Will Crossrail have a "look"?

As much as good architecture is a positive influence for the users of a system, at this moment in time I feel its right that it should be taking a back burner on XR. The problem with having 'good' architecture atm is that like most things nowadays, whilst there are a few people who are genuinly about the pride of making good design, theres countless thousands of faceless middlemen who'll use it as cashcow.

Odd then that the raised capital "R" is not present on the Crossrail website:
www.crossrail.co.uk/

Give me the practicality of the Victoria Line's cross platform interchanges every time over the "long march" of the JLE (or SPInternational for that matter), never mind the "wow" factor

Well whatever it's called, they look cool. The concrete and metal look with the mood lighting must have been in vogue at the time. They also did it for the Heathrow stations.

I would not be surprised if the capital R had been lost and regained a couple of times in various rebranding exercises over the years. Look what happened to the logo for the Olympics - the clever bid logo that everybody liked was replaced by the one that has been ridiculed from high and low and described best (imo) as appearing to show Lisa Simpson kneeling in front of a man's crotch.
While I was working for them, the Department for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs went from being very picky about being known as "DEFRA" to being even more picky about being called "Defra" - and that department was only created following the 2001 general election - far younger than the Cross[r|R]ail project.

We have discussed this previously I think, but do bear in mind that the purpose of a city transport system is to move people about in the most efficient manner; it is not to win design awards for architects.

Which brings us to a comparison between the Victoria Line (plain stations, nicely located, minimum distance to walk, convenient for changing to other lines, done on a minimal budget for what was achieved) and the Jubilee Line Extension (the opposite in all respects).

Regarding Southwark, this is the station which has an interchange with Waterloo East station which triplicates what was also provided between the same routes at the stations either side, Waterloo and London Bridge, but fails to provide any interchange with the other rail line built across London in the last 30 years, Thameslink, which crosses alongside but has no connection whatsoever. Talk about "losing the plot".

I couldn't disagree more Diana (there's a surprise!). The JLE platforms and stations are big and allow for easy flows of people in and out of the stations. The Vic platforms are narrow and with only one entrance/exit, fewer escalators and no lifts in or out for disabled people or buggies, they're far more difficult to traverse. As a result, Vic stations are also hotter than those on the JLE. Allowing a flow of air movement decreases train, tunnel and station temperatures. The Vic was created on a smaller budget and designed for maximum interchanges as you rightly point out. The JLE was designed to accommodate large flows of passengers into an area of London largely underserved by The Underground. Two different design specs, two different results. You've previously complained about the DLR not being able to cope when the JLE is suspended but you also complain that the designs are too grandiose (the very thing that allows for the stations to cope with so many passengers). I am much confused by your arguments.

But, back to the subject at hand.
Intial designs found here:
www.tunneltalk.com/Crossrail-Aug10-Settlement-control-measures.php
Crossrail will have long trains. So we must assume that the stations will need to be big to accommodate so many people entering and leaving stations. We already know where the stations will be located and that in Zone 1 they will have multiple entrances. If we look at the designs for Farringdon, we see an easy interchange for both Thameslink and LU. At Liverpool Street there will be quite easy access for both the SSL and Northern Line at Moorgate. Paddington will have easy access for the Bakerloo and District/Circle. Bond Street will have a good interchange with both the Jub and Central. TCR will have improved passenger flows and additional ticket halls as a result of Crossrail. Canary Wharf unfortunately, will not be an easy interchange. A separate station to the JLE and DLR.

Whether or not it has a look will be of interest. As there will be several different contractors, but I think there must be an overriding design spec if even there's not a JLE type architectural theme.

I never said either in my original post. I said that it would be a shame if they all turned out to be grey featureless boxes. Not quite sure why you feel it necessary to point something to me that is blatantly obvious. It's perfectly possible to good design within that, even if done cheaply.



Congratulations on turning yet another thread into a moan about the Jubilee line.

From the look of it, one end of the Bond St CR station (Hanover Sq) will be a lot closer to Ox Circus than TCR western most entrance (Dean St).