Bradford Forster Square 4th Platform Funding Announced: what improvements would you like to see made?

[DM352]

Not sure what they are planning on building next to Century Court but if it now abandoned they could put 4-5 new platforms there, trim out the Poundland tin shed retail place to skew the lines to reach it. Think more realistic to demo Century Court and replace it with a more welcoming station to restore BR's short sightness.

Century Court reminds me of Marylebone where they built something big and square west side and had to push the platform out behind it.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Property valuation for Centenary Court £20,879,000

Property valuation - Centenary Court, 1, St Blaise Way, Bradford, BD1 4YH

Centenary Court, 1, St Blaise Way is a freehold property - it is ranked as the most expensive property* in BD1 4YH, with a valuation of £27,216,000.

themovemarket.com

New station £17 million from the WY Transport Fund

That leaves about £3.1 million to demolish Centenary Court and extend 4 platforms.

You could potentially insert another platform in upon the East side which would be about as long as P3 is now.

I don't suppose anybody knows if HMRC actually owns Centenary Court or not ?

 

[Neptune]

Why does every ’good plan’ for railways in Bradford always seem to include either demolition of buildings the person suggesting it has absolutely no jurisdiction over or moving the railway out of the city which seems to be the inept ‘I wouldn’t trust them to run a bath‘ council’s favoured plan.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Why does every ’good plan’ for railways in Bradford always seem to include either demolition of buildings the person suggesting it has absolutely no jurisdiction over or moving the railway out of the city which seems to be the inept ‘I wouldn’t trust them to run a bath‘ council’s favoured plan.

Well if we were only allowed to suggest acquiring land/demolishing buildings that we only had jurisdiction over then a lot of suggestions of improving the rail network wouldnt be made!

 

[Neptune]

Well if we were only allowed to suggest acquiring land/demolishing buildings that we only had jurisdiction over then a lot of suggestions of improving the rail network wouldnt be made!

Exactly. Rail enthusiasts can’t decide which buildings stay and which buildings go in reality so why make the speculative suggestions? It just feels that demolition is the only ever consideration especially where Bradford is concerned. I know the council run the place like they want to regain town status but rail enthusiasts seem to want the same and make sure there’s nothing left in the centre except railway lines.

See numerous threads where live business premises are fair game for reinstating x, y & z railway plans with zero consideration for that particular business or in some cases even home owners. Imagine if the rail enthusiasts suggested your home/business because, trains.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Exactly. Rail enthusiasts can’t decide which buildings stay and which buildings go in reality so why make the speculative suggestions? It just feels that demolition is the only ever consideration especially where Bradford is concerned. I know the council run the place like they want to regain town status but rail enthusiasts seem to want the same and make sure there’s nothing left in the centre except railway lines.

Aint it a bit disingenous to presume everyone on here is a rail enthusiast ?

I cant actually believe that you believe that people shouldn't speculate what should done to improve Bradford or anywhere else for that matter!

 

[Neptune]

Aint it a bit disingenous to presume everyone on here is a rail enthusiast ?

Sorry my mistake. I thought this was Rail forums.

I cant actually believe that you believe that people shouldn't speculate what should done to improve Bradford or anywhere else for that matter!

No the problem as I see it is that on this forum there are many different ‘great solutions’ to the problem of poor public transport in Bradford. Most if not all solutions that are put forward include either demolishing part of the city centre (we’ve had the Law Courts, the new Broadway shopping centre and now Centenary Court which, by the way looks like remaining open as the regional centre at Leeds is full).

We then see railway lines going all over the city centre but no solution to putting back what has been removed. The final great idea from the council itself and endorsed by some on here is to move the station out of the city altogether. Do you see why I think alot of people are aiming for Bradford to regain its town status, lots of demolition, lots of railway tracks but nothing being put back in. The solution to everything in Bradford it would seem.

 

[Andyh82]

Those arches just need to be blocked off.

