• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Platform Zero at Leeds

Status
Not open for further replies.

Class195

Member
Joined
28 Nov 2019
Messages
298
Location
Bradford
The Whitehall platform was linked to the main station by bus link. Think it only got used for Knottingley and Sheffield via Castleford services, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me!

That's how I remember it when using the train to Castleford.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

D6700

Member
Joined
13 Mar 2010
Messages
649
The Whitehall platform was linked to the main station by bus link. Think it only got used for Knottingley and Sheffield via Castleford services, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me!
And here he is ;)

"Leeds (Whitehall)" was regularly used by overnight trains between York and Manchester Airport.

Interestingly, the "Leeds First" scheme was promoted as being "Railtrack's £165 million regeneration of Leeds City Station" - and, to be fair, it did exactly that, although it probably ran over-budget, especially given the Christmas 2000 blockade debacle. The Network Rail web page including the Video of the recent Christmas work, linked to earlier, mentions the current marginal add-on scheme is a £161 million project. Quite a bizarre coincidence for two very different jobs at the same location, nearly 20 years apart.

I'll just add that platforms 2 and 3 have been reduced in length as part of the current work.
 

Mollman

Established Member
Joined
21 Sep 2016
Messages
1,210
The Whitehall platform was linked to the main station by bus link. Think it only got used for Knottingley and Sheffield via Castleford services, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me!

Seem to recall the odd late evening London arrival using it too.
 

Ianigsy

Member
Joined
12 May 2015
Messages
1,104
I certainly disembarked from a TPE 158 at Leeds Whitehall after spending Christmas 2000 away. In the run up to Christmas the TP service was diverted via Castleford (where some calls were made) and Healey Mills to miss Leeds entirely but after Christmas the Whitehall platform was available.
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
How can it take over a year to get this platform into operation? It makes Crossrail look like a fast-track project.
Opening on 2021 hmm. I suspect I'm not alone in being amazed at the glacial progress of some infrastructure works. As they've already been working on it about a year if it goes into late 2021 that will be 3 years.
Now coincidentally I was watching Don Coffeys latest cab ride from York to Middlesbrough he remarked that the East cost main line took 3 years to build. Amazing.
K
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
I guess the question I have is that Northern are holding off running longer trains (2 x 3 car 331s) on the Airedale until Platform 0 is completed - as they claim they can't currently stack them on the existing platforms due to length. Yet from the post above the only change to capacity would be a shortening of platform 1? How is that going to magically create more space when using 0-4 rather than 1-5?

Or are Northern just using it as an excuse?
Elsewhere on this forum theres praise that a number of West Side trains are formed of 2x 3 car 331s presumably the ones meant for the Aire Valley which remains all 4 car.
Perhaps if platform zero is ever finished getting them back may be politically difficult.
K
 
Last edited:

matacaster

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2013
Messages
1,595
It looks like it will take circa 3 years from start to introduce one new platform in a place which needed no additional substations etc as far as I know, is virtually flat and used to have platforms which were already owned by NR. So the work required was to build a platform (mainly away from running rails in service) install a couple of points, add 200m of overhead wiring and adjust signalling. One can't even begin to guess at the costs involved for this tiny enhancement. This is surely the most abject failure to control costs and timescales ever. God help us if HS2 ever materialises if the costs and timescales are in any way proportional. £100bn will just about sort out Euston on that basis.

There surely needs to be a serious look at the costs and timescales of every aspect of this project.
 
Last edited:

MarkRedon

Member
Joined
16 Sep 2015
Messages
292
It looks like it will take circa 3 years from start to introduce one new platform in a place which needed no additional substations etc as far as I know, is virtually flat and used to have platforms which were already owned by NR. So the work required was to build a platform (mainly away from running rails in service) install a couple of points, add 200m of overhead wiring and adjust signalling. One can't even begin to guess at the costs involved for this tiny enhancement. This is surely the most abject failure to control costs and timescales ever. God help us if HS2 ever materialises if the costs and timescales are in any way proportional. £100bn will just about sort out Euston on that basis.

There surely needs to be a serious look at the costs and timescales of every aspect of this project.

Here is an intemperate, ill-thought-out but heartfelt aagument that somehow "we" (me, you, DarloRich and other NR people) need to look again at the costs which the public purse is forced to endure in the Brave New World of privatised railways.
Saltaire Station reopening in 1984. Not accessible. Built of balsa wood. £60,000. Useful and used by nearly a million passengers a year.
Leeds Platform Zero. 2020 (let's be optimistic). Another contribution to a UK railway system which has actually opened nothing significant since the Borders Railway and where new infrastructure costs half a billion pounds for each new station, cf. Elizabeth Line. That is Weimar Republic levels of railway cost inflation in an era of overall low inflation. It means that almost ANY proposal to give rail access to new segments of the UK population is poo-pooed on this forum by knowledgable experts as "totally unthinkable, old chap".
Leeds First circa 2002: five new platforms, throat expansion from four lines to six, decent (but immediately overcrowded) station. Huge contribution to the attractiveness of Leeds city centre. £250m.
Leeds minor improvements, one new platform, almost no new capacity, circa 2020, £250m.
VFM comparison with 2002: you decide.

