What constitutes good station design?

To me the station which confuses me most is Stratford, but that's down to it having grown enormously and having substandard passageways, rather than because of poor signage or too much commercial clutter (which it doesn't have)

Tio Terry said:

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.

Click to expand...

Oh OK - thanks. But I still think that maybe having something more akin to what BR had would make for a more unified network.
-Peter

Peter C said:

Oh OK - thanks. But I still think that maybe having something more akin to what BR had would make for a more unified network.
-Peter

Click to expand...

Have a look at the Design Guide, I think you will see it’s very similar to what BR did but just updated to meet current legislation.

Mikey C said:

To me the station which confuses me most is Stratford, but that's down to it having grown enormously and having substandard passageways, rather than because of poor signage or too much commercial clutter (which it doesn't have)

Click to expand...

I think that may be the case with quite a few of these large stations - one must remember that the railways were never planned out bar where each company was going to put its lines. Today, the system is planned out to ensure that lines don't cross and cause delays and ruin the land, but the fact that so many railway lines going into one station means that the station will inevitably become a mess. In a perfect world, every big station would have x platform for 1 TOC and y platform for another, etc, but that won't happen.

-Peter

Tio Terry said:

Have a look at the Design Guide, I think you will see it’s very similar to what BR did but just updated to meet current legislation.

Click to expand...

OK - Will do!

-Peter


EDIT: I have had a quick look at a National Rail design guide and I can say that it is very similar to what BR did - I approve of it. It's simple and easy-to-understand, but there are still a few stations I can think of, such as Kingham, which could benefit from more signage for passengers.
Just the other week, I was at Kingham to see a fast train go through and someone arrived and ended up asking us where to buy tickets as the ticket office had closed hours before he arrived. The only signs referencing tickets were ones threatening people they would be fined if they didn't have a ticket when they boarded, and there were no signs saying that you could buy a ticket on the train, which I know for a fact you can do. But maybe that's not necessarily related to signage standards.

hooverboy said:

there is a recent phenomenon, not just in train stations, but in airports also, whereby you are basically made to walk the most convoluted route possible through shops and establishments, in the hope you will be distracted and want to buy something.

the planners have made a b***ls up here I feel.
it's not just people don't like being pressured into buying stuff, but for the late connecting traveller this development is massively irritating.

I think people prefer to buy stuff when they are relaxed, which a last minute passenger trying to make a gate in time certainly is not.

Click to expand...

I travel through New St twice a day and have never either shopped there, played the piano or bought any food in there. Did go to use the 1st class lounge but it was shut so we popped in All-bar one once. Horrible environment to sit down in, and why is P1 the only one without a down escalator? The B end of the station a mess.

boxy321 said:

I travel through New St twice a day and have never either shopped there, played the piano or bought any food in there. Did go to use the 1st class lounge but it was shut so we popped in All-bar one once. Horrible environment to sit down in, and why is P1 the only one without a down escalator? The B end of the station a mess.

Click to expand...

Noting that many people seem to complain about the A end of New Street (having to be divided in order that the ‘main entrance’ can actually function as such) I am intrigued as to why the B end strikes you as a mess.
There is a single corridor providing access to and from all platforms, two (‘Red’) lounges, toilets, places to purchase light refreshments and two wide barrier lines to exits and other facilities. There seem to be plenty of information screens and no need to go down to the platform until your train is close at hand.
Obviously it would be nicer if the platforms themselves were a bit wider but the footprint die was cast back in the mid-19th century.

Peter C said:

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.

Click to expand...

No I haven't. The rules of this board do not allow for rudeness or for me to use the kind of words I would like to use to comment on some postings!

Peter C said:

2)What? A privatised mess of signage standards and different styles makes for a standardisation system? No, it doesn't!

Click to expand...

Yes it does. Go and read the design guide and legislation suggested above.

Peter C said:

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!

Click to expand...

eh? I haven't implied anyone has any form of mental disorder. If I was wanting to say that I would say so directly.