That’s the sort of thing I could imagine going viral in a negative way - Forcing the homeless to sleep in the open rather than undercover

Rather than blocking them off, Bradford council are more likely to do the opposite to be honest

 

[MarkyT]

No the problem as I see it is that on this forum there are many different ‘great solutions’ to the problem of poor public transport in Bradford. Most if not all solutions that are put forward include either demolishing part of the city centre (we’ve had the Law Courts, the new Broadway shopping centre and now Centenary Court which, by the way looks like remaining open as the regional centre at Leeds is full).

We then see railway lines going all over the city centre but no solution to putting back what has been removed. The final great idea from the council itself and endorsed by some on here is to move the station out of the city altogether. Do you see why I think alot of people are aiming for Bradford to regain its town status, lots of demolition, lots of railway tracks but nothing being put back in. The solution to everything in Bradford it would seem.

The buffer stops were around 300m apart between the old Forster Square and Exchange stations, little more than a train length, probably ~5 mins on foot. The progressive movement of the stations further apart, first with the replacement of Exchange by Interchange, then by the reconstruction of Forster Square has resulted in a trek of nearly 800m. Both stations are still fairly central, but interchange between the two has been made significantly more difficult. Interchange traffic may not be particularly significant in numbers but it seems counterproductive to deliberately make it harder; that just ensures it will never grow. And before anyone states you can always travel from the Aire Valley via Leeds, that seems to add about £2 to any fare towards Manchester and ~15m to journey time, even allowing 20m or so for the half-mile schlep across Bradford. Dedicated bus links between stations may be fine theoretically but you need extraordinary frequency to beat walking even over the current distance, and frequency may not be easy to maintain on a subsidised service, especially at off-peak times. A bus transfer is also unlikely to be free or if it was initially, some kind of funding crisis is bound to occur eventually leading to charges being introduced. A £2 fare (say) for a half-mile journey is very poor value for money, which would encourage anyone fully able-bodied to walk it so reducing clientele to just those who have little choice, again very poor for the economics of such a service. Moving the Calder Valley Line station yet further out, higher still and on the wrong side of a major highway and junction complex to the St James site makes changing between the two stations even more inconvenient as well as making walking to many parts of the traditional city centre harder, including the Interchange bus terminal and the Broadway shopping centre. One definition of insanity is when you keep doing the same thing when it has already proven to be harmful. I know proponents see the St James site to be a big shiny new transportation hub at the centre of a vibrant new business district, but that will be dependent on broader economic conditions and whether developers getting in on the act actually deliver anything or it's just a scam to get hold of some cheap industrial land with a use change preapproved. It all just reminds me of the biggest transportation mistake ever in Serbia's capital Beograd (not my description but that of one of Serbia's leading public transport experts Vukan R. Vučić). I bring you...(drum roll)...Bradford Centar!

 

[Bantamzen]

Property valuation for Centenary Court £20,879,000

Property valuation - Centenary Court, 1, St Blaise Way, Bradford, BD1 4YH

Centenary Court, 1, St Blaise Way is a freehold property - it is ranked as the most expensive property* in BD1 4YH, with a valuation of £27,216,000.

themovemarket.com

New station £17 million from the WY Transport Fund

That leaves about £3.1 million to demolish Centenary Court and extend 4 platforms.

You could potentially insert another platform in upon the East side which would be about as long as P3 is now.

I don't suppose anybody knows if HMRC actually owns Centenary Court or not ?

Being a building used by HMG, its probably unlikely to be owned outright by them but instead one of the government's estate contractors. However I don't think knocking it down just to move Forster Square's platforms down a bit is very likely at all. I'm sure the owners of the building would rather have the space used by other companies or organisations, and let's face it a lot can happen in the 4 years before HMRC move out. We will likely see a new government take over, and they may have very different ideas about what estate should be used.

So that £17 million could be better purposed in making Forster Square a bit more appealing, including improving lighting, putting in more retail space, expanding the footprint of the station to allow for bigger indoor waiting areas, and improving the aesthetics of the approaches especially from Cheapside.

 

[Neptune]

Being a building used by HMG, its probably unlikely to be owned outright by them but instead one of the government's estate contractors. However I don't think knocking it down just to move Forster Square's platforms down a bit is very likely at all. I'm sure the owners of the building would rather have the space used by other companies or organisations, and let's face it a lot can happen in the 4 years before HMRC move out. We will likely see a new government take over, and they may have very different ideas about what estate should be used.

