Glasgow Queen Street refurbishment and remodelling

[PaxVobiscum]

.
Class 385 launch special edition!
Includes a pull-out feature on the launch of the new trains!

Sorry it took so long, but this is also a kind of anniversary edition being nearly 8 minutes long and with an enormous budget which included an off peak return to Edinburgh and a cup of ScotRail coffee on board.

If the lady who came on the train mid journey and caught me lying on the (nice new) carpet pointing my phone at the slow-closing lid of the waste bin is reading this (highly unlikely), well missus, now you know why.

She gave me a superb withering look, well worthy of Lady Bracknell of handbag fame.
"A waste bin?'

For the eagle eyed purists, of necessity I conform to only marginally higher standards of continuity than those exhibited by the “Great British Railway Journeys” editors - sorry about that.

Link to video series

 

[Highland37]

One thing I hope is dealt with is the lack of ticket machines. Beyond being short sighted and tight budgets, why are there so few?

It's rammed right now .

 

[gsnedders]

Just in Queen Street for the first time since the new low level entrance opened, and… it's bad!

When the reached the (western) stairs to the eastbound low level platform, I was hit by a wall of diesel exhaust blowing down the stairs. That cannot be at all good for the staff who were there to direct passengers, given my lungs still hurt a few minutes after leaving the station.

 

[najaB]

When the reached the (western) stairs to the eastbound low level platform, I was hit by a wall of diesel exhaust blowing down the stairs.

That should hopefully be on the decrease as more services are EMU operated.

 

[gsnedders]

That should hopefully be on the decrease as more services are EMU operated.

Definitely. I think the big culprit was a Stirling service (a 170) on P2 at the time.

 

[385001]

Some updates from Network Rail on Twitter.

Really coming along now!

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailGQS/status/1032988837541306368

Just look how much space is now available for us to build a new & bigger concourse for #GlasgowQueenStreet station. With the area cleared we’re strengthening foundations with piles to support an expanded structure. #behindthehoardings

On Dundas Street, the #GlasgowQueenStreet project team is using a remote-controlled excavator to break up the final section of redundant building. This method reduces noise and dust escaping into the environment. #behindthehoardings

 

[Altnabreac]

Thanks for posting. You really see the scale of the works in these shots. Beginning to feel like significant progress is being made now.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Thanks for posting. You really see the scale of the works in these shots. Beginning to feel like significant progress is being made now.

Seconded.

Not so easy to see what's going on without special access privileges but I thought it was about time my trained seagull and I paid another visit.

Also a wee bonus which at a casual glance may appear to be the same as the last of the photos posted above, but it’s not... (my trained seagull has contacts in high places).

 

[GrimShady]

Any word on what the new operations/buchanan building will look like?

Was there any consideration ever given to squeezing in some more platforms in the former goods yard? Surely there's enough space for two 4 coach length platforms?

 

[385001]

Another update from Network Rail on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailGQS/status/1045265915212894209

#Behindthehoarding we’re transforming #GlasgowQueenStreet into a bigger and brighter transport hub while over 47,000 people pass through the station each week day.

 

[Carntyne]

Any word on what the new operations/buchanan building will look like?

Was there any consideration ever given to squeezing in some more platforms in the former goods yard? Surely there's enough space for two 4 coach length platforms?

There's passive provision for another platform next to P7.

 

[gsnedders]

There's passive provision for another platform next to P7.

To what extent? Presumably any such platform would be entirely outside of the train shed?

 

[XDM]

There's passive provision for another platform next to P7.

Just like the "passive provision" Network Rail said would be made for a second track through Tottenham Hale on the Lee valley project.

Now this long single track siding is almost completed, a three year old can see there is no room for a second extra track through Tottenham Hale, let alone a fourth platform.

Oh, & for at least two miles every catenary mast has been placed where a second extra track could go. They could have been put on the other side to leave the Network Rail media office famous "passive provision" in most places for a second track.

It is as if someone high at NR has set out to thwart ever laying a second track alongside.

 

[Southsider]

Just like the "passive provision" Network Rail said would be made for a second track through Tottenham Hale on the Lee valley project.

