|
Post by stapler on Sept 21, 2014 9:45:34 GMT
I do hope that LT's obsession with revenue protection will not result in the WA stations to be transferred to them being made less convenient for users. Highams park, for instance, has four exits/entrances, which it would be impossible to gate each of. This includes the exit from the down platform to Larks Hall rd, which was made by "people power" some 30 years ago and is a rare example of an unofficial exit (it was originally the staff gate to the goods yard) being made official. Walthamstow central will also be problematic. Chingford could do with the exit from plat3 being made fully functional with an oyster reader, as that side of the station is the destination for many users.
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 21, 2014 10:16:22 GMT
I do hope that LT's obsession with revenue protection will not result in the WA stations to be transferred to them being made less convenient for users. Highams park, for instance, has four exits/entrances, which it would be impossible to gate each of. This includes the exit from the down platform to Larks Hall rd, which was made by "people power" some 30 years ago and is a rare example of an unofficial exit (it was originally the staff gate to the goods yard) being made official. Walthamstow central will also be problematic. Chingford could do with the exit from plat3 being made fully functional with an oyster reader, as that side of the station is the destination for many users. You would be surprised what can be done these days - my local station (while not in London) has 3 access points - none of which are particularly wide - and all were gated a year or two ago. Because hey are all linked and have a help point with AV capabilities it only takes one person to oversee them all (a requirement if the gates are in operation)
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Sept 21, 2014 16:55:34 GMT
Gates don't seem to be thought necessary on most of the GOBLIN stations that I have used, I doubt if it should be necessary to gate the more lightly used stations on the Chingford or Enfield lines.
As long as the main destinations are gated the revenue loss from illicit journeys between say Highams Park and St James Street should be trivial.
I doubt if it is feasible but ideally the LUL and main line stations at Walthamstow should be combined so that there are only gatelines at the street exits.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 21, 2014 20:28:26 GMT
That would revert to the situation up to c.?1990, when there was free access between the BR line and the Victoria Line, and tickets were collected only at the two street exits.
Aren't some of the Goblin stations being gated now? I passed through gates at Leytonstone HRd a week or so ago....
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 22, 2014 12:15:11 GMT
That would revert to the situation up to c.?1990, when there was free access between the BR line and the Victoria Line, and tickets were collected only at the two street exits. Aren't some of the Goblin stations being gated now? I passed through gates at Leytonstone HRd a week or so ago.... Slowly but surely the GOBLIN is gaining gates. It's not easy because whatever buildings there were years ago have been wiped away. South Tottenham is in line for gates and Leyton Midland Road now has them too. WW Queens Rd is pretty much impossible with the new link allowing local pedestrian access across the bridge. It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train home. I am not overly familiar with Highams Park as I tend to go past by bus rather than use it by train. I also expect LOROL will try to gate a raft of stations on the Enfield and Cheshunt routes but again there is not a lot of space at many stations following the loss of station buildings / rationalisation of facilities by BR over many years. They also have some issues about whether to maintain access through ticket halls at night or just keep using the "night time" exits that exist at many stations. It'll be interesting to see what LOROL do given they have a short tenure on West Anglia but, of course, they're simply doing what TfL are asking them to do under the concession contract.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 22, 2014 12:24:37 GMT
That would revert to the situation up to c.?1990, when there was free access between the BR line and the Victoria Line, and tickets were collected only at the two street exits. Aren't some of the Goblin stations being gated now? I passed through gates at Leytonstone HRd a week or so ago.... Slowly but surely the GOBLIN is gaining gates. It's not easy because whatever buildings there were years ago have been wiped away. South Tottenham is in line for gates and Leyton Midland Road now has them too. WW Queens Rd is pretty much impossible with the new link allowing local pedestrian access across the bridge. It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train home. I am not overly familiar with Highams Park as I tend to go past by bus rather than use it by train. I also expect LOROL will try to gate a raft of stations on the Enfield and Cheshunt routes but again there is not a lot of space at many stations following the loss of station buildings / rationalisation of facilities by BR over many years. They also have some issues about whether to maintain access through ticket halls at night or just keep using the "night time" exits that exist at many stations. It'll be interesting to see what LOROL do given they have a short tenure on West Anglia but, of course, they're simply doing what TfL are asking them to do under the concession contract. It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train homeI I have seldom heard of anything more preposterous. What possible good could it do?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2014 15:16:53 GMT
The gating of stations on the West Anglia inner lines is nothing to do with LOROL. TfL will determine this, and they are already deciding this and from the last list of candidates for gating i saw about 5 months ago it appears that at least 85% of stations (that are not already gated!) will (or might) be gated. On GOBLIN Gospel Oak, Blackhorse Road, Leyton Midland Road, Leytonstone High Road and Barking are gated. Thats 5 out of 12. South Tottenham is in process of gating. And there are outline plans for Harringay Green Lanes in the not too distend future.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 22, 2014 15:47:44 GMT
The gating of stations on the West Anglia inner lines is nothing to do with LOROL. TfL will determine this, and they are already deciding this and from the last list of candidates for gating i saw about 5 months ago it appears that at least 85% of stations (that are not already gated!) will (or might) be gated. On GOBLIN Gospel Oak, Blackhorse Road, Leyton Midland Road, Leytonstone High Road and Barking are gated. Thats 5 out of 12. South Tottenham is in process of gating. And there are outline plans for Harringay Green Lanes in the not too distend future. Why are TFL so obsessed with gating? It's a good job they don't go as far as Norfolk, or they'd do Berney Arms.