So that £17 million could be better purposed in making Forster Square a bit more appealing, including improving lighting, putting in more retail space, expanding the footprint of the station to allow for bigger indoor waiting areas, and improving the aesthetics of the approaches especially from Cheapside.

I think Mapeleys own the building. No guarantee that HMRC will move out now as I mentioned previously.

 

[Halifaxlad]

However I don't think knocking it down just to move Forster Square's platforms down a bit is very likely at all.

The suggestion of knocking down either whole or part of the tax office isnt just about moving Bradford further South but about creating longer platforms, improving access and making the station much more appealling.

To spend £17 million on it where it is, is just a waste of money especially if it doesnt include a central concourse!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Dedicated bus links between stations may be fine theoretically but you need extraordinary frequency to beat walking even over the current distance, and frequency may not be easy to maintain on a subsidised service, especially at off-peak times. A bus transfer is also unlikely to be free or if it was initially, some kind of funding crisis is bound to occur eventually leading to charges being introduced. A £2 fare (say) for a half-mile journey is very poor value for money, which would encourage anyone fully able-bodied to walk it so reducing clientele to just those who have little choice, again very poor for the economics of such a service.

Back in the 2000s WYPTE introduced free bus services in most of the larger town and city centres, though only a few remain today. Wakefield's service is one which survives and is quite useful for transfer between the two stations. Bradford's was always flawed as the routing meant it was great for BDI to BDQ but terrible in the opposite direction. Ideally it should have run bi-directionally meaning it would be suitable for transfers in both directions. It also didn't help that the tender was awarded to the stupidly-named Ladies Only Travel. This name was displayed at stops and confused some.

 

[MarkyT]

Back in the 2000s WYPTE introduced free bus services in most of the larger town and city centres, though only a few remain today. Wakefield's service is one which survives and is quite useful for transfer between the two stations. Bradford's was always flawed as the routing meant it was great for BDI to BDQ but terrible in the opposite direction. Ideally it should have run bi-directionally meaning it would be suitable for transfers in both directions. It also didn't help that the tender was awarded to the stupidly-named Ladies Only Travel. This name was displayed at stops and confused some.

Also for around a half-mile distance, to be attractive you'd need a high frequency to compete with walking as you can always begin striding off immediately you exit the station rather than waiting for the bus. I'm all for encouraging walking by the way, which is why in an ideal world I'd move the termini closer back together (just to be clear not joined into a single through station!), then you wouldn't need a bus at all. What an utterly daft name for a general service bus company!

 

[Andyh82]

Its not just the anti-social behaviour I'm afraid, there is an increasing rancid smell as it seems some use the "spare" arches as toilets. It was particularly bad on Saturday evening after the City game. I'm really surprised that NR, Northern, HMRC or the Midland Hotel aren't complaining more to Bradford Council about. They all at some point must be able to smell it in their premises.

I walked past there today, and like you say, there is a strong whiff of urine as you exit the station due to the homeless village that occupies the arches

And to top it off the lift tower was closed due to the lift being out of order, so everyone arriving at Forster Square had to walk past this scene

 

[Halifaxlad]

I remember that bus, which I only used to use sometimes as it wasn't as frequent enough!

I never saw much point waiting about 10 minutes when I could walk it in that time!

 

[DM352]

If it was today that BFS would be knocked down, there is more likley to be an office block on a station raft to preserve most platforms.

It seemed late 70's to early 90's BR chose to truncate terminus stations to make a quick buck on land but get the government most at that time did not love the railways so BR needed a money tree.

Bradford seems like it wants its central shopping district but also the tin shed retail park nearby.

I think both Bradford stations are pretty awful but know BFS is this discussion

 

[MichaelTrains]

If it was today that BFS would be knocked down, there is more likley to be an office block on a station raft to preserve most platforms.

It seemed late 70's to early 90's BR chose to truncate terminus stations to make a quick buck on land but get the government most at that time did not love the railways so BR needed a money tree.

Bradford seems like it wants its central shopping district but also the tin shed retail park nearby.