I simply ask why so many posters here have problems navigating large, modern stations. The point about my mum is that she DOESN'T go to New Street very often, if ever and is not a regular train user. She went a couple of times, was worried that such a big station might be confusing for her on her own and with luggage ( as it was in the past if we are honest). However, she found it was really straightforward and easy to navigate. She felt it was more like an airport than a station. Why is it that a casual user has no problems but an expert like you does?

Peter C said:

4) Also - please explain - in plain English - what you want from a station. And don't just say the Equalities Act!
.

Click to expand...

Here goes:

I want a station that is accessible to everyone, I want it to offer step free access from the train to the street, I want it to be dry, safe, light, airy and covered and I would like some form of temperature control if at all possible. I want it to have large circulating areas, clear display screens, have a decent selection of shops and refreshment outlets, a selection of waiting locations and styles of furniture, i want waiting to be away form the platform as much as possible if only to help people keep warm and dry in the winter. I want large doorways and long ticket barriers, I want wide, covered platforms that aren't overloaded and dangerous at rush hour, I want visible staff/help points and good quality, clear announcements. I want it to have decent toilets for all types of people and I want it to have systems and equipment built in to ensure that usage barriers are removed for as many people as possible. If we have more than one level I want a good selection of stairs, high speed lifts and escalators to move people. Added to that if I could have a fantastic, striking and modern building design I would be really happy.

I would be really, really happy if we could have a well structured transport interchange on the same site as the station carrying those design rules throughout but we do live in the real world not cloud cuckoo land!

Will that do for you?

DarloRich said:

No I haven't. The rules of this board do not allow for rudeness or for me to use the kind of words I would like to use to comment on some postings!



Yes it does. Go and read the design guide and legislation suggested above.



eh? I haven't implied anyone has any form of mental disorder. If I was wanting to say that I would say so directly.

I simply ask why so many posters here have problems navigating large, modern stations. The point about my mum is that she DOESN'T go to New Street very often, if ever and is not a regular train user. She went a couple of times, was worried that such a big station might be confusing for her on her own and with luggage ( as it was in the past if we are honest). However, she found it was really straightforward and easy to navigate. She felt it was more like an airport than a station. Why is it that a casual user has no problems but an expert like you does?



Here goes:

I want a station that is accessible to everyone, I want it to offer step free access from the train to the street, I want it to be dry, safe, light, airy and covered and I would like some form of temperature control if at all possible. I want it to have large circulating areas, clear display screens, have a decent selection of shops and refreshment outlets, a selection of waiting locations and styles of furniture, i want waiting to be away form the platform as much as possible if only to help people keep warm and dry in the winter. I want large doorways and long ticket barriers, I want wide, covered platforms that aren't overloaded and dangerous at rush hour, I want visible staff/help points and good quality, clear announcements. I want it to have decent toilets for all types of people and I want it to have systems and equipment built in to ensure that usage barriers are removed for as many people as possible. If we have more than one level I want a good selection of stairs, high speed lifts and escalators to move people. Added to that if I could have a fantastic, striking and modern building design I would be really happy.

I would be really, really happy if we could have a well structured transport interchange on the same site as the station carrying those design rules throughout but we do live in the real world not cloud cuckoo land!

Will that do for you?

Click to expand...

I have read the design guide.
You definitely have implied that we are all stupid* in some form.
When did any of us on here say we are experts? You have said multiple times that we all are. I don't recall saying I'm an expert, just that I'm an enthusiast with opinions, which I share.

Blimey, your idea of a perfect station sounds a lot like Paddington! Step-free access**, dry, safe, light, airy, covered, clear display screens, plenty of shops and refreshment areas, waiting locations, the platforms are completely covered, etc.
Waterloo is also a good contender here.

So, where do enthusiasts live? "Cloud cuckoo land"? Am I right in assuming that you are an enthusiast, but because of your high level of intelligence compared to everyone else here you live in the "real world" with "normals"?

-Peter

DarloRich said:

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...............

Click to expand...

I don’t know what your insinuating here...!? When I use a station I like it to be easy, look at a board, read the platform, find the platform and go to it. Ideally not through more than one sets of barriers (New Street!) or through a shopping mall (St Pancras).

