What constitutes good station design?

Peter C said:

Um... I think the original post here asked people for their examples of good and bad station design. We are all entitled to our opinions and if they don't conform to your ideas then you don't have the right to have a go at other people.
Modern stations are all smoke and mirrors; why do we need a big glass mess for Oxford*, when the current station buildings work well? Yes, they may have some flaws (such as being built in the 1980s and the colours are a bit NSE), but every aspect of the station is easy to navigate.
*Example.

Click to expand...

what on earth are you talking about? big glass mess?

The station at Oxford is a disgrace for such a tourist destination. it is completely shambolic.

Peter C said:

A station should be designed to follow the Equalities Act, yes, but building a large glass thing at Oxford or Kidderminster won't help anyone. Surely someone with poor sight would prefer the red and blue of the current Oxford, which can easily be identified, as opposed to the bland and colourless station building which has been proposed? Modern art around a station, whilst it may look pretty, is a waste of space when that space could be designed to hold a ticket machine or two.

Click to expand...

so, essentially, what you are saying is that only stations that look like stations have always looked like are acceptable and that no new methods, styles, techniques or materials may be used in building a station. Your point about colours shows you really have no idea what you are on about.

Peter C said:

Please name a modern station which, in your own experience, is easy to get around. Birmingham Snow Hill is a good example of a station which, when designed, was planned to be the best thing since sliced bread, but is now just a mess and people who just want to get to the platform for their train can't.

Click to expand...

Unlike most posters here I have never found a station difficult to get around. Perhaps I am just lucky.

How can people not get to their platform at Snow Hill? it was used by c.4.2m people last year. I have no idea what you are on about? None.

Peter C said:

I think you'll find that people on here probably know more than "normals". People who have posted on this thread obviously have an interest in the subject and have therefore almost 100% of the time spent a long time looking into the subject. Please note that, as I said at the beginning of this post, your ideas are not the same as everyone else's. We all meet people in the world who don't share the same ideas as us and very few of us feel the need to moan and moan about them all because we're all different.

Click to expand...

Sorry but posters here absolutely do not know more than normal people. Normal people are the people stations are designed for not the self appointed experts here.

DarloRich said:

what on earth are you talking about? big glass mess?

The station at Oxford is a disgrace for such a tourist destination. it is completely shambolic.



so, essentially, what you are saying is that only stations that look like stations have always looked like are acceptable and that no new methods, styles, techniques or materials may be used in building a station. Your point about colours shows you really have no idea what you are on about.



Unlike most posters here I have never found a station difficult to get around. Perhaps I am just lucky.

How can people not get to their platform at Snow Hill? it was used by c.4.2m people last year. I have no idea what you are on about? None.



Sorry but posters here absolutely do not know more than normal people. Normal people are the people stations are designed for not the self appointed experts here.

Click to expand...

May I ask, have you seen the images for Oxford station (the new building)?
These images quite clearly show that the new station building which is proposed for Oxford, whilst being made from a lot of brick, is also made out of a lot of glass. Why does Oxford need this? It doesn't. Not to mention I don't know what on earth will happen to other buildings in the area in order to build this.

Give me one good reason for as to why the current station at Oxford is "shambolic". Back up your points with evidence or else they are useless.

I think that stations should keep their identity as stations, yes, but I am willing to see a concept image for a half-decent station rebuild. Why does my point about colours show that I don't know what I'm on about? Surely, if you had poor sight, you would prefer colours such as blue and red as opposed to grey and brown? The Royal National Institute for Blind People say that red is a good colour for people with poor sight. Why do you think road crossings use red? Hm?

Oh, look at you, not having any issues whilst trying to have a nice day out. Please tell us your secrets, oh wise one.

Birmingham Snow Hill may be used by millions every year, but how many of those people do you think actually choose to use that station? People cannot just move house or job to fit their favourite station.