It is time to get ANGRY at the fact that the UK railway system outside London is essentially static in size, with zero infrastructure expansion. "Sorry, old chap, but nothing can be done beyond marginal PPM improvement."
"The system as bequeathed us by BR in 1988 is the best that can be done. We're not even sure we can do HS2, so we'll spend a few billions defending a paper project that may never move a single passenger."
While spending a few more billions on care and maintenance of the existing railway, which "God Has told Us is the Right Size".
Too much wine. I live half my time in France, where railways do get built and where railways even get reopened.
It really is time to get angry. Please, before reacting to my obvious stupidity, reflect as to how stupidly inflated costs can be pushed down?
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,320
The Whitehall platform was linked to the main station by bus link. Think it only got used for Knottingley and Sheffield via Castleford services, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me!
It was also used by some Trans Pennine services, including one I used.
 

Andyh82

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2014
Messages
3,489
It looks like it will take circa 3 years from start to introduce one new platform in a place which needed no additional substations etc as far as I know, is virtually flat and used to have platforms which were already owned by NR. So the work required was to build a platform (mainly away from running rails in service) install a couple of points, add 200m of overhead wiring and adjust signalling. One can't even begin to guess at the costs involved for this tiny enhancement. This is surely the most abject failure to control costs and timescales ever. God help us if HS2 ever materialises if the costs and timescales are in any way proportional. £100bn will just about sort out Euston on that basis.

There surely needs to be a serious look at the costs and timescales of every aspect of this project.
I agree, as you say it seems relatively straight forward, all flat railway land, surely they could have closed Platform 1 every weekend and worked on Platform 0 within 6 months? With more disruptive work like the signalling gantries and the link with existing tracks done over Christmas just gone.

With the speed and cost of this project, we might as well close the thread from over the Pennines about the infamous Platform 15 & 16 now, as its far more complex.
 

Wharfe106

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2019
Messages
50
Location
Wharfedale
As has been noted on another thread, the agenda for Friday's West Yorkshire Combined Authority Transport Committee indicates that Platform Zero will not be in use until December 2021

https://westyorkshire.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=851

Beginning at page 141 (Item 9) - the agenda item also discusses constraints to service development at Leeds, which might form material for another thread, see Item 9, Appendix 1
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,037
Leeds First circa 2002: five new platforms, throat expansion from four lines to six, decent (but immediately overcrowded) station. Huge contribution to the attractiveness of Leeds city centre. £250m.
Leeds minor improvements, one new platform, almost no new capacity, circa 2020, £250m.
VFM comparison with 2002: you decide.
Without necessarily disagreeing with the gist of what you are saying, Leeds First delivered 3 (rather than 5) new platforms, a cruddy new roof, and about half a mile of new double track on existing railway land. To do this required years of hugely disruptive possessions, including a couple of years use of a really inconvenient night platform which wouldn't be legal now under disability regs, and a complete cancellation of Bradford Interchange service for 6 months which might work out literally impossible with current passenger volumes. IIRC it also ran over its budget, which was £450m at 1998-ish prices, which amounts to over £750m in current prices. It was probably a fair price for what it was, and it was probably about the right amount of improvement to make at a time when passenger numbers weren't expected to grow even to current volumes, but it wasn't really out of line with modern costs for the same type of work.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,623
Location
Another planet...
It was also used by some Trans Pennine services, including one I used.
Already corrected on that one... and it makes sense for them to use it as they regularly divert via Castleford, with Whitehall curve being accessible from both the Woodlesford and Dewsbury lines.

The London claim seems more dubious though. "Pics or it didn't happen" territory!
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,623
Location
Another planet...
Leeds First actually delivered four new platforms, rather than 3 or 5 as stated above: prior to the start there were platforms 1-12 (old numbers) and W (now P1). Two new platforms were built on the old parcels dock between W and the old P1 which became the new 2 and 3, with W becoming 1 as you'd expect. All other legacy platforms had 3 added to their numbers to allow for the three extras (including W), so 5 became 8, and 12 (previously the neglected outer-limits of the station) became 15 and finally received OHLE 12 years after the rest of the through platforms. 16 was built opposite, on what had been stabling sidings, then a bay (17) was added to the south end a little later.