Now this long single track siding is almost completed, a three year old can see there is no room for a second extra track through Tottenham Hale, let alone a fourth platform.

Oh, & for at least two miles every catenary mast has been placed where a second extra track could go. They could have been put on the other side to leave the Network Rail media office famous "passive provision" in most places for a second track.

It is as if someone high at NR has set out to thwart ever laying a second track alongside.

That’s quite a rant with the most tenuous of links to Glasgow Queen Street!

 

[deltic08]

There's passive provision for another platform next to P7.

And in 30 years time when 3 extra platforms are needed what then? Where would they go if the car park has been built over?
Queen St will never take more than 8 coaches as they can't extend anymore into St Georges Square and the tunnel can't be opened out because some fool allowed building over it. With frequency almost at capacity it would need a second tunnel, more platforms and quad track to segregate stopping and fast services.
We are in this situation now because Beeching didn't see beyond his nose and closed half of Glasgow's terminus capacity. Four into two didn't work in 1965 and 1967. Just think if St. Enoch and Buchanan St. were still available now.

 

[GrimShady]

And in 30 years time when 3 extra platforms are needed what then? Where would they go if the car park has been built over?
Queen St will never take more than 8 coaches as they can't extend anymore into St Georges Square and the tunnel can't be opened out because some fool allowed building over it. With frequency almost at capacity it would need a second tunnel, more platforms and quad track to segregate stopping and fast services.
We are in this situation now because Beeching didn't see beyond his nose and closed half of Glasgow's terminus capacity. Four into two didn't work in 1965 and 1967. Just think if St. Enoch and Buchanan St. were still available now.

There's still space on the east side of St Enoch shopping centre for a QS sized station. Huge area currently used for car parks (that needs sorting) which could still exist underneath if they so choose, it could even be integrated into the centre. It would also free up space in Central by diverting the Inverclyde services.

 

[deltic08]

There's still space on the east side of St Enoch shopping centre for a QS sized station. Huge area currently used for car parks (that needs sorting) which could still exist underneath if they so choose, it could even be integrated into the centre. It would also free up space in Central by diverting the Inverclyde services.

But that doesn't solve future capacity problems at Queen St. Buchanan St would have done. In fact the wrong station was closed. Buchanan St site would have provided enough room to build a big enough station for both.
Yet another terrible mistake in the 1960s by Beeching.

 

[Highlandspring]

Additional platforms at Queen Street don’t solve the capacity problem either; the single bore double line tunnel severely restricts the potential for any traffic growth in and out of QS.

 

[edwin_m]

Buchanan Street feels as if it's outside the city centre and is too far (and too steep) to count as an easy walk from Central. It would probably have had to have a long moving walkway back to the Queen Street site to provde reasonable central access and connect with the low level platforms.

 

[GrimShady]

But that doesn't solve future capacity problems at Queen St. Buchanan St would have done. In fact the wrong station was closed. Buchanan St site would have provided enough room to build a big enough station for both.
Yet another terrible mistake in the 1960s by Beeching.

It does if you divert certain services there. Let's not forget Waverly is struggling with capacity issues, maybe it's time to reopens Princess Street station?

 

[deltic08]

Additional platforms at Queen Street don’t solve the capacity problem either; the single bore double line tunnel severely restricts the potential for any traffic growth in and out of QS.

Read #615 again.

 

[GrimShady]

Are you gents aware of the proposal in the 60s to turn Buchanan Street into Glasgow North? QS would have been closed to become QS bus station. Cowlairs incline was to be closed with the tunnel into Buchanan Street opened up.

See here for details.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/urbanglasgow.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=1055&amp=1

 

[deltic08]

It does if you divert certain services there. Let's not forget Waverly is struggling with capacity issues, maybe it's time to reopens Princess Street station?

The trouble is too much has been built on ex railway land and we can't go back. As part of the Beeching Act should have been a clause forbidding the sale of and building on ex railway land. There are many closed lines that could do with reinstatement due to population explosion and could be reinstated relatively cheaply and easily if it wasn't for the small housing estate development or supermarket on the station site.