OK. So someone who just goes through a station for ~5/10mins, admittedly every day, knows more about the stylistic choices of that station and why it was built like that? Please remember that enthusiasts often know more about the railway than "normals" and that your points may be wrong. No-one here has said that they are an expert. Please stop just going around and stirring up trouble. I'm only responding to tell you why your points, oh wise one, may be slightly incorrect.

-Peter

Peter C said:

May I ask, have you seen the images for Oxford station (the new building)?

Click to expand...

it looks really good. Striking, spacious, modern, light, airy, dry and fun.

( of course the final design will look nothing like these conceptual drawings)

Peter C said:

These images quite clearly show that the new station building which is proposed for Oxford, whilst being made from a lot of brick, is also made out of a lot of glass. Why does Oxford need this? It doesn't. Not to mention I don't know what on earth will happen to other buildings in the area in order to build this.

Click to expand...

shall we be honest. What you don't like is that it is new. The council in thier strategic plan seem to be very keen on the redevelopment? have you read that document?

I might buy the argument that the design is out of keeping with the historic setting of Oxford but that doesn't mean we have to have a twee recreation of some mythical 1930's GWR wonderland.

Peter C said:

Why does my point about colours show that I don't know what I'm on about? Surely, if you had poor sight, you would prefer colours such as blue and red as opposed to grey and brown? The Royal National Institute for Blind People say that red is a good colour for people with poor sight. Why do you think road crossings use red? Hm?

Click to expand...

read the legislation and the documentation suggested above. What happens if you are colour blind or completely blind? How does your wonderful red paint help then?

Peter C said:

Give me one good reason for as to why the current station at Oxford is "shambolic". Back up your points with evidence or else they are useless.

Click to expand...

honestly? Have you ever visited? The station building looks like a public toilet or a minor leisure centre, the entrance is narrow and up steps, the concourse is cramped, the entrance to the platforms is very constricted, the exterior is a confusing bus park , the platforms are nice and long but are a bit narrow, lack complete cover and aren't level. Will that do?

it is a disgrace that this is a gateway to one of our main tourist locations.

Peter C said:

Birmingham Snow Hill may be used by millions every year, but how many of those people do you think actually choose to use that station? People cannot just move house or job to fit their favourite station.

Click to expand...

what a silly comment. Most people chose to use the train! most people choose to use Snow Hill because it suits their needs. They aren't choosing a station becuase it is nice but because it is practical and close to the office/home.

Peter C said:

Oh, look at you, not having any issues whilst trying to have a nice day out. Please tell us your secrets, oh wise one.

Click to expand...

Sorry, no idea what you are on about. I am out and about all week by train for work. I go though all kinds of stations and never have problems. I wonder why you do seem to have such trouble.

Peter C said:

OK. So someone who just goes through a station for ~5/10mins, admittedly every day, knows more about the stylistic choices of that station and why it was built like that? Please remember that enthusiasts often know more about the railway than "normals" and that your points may be wrong. No-one here has said that they are an expert. Please stop just going around and stirring up trouble. I'm only responding to tell you why your points, oh wise one, may be slightly incorrect.

Click to expand...

Sorry but no. Enthusiasts THINK they know more about railways than anyone else. The truth is different.

I haven't stirred up any trouble or any such nonsense. I have simply pointed out that, while you are welcome to express your opinion, it is based on the particular and somewhat esoteric needs of the enthusiast rather than the real world and the needs of the people for whom stations are designed: Normal people.

DarloRich said:

it looks really good. Striking, spacious, modern, light, airy, dry and fun.

( of course the final design will look nothing like these conceptual drawings)



shall we be honest. What you don't like is that it is new. The council in thier strategic plan seem to be very keen on the redevelopment? have you read that document?



read the legislation and the documentation suggested above. What happens if you are colour blind or completely blind? How does your wonderful red paint help then?



honestly? Have you ever visited? The station building looks like a public toilet or a minor leisure centre, the entrance is narrow and up steps, the concourse is cramped, the entrance to the platforms is very constricted, the exterior is a confusing bus park , the platforms are nice and long but are a bit narrow, lack complete cover and aren't level. Will that do?

it is a disgrace that this is a gateway to one of our main tourist locations.



what a silly comment. Most people chose to use the train! most people choose to use Snow Hill because it suits their needs. They aren't choosing a station becuase it is nice but because it is practical and close to the office/home.