I fear that your insinuations are confusing ability to navigate the station, with which I have no problem (I always get where I want to go) and ease of navigation, which is really the problem here.

DarloRich said:

She felt it was more like an airport than a station. Why is it that a casual user has no problems but an expert like you does?

Click to expand...

Now that’s quite an interesting comment! Personally I see airports as unpleasant, stressful environments to be endured and as such I don’t per se mind the long walks and endless barriers/security. I can see the comparison to New Street but it shouldn’t be like that, a station should he pleasant and enjoyable to use like the great victorian stations, designed for a grand entrance not a tiring, stressful one.

DanTrain said:

I can see the comparison to New Street but it shouldn’t be like that, a station should he pleasant and enjoyable to use like the great victorian stations, designed for a grand entrance not a tiring, stressful one.

Click to expand...

so is the issue that modern stations don't meet your ideas of what a station should be?

DanTrain said:

I don’t know what your insinuating here...!? When I use a station I like it to be easy, look at a board, read the platform, find the platform and go to it. Ideally not through more than one sets of barriers (New Street!) or through a shopping mall (St Pancras).

I fear that your insinuations are confusing ability to navigate the station, with which I have no problem (I always get where I want to go) and ease of navigation, which is really the problem here.

Click to expand...

I disagree that there is an issue with ease of navigation at any station I have ever visited.

DarloRich said:

so is the issue that modern stations don't meet your ideas of what a station should be?

Click to expand...

Yes, pretty much...

DanTrain said:

Yes, pretty much...

Click to expand...

Thanks.

DarloRich said:

I disagree that there is an issue with ease of navigation at any station I have ever visited.

Click to expand...

I think though that the problem though with your logic is that multiple people (including myself) on these thread have reported having trouble navigating Birmingham New Street. And I'm pretty sure I recall other times on railforums when various people have complained about problems finding their way around New Street. That's significant because people on these forums tend to be regular train users, which would imply most people here are well used to navigating railway stations.

Obviously, no matter how you design a station, occasionally someone is going to miss something and therefore have a problem navigating it. But if problems are occurring frequently then you do need to ask whether that station has been badly designed. In the case of New Street, the number of people on railforums who have complained about the station since its rebuild does seem to suggest that people having problems navigating it is not an isolated thing.

DynamicSpirit said:

I think though that the problem though with your logic is that multiple people (including myself) on these thread have reported having trouble navigating Birmingham New Street. And I'm pretty sure I recall other times on railforums when various people have complained about problems finding their way around New Street. That's significant because people on these forums tend to be regular train users, which would imply most people here are well used to navigating railway stations.

Obviously, no matter how you design a station, occasionally someone is going to miss something and therefore have a problem navigating it. But if problems are occurring frequently then you do need to ask whether that station has been badly designed. In the case of New Street, the number of people on railforums who have complained about the station since its rebuild does seem to suggest that people having problems navigating it is not an isolated thing.

Click to expand...

Thank you - that's what I've been meaning to say!

-Peter

DynamicSpirit said:

I think though that the problem though with your logic is that multiple people (including myself) on these thread have reported having trouble navigating Birmingham New Street. And I'm pretty sure I recall other times on railforums when various people have complained about problems finding their way around New Street. That's significant because people on these forums tend to be regular train users, which would imply most people here are well used to navigating railway stations.

Obviously, no matter how you design a station, occasionally someone is going to miss something and therefore have a problem navigating it. But if problems are occurring frequently then you do need to ask whether that station has been badly designed. In the case of New Street, the number of people on railforums who have complained about the station since its rebuild does seem to suggest that people having problems navigating it is not an isolated thing.

Click to expand...

with respect: that shows that enthusiasts are unable to use the station. Could the issue be that they come to the scene with preconceptions and rigid ideas about how a station, in their mind, should function rather than looking at how it DOES function?

