Footbridge vs underpass

[DelW]

What we don't really have in this country, but is quite common on the continent at least in Germany, is a large subterranean shopping and eating area, located below the main line tracks and above or alongside the U-bahn platforms. I suppose that only London has an Underground system to connect to, but even there they're rare. St Pancras is about the closest equivalent I can think of, though it's not exactly comparable, plus possibly the new development at Waterloo, which I've yet to see. Are there any others?

 

[coppercapped]

In general I concur with other posters that the lie of the land is the main factor. Some German cases come to mind:

1. With the Prussian takeover (sorry, German unification), some early terminus stations were sometimes replaced with through stations which suited the military in particular. This means building in already urbanised areas and (as in London and Manchester) it was much easier to build on arches than to build at ground level and raise the road network.
(Exception to prove the rule - Lübeck is at ground level and has a footbridge!)

2. In some cases the original railway had been built at ground level with several level crossings; as traffic grew the best solution was to rebuild at a higher level - Erfurt Hbf is the case I have in mind.

A bit more background as I know Lübeck well as we have in-laws living nearby. The station is, as you say, at ground level but the ground drops away to both sides; for example on the eastern side the railway runs alongside the Stadtgraben, a side arm of the Trave river, within 300m of the end of the platform. The railway runs through a higher spur of land in a cutting which is where the station is placed, so making an overbridge the obvious choice as a way of getting to the platforms. The Fackenburger Allee at the eastern end of the platforms also goes over the railway on a bridge although the road is at the local ground level.

Incidentally, the station foot bridge was jacked up by a metre or more to give room for the overhead wires when the line was electrified some 10 or 15 years ago. All the stairways had to be adjusted and the opportunity was taken to add lifts to each of the platforms.

 

[The exile]

What we don't really have in this country, but is quite common on the continent at least in Germany, is a large subterranean shopping and eating area, located below the main line tracks and above or alongside the U-bahn platforms. I suppose that only London has an Underground system to connect to, but even there they're rare. St Pancras is about the closest equivalent I can think of, though it's not exactly comparable, plus possibly the new development at Waterloo, which I've yet to see. Are there any others?

We also don’t have many main line stations where entirely new u-bahn style connections were built in 60s - 80s. Probably because (West) Germany was flush with money at the time and we were broke. Mind you - all those 50 - 60 year old tunnels are coming up for some seriously expensive maintenance - with at least one responsible authority seriously doubting whether it can be paid for.

 

[Mikey C]

What we don't really have in this country, but is quite common on the continent at least in Germany, is a large subterranean shopping and eating area, located below the main line tracks and above or alongside the U-bahn platforms. I suppose that only London has an Underground system to connect to, but even there they're rare. St Pancras is about the closest equivalent I can think of, though it's not exactly comparable, plus possibly the new development at Waterloo, which I've yet to see. Are there any others?

The redeveloped London Bridge has a massive undercourse, though relatively limited in terms of eating

 

[Grecian 1998]

A lot of the major stations built by the original GWR (or affiliated companies) have subways - Bristol Temple Meads, Bath Spa, Cardiff Central, Taunton, Swindon, Didcot Parkway, Plymouth. I note it's been stated upthread Reading originally had a subway too. On the other hand, Exeter St Davids, Newton Abbot, Newport, Cheltenham Spa and Oxford to name a few have footbridges (and presumably always have), so it doesn't seem as though there was a deliberate policy.

Much more likely to be affected by the lay of the land as others have suggested.

 

[vic-rijrode]

Watford Junction has a quite narrow underpass connecting all platforms which at peak times and, when 2 (or more) trains arrive at the same time, can be positively dangerously overcrowded.

It used to have a footbridge connecting the four mainline platforms at the northern end - which was demolished, I believe, during electrification in the 60s. Also there was a separate entrance to the DC rail platforms (Bakerloo, Euston, Broad Street and Croxley Green trains) with steps up from the booking hall and a "passimeter" at the top. This was because the DC platforms were isolated from the mainline platforms by a loop off the down fast line (Platform 5 as was). All went when the booking hall was rebuilt and the loop line was curtailed by a walkway from platform 6 to the DC platforms.

 

[Mikey C]

I assume it's easier when trying to improve accessibility to add a new footbridge with lifts, rather than trying to adapt a subway, especially if it's narrow and twisty?

Canterbury West for example has a fairly tight subway plus a modern footbridge with lifts.

 

[XAM2175]

What we don't really have in this country, but is quite common on the continent at least in Germany, is a large subterranean shopping and eating area, located below the main line tracks and above or alongside the U-bahn platforms. I suppose that only London has an Underground system to connect to, but even there they're rare. St Pancras is about the closest equivalent I can think of, though it's not exactly comparable, plus possibly the new development at Waterloo, which I've yet to see. Are there any others?

They do have an extra incentive to develop in this manner, mind: railway stations in Germany, and also Austria and Switzerland, are exempt from Sunday trading laws.

 

[ClivePage]

And (at least) one station with both, but not at the same time! Oxford's subway was replaced by a footbridge.

And Kettering used to have a subway, now replaced by a footbridge. So a lot more steps to climb (though there are lifts, but there could have been lifts to the subway level, but I don't suppose anyone thought of that).

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

Of course, you can deliver a footbridge on the back of a lorry. I'd love to see that done with an underpass!
Pat

 

[DelW]

Clapham Junction has both too, though I'm not sure of when either the footbridge or the subway were built. Also not sure if that'll be the case if/when it's rebuilt for Crossrail 2 though.

I'd always assumed that the footbridge came first with the subway being more recent, but this map on the NLS site indicates that the subway dates from the early days of the station:

View map: Great Britain. Ordnance Survey, OS town plan - London - sheet X.60 - Ordnance Survey Town Plans of England and Wales, 1840s-1890s

maps.nls.uk

It has obviously been extended since of course.