Sorry, no idea what you are on about. I am out and about all week by train for work. I go though all kinds of stations and never have problems. I wonder why you do seem to have such trouble.



Sorry but no. Enthusiasts THINK they know more about railways than anyone else. The truth is different.

I haven't stirred up any trouble or any such nonsense. I have simply pointed out that, while you are welcome to express your opinion, it is based on the particular and somewhat esoteric needs of the enthusiast rather than the real world and the needs of the people for whom stations are designed: Normal people.

Click to expand...

You're entitled to your opinion on Oxford.
OK, I may not like change in all its forms, but I do like change which does not just work for those who think that people want a nice public space. A station isn't a national park; it's a railway station.
I've visited Oxford many, many times and I would say that only one thing is correct with as to what you have said; the bus station outside could be a bit better. Platforms 1, 2, 3, and 4 all have some form of canopy on them. Platform 4 also has a waiting shelter in the non-covered area. I have spent hours at Oxford over the years. The platforms are level. More level than other stations, such as Hereford.
What planet are you on if you think that most people choose to take the train? A combination of high house prices, not enough houses, and job opportunities mean that most people have to take the train! People who don't go to Snow Hill DO NOT use it because it suits their needs. The busses are probably poor in their area, and the only way of being able to get into work at a reasonable time is the train! Commuters do not choose stations because of practicality, they choose them because they are near to their house/job or they are the only station in the area which they can use to get to their home or job.
I don't have trouble with getting around stations, but others might as we are not perfect. But the way you phrased your comment made it seem as though you felt as though you knew more than us and that we were stupid for not knowing everything.
Enthusiasts often know more than a "normal". Please note that a commuter, staring at their phone for an entire commute, will know naff all about the services at their local station bar the one that gets them to work and the one that gets them home. They will also probably not know about the station's facilities, bar the ones they use all the time, such as a ticket barrier or maybe a refreshment area. Who knows more about something - someone who uses that thing for ~1 hour every day (barring weekends) or someone who uses that thing every day for a longer time and then spends even more time researching the subject they are interested in?
Enthusiasts are also part of the real world. I assume that you are an enthusiast. That means, by your own logic, you are not a member of the "real world", but you seem to know a lot about this other land. Enthusiasts may also commute every day. And therefore they both know lots of info and nothing about the railway at the same time, according to your logic.

Please clear up your points,

-Peter

I have to agree with Darlo regarding Oxford station. The present concourse is too narrow and cramped, it can be a nightmare trying to get through the crowds standing Infront of the barriers.

The new design does look attractive and fits in well because the local buildings such as the business school and even Nuffield college are modernist in design. The ancient colleges are well away from the station.

There are no buildings in danger of demolition as the station is surrounded by the already mentioned bus station and car and cycle parks.

Dr_Intoxicated said:

I have to agree with Darlo regarding Oxford station. The present concourse is too narrow and cramped, it can be a nightmare trying to get through the crowds standing Infront of the barriers.

The new design does look attractive and fits in well because the local buildings such as the business school and even Nuffield college are modernist in design. The ancient colleges are well away from the station.

There are no buildings in danger of demolition as the station is surrounded by the already mentioned bus station and car and cycle parks.

Click to expand...

I think I'll have to agree with you in terms of people standing in front of the barriers, but that is a small issue as most of the time there aren't loads of people trying to get through at once (in my experience, but I don't go there during the peak hours a lot. However, I have been during busy times)
Personally, I don't think the new building is that good as I feel as though most of the buildings that are replacing older ones around the country all seem to be made in this style. Hopefully a different concept image will come around, but if it doesn't, I guess I'll have to put up with the new one.
OK - thanks for clearing that one up for me. I thought that the building looks a bit bigger in the concept image than the current one, and surely the bus station would still be a major part of the station? A lot of buses go to Oxford station.