I know few enthusiasts but do know lots of "normal" people and not one has reported an issue with New Street. Why? Surely, without the celebrated experience of enthusiasts, they would be reporting massive confusion and frustration. They honestly are not.

I acknowledge this is all anecdotal and I do not claim to be correct. I simply reflect the experience and conversations I have had on this subject. People are welcome to disagree.

Speaking purely for me, myself and I, I don't think Birmingham New Street is brilliant, but I do freely acknowledge that having been a user on and off for about 40 years* I had a good mental model of the relationship of platform numbers to the rest of Birmingham and how to optimally move betwixt - I am still having to relearn the last part, but I contend that the new concourse layout is not an improvement on the old, and many of my colleagues agree.

And before anyone pigeonholes me as an enthusiast, I am currently actively leading the design of about half a dozen new and remodelled stations, some of them major regional ones.


* having first visited a family member at Stanier House at about the age of ten

Well I find New Street rather confusing! Any station where (presumably because I came up at the "A" end") when changing trains I ended up having to exit the gates then go back in again isn't especially friendly to non regular users.

Yes I should have used the "B" end, but why should have I have needed to know that? When existing a train I use the nearest exit, like I do at every other railway station.

The changes at New Street are a massive improvement. Before it was a complete ****hole and dangerous. I have personal experience as my aunt fell down one of the old escalators in the crush and was in hospital for weeks. Not to mention the old Station Street piss steps to get down to the Midland Red bus station. But no I'm wrong because you need to go through two gatelines if changing at the A end, what a hassle.

Mikey C said:

Well I find New Street rather confusing! Any station where (presumably because I came up at the "A" end") when changing trains I ended up having to exit the gates then go back in again isn't especially friendly to non regular users.

Yes I should have used the "B" end, but why should have I have needed to know that? When existing a train I use the nearest exit, like I do at every other railway station.

Click to expand...

There are signs at the foot of the 'A' exits pointing out that it is best to *interchange* via the 'B' end. In my frequent experience on CrossCountry arrivals the conductor will usually stress this when giving out connectional information as the train approaches Birmingham.

In any event, why is having to pass through two barriers such a big deal? It is standard practice for connecting to the Underground at most London termini and at terminal stations like Glasgow Central (e.g. between many places in England and Ayrshire) or Manchester Piccadilly (e.g. between the Romiley Lines and London to avoid traipsing over the footbridge).

To answer your "why"; as has been explained on numerous previous threads, the 'gap' in the 'A' end at New Street is to allow continued use of the 'main entrance' even in the era of multiple lifts, escalators and stairs to/from the platforms. As someone who was born and brought up in Birmingham and still has many links with the city, I can confirm some people do actually want to get out of New Street into the City Centre or to Moor Street rather than just interchange!

Dr Hoo said:

There are signs at the foot of the 'A' exits pointing out that it is best to *interchange* via the 'B' end. In my frequent experience on CrossCountry arrivals the conductor will usually stress this when giving out connectional information as the train approaches Birmingham.

In any event, why is having to pass through two barriers such a big deal? It is standard practice for connecting to the Underground at most London termini and at terminal stations like Glasgow Central (e.g. between London and Ayrshire) or Manchester Piccadilly (e.g. between the Romiley Lines and London to avoid traipsing over the footbridge.

To answer your "why"; as has been explained on numerous previous threads, the 'gap' in the 'A' end at New Street is to allow continued use of the 'main entrance' even in the era of multiple lifts, escalators and stairs to/from the platforms. As someone who was born and brought up in Birmingham and still has many links with the city, I can confirm some people do actually want to get out of New Street into the City Centre or to Moor Street rather than just interchange!

Click to expand...

My "why" wasn't about whether there should be a main entrance (as it happens I was in Birmingham on Saturday, though used Chiltern to Moor Street instead). Passing through two barriers IS a big deal, when you're not transferring to a different network like the London Underground. People will naturally be worried that their tickets will be swallowed for a start. I don't recall being advised by the guard when I changed there last year from a VTWC service to a Shrewsbury train, but then as I never realised there was an issue, I wouldn't necessarily have twigged what he meant if he had said it anyway.