 

[GrimShady]

The trouble is too much has been built on ex railway land and we can't go back. As part of the Beeching Act should have been a clause forbidding the sale of and building on ex railway land. There are many closed lines that could do with reinstatement due to population explosion and could be reinstated relatively cheaply and easily if it wasn't for the small housing estate development or supermarket on the station site.

We can always go back, the question is cost unfortunately, after all many of these stations were built on occupied land back in the day.

What's currently on the old Princess Street site apart from that huge office block? Have the former connecting lines been built on too?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Re-instating Victorian termini is rarely a good solution. The world has moved on. If more capacity is required, then a better solution can be found. This is why either a tunnel or a metro system are considered official options for resolving Glasgow's terminal station capacity issues alongside a neo-St Enoch.

 

[gsnedders]

What's currently on the old Princess Street site apart from that huge office block? Have the former connecting lines been built on too?

The Edinburgh International Conference Centre and a hotel or two as well as offices; West Approach Road was built over the former railway lines. See https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=55.9472&lon=-3.2075&layers=170&b=3.

IMO, we shouldn't get too hung up on where stations used to be, because it's quite frankly not relevant (after all, they no longer exist!). We should look at where we can build new stations (or expand current ones) both with concern to the local area, railway connectivity, and onward transport. It might so happen that in some cases the sites of closed railway stations do well in this regard, but it's not universally the case. And cursing the closure doesn't really help—the decision is long gone, at this point!

 

[deltic08]

The Edinburgh International Conference Centre and a hotel or two as well as offices; West Approach Road was built over the former railway lines. See https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=55.9472&lon=-3.2075&layers=170&b=3.

IMO, we shouldn't get too hung up on where stations used to be, because it's quite frankly not relevant (after all, they no longer exist!). We should look at where we can build new stations (or expand current ones) both with concern to the local area, railway connectivity, and onward transport. It might so happen that in some cases the sites of closed railway stations do well in this regard, but it's not universally the case. And cursing the closure doesn't really help—the decision is long gone, at this point!

It doesn't help but I still curse Beeching as there are places I used to visit by train that I cannot visit now.
I also live in a city that lost its railway in 1967 when I needed it to commute to Leeds University for 7 years. This is when I really cursed Beeching. I had to drive to a railhead then catch a train. To-day we have a choice of three railheads depending where we are going but neither is ideal compared to walking to a station just down the road. We tend to use the car now for the complete journey while we are still able.
That is NOT progress.

 

[route:oxford]

And in 30 years time when 3 extra platforms are needed what then? Where would they go if the car park has been built over?
Queen St will never take more than 8 coaches as they can't extend anymore into St Georges Square and the tunnel can't be opened out because some fool allowed building over it. With frequency almost at capacity it would need a second tunnel, more platforms and quad track to segregate stopping and fast services.
We are in this situation now because Beeching didn't see beyond his nose and closed half of Glasgow's terminus capacity. Four into two didn't work in 1965 and 1967. Just think if St. Enoch and Buchanan St. were still available now.

The original plan was to close *both* Buchanan Street and Queen Street wasn't it?

 

[jopsuk]

The earlier Bruce Report (which resulted in things such as the motorways through Glasgow) called for closing all four, replacing them with Glasgow North roughly where Buchanan Street was and Glasgow South, roughly where Central is- though given how much destruction Bruce wanted to inflict upon Glasgow it is a mystery as to why the report didn't suggest going the whole hog with a single station

 

[GrimShady]

Re-instating Victorian termini is rarely a good solution. The world has moved on. If more capacity is required, then a better solution can be found. This is why either a tunnel or a metro system are considered official options for resolving Glasgow's terminal station capacity issues alongside a neo-St Enoch.

The world may have moved on but your never going to get prime sites built in the city centre anymore, that's why these former stations are still a good bet. Anything built on ex railway land can easily be removed without impacting on the city's heritage. Metro isn't going to solve the problem of more Intercity trains, even if it was the answer it would mean reducing the number of local heavy rail services to be replaced with metro lines.

The Glasgow subway no longer connects the population centers it once did. South of the river it's practically pointless!

If the Victorians made it work then surely we can too. Glasgow had a huge provison of railways until the powers that be decided to destroy most of it. We should be looking at reinstating most of the ex suburban network to rid ourselves of the evil bus curse.