-Peter

Peter C said:

I think I'll have to agree with you in terms of people standing in front of the barriers, but that is a small issue as most of the time there aren't loads of people trying to get through at once (in my experience, but I don't go there during the peak hours a lot. However, I have been during busy times)
Personally, I don't think the new building is that good as I feel as though most of the buildings that are replacing older ones around the country all seem to be made in this style. Hopefully a different concept image will come around, but if it doesn't, I guess I'll have to put up with the new one.
OK - thanks for clearing that one up for me. I thought that the building looks a bit bigger in the concept image than the current one, and surely the bus station would still be a major part of the station? A lot of buses go to Oxford station.

-Peter

Click to expand...

Even when it's not busy, it's a pain with people standing looking at the boards or walking between the retail and the ticket office clashing with those walking towards the platforms.
It's also bad on the other side of the barriers where you're dumped straight onto platform 3. You then get the battle between people coming off that train and those trying to get along to the other platforms.
The new station proposal includes additional through platforms (which are definitely needed to avoid Oxford being a bottleneck), including one straight through the current station building so there has to be a change. The big overdeck model as proposed does seem to provide the best way of giving good access to all platforms.
The new station is bigger and will result in some demolition, the Youth Hostel to the Southwest of the station is earmarked to go to provide for additional through lines. The bus station will also be relocated to the current carpark South of the current station as there won't be enough room.

JamesT said:

Even when it's not busy, it's a pain with people standing looking at the boards or walking between the retail and the ticket office clashing with those walking towards the platforms.
It's also bad on the other side of the barriers where you're dumped straight onto platform 3. You then get the battle between people coming off that train and those trying to get along to the other platforms.
The new station proposal includes additional through platforms (which are definitely needed to avoid Oxford being a bottleneck), including one straight through the current station building so there has to be a change. The big overdeck model as proposed does seem to provide the best way of giving good access to all platforms.
The new station is bigger and will result in some demolition, the Youth Hostel to the Southwest of the station is earmarked to go to provide for additional through lines. The bus station will also be relocated to the current carpark South of the current station as there won't be enough room.

Click to expand...

Oh OK. Thanks for the extra info on the new building and plans - Google searches in the recent past for me about this subject came up inconclusive.

-Peter

Berlin Hbf is lovely and Liege is a mess, I suspect Vienna Hbf would also fall into the latter category

JamesT said:

Even when it's not busy, it's a pain with people standing looking at the boards or walking between the retail and the ticket office clashing with those walking towards the platforms.
It's also bad on the other side of the barriers where you're dumped straight onto platform 3. You then get the battle between people coming off that train and those trying to get along to the other platforms.
The new station proposal includes additional through platforms (which are definitely needed to avoid Oxford being a bottleneck), including one straight through the current station building so there has to be a change. The big overdeck model as proposed does seem to provide the best way of giving good access to all platforms.
The new station is bigger and will result in some demolition, the Youth Hostel to the Southwest of the station is earmarked to go to provide for additional through lines. The bus station will also be relocated to the current carpark South of the current station as there won't be enough room.

Click to expand...

The bridge will also get rebuild so standard spec double deck buses can go under which then removes the need to terminate as many at the station so bus facilities are less crucial

hwl said:

The Kings Cross Scheme was so long in gestation approvals and planning stage that stage that access to accurate train running information on mobiles wasn't originally part of the thinking i.e. being able to cut out needing to use the concourse didn't feature.
There was also a bit of rigid "we have to stick to the approved operating plan to begin with".
If you stand on the "departures" concourse and look at the arrival information you'll find you are at the designated meeting point!

Click to expand...