I think both Bradford stations are pretty awful but know BFS is this discussion

Both Forster Square and the Interchange need massive improvements.

Simple things like extending the roofs so passengers aren't stuck on the open platform exposed to the elements for one.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Both Forster Square and the Interchange need massive improvements.

Simple things like extending the roofs so passengers aren't stuck on the open platform exposed to the elements for one.

If it's raining just wait under the roof until the train arrives or is unlocked ready for boarding, and walk up the platform then. You aren't ever "stuck on the open platform". There's lots that could be done to improve both stations I agree, but it really isn't necessary (or a smart use of limited funds) to extend canopies all the way to the platform ends. At Interchange, replacing the mid-platform waiting room would be a better use of funds.

 

[Halifaxlad]

If it's raining just wait under the roof until the train arrives or is unlocked ready for boarding, and walk up the platform then. You aren't ever "stuck on the open platform". There's lots that could be done to improve both stations I agree, but it really isn't necessary (or a smart use of limited funds) to extend canopies all the way to the platform ends. At Interchange, replacing the mid-platform waiting room would be a better use of funds.

Extending the canopies at BFS is a much smarter use of funds than spending goodness knows how much on replacing them entirely simply to change the design as is the plan and wish of WYCA and Bradford Council which Ive never seen the point in.

There is also a safety argument as much like Keighley, you end up with a unsafe build up of passengers in one particular area. Keighley is going to be much more interesting in the next couple of months as the ramps where passengers wait will become restricted that much it will be impossible to wait underneath them without blocking access to the station for everyone else.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Extending the canopies at BFS is a much smarter use of funds than spending goodness knows how much on replacing them entirely simply to change the design as is the plan and wish of WYCA and Bradford Council which Ive never seen the point in.

There is also a safety argument as much like Keighley, you end up with a unsafe build up of passengers in one particular area. Keighley is going to be much more interesting in the next couple of months as the ramps where passengers wait will become restricted that much it will be impossible to wait underneath them without blocking access to the station for everyone else.

Agree about simply replacing like for like being pointless, unless the existing ones were life expired, which they aren't. If they were due for replacement anyway then by all means extend them while you're at it.
The safety issue is something I hadn't considered, and the example you cite of Keighley is a good one as it can get very crowded on those ramps at college kicking-out times. I've never seen either of the Bradford stations being so crowded that it was a safety concern, though Interchange is probably awkward at the moment with the bus station access being closed.

I remember that bus, which I only used to use sometimes as it wasn't as frequent enough!

I never saw much point waiting about 10 minutes when I could walk it in that time!

I used it a few times if the weather was bad, but only once to get from Forster Square to Interchange- that's a mistake you only make once!
Agree that if you've just missed one and it isn't peeing it down you're better of walking if you're able, but anything greater than a 10min frequency is probably unsustainable.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Been having a closer look at Centenary Court but in particular how much would need to be demolished to extend the platforms. I reckon you could get away with demolishing only half of the building, potentially less!

 

[zwk500]

Been having a closer look at Centenary Court but in particular how much would need to be demolished to extend the platforms. I reckon you could get away with demolishing only half of the building, potentially less!

Can the building "get away" with only demolishing half of it, or if you knock down a significant portion of it are you committed to the whole thing?

In a money no object world then yes, demolishing the office building, extending the platforms back, building a concourse over the top with potentially office space on a raft above the first half of the platforms would make a lot of sense. However the building is either sold off to a private developer or owned by the government department currently running it, so the idea of anybody funding NR (and if it's owned by HMRC it won't simply be turned over to NR) to purchase the building back to demolish it and build a concourse is somewhat beyond speculative.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Can the building "get away" with only demolishing half of it, or if you knock down a significant portion of it are you committed to the whole thing?

What do you actually mean ?

The demolition of a building to facilitate rail improvements is no more or less speculative than anything else on this forum!

 

[JamesT]

What do you actually mean ?

I read it as whether the structure of the building is such that the thing will stand up if you remove part, or if you chop off a chunk you’re going to have to take it all down.
For example the curved roof may be acting as an arch, where the force is transmitted sideways to the supporting walls. How does that work if one side isn’t there? Is it possible to put in a replacement structure to support the roof without intruding on the space needed for the railway?
I’m thinking of houses where there is a large metal buttress needed to hold up the side of a house where its neighbour has been demolished.