 

[Barn]

An example of the lie land theory is with the Greenwich line, where leaving London
Deptford (on a viaduct) has a subway
Greenwich (at ground level) has a subway
Maze Hill (at ground level) has a bridge
Westcombe Park (at ground level) has a subway
Charlton (in a cutting) has a bridge
Woolwich Dockyard (in a cutting) has a bridge
Woolwich Arsenal (in a cutting) has a bridge

Am I right in thinking that Maze Hill did once have an underpass in its early years (where the exit from the down platform currently is, next to the station building which is now Maze Hill Pottery)?

 

[DelW]

Of course, you can deliver a footbridge on the back of a lorry. I'd love to see that done with an underpass!
Pat

Wasn't that an old Army joke? - Sergeant to new recruit: dig this hole up and move it somewhere else.

 

[Dr Hoo]

And Kettering used to have a subway, now replaced by a footbridge. So a lot more steps to climb (though there are lifts, but there could have been lifts to the subway level, but I don't suppose anyone thought of that).

Kettering is a listed building. No way could anyone ‘just stick lifts in’ to the (terribly narrow, anyway) subway.

 

[Falcon1200]

Oxford to name a few have footbridges (and presumably always have), so it doesn't seem as though there was a deliberate policy.

Oxford had a subway until the second BR rebuilding of 1990 (and a temporary scaffolding footbridge during the first BR rebuilding of 1971).

 

[Bald Rick]

Of course, you can deliver a footbridge on the back of a lorry. I'd love to see that done with an underpass!
Pat

what, like this

(not my pic)

 

[swt_passenger]

Oxford had a subway until the second BR rebuilding of 1990 (and a temporary scaffolding footbridge during the first BR rebuilding of 1971).

It’s possibly going to have a new one to get to the P4/5 island? Unless they can recycle the unused one…

 

[Falcon1200]

It’s possibly going to have a new one to get to the P4/5 island? Unless they can recycle the unused one…

P4/5 will of course be served by the existing footbridge, however that does get very busy at times, crossing it against the flow off an arrival can be fun! The subway would have been handy as an addition to the footbridge to separate the flows, however doubt it could be easily resurrected now. Or is a new entrance/exit on the Down side part of the plan (which would require a new bridge or subway)?

 

[Horizon22]

The redeveloped London Bridge has a massive undercourse, though relatively limited in terms of eating

Although this is essentially at street level with station above. It’s also the reverse to the thread’s premise; the overbridge was removed in the rebuild.

I also imagine that whilst not a primary factor, subways even in Victorian times must have been considered a flood risk with tricky drainage.

 

[Wychwood93]

It’s possibly going to have a new one to get to the P4/5 island? Unless they can recycle the unused one…

The former subway here:

Georeferenced Maps - Map images - National Library of Scotland

maps.nls.uk

If it was still there (is it in some form or other?), it would have come out close to the current zebra crossing on the east side.

 

[swt_passenger]

Or is a new entrance/exit on the Down side part of the plan (which would require a new bridge or subway)?

Definitely a new western entrance. It’s mentioned in the various documents linked in the separate thread running about it.

 

[Falcon1200]

Definitely a new western entrance. It’s mentioned in the various documents linked in the separate thread running about it.

Thanks, that will help with the passenger flows!

 

[dk1]

Gypsy Lane foot crossing (Needham Market) was to have been closed to allow removal of a 50TSR in the down direction which was imposed following a fatality in 2011. The original underpass had to be discounted due to being below the water table. The footbridge option has received much objection due to neighbouring properties being overlooked. A settlement was apparently reached with a landowner to take a footpath to a nearby bridge but this appears to have stalled.

 

[Western Lord]

With regard to continental railways, I would have thought that by far the most common method of crossing the tracks was the flat pedestrian or barrow crossing so common in France. In recent years the SNCF have had to spend a lot of money raising platforms and installing footbridges with lifts in order to comply with accessibility regulations. I doubt that any new subways have been built.

 

[PeterC]

Although this is essentially at street level with station above. It’s also the reverse to the thread’s premise; the overbridge was removed in the rebuild.

I also imagine that whilst not a primary factor, subways even in Victorian times must have been considered a flood risk with tricky drainage.

The subway at Chalfont and Latimer does flood regularly in heavy rain. This is one of the few that I can think of that us genuinely below ground level.

For a total reverse there is Romford where the "subway" connecting the plaforms is well above street level.

 

[Taunton]

A lot of the major stations built by the original GWR (or affiliated companies) have subways - Bristol Temple Meads, Bath Spa, Cardiff Central, Taunton, Swindon, Didcot Parkway, Plymouth. I note it's been stated upthread Reading originally had a subway too. On the other hand, Exeter St Davids, Newton Abbot, Newport, Cheltenham Spa and Oxford to name a few have footbridges (and presumably always have),

Taunton was originally a footbridge. The current subway replaced it in 1930.

 

[Malaxa]

The old Hackney Wick, ramp-accessed, Overground station on an embankment had a footbridge [without lift] but on remodelling a subway was pushed through the embankment incorporating stairs and lifts.

Hackney Wick station makeover unveiled in £25m regeneration plan

www.railtechnologymagazine.com

 

[DarloRich]

You wouldn't tunnel, you'd dig a trench and put a roof on it.

Fine - ground work then. it is still going to be an expensive task

 

[zwk500]

Fine - ground work then. it is still going to be an expensive task

Especially if the trench hoes below ground level, as you then need lots of extra work on drainage and that sort of thing.

 

[plymothian]

Taunton was originally a footbridge. The current subway replaced it in 1930.

Likewise, Plymouth (North Road) as originally built had a footbridge.