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by Dom K on Sept 22, 2014 16:05:07 GMT
The gating of stations on the West Anglia inner lines is nothing to do with LOROL. TfL will determine this, and they are already deciding this and from the last list of candidates for gating i saw about 5 months ago it appears that at least 85% of stations (that are not already gated!) will (or might) be gated. On GOBLIN Gospel Oak, Blackhorse Road, Leyton Midland Road, Leytonstone High Road and Barking are gated. Thats 5 out of 12. South Tottenham is in process of gating. And there are outline plans for Harringay Green Lanes in the not too distend future. Why are TFL so obsessed with gating? It's a good job they don't go as far as Norfolk, or they'd do Berney Arms. Gating is a cost measure as you save money on staffing the fare enforcers. Plus you dramatically reduce fare evasion, therefore making services more profitable. Some stations I'd imagine are harder to gate than others. Silver Street springs to mind!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 22, 2014 16:14:53 GMT
The gating of stations on the West Anglia inner lines is nothing to do with LOROL. TfL will determine this, and they are already deciding this and from the last list of candidates for gating i saw about 5 months ago it appears that at least 85% of stations (that are not already gated!) will (or might) be gated. On GOBLIN Gospel Oak, Blackhorse Road, Leyton Midland Road, Leytonstone High Road and Barking are gated. Thats 5 out of 12. South Tottenham is in process of gating. And there are outline plans for Harringay Green Lanes in the not too distend future. Why are TFL so obsessed with gating? It's a good job they don't go as far as Norfolk, or they'd do Berney Arms. To be fair I don't think it is an obsession. You could turn the argument on its head and say "why are the TOCs so blasé about not protecting revenue on busy inner urban area services?" They carry the revenue risk but couldn't care less about people travelling for nothing in a lot of cases. I was responsible for the network wide gating business case on LU and we just about got everywhere done on LU barring a few exceptions because the cost of station rebuilds was too high. Later we also got to the point of ensuring they were managed properly. I think gates basically instill a discipline on passenger flows, help ensure people have valid tickets or cards and, to a much lesser extent, enhance security within the station environment. I look forward to the day when Finsbury Park is finally gated by LU - I bet the revenue goes sky high as a result. It's perfectly clear that a well designed gateline with enough capacity can get people in and out of stations effectively while ensuring they have a valid ticket. The railway isn't free and in the current environment TfL need to earn every penny they can. Shutting down gaps in gating coverage also ensures that any residual ticket inspection activity can be properly targeted. And before anyone says it I would never claim that gating is a panacea or a 100% solution to fare dodging - it isn't and never was. Some TOC gating schemes are appallingly bad IMO and it's pointless spending hundreds of thousands of pounds and then leaving gates open or locked away in "peak hour only" enclosures. All you do is shift the fare dodging to different time periods. LOROL have a small financial incentive in the concession contract to reduce fare evasion and that's fine. As Mr Dunning says - TfL are the guiding light as to what investment takes place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2014 17:12:37 GMT
Berney Arms - Oh dear I hate to say but that will be gated in 2095! Only joking! Actually 2094!!!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Sept 22, 2014 18:48:07 GMT
snoggle:
Fascinating to know about your previous project experience. Can you share any more information about that project as a whole, or about the decisions it entailed, such as the style of gating (half height vs full height) and the affects on stations with additional outdoor exit points (the Met country stations eg)
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 22, 2014 20:59:09 GMT
Why are TFL so obsessed with gating? It's a good job they don't go as far as Norfolk, or they'd do Berney Arms. To be fair I don't think it is an obsession. You could turn the argument on its head and say "why are the TOCs so blasé about not protecting revenue on busy inner urban area services?" They carry the revenue risk but couldn't care less about people travelling for nothing in a lot of cases. I was responsible for the network wide gating business case on LU and we just about got everywhere done on LU barring a few exceptions because the cost of station rebuilds was too high. Later we also got to the point of ensuring they were managed properly. I think gates basically instill a discipline on passenger flows, help ensure people have valid tickets or cards and, to a much lesser extent, enhance security within the station environment. I look forward to the day when Finsbury Park is finally gated by LU - I bet the revenue goes sky high as a result. It's perfectly clear that a well designed gateline with enough capacity can get people in and out of stations effectively while ensuring they have a valid ticket. The railway isn't free and in the current environment TfL need to earn every penny they can. Shutting down gaps in gating coverage also ensures that any residual ticket inspection activity can be properly targeted. And before anyone says it I would never claim that gating is a panacea or a 100% solution to fare dodging - it isn't and never was. Some TOC gating schemes are appallingly bad IMO and it's pointless spending hundreds of thousands of pounds and then leaving gates open or locked away in "peak hour only" enclosures. All you do is shift the fare dodging to different time periods. LOROL have a small financial incentive in the concession contract to reduce fare evasion and that's fine. As Mr Dunning says - TfL are the guiding light as to what investment takes place. But that was before Oyster and "maximum fare" charging for a missed entry or exit. Provided you kept some gates open/closed at random times you would defer casual, opportunistic, fraud. You will never stop the determined fraudster, who will either jump over the gates or tailgate another passenger, feed a business card into the slot and let them close on him/her (it doesn't hurt and no staff ever query it). there is surely no need to gate every suburban station.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 22, 2014 23:06:19 GMT
But that was before Oyster and "maximum fare" charging for a missed entry or exit. Provided you kept some gates open/closed at random times you would defer casual, opportunistic, fraud. You will never stop the determined fraudster, who will either jump over the gates or tailgate another passenger, feed a business card into the slot and let them close on him/her (it doesn't hurt and no staff ever query it). there is surely no need to gate every suburban station. You clearly didn't read what I wrote. I never said gating was 100% effective. I never said the intent was to stop the determined fraudster. No one has said every suburban station is going to be gated. It is perfectly possible to travel long distances across London without ever encountering a gate and if you don't touch a card on a reader then a maximum fare is irrelevant. Some examples - Stratford International to Kew Bridge. Crouch Hill to Woolwich Dockyard. Alexandra Palace to Elephant and Castle. The list goes on if you know where the open interchanges are and you don't encounter a ticket inspection.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 23, 2014 7:15:50 GMT
But that was before Oyster and "maximum fare" charging for a missed entry or exit. Provided you kept some gates open/closed at random times you would defer casual, opportunistic, fraud. You will never stop the determined fraudster, who will either jump over the gates or tailgate another passenger, feed a business card into the slot and let them close on him/her (it doesn't hurt and no staff ever query it). there is surely no need to gate every suburban station. You clearly didn't read what I wrote. I never said gating was 100% effective. I never said the intent was to stop the determined fraudster. No one has said every suburban station is going to be gated. It is perfectly possible to travel long distances across London without ever encountering a gate and if you don't touch a card on a reader then a maximum fare is irrelevant. Some examples - Stratford International to Kew Bridge. Crouch Hill to Woolwich Dockyard. Alexandra Palace to Elephant and Castle. The list goes on if you know where the open interchanges are and you don't encounter a ticket inspection. Those aren't journeys 999/1000 fare evaders would want to make! My point is, there is surely no point in expending large sums on gating the remoter stations (which, as I understood it at the time) was why central stations were done some years ahead of TFL outer ones. By the way, I should have said, I've never travelled on a train without a valid ticket (save last year on the Saturday morning through Tenby-Paddington, when the GW conductor couldn't issue the right ticket, so let us travel to Carmarthen to buy the necessary Rover). I think the gates are generally effective - I did once go a whole year under the previous system, having a valid annual season, but showing an invalid one, without being stopped - but there needs to be a sense of moderation.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,246
|
Post by rincew1nd on Sept 23, 2014 8:11:32 GMT
I did once go a whole year under the previous system, having a valid annual season, but showing an invalid one, without being stopped - but there needs to be a sense of moderation. I have done similar on occassions, holding a valid ticket for the journey I have presented an invalid one without challenge. Similarly I presented what I thought was a valid ticket, when told it wasn't paid the excess; however later on the journey presented the original ticket (without the excess) and wasn't challenged.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 23, 2014 10:24:50 GMT
You clearly didn't read what I wrote. I never said gating was 100% effective. I never said the intent was to stop the determined fraudster. No one has said every suburban station is going to be gated. . Those aren't journeys 999/1000 fare evaders would want to make! My point is, there is surely no point in expending large sums on gating the remoter stations (which, as I understood it at the time) was why central stations were done some years ahead of TFL outer ones.. There is a law of diminsihing returns - if it costs more to gate the station than the revenue that is being lost through non-payment (bearing in mind that you will not get any revenue from those who will decide not to travel at all rather than than pay) hen it's not woirth doing - "spending a pound to find a penny". I also know of people who, through overdraconian enforcement of The Rules rather than common sense when a genuine mistake has been made, have been put off train travel altogether: more lost revenue.
