns about the Archway plans. I know the area well having worked in Archway Tower for 10 years. There were several nasty RTAs involving pedestrians during that time, and the plans may I suppose help to mitigate that risk.
@matW
TfL has the legal responsibility to ensure that road works on its own network and the strategic road network on borough roads are sufficiently coordinated.
Thanks all and noted on TfL’s role to coordinate the roadworks on their network with the boroughs.
Also noted that the rail-connected works are all necessary, not least for GOBLIN electrification and the subsequent new trains. That’s great news that Wightman Road is set to re-open soon. And I’m quite impressed with the forward planning from TfL and their contractors e.g., for Upper Holloway a new service bridge has already been installed ahead of the main bridge replacement works over Christmas 2016. All that said, it will be wonderful when the various road works are done and dusted.
Network Rail have announced the reopening of Wightman Road see –
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/wightman-road-bridge-replacement-set-to-reopen
There’s a notice on the Finsbury Park tube northbound platform that ‘works to refurbish the main staircase and enable a new lift shaft to be constructed will take longer than initially planned’. Therefore the reduced stair access to and from the northbound platform will carry on till December 2016. From memory this was originally due to complete by the end of September. Let’s hope this isn’t a portent of things to come.
In the meantime works are now underway on the station arches in Station Place and the Stroud Green Road southbound closure is still in effect. The walk from the W3/W7/210 bus stops in Wells Terrace seems to be going mostly OK from the few times I’ve done it recently.
@ Mat W – I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they are finding all sorts of horrors at Finsbury Park as they try to open up areas of the station that are long deserted or touch bits of the structure. The amount of water that has poured into the place for decades will no doubt prove to be a nasty welcome for the engineers and construction people.
Finsbury Park update:
1) According to the Islington Gazette, the southbound closure of Stroud Green Road will be in place until Spring 2018, significantly longer than Islington Council originally indicated. See the link in one of my earlier posts for context. There are concerns that there will be a serious accident as a result of the subset of drivers who ignore the road closure and drive through the chicane under the bridge. Currently it seems unclear whether TfL, Islington or Haringey (as the road forms the boundary between the two boroughs here) are responsible for policing the issue.
2) And according to this article, the work to build the lift shaft to the northbound Victoria and Piccadilly line platforms is almost done and the closed staircase will re-open in mid-February after being closed for a year. However, one of the two main southbound staircases will then be closed from February 27 until late 2017 while the other lift shaft is built. This is expected to be even more disruptive due to the numbers of commuters travelling south in the morning rush-hour.
@Arkady, any chance of that article please reminding us what the station will be like (included perhaps expected service patterns unless this has been covered elsewhere?) once all this is done and dusted? Thanks indeed in advance.
Et voila … from the Islington Gazette:
‘Dangerous idiot’ gets stuck driving lorry wrong way through Finsbury Park bridge
And based on a mail from TfL, today was the first day of reduced stair access to/from both southbound Tube platforms at Finsbury Park whilst the second new lift shaft is constructed. I’ve been cycling to work recently so has anyone experienced the new one-way system?
It seemed OK this morning at 08:30ish. Not really any different to the previous one-way system, just a different set of stairs closed.
Lifts are open…
There’s no sign of any work on lifts to National Rail platforms 3 & 4 or 7 & 8.
I think the first lot of lifts installed provide access to the Piccadilly and Victoria lines and maybe the national rail platforms they serve is a ‘by product’.
Update
Ian Visits reports that the step=free alterations here are now finished . And that there is now step-free access to all platforms.