Aha - so there's a "designated meeting point" - I didn't realise ... which says something about the design... But the point remains: a friend arriving there went the obvious way they felt directed from the platform, ie straight ahead through the barriers and, within a couple of paces, out into the weather. Meanwhile, I was waiting watching the arrivals board in the departures area - we were out of sight of one another and missed one another.

hwl said:

As others have said the upper level was only ever design to handle a small percentage of passengers arriving (very) early for long distance services primarily those unfamiliar with the station and get them out of everyone else's way! The publicity was designed to nudge people as it would be an up hill struggle.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this - an earlier poster implied the scheme was for the upper level to be the main way to get to the platforms. But I'm not sure those unfamiliar with the station are going to be the people who go up there; if I'm somewhere I don't know, I want to be within sight of the departures board and of the platforms!

DarloRich said:

Perhaps this is why so many posters here seem unable to deal with modernized stations that are easy for normals to use and which are popular with people providing good facilities and opportunities for refreshment.

Click to expand...

DarloRich said:

I don't. What should be positively aimed for is what is required to met the terms of the Equalities Act and make sure that everyone can use a station. What this thread shows is that posters here don't really understand what normal people want from a modern station. Is isnt somewhere to sit and jot down numbers.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure who "normals" are? If you mean not people who "sit and jot down numbers", then I'm eminently normal. I haven't done that jotting down numbers thing since my childhood long ago, and then it was more buses than trains! I'm on this forum as an enthusiast for railways as a (potentially) very pleasant and sensible and ecologically useful part of the system society sets up to allow us all to be mobile. I'm not an anorak/trainspotter/enthusiast of the sort you seem to be denigrating, but someone who uses railways to travel nationally and internationally from time to time (when the need arises and I can afford it), and is surprised how many newer stations are so hard to "read" if you just come into them from scratch. Regular users don't care of course - they don't need to - but having a station which is easy to understand and to use for a new user needn't make it any harder for regulars/commuters. (Though it might make it less profitable for the shopping arcade owners - and I take the point of another poster that if St P is run by the Channel Tunnel link people, then of course they're more concerned about oyster bars than the convenience of large numbers of commuters. Which all goes to show how retrograde splitting up and privatising railways is.)

I'm neither in favour of nor opposed to newness - I judge things in terms of their functionality as I perceive it. Clearly different people have different perceptions, and I wish people on this forum would accept that, without claiming that their way of seeing the world is necessarily superior.

DarloRich said:

Funny that my mum, not a regular train, user can navigate new Street without issue and thinks it is great station yet the so called "experts" here cant. Why is that?

Click to expand...

I missed the bit where I claimed to be an expert...

Just because your Mum likes it doesn’t mean I have to, we are all entitled to opinions and I personally find it a bit confusing as you can’t always go directly to where you want to go.

AlbertBeale said:

I'm not sure who "normals" are? If you mean not people who "sit and jot down numbers", then I'm eminently normal. I haven't done that jotting down numbers thing since my childhood long ago, and then it was more buses than trains! I'm on this forum as an enthusiast for railways as a (potentially) very pleasant and sensible and ecologically useful part of the system society sets up to allow us all to be mobile. I'm not an anorak/trainspotter/enthusiast of the sort you seem to be denigrating, but someone who uses railways to travel nationally and internationally from time to time (when the need arises and I can afford it), and is surprised how many newer stations are so hard to "read" if you just come into them from scratch. Regular users don't care of course - they don't need to - but having a station which is easy to understand and to use for a new user needn't make it any harder for regulars/commuters. (Though it might make it less profitable for the shopping arcade owners - and I take the point of another poster that if St P is run by the Channel Tunnel link people, then of course they're more concerned about oyster bars than the convenience of large numbers of commuters. Which all goes to show how retrograde splitting up and privatising railways is.)

I'm neither in favour of nor opposed to newness - I judge things in terms of their functionality as I perceive it. Clearly different people have different perceptions, and I wish people on this forum would accept that, without claiming that their way of seeing the world is necessarily superior.

Click to expand...

Noting some of the railway station design from the BR era, such as the previous incarnation of Birmingham New Street under a shopping centre, Southport, Sunderland, Walsall and Liverpool Central to name a few, I am not clear how design retrogression is seen as a recent (or privatised) phenomenon.