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Sept 23, 2014 10:28:32 GMT
In British Rail days I have gone through the barriers at Liverpool Street showing my office id rather than my ticket but I never managed to get into the office when I showed my season ticket!
Gating also reduces the risk of vandalism as the station doesn't get used as a covenient hang out for the local yobs. The shutting of the ungated exit at Chalfont and Latimer at quiet times was done, I believe, for this reason.
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 6, 2015 0:28:17 GMT
Slowly but surely the GOBLIN is gaining gates. It's not easy because whatever buildings there were years ago have been wiped away. South Tottenham is in line for gates and Leyton Midland Road now has them too. WW Queens Rd is pretty much impossible with the new link allowing local pedestrian access across the bridge. It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train home. I am not overly familiar with Highams Park as I tend to go past by bus rather than use it by train. I also expect LOROL will try to gate a raft of stations on the Enfield and Cheshunt routes but again there is not a lot of space at many stations following the loss of station buildings / rationalisation of facilities by BR over many years. They also have some issues about whether to maintain access through ticket halls at night or just keep using the "night time" exits that exist at many stations. It'll be interesting to see what LOROL do given they have a short tenure on West Anglia but, of course, they're simply doing what TfL are asking them to do under the concession contract. It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train homeI I have seldom heard of anything more preposterous. What possible good could it do? The Walthamstow refurb is now progressing well. The Northern ticket hall is nearly finished, and the place has been transformed with new windows, a new ticket office, and a much needed new flooring as well as a fresh coat of paint. Looks very smart! No barriers yet. The gates which will become the LU entrance on that side are now kept permanently open, presumably to acclimatize people to them. The new tube entrance on the Southern station side is being knocked through from the top of the stairs. I'm still curious to see how this separation of gate lines will work in practice, and still surprised they chose to do it this way.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 6, 2015 15:11:23 GMT
It is clear that Abellio GA are progressing a gating scheme at Walthamstow Central which will be handed over to LOROL. That will break the current open interchange between LU and the Chingford Line with people being forced out to the street before re-entering the AGA paid area. That's madness as AFAIAC and I think the passengers will be in revolt when it happens if they regularly miss their train homeI I have seldom heard of anything more preposterous. What possible good could it do? The Walthamstow refurb is now progressing well. The Northern ticket hall is nearly finished, and the place has been transformed with new windows, a new ticket office, and a much needed new flooring as well as a fresh coat of paint. Looks very smart! No barriers yet. The gates which will become the LU entrance on that side are now kept permanently open, presumably to acclimatize people to them. The new tube entrance on the Southern station side is being knocked through from the top of the stairs. I'm still curious to see how this separation of gate lines will work in practice, and still surprised they chose to do it this way. I had a chat to a member of station staff at WW after he had told me off for taking photos of the updated ticket hall! He confirmed that the flows are to be separated with fixed barrier line on the platforms. He also said the old taxi office had been closed on the "up" side of the station and that was being knocked through to create the street to LU entrance / exit. The current opening on the up platform will be shut off with all interchange passengers routed through the tiny ticket hall on the up side. Passengers would then have to go out into the new courtyard and re-enter. He said the "up" ticket office is going to be closed but wasn't sure whether the ticket hall was going to be changed to allow a bigger gateline because the building is listed. I simply cannot see how there will be enough capacity to handle the huge crowds that interchange from Chingford line trains and head down to the tube in the AM peak. You are talking about hundreds of people which will take minutes to clear if there is only 1 gate out and 1 gate in in the "up" ticket hall. I expressed concern to the staff member that the scheme was unworkable and that I could not see how the Fire Brigade, if they've been consulted, would approve such a scheme that creates pinchpoints and queuing. Naturally enough he didn't respond to that which is perfectly understandable as he just works there and isn't responsible for the detail of the gating scheme. Cubic were at the updated ticket hall this morning measuring things and putting screws in the floor so I guess they might be along to start installing equipment in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jan 6, 2015 22:32:35 GMT
Am I alone in thinking what is being done at Walthamstow Central is sheer lunacy, especially given that in less than six months, both lines will be on the same ticketing regime?