 

[Bantamzen]

Been having a closer look at Centenary Court but in particular how much would need to be demolished to extend the platforms. I reckon you could get away with demolishing only half of the building, potentially less!

View attachment 152527

And why not go further and plough on through the Midland Hotel, Broadway, and up through the courts buildings? Voila! Bradford Crossrail!

But being serious, I very much doubt that NR would be in the business of buying, then demolishing it simply to move the platforms a couple of hundred metres closer to the city centre. Better to use available funds to tidy up and improve the approaches, and increase the fully covered area around where the ticket office and lift are to make a better waiting area for passengers.

 

[zwk500]

What do you actually mean ?

If you knock down half the building, can you simply put a wall up where you stop, or would you need to demolish the whole thing and build a new replacement. Structural integrity has already beem mentioned, and where are the lifts and stairwells within Centenary Court, the fire escapes, building services, pipes, etc. Would the modified building still meet all the relevant fire and evacuation codes, these kind of questions

The demolition of a building to facilitate rail improvements is no more or less speculative than anything else on this forum!

Well I think plenty of suggestions on this forum go well beyond speculative as well.
However I was more referring to the fact that your maths upthread implied you were suggesting that demolishing Centenery Court would pay for the project with a £3m surplus, when in reality it would be doubling the project cost. Apologies if my inference is wrong in that regard.

 

[Neptune]

Losing that side of the building would be losing half your fire escapes but retaining more than half the office space. How would that be resolved?

 

[deltic08]

Also for around a half-mile distance, to be attractive you'd need a high frequency to compete with walking as you can always begin striding off immediately you exit the station rather than waiting for the bus. I'm all for encouraging walking by the way, which is why in an ideal world I'd move the termini closer back together (just to be clear not joined into a single through station!), then you wouldn't need a bus at all. What an utterly daft name for a general service bus company!

I totally agree, move the termini closer together. Think of those who can't easily walk between the present Bradford central stations. I nearly didn't make it last time I tried, missing my connection. I haven't tried again since 2014.
£21M would go a long way towards building Skipton-Colne, an even better way from Aire valley stations to Manchester, Lancashire and Fylde coast.

 

[Neptune]

I totally agree, move the termini closer together. Think of those who can't easily walk between the present Bradford central stations. I nearly didn't make it last time I tried, missing my connection. I haven't tried again since 2014.

So to move them back where they were in January 1973 you would be demolishing Centenary Court, the Law Courts and digging down to the old terminus site of Exchange and replacing the bridge over the railway on Bridge Street. That is going to be one hell of a cost to cut a 10 minute walk down to 5.

£21M would go a long way towards building Skipton-Colne, an even better way from Aire valley stations to Manchester, Lancashire and Fylde coast.

I wondered when this white elephant would resurface, it’s been a while.

Is £21m going a long way towards it based on SELRAP’s costings? I mean they’re not exactly known for their accuracy of information. The following have been variously mentioned in the past having being taken from their website. Some may of course have been removed since as surely even they must have thought “Nah”:-

‘There are no railway links between East Lancs and the West Yorkshire cities of Bradford and Leeds’ totally ignoring the copy pit route. That’s my favourite.

‘It would take less than an hour from Colne to Leeds via Skipton’ is another good one no doubt based on non stop timings and ignoring any route constraints at best.

‘It’s a simple rebuild’ is another corker. Removing bypasses and building bridges must be easy in their area before you even start to build a fully signalled railway and of course the entire Gannow Junction to Colne section would need to be rebuilt to cope with their ideas.

‘There’s no public transport between Colne and Skipton/Keighley’ ignoring regular bus services completely.

‘It’s the perfect route for cross pennine freight’ only if you want it to take twice as long as you do now crossing the highly constrained Leeds station throat after heading down the highly constrained Aire Valley line.

I’m sure there’s plenty more that I’ve forgotten about.

No I’d take anything they say with one hell of a pinch of salt.