St Pancras domestic is a bit tricky from the subsurface Underground platforms and the Euston Road, but fine from the other Tube lines, the Thameslink platforms, Kings Cross or from the canal areas.

It has a clear destination board, and all the useful facilities are nearby (ticket office, toilets, "normal" food and drink, Smith's etc)

Mikey C said:

St Pancras domestic is a bit tricky from the subsurface Underground platforms and the Euston Road, but fine from the other Tube lines, the Thameslink platforms, Kings Cross or from the canal areas.

Click to expand...

From the Thameslink platforms, you might well realise that the MML domestic platforms are above you as you emerge to ground level ... but then struggle to find out how to get to them without walking quite a distance away from them.

Dr Hoo said:

Noting some of the railway station design from the BR era, such as the previous incarnation of Birmingham New Street under a shopping centre, Southport, Sunderland, Walsall and Liverpool Central to name a few, I am not clear how design retrogression is seen as a recent (or privatised) phenomenon.

Click to expand...

I don't know what "design retrogression" is a function of, but prioritising oyster bars over a speedy interchange for commuters is - it seems to me - a function of fragmentation and privatisation of the railway system. My preference is for an integrated and publicly controlled system. (And one which is full integrated, with regards to ticketing and so on, with similarly publicly owned systems in neighbouring countries ... as used to be the case many years ago when international rail travel in Europe was seamless, and countries sold one another's tickets with no worries about whether you needed a different ticket for a different company. In this respect, the EU's competition mania has a lot to answer for.)

As someone who commuted past the champagne and oyster bar at St Pancras for around seven years I never found that it got in the way.
I am entirely unclear what ticketing policy has to do with station design. In my experience in Europe there is plenty of ‘fine dining’ at some major terminals along with plenty of ticketing quirks for the unwary even between wholly ‘state-owned’/public organisations.

Good design principles for me:

1) Clear wayfinding signage. Although Network Rail stations are generally good - they can get carried away with the arrows that just end up being confusing/misleading/wrong.

2) Eliminating crossflows between passengers which make navigating the station concourse stressful. Peak time Manchester Piccadilly is a perfect example.

Dr Hoo said:

Noting some of the railway station design from the BR era, such as .... Southport.... I am not clear how design retrogression is seen as a recent (or privatised) phenomenon.

Click to expand...

What's wrong with Southport from a functional point of view? Aesthetically it's a fairly uninspiring bit of brutalism, but it works surely?

Southport isn't exactly overdone with facilities. An M-to-go, toilets inside the barrier and not a lot else. Fine for a wayside commuter station but not exactly a grand gateway to the town. The service to Liverpool may be frequent but it isn't much fun to hang about at whilst waiting for a service towards Manchester. Bus interchange or even integrated car parking has never been a strong feature either despite having started with a large land bank.

I think the point about having to work within the confines of what's there already is a key point here.

But there have been some completely new stations built fairly recentaly. Stratford International is of course fit for domestic and Olympic purposes but not international ones, but therefore misnamed and too big, not well-connected with Stratford GEML station. Ebbsfleet was also built right next to Northfleet, but still no sign of a connection between the two.

js1000 said:

Good design principles for me:

1) Clear wayfinding signage. Although Network Rail stations are generally good - they can get carried away with the arrows that just end up being confusing/misleading/wrong.

2) Eliminating crossflows between passengers which make navigating the station concourse stressful. Peak time Manchester Piccadilly is a perfect example.

Click to expand...

I'm going to agree with this here - and I'll say that the BR signage which you can still see around the country was the clearest you could get. A simple standard across the country meant you knew where you were going in a station at all times.

-Peter

Peter C said:

I'm going to agree with this here - and I'll say that the BR signage which you can still see around the country was the clearest you could get. A simple standard across the country meant you knew where you were going in a station at all times.

-Peter

Click to expand...