There's occasional talk of joining the ends of 13 & 14 to create an additional through platform, as 14 rarely sees use and isn't really needed- Platform 7 can serve the same purpose just as well. However this would restrict access to 15 to only the narrow staircase and escalator furthest from the main entrance and would probably cause overcrowding issues.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Leeds minor improvements, one new platform, almost no new capacity, circa 2020, £250m.

https://www.networkrailmediacentre....rt-of-two-more-key-upgrades-for-leeds-station

So it's actually £161m, and provides three improvements:

(1) Platform zero
(2) Rebuild of tracks approaching platforms 1 to 6
(3) Major upgrade to signalling across the whole station

I suspect (1) is the smallest contribution to the budget and is least critical to the programme, hence why we've seen little apparent progress on it.
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
I'm still puzzled by the 2 or was it 3 points installed over the Christmas period.
The one for Platform zero connects to the Route A (north track) out of the station on the west side of the crossover to B. This means trains leaving Zero will have to travel all the way along A to Wortley junc to then gain either the outward Harrogate or Shipley lines.
Also, the point installed along Platform 1 presumably to join to 2 will shorten this platform by 60m, hardly an improvement. Perhaps I'm missing something and more alterations are proposed but it seems a huge cost and time for not a lot if any improvement.
K
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,864
Location
Airedale
I'm still puzzled by the 2 or was it 3 points installed over the Christmas period.
The one for Platform zero connects to the Route A (north track) out of the station on the west side of the crossover to B. This means trains leaving Zero will have to travel all the way along A to Wortley junc to then gain either the outward Harrogate or Shipley lines.
Also, the point installed along Platform 1 presumably to join to 2 will shorten this platform by 60m, hardly an improvement. Perhaps I'm missing something and more alterations are proposed but it seems a huge cost and time for not a lot if any improvement.
K

Without sight of the pointwork (it was dark last night...) or any plans, I presume there is more to come, as you can't access the Down Skipton from A line.
Shortening Platform 1 to take only 12 cars isn't going to be a huge problem.
 

matacaster

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2013
Messages
1,595
https://www.networkrailmediacentre....rt-of-two-more-key-upgrades-for-leeds-station

So it's actually £161m, and provides three improvements:

(1) Platform zero
(2) Rebuild of tracks approaching platforms 1 to 6
(3) Major upgrade to signalling across the whole station

I suspect (1) is the smallest contribution to the budget and is least critical to the programme, hence why we've seen little apparent progress on it.

I might be more impressed if there was a before and after track and signalling plan and a description of changes thereof. I seem to remember Railtrack made a complete balls by placing signal gantries too close (I think) for adequate sighting and thus there was a very low speed limit introduced, has this been remedied?
As far as I remember, the signalling is done from York and the interlocking is digital, so this should be done with a test harness initially to prove computer interlocking with physical connections to outside world and subsequent full system testing being the final exercise.
 

rich-leeds

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2017
Messages
63
The latest published Enhancements Delivery Plan (Sept 2019) provides some basic facts on the project: https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-October-2019.pdf

See the project listed as 'LNE001b' - Leeds Station Capacity Improvements. The entry straddles pages 5 and 6. It sets out the various phases as follows:
Leeds Station Capacity Enhancements - Additional capacity at Leeds Station to support the operation of longer trains and additional services on a number of routes. The project will be delivered in the following phased strategy:
  • Phase 1 - Recontrol of the signalling control system to the York Rail Operating Centre (ROC)
  • Phase 2 - The relocking of 8No. existing signalling interlockings to provide additional signalling capacity
  • Phase 3 - A new 8-car platform (platform 0) and longer train standages on platforms 6. Track remodelling to the West end of the station to provide greater operational flexibility. Associated resignalling
Note that further outputs for the Transpennine Route Upgrade are being developed by Network Rail and will be published in this EDP as a separate programme (Transpennine Route Upgrade) once they have been agreed with the DfT.

Dates and other information against each phase in the document linked.
 

matacaster

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2013
Messages
1,595
The latest published Enhancements Delivery Plan (Sept 2019) provides some basic facts on the project: https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-October-2019.pdf

See the project listed as 'LNE001b' - Leeds Station Capacity Improvements. The entry straddles pages 5 and 6. It sets out the various phases as follows:


Dates and other information against each phase in the document linked.

Thanks for that.

Phase 1 I understand and agree its a good move.

Phase 2 - I am still struggling to understand, quantitatively, what improvements this work brings. eg How much additional signalling capacity? .... indeed what does this actually mean in terms of train movements / reduced delays etc? (or is it more like it gives more options and that must be good? - ie it falls into the same category of we should train drivers on diversionary routes [which I do actually approve of] but in practice we use buses because its cheaper)

Phase 3 - Track remodelling / greater operational flexibility- Overall, how many additional train movements (if that's how we define capacity) are we getting for our bucks?
 

D6700

Member
Joined
13 Mar 2010
Messages
649
I'll just add that platforms 2 and 3 have been reduced in length as part of the current work.