The old station wasn't pleasant, but I actually found it easier to navigate as it looked like a railway station, whereas with the new one when you enter the building it looks like a grand shopping mall and it's less obvious which direction you have to go.

For me, it's quite simple. At a railway station:

• Intending passengers requiring to buy a ticket should be able to do so quickly and easily.
• Passengers joining, changing, or leaving trains should be able to so without difficulty or discomfort.
• The layout of the station should prevent an unsafe condition from occurring as far as possible.

Anything else is a nice-to-have, in my book. I have no objection to station concourse retail or catering units, even the market stall type, provided that they don't obstruct the flow of passengers or reduce waiting space below the required level. Toilets might well come under 'without discomfort', but aren't always needed. And some of this is operational - the way boarding is handled at certain stations adds unnecessary difficulty and/or discomfort to the experience for passengers.

Whether it looks like a Georgian manor, a concrete bunker, or a steel-and-glass vision is largely irrelevant to me.

Actually, most stations achieve this fairly easily; it's quite difficult to mess up a single platform or two-platform through station, after all.

Joseph_Locke said:

I contend that the new concourse layout is not an improvement on the old, and many of my colleagues agree.

Click to expand...

I disagree. The updated New Street is miles better than what we had before.

Mikey C said:

The old station wasn't pleasant, but I actually found it easier to navigate as it looked like a railway station, whereas with the new one when you enter the building it looks like a grand shopping mall and it's less obvious which direction you have to go.

Click to expand...

Again I disagree that the old station was easier to use. It wasn't, certainly not for normal people.

This post supports the central point of my argument: Posters here have a fixed view about what a station should be and simply cannot cope when that isnt presented. As I said previously look at how the station does work rather than how you think it should work .

RLBH said:

For me, it's quite simple. At a railway station:

• Intending passengers requiring to buy a ticket should be able to do so quickly and easily.
• Passengers joining, changing, or leaving trains should be able to so without difficulty or discomfort.
• The layout of the station should prevent an unsafe condition from occurring as far as possible.

Anything else is a nice-to-have, in my book. I have no objection to station concourse retail or catering units, even the market stall type, provided that they don't obstruct the flow of passengers or reduce waiting space below the required level. Toilets might well come under 'without discomfort', but aren't always needed. And some of this is operational - the way boarding is handled at certain stations adds unnecessary difficulty and/or discomfort to the experience for passengers.

Whether it looks like a Georgian manor, a concrete bunker, or a steel-and-glass vision is largely irrelevant to me.

Click to expand...

so lets not worry about the provisions of the Equality Act then..................

tomuk said:

The changes at New Street are a massive improvement. Before it was a complete ****hole and dangerous. I have personal experience as my aunt fell down one of the old escalators in the crush and was in hospital for weeks. Not to mention the old Station Street piss steps to get down to the Midland Red bus station. But no I'm wrong because you need to go through two gatelines if changing at the A end, what a hassle.

Click to expand...

Sorry to hear that. But I don't think what you're saying contradicts the criticisms of the New Street. It's perfectly possible for the new station to be an improvement on the old one but still not be well designed. Personally I'd say that the new station is a vast improvement visually, and I'm willing to believe it's also an improvement in safety. But I still would say it's confusing and very poorly laid out.

Finally dug this out. This photo that I took last year is an example of why I would say New Street is confusing. I think it's what @edwin_m referred to upthread. It's what you see on your left if you enter by the Eastern entrance. Lots of steps down to the platforms with very obvious platform numbers. For all the world, it looks like that's where you go for the platforms - especially if you know you need platform 6 or 7... except it isn't. As far as I could tell, there's no way in the near vicinity to get past the glass barrier: It's completely misleading because it looks like you should walk towards the platform signs to get to the platforms, but that isn't where you should walk at all - the main ticket barriers are at the far end of the station. I don't think you can justify this with statements along the lines of 'my mum wasn't confused so it's fine' and so on. By any objective standards, what the picture shows is very bad design. A basic principle of good station design is surely that the layout should make it obvious which way you need to walk to get to the trains, and this part of New Street does the opposite.