There's two elements to effective signage:

1) Clear design and legibility of the signs
2) Signs in all the right places

Fawkes Cat said:

There's two elements to effective signage:

1) Clear design and legibility of the signs
2) Signs in all the right places

Click to expand...

I'd add a third and forth
3) a hierarchy for signage with more important signage with bigger font and more standout colours (quicker to read colours e.g. yellow / black over white / navy over black /white) - e.g. see what NR did when taking over Clapham Jn from SWT
4) don't clutter with to many signs otherwise you lose impact and slow people down

AlbertBeale said:

I'm not sure who "normals" are? If you mean not people who "sit and jot down numbers", then I'm eminently normal. I haven't done that jotting down numbers thing since my childhood long ago, and then it was more buses than trains! I'm on this forum as an enthusiast for railways as a (potentially) very pleasant and sensible and ecologically useful part of the system society sets up to allow us all to be mobile. I'm not an anorak/trainspotter/enthusiast of the sort you seem to be denigrating, but someone who uses railways to travel nationally and internationally from time to time (when the need arises and I can afford it), and is surprised how many newer stations are so hard to "read" if you just come into them from scratch. Regular users don't care of course - they don't need to - but having a station which is easy to understand and to use for a new user needn't make it any harder for regulars/commuters. (Though it might make it less profitable for the shopping arcade owners - and I take the point of another poster that if St P is run by the Channel Tunnel link people, then of course they're more concerned about oyster bars than the convenience of large numbers of commuters. Which all goes to show how retrograde splitting up and privatising railways is.)

Click to expand...

You are, of course, entitled to express your opinion. I do not have to agree with it and if I do not I am entitled to call out what I think is utter balderdash. Your view seems to be based on your inability to "read" ( whatever than means) a station. I think this is bunkum.

The issue, I believe, is that modern stations do not conform to your view of what a station should be. I think you struggle with the fact there are shops, perhaps shops you don't understand or need, that you cant see the trains, that there might be places to eat beyond some grotty travelers fare type establishment, that there might be bars or that there might be people not entirety focused on the train as the most important part of their journey. Personally, I suspect the issue is not the station, it's deign or it's layout..

St Pancras is a really simple station to understand! It has one main corridor and two branch corridors for goodness sake!

AlbertBeale said:

I'm neither in favour of nor opposed to newness - I judge things in terms of their functionality as I perceive it. Clearly different people have different perceptions, and I wish people on this forum would accept that, without claiming that their way of seeing the world is necessarily superior.

Click to expand...

As I said previously I have never once had any issue using a station in this country. Is there some reason that you do have such problems?

Peter C said:

A simple standard across the country meant you knew where you were going in a station at all times.

Click to expand...

That is exactly what exists today!

hwl said:

a hierarchy for signage with more important signage with bigger font and more standout colours (quicker to read colours e.g. yellow / black over white / navy over black /white) - e.g. see what NR did when taking over Clapham Jn from SWT

Click to expand...

they do, of course, have to meet accessibility rules.

DanTrain said:

I missed the bit where I claimed to be an expert...

Just because your Mum likes it doesn’t mean I have to, we are all entitled to opinions and I personally find it a bit confusing as you can’t always go directly to where you want to go.

Click to expand...

your entitled to your opinion, of course, but my point remains: what is about the users of this board that means they are unable to navigate a modern railway station ( and we are told by posters above that the "enthusiast" knows more about railways than anyone else) when a pensioner ( and she will kill me for saying that!) who is not a regular railway user can easily navigate the same station? Perhaps the issue is not the station...............

AlbertBeale said:

but prioritising oyster bars over a speedy interchange for commuters is - it seems to me - a function of fragmentation and privatisation of the railway system.

Click to expand...

but that isnt what has happened at all.

DarloRich said:

You are, of course, entitled to express your opinion. I do not have to agree with it and if I do not I am entitled to call out what I think is utter balderdash. Your view seems to be based on your inability to "read" ( whatever than means) a station. I think this is bunkum.

