London Charing Cross
Marginally earlier,
in 1925, the topic concerning the closure of Charing Cross and its relocation to
the South Bank, came to light again. A fruitless meeting between the LCC and SR
in this year was followed in 1926 by the emergence of quite drastic plans. The
proposals of 1901 had been altered: rather than a new terminus on the south side
of the river, it was instead suggested moving the existing site a short distance
east. Coupled with this, Hungerford Bridge would be demolished and in its place,
a huge double-decker bridge erected. Half a dozen tracks would be carried across
the new structure, and a road would be suspended above. The SR took much
interest in this; the company had been considering the total rebuild of Charing
Cross to provide improved facilities and an increase in the limited six platform
arrangement. However, with the cost of this whole undertaking estimated at
£13,050,000, attention again turned to the cheaper concept of relocating the
whole station to the South Bank – it would be at least £2,250,000 cheaper.
Ultimately, it was to be the Government which would either approve or scrap the
scheme – it did the latter. The plan of having a terminus on a new site on the
South Bank had itself gained steady opposition and in light of the signalling
modernisation and electrification already undertaken by the SR in and around
Charing Cross, it was deemed that the original terminus would remain. However,
what of the SR’s plans to expand Charing Cross? These became far less important
with the commencement of electric services, which removed the delays caused by
the Hungerford Bridge restrictions and allowed for more intensive working
(helped by the renewed signalling).
In connection with the aforementioned electrification, platforms were
renumbered, therefore numbers now ascended from north east to south west. Platforms 1 to 3
were generally used for suburban services, whilst 4 to 6 accommodated the remaining locomotive-hauled trains
which utilised the stronger part of the bridge. All platforms were lengthened,
again utilising wood in light of weight restrictions, which brought the longest
surface to 750 foot in length. Track rationalisation saw the seventh line, which
has been mentioned earlier as a rolling stock siding, lifted, which allowed
subsequent widening of platforms 3 and 4. Spaciousness was very much the theme,
and in 1930 the SR enlarged the ‘’modest’’ concourse by truncating the ends of
platforms 2 and 3 – the effect of this had, however, been countered by the
extension of these surfaces at the river end of the station.
World War II dealt quite a considerable blow to the station. A night attack on
16th April 1941 saw considerable damage inflicted upon the hotel, with many of
the upper floors being gutted. That was followed three years later by the
bombing of part of the original SER Hungerford Bridge, damage of which took six
months to fully repair. The first modification implemented by British Railways
on the site was to the 1887 section of Hungerford Bridge: this was strengthened
considerably during 1948. Then, in 1951, ten years after being bombed, the hotel
received extensive repairs. In general, this comprised of a whole new set of top
floors; these were, however, built to a style reflecting the antithesis of the
elaboration which once graced the Strand. Straight lines and concrete replaced
elegant spires, magnificently carved stonework, and of course, the crème
brickwork. Despite this retrograde step in architecture, the hotel at least had
far greater luck than the equally elaborate example at Cannon Street, which had
been gutted by bombs in May 1941. Originally scheduled for repair, the seemingly
cheaper and easier option was taken: it was bulldozed in April 1963. Contrasting
with this, the hotel façade of Charing Cross was subject to a much needed clean
at the same time.
27th December 2002
A noticeable change occurs when one trundles in on the train towards the buffer stops: it gets dark!
This view from 27th December 2002 shows the huge columns which support an office block weighing
3500 tons. Victoria's ''Brighton'' side also has a similar lighting system which gives a distinct ''yellow''
effect. It is somewhat a shame that many historic London termini were subject to such developments.
David Glasspool
27th December 2002
The fibreglass crest was at least retained over platform 4 as an indication of the station's history.
This particular crest arrived new in 1985, but would only last on the 1906 roof for less than three
years, with the latter's dismantling occurring in 1988. David Glasspool
27th December 2002
A scene from 27th December 2002 reveals 4 Vep No. 3579 on the left, displaying a Hastings head
code, and Class 465 No. 465009 in the centre. The most dominant feature is, of course, the office
block mentioned in the main text. Despite the presence of this huge structure, the original retaining
side walls of the station - which once supported the 1906 roof - remain in near complete condition.
David Glasspool
<< Previous Next: the History Continues >>
Return to the Kent Rail Homepage or alternatively, check for Updates.
Website & Copyright information - Links - Contact the Webmaster
All content is copyright © David Glasspool