|
|
Post by angelislington on Jun 5, 2008 21:42:29 GMT
In short - why do it?
I'm just thinking of all the faff in resigning, reprinting maps etc, letting passengers know...
I'm thinking in particular of the whole Charing Cross/Strand/Embankment fun & games, but of course there are many others.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Jun 5, 2008 21:52:20 GMT
Aldersgate was changed to Barbican to coincide with the opening of the Barbican Centre in the late 60s.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2008 22:01:22 GMT
The Metropolitan originally did it to make their stations appear to be covering areas covered by other companies (think Farringdon and High Holborn etc.) Other stations were renamed when the areas developed as the original station names weren't appropriate (eg Mill Hill Park to Acton Town) The Charing Cross situation arose because of the confusion of interchange between all the new tube lines. Since it was redeveloped for the Jubilee it seemed wise to rename the whole station as the maps would need to be reprinted to add the Jubilee in any case! It causes confusion now though with tourists thinking that Trafalgar Square isn't on the tube  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2008 23:00:23 GMT
Changing a station name is sometimes done because it was perhaps the wrong name they chose in the past, or to combine two stations that were on competing lines in the old days, or just because another station has the same name and that is confusing. Some changes are purely commercial, though. Brent station opened in 1923, and changed to Brent Cross in 1976 due to the opening of the shopping centre. It's not actually far from there, admittedly, but the nearest station is Hendon Central.
The worst one of all has got to be Arsenal. The justification has now gone, but it remains Arsenal with no sign of anyone who could be regarded as "official" talking of changing it back to its old name, Gillespie Road.
Then of course you have the "proposed" names that were never used - Brunswick on the DLR and Woodstock on the Northern Line being good examples.
|
|
|
|
Post by ianvisits on Jun 6, 2008 10:44:36 GMT
Don't forget that the Surrey Quays shopping centre paid LU to rename Surrey Docks as Surrey Quays as it was felt that a Quay was more stylish than a Dock at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jun 6, 2008 19:23:54 GMT
Sometimes it is because of new areas actually being developed after the station built. Take Enfield West (Oakwood) renamed to Oakwood 12 years later for example; the area's name 'Oakwood' I believe didn't really exist until 1933, when the Piccadilly Line arrived.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2008 20:53:07 GMT
Sometimes it is because of new areas actually being developed after the station built. Take Enfield West (Oakwood) renamed to Oakwood 12 years later for example; the area's name 'Oakwood' I believe didn't really exist until 1933, when the Piccadilly Line arrived. Indeed; the early pictures of 'Enfield West' that I've seen are pretty much a station surrounded by fields. |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jun 6, 2008 21:10:44 GMT
The opening WTT was to Enfield West as well, was on the galley for the prrevious couple - South Harrow (Picc extension of service).
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jun 7, 2008 15:39:09 GMT
There's an interesting book on station names, I have a copy somewhere. At one time, for example, Cockfosters was to be called Trent Park.
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Jun 7, 2008 16:45:36 GMT
The worst one of all has got to be Arsenal. The justification has now gone, but it remains Arsenal with no sign of anyone who could be regarded as "official" talking of changing it back to its old name, Gillespie Road. Arsenal Tube won't be changing. It's still the closest to the actual Stadium. Also, most Arsenal supporters refer to going "Up The Arsenal", thus defining that area as "Arsenal" and not Islington or Highbury. I'm sure I have mentioned this before, but there was a plan at one time to build a station in the Ashburton Grove complex, which I guess would have been called Arsenal. Now whether that meant the current Arsenal would revert to Gillespie Road, or close altogether is debatable, however as it didn't happen, I suppose it's irrelevant really. |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jun 8, 2008 13:42:41 GMT
There's an interesting book on station names, I have a copy somewhere. At one time, for example, Cockfosters was to be called Trent Park. Now that Ive never heard of and probably cannot believe!!  |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Jun 8, 2008 14:58:40 GMT
SE13, I can't recall reading any details of this. Can you elaborate by any chance? Sounds interesting
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2008 20:50:12 GMT
Now that Ive never heard of and probably cannot believe!! Why not? Trent Park runs between Cockfosters and Oakwood, and the bus stop directly before the station bus stop is Trent Park. The park is extensive and, as well as public woodlands etc, also has a golf course, equestrian club, a Middlesex University campus.. it's a fairly major feature of the area. |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jun 8, 2008 21:13:10 GMT
Hey I value your points most definately; Trent park is close by (pretty much north the way I see it) and contains the Uni. However I live locally (not in Cockfosters but in the same borough) and it would be like calling Southgate station "Grovelands Park" etc!  Do you see where I am coming from? Whereas Cockfosters is the actual settlement. However perhaps it wasn't as built up before the tube arrived in 1933, so I would have thought Trent Park was one of the possible names (I have not seen evidence for it actually being named that through 3 different books). =D |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jun 8, 2008 21:14:07 GMT
<puts hand up> I've heard of Cockfosters being called Trent Park too. Isn't is on one of the LTM photos with the 'suggested names' hoardings during the building period?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2008 4:09:04 GMT
However I live locally (not in Cockfosters but in the same borough) and it would be like calling Southgate station "Grovelands Park" etc! Or calling Arnos Grove Arnos Park? Because that was another suggested one. I believe Cockfosters as a place was not at all well built up or well known before the tube arrived - again, in a similar way to Oakwood (or going in another angle, like most of the Metroland area) the area grew with the tube. |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jun 9, 2008 20:59:27 GMT
Yep true; some really obscure suggested names for Oakwood, Arnos Grove and Cockfosters so I can imagine one being Trent Park most definately! The road Arnos Grove I walked up today as an alternative route to the norm and is the other side of the park; just a quiet residential road. The area we know today to be Arnos Grove therefore takes it's name from that road albeit the shops etc. (including a wonderful fish & chips  ) are in Bowes Road. Oakwood was suggested to be 'Southgate north' as well! |
|
Do you see where I am coming from? Whereas Cockfosters is the actual settlement. However perhaps it wasn't as built up before the tube arrived in 1933, so I would have thought Trent Park was one of the possible names (I have not seen evidence for it actually being named that through 3 different books). =D
) are in Bowes Road.