The issue, I believe, is that modern stations do not conform to your view of what a station should be. I think you struggle with the fact there are shops, perhaps shops you don't understand or need, that you cant see the trains, that there might be places to eat beyond some grotty travelers fare type establishment, that there might be bars or that there might be people not entirety focused on the train as the most important part of their journey. Personally, I suspect the issue is not the station, it's deign or it's layout..

St Pancras is a really simple station to understand! It has one main corridor and two branch corridors for goodness sake!



As I said previously I have never once had any issue using a station in this country. Is there some reason that you do have such problems?



That is exactly what exists today!



they do, of course, have to meet accessibility rules.



your entitled to your opinion, of course, but my point remains: what is about the users of this board that means they are unable to navigate a modern railway station ( and we are told by posters above that the "enthusiast" knows more about railways than anyone else) when a pensioner ( and she will kill me for saying that!) who is not a regular railway user can easily navigate the same station? Perhaps the issue is not the station...............



but that isnt what has happened at all.

Click to expand...

Just a few points:
1) You're being quite rude; I don't agree with many things but I keep my mouth quiet because I actually have some sense of politeness.
2)What? A privatised mess of signage standards and different styles makes for a standardisation system? No, it doesn't!
3) If your mum can navigate any station she goes to, good for her! All because we have our own opinions about certain stations doesn't mean that we are stupid. As I said earlier, you are being bloody rude. May I ask, are you trying to imply that we all have some form of mental disorder? If so, that goes against your logic and the Equalities Act!
4) Also - please explain - in plain English - what you want from a station. And don't just say the Equalities Act!

-Peter


Also, I believe you have been quite vocal on other threads about how you are sick and tired of having arguments and explaining things to people on here, so please, follow your own logic and just give up.

gordonthemoron said:

Berlin Hbf is lovely and Liege is a mess, I suspect Vienna Hbf would also fall into the latter category

Click to expand...

Vienna Hbf is a design sibling of London Bridge.

Fawkes Cat said:

There's two elements to effective signage:

1) Clear design and legibility of the signs
2) Signs in all the right places

Click to expand...

hwl said:

I'd add a third and forth
3) a hierarchy for signage with more important signage with bigger font and more standout colours (quicker to read colours e.g. yellow / black over white / navy over black /white) - e.g. see what NR did when taking over Clapham Jn from SWT
4) don't clutter with to many signs otherwise you lose impact and slow people down

Click to expand...

Four very good points. We need to have one standardised signage system to ensure that people can easily get around. And, looking it from the view of a "normal" (whatever they are), I would prefer it if there was one system of signs as opposed to having a different system for each TOC.
Yes, the different sign styles may look similar, but we should go back to BR signage and the Rail Alphabet font. Surely there is a reason that the BR sign at the entrance to the car park at Kingham station has been kept, cleaned, and maintained for so many years? There are examples of BR signs around the country. If they were rubbish, they would have been taken down already. But around 20 years after BR left, we can still see so many examples of its signage. So they must have done something right!

If anyone thinks I am talking rubbish, please look at the following link:
http://www.doublearrow.co.uk/manual.htm
And tell me that BR weren't onto something there. They made an entire Corporate Identity Manual for the standardisation of the British railway network. They knew that having one set of signs made for a unified network and an easy-to-use network.

-Peter

gordonthemoron said:

Berlin Hbf is lovely and Liege is a mess, I suspect Vienna Hbf would also fall into the latter category

Click to expand...

Berlin Hbf looks impressive (And achieve the objective of a single main hub station for Berlin), but it is a heck of a long way down to/up from the low-level platforms!

As I found with pram and luggage last year, the outermost low-level platform islands only have one lift each to serve them. Which was broken when we tried to use it....

Peter C said:

I'm going to agree with this here - and I'll say that the BR signage which you can still see around the country was the clearest you could get. A simple standard across the country meant you knew where you were going in a station at all times.

-Peter

Click to expand...

There is a national standard for signage that meets the requirements of the Equalities Act and the PRM TSI, it’s all in the Design Guide for Accessible Railway Stations.