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 6, 2015 23:19:32 GMT
This is being done to TfL's design and they are well aware that the station is transferring to LO. I am also surprised by it. I can only imagine this is to preserve the ungated right of way under the tunnel into the town centre.
They've done something similar at Tottenham Hale by the way. There you now have to leave the station to interchange too. Does anyone know the thinking behind this?
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 6, 2015 23:21:34 GMT
Do you think there might be an additional gate line for interchange on the platform itself, preserving the current entrance?
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 6, 2015 23:22:08 GMT
And how come none of this has needed planning permission?!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 7, 2015 0:47:07 GMT
And how come none of this has needed planning permission?! Given the work to date is within the existing structure of the railway premises then it is deemed to be "permitted development" which gets round the need for planning permission. This is something that is a long standing right of the railway which Network Rail have inherited through legislation. I have seen this reffered to in some planning applications where Network Rail decided *not* to use this provision and instead obtain planning permission. Changes at Dalston Kingsland made referene to this - accessible via Hackney Council's planning application database. Where life gets interesting at WW is with the listed part of the station. I don't believe permitted development overrides listing and the associated planning approvals so that's why I am intrigued as to what will be done in that part of the station. I don't believe the scheme at WW will work as currently being put together - it will only take one accident or too many people missing their connection because of a jam of people trying to get out and back in for there to be an outcry. Unfortunately it is not possible given the way the layout at WW has evolved in recent years to perimeter gate the station - the subway link with its change of levels can't take a gateline and you couldn't excavate a new ticket machine enclosure in the subway without incurring massive expense. The piece by piece development has left us with a difficult legacy. As for Tottenham Hale I think this was a Greater Anglia initiative to reduce ticketless travel. It may also have been a requirement of the short term franchise extension - they're cheapish and quick schemes and the DfT like ticket gates. I think they had a problem at T Hale which is why there were revenue inspectors there so frequently. That and the numbers of people travelling to Stansted who don't understand the difference between the tube and the main line railway. Even in the plans to build a new ticket hall there will still be two gatelines within spitting distance of each other which is farcical. When I was involved in gating I deliberately avoided plans which sought to gate every flow including interchanges. The Vic Line management of old wanted all sorts of nonsense done to remove every instance of open interchange between the main line and the tube - they wanted a three spoke gateline at Seven Sisters (SS Rd end) to gate entry to NR, entry to the Vic Line and to gate the interchange flow. Apart from the fact it wouldn't work it would almost certainly have been unsafe given the huge interchange flows. It seems my boring old logic of keeping interchange open where feasible has been done away with by newer people with different ideas or different objectives from "on high".
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 7, 2015 17:38:25 GMT
It's full steam ahead with this. Today they marked out where the partition on the down-platform will be installed, to segregate the Vic line exit, so we'll get to see the outcome of this experiment pretty soon!
If TfL are smart they'll guinea pig this under GA's tenure so GA get the flack if it doesn't work!
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jan 8, 2015 18:50:08 GMT
BTW, I notice from the schedule of TFL closures at weekends, the Chingford Line is included for early June under London Overground, so that presumably implies it will be so branded from 31 May.....
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jan 8, 2015 19:16:44 GMT
That's right. 31st of May is LO-day. Can't wait!
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Jan 8, 2015 21:26:54 GMT
I have only used Tottenham Hale on a couple of occasions a few years ago but then you had to touch out from the NR station and touch in to the Vic. A bit confusing when you haven't been there before and the free standing exit reader is hidden in the press of commuters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2015 16:58:31 GMT
BTW, I notice from the schedule of TFL closures at weekends, the Chingford Line is included for early June under London Overground, so that presumably implies it will be so branded from 31 May..... Where is shown on the TfL website?
|
|