Some further detail:

Platform 2 has been reduced by 30m to 209m - and is permanent.
Platform 3 has been reduced by 30m to 103m - and is temporary.
 

Wharfe106

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2019
Messages
50
Location
Wharfedale
There's occasional talk of joining the ends of 13 & 14 to create an additional through platform, as 14 rarely sees use and isn't really needed- Platform 7 can serve the same purpose just as well. However this would restrict access to 15 to only the narrow staircase and escalator furthest from the main entrance and would probably cause overcrowding issues.
With regard to joining 13 and 14, Network Rail's enhancements delivery plan for Control Period 5 (April 2014-March 2019, and published 31 March 2014) states, among several other West Yorkshire schemes:

"Leeds and Sheffield capacity
 Additional platform capacity at Leeds Station. Options being developed include:
 increasing capacity in low-numbered platforms 1-5;
 increasing the operational length of platform 17; and
 creation of an additional through platform through joining platforms 13 and 14."

With a completion date of December 2018
 

Pieman

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
10
Location
Leeds
Would it not be advantageous to four track from Neville Hill to Leeds Station or as close as practical to improve the through put at the east of the station and in light of the proposed Marsh Lane station?
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Would it not be advantageous to four track from Neville Hill to Leeds Station or as close as practical to improve the through put at the east of the station and in light of the proposed Marsh Lane station?
I'm not aware of any firm proposal for a station at Marsh Lane - it's certainly not on the list of new stations being developed in Leeds. Nevertheless, four-tracking is probably needed regardless. The current timetable sees 10 trains per hour in each direction in the peak, which already causes big problems for stopping patterns and so on. With transpennine upgrade and northern powerhouse rail on the horizon we would certainly need more tracks.
 

Pieman

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
10
Location
Leeds
I don't think there are any firm proposals for Marsh Lane station it was just statements by local councillors that Leeds could do with a second station.
 

Domeyhead

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2009
Messages
386
Location
The South
Here is an intemperate, ill-thought-out but heartfelt aagument that somehow "we" (me, you, DarloRich and other NR people) need to look again at the costs which the public purse is forced to endure in the Brave New World of privatised railways.
Saltaire Station reopening in 1984. Not accessible. Built of balsa wood. £60,000. Useful and used by nearly a million passengers a year.
Leeds Platform Zero. 2020 (let's be optimistic). Another contribution to a UK railway system which has actually opened nothing significant since the Borders Railway and where new infrastructure costs half a billion pounds for each new station, cf. Elizabeth Line. That is Weimar Republic levels of railway cost inflation in an era of overall low inflation. It means that almost ANY proposal to give rail access to new segments of the UK population is poo-pooed on this forum by knowledgable experts as "totally unthinkable, old chap".
Leeds First circa 2002: five new platforms, throat expansion from four lines to six, decent (but immediately overcrowded) station. Huge contribution to the attractiveness of Leeds city centre. £250m.
Leeds minor improvements, one new platform, almost no new capacity, circa 2020, £250m.
VFM comparison with 2002: you decide.

It is time to get ANGRY at the fact that the UK railway system outside London is essentially static in size, with zero infrastructure expansion. "Sorry, old chap, but nothing can be done beyond marginal PPM improvement."
"The system as bequeathed us by BR in 1988 is the best that can be done. We're not even sure we can do HS2, so we'll spend a few billions defending a paper project that may never move a single passenger."
While spending a few more billions on care and maintenance of the existing railway, which "God Has told Us is the Right Size".
Too much wine. I live half my time in France, where railways do get built and where railways even get reopened.
It really is time to get angry. Please, before reacting to my obvious stupidity, reflect as to how stupidly inflated costs can be pushed down?
I hear you and agree and to an extent also get angry about the "complexity inflation" that leads to cost multiples in all our large infrastructure projects. But the problem that is always overlooked is that this is not created by privatisation and therefore won't be solved by nationalisation. The problem is the "Regulation Industry" - an entirely public sector set of Government Agencies whose own existence depends on producing regulation - and to ensure they do they are also monitored by the National Audit Office stood behind them. I have had several years of dealing with OFGEM and OFCOM and exactly the same applies to the ORR and the myriad of departments responsible for different aspects and layers of safety. I'n not arguing against safety, of course not, but the Government's Regulation Layer exists as much to protect politicians as it does to assure safety, and it will not go away. I can tell you that the (private sector) Civil Engineers and Project Managers are as sick to death of the constant need to back up a plan by months and start again because of some new regulation that some bright spark in some department has thought to bring in - and in many cases the Regulators themselves when rarely called to account, come up with some lame excuse about "aligning with EU directives " or some such drivel because they forgot to ask for a derogation despite repeated prodding from NR. Perhaps I am as angry as you after all :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top