DarloRich said:

so lets not worry about the provisions of the Equality Act then..................

Click to expand...

What part of the Equalities Act prohibits railway stations being easy to use for rail travel? I've specified that stations should be designed to avoid difficulty, discomfort or unsafe conditions, which to my mind covers all passengers, not just able-bodied straight white men.

DynamicSpirit said:

Finally dug this out. This photo that I took last year is an example of why I would say New Street is confusing. I think it's what @edwin_m referred to upthread. It's what you see on your left if you enter by the Eastern entrance. Lots of steps down to the platforms with very obvious platform numbers. For all the world, it looks like that's where you go for the platforms - especially if you know you need platform 6 or 7... except it isn't. As far as I could tell, there's no way in the near vicinity to get past the glass barrier: It's completely misleading because it looks like you should walk towards the platform signs to get to the platforms, but that isn't where you should walk at all - the main ticket barriers are at the far end of the station. I don't think you can justify this with statements along the lines of 'my mum wasn't confused so it's fine' and so on. By any objective standards, what the picture shows is very bad design. A basic principle of good station design is surely that the layout should make it obvious which way you need to walk to get to the trains, and this part of New Street does the opposite.

Click to expand...

I disagree. This is again supporting my point that posters here come to the scene with preconceptions about how they think a station should work rather than how it does work.

The design is such that you are supposed to go to the large central circulating area, obtain any required refreshment or sustenance, look at the information boards, then make your way to the required platform via the appropriate A or B end using whichever mechanism you need be that stairs, lift or escalator. That is what normals do. I get that for people here who have "da gen" on platform allocations early not being able to stride purposely (and perhaps, like me, a bit smugly) toward the platform ahead of the herd is a big frustration but I maintain that for the vast majority of normal people the station design works well and is a vast improvement on what we had before.

I will fall back on the fact that is my mum can use the station without issue there is little wrong with the design!

RLBH said:

What part of the Equalities Act prohibits railway stations being easy to use for rail travel? I've specified that stations should be designed to avoid difficulty, discomfort or unsafe conditions, which to my mind covers all passengers, not just able-bodied straight white men.

Click to expand...

Your words were not clear that you considered the requirements of the equality act within your views however you have now clarified that and I withdraw my comment. The requirements of that act should be the very minimum we expect from a modern station.

DynamicSpirit said:

Finally dug this out. This photo that I took last year is an example of why I would say New Street is confusing. I think it's what @edwin_m referred to upthread. It's what you see on your left if you enter by the Eastern entrance. Lots of steps down to the platforms with very obvious platform numbers. For all the world, it looks like that's where you go for the platforms - especially if you know you need platform 6 or 7... except it isn't. As far as I could tell, there's no way in the near vicinity to get past the glass barrier: It's completely misleading because it looks like you should walk towards the platform signs to get to the platforms, but that isn't where you should walk at all - the main ticket barriers are at the far end of the station. I don't think you can justify this with statements along the lines of 'my mum wasn't confused so it's fine' and so on. By any objective standards, what the picture shows is very bad design. A basic principle of good station design is surely that the layout should make it obvious which way you need to walk to get to the trains, and this part of New Street does the opposite.

View attachment 66793

Click to expand...

That illustrates the exact point I was trying to make upthread. Sorting it out wouldn't cost much - just replace the 6 on that sign with a reasonably sized sign pointing towards the Yellow barrier line for platforms 6-12.

I think I'm out of line with latest thinking, but I still think the black on white signs are more visible than white on blue. The 6 is fine (which is part of the problem!) but the platform directional signage is hard to see quickly. It's far worse at somewhere like Waverley where the general background is mostly darker in colour and the signs tend to merge in.

edwin_m said:

That illustrates the exact point I was trying to make upthread. Sorting it out wouldn't cost much - just replace the 6 on that sign with a reasonably sized sign pointing towards the Yellow barrier line for platforms 6-12.

Click to expand...

I agree. this would remove any potential confusion