Cities in need of an extra station.

[John55]

There used to be a station there at Marsh Lane. There is quite a large area of land for a station where the permanent way siding is. The only problem is that very few trains from the east terminate at Leeds - just about everything goes through. Really what is needed is a station to the west to handle all the terminating services.

Are you really suggesting not calling at the current station?

 

[142094]

Are you really suggesting not calling at the current station?

The current Leeds station is already just about full to capacity again, so either Network Rail are going to have to do some serious construction, such as slinging extra tracks over the viaduct to the east, construct low level platforms, or try and shift some services from the current station to elsewhere.

 

[Stats]

Perhaps North TP electrification may help provide some opportunties to release services from terminating at Leeds. It would be good, for example, for one of the Class 333 routes to be extended through to York or Hull.

 

[philjo]

The current Leeds station is already just about full to capacity again, so either Network Rail are going to have to do some serious construction, such as slinging extra tracks over the viaduct to the east, construct low level platforms, or try and shift some services from the current station to elsewhere.

I don't think Low level platforms at Leeds station are a good idea.
The river Aire runs right under part of the station so this would limit the space for the low level platforms (unless in a very deep & expensive tunnel) & it is likely that the platforms would flood every time there is heavy rain. The Aire tends to flood other buildings in the area at the moment on a regular basis.
It is best to keep the lines on the same level as the existing track or possibly put in a high level viaduct

 

[Waverley125]

I think Leeds is the archetypal case we're talking about here, and the answer is simple.

Either:

a) Build a new double line through the current platform 12/15 connecting where bays 13 & 14 currently are, and widen the East Leeds viaduct to 4 lines (which can be done with the need for demolishing only 1 building, part of the office park on The Calls).

b) build a new station at Marsh Lane with both terminating and through platforms to take stoppers from the east.

My personal preference is for the new station, 'Leeds St Patricks' (after the nearby Catholic Church). 4 terminating bays leading onto the East End Park cutting and 2 platforms on the throughs should easily cope with demand. The St Patricks-City station could be run (as Piccadilly-Oxford Road is) is an all-stop section, so the question would be less how many trains had to leave Leeds to the east, and more how many trains you could fit through that section per hour.

This would also allow for the York & Selby stoppers (I'd like to see 2tph on both routes) terminating here, as well as any trains to Harrogate via Wetherby were it ever reopened.

 

[ainsworth74]

Perhaps North TP electrification may help provide some opportunties to release services from terminating at Leeds.

It's not the terminating services that are the issue it's the number of through services. There are only four through lines, which are admittedly bi-di and subdivided with crossovers, but that's still not much when it's trying platform all of TPE and XCs services, as well as some Northern, EC and EMT services as well.

 

[yorksrob]

It's not the terminating services that are the issue it's the number of through services. There are only four through lines, which are admittedly bi-di and subdivided with crossovers, but that's still not much when it's trying platform all of TPE and XCs services, as well as some Northern, EC and EMT services as well.

Six through platforms currently - although there are fewer tracks over the viaduct to the East of the station.

As well as possible through platforms where 13 and 14 are now, a fairly long bay platform could be accommodated relatively easily alongside platform 1 (nee W) by shaving the car park.

 

[142094]

Having extra through platforms would mean the Northern termining services would have to be shifted. I do remember mention of constructing extra platforms where the Holbeck Viaduct starts at the west of the station, then linking those in with the main station by a travelator or something similar, which could take some of the terminating trains away from the main station.

 

[yorksrob]

Having extra through platforms would mean the Northern termining services would have to be shifted. I do remember mention of constructing extra platforms where the Holbeck Viaduct starts at the west of the station, then linking those in with the main station by a travelator or something similar, which could take some of the terminating trains away from the main station.

13 is currently heavily used (often with two trains at the same time), so how practical it would be to move all terminators along a couple of platforms I don't know. 14 Hardly ever seems to be used, so I doubt that would be much of an issue.

 

[Ivo]

Does anyone know if the East Parkway idea is still around? Would it not help?

 

[yorksrob]

Does anyone know if the East Parkway idea is still around? Would it not help?

I think the idea's still around. I'm not sure whether there's enough capacity on the viaduct to the East of the City or in the six through platforms though.

 

[philjo]

I did read somewhere that there are plans for building Platform 0 alongside platform 1 to accommodate additional Horsforth/harrogate trains once the turnback at Horsforth is in use.

 

[tbtc]

I do remember mention of constructing extra platforms where the Holbeck Viaduct starts at the west of the station, then linking those in with the main station by a travelator or something similar, which could take some of the terminating trains away from the main station.

Was that the Whitehall station, around ten years ago? One of the most recent station closures in the UK (albeit it was only opened for a short period!)

 

[YorkshireBear]

If you look you could probably fit another 3-4 terminus platforms one the car park, just put the car park above the station, car parks are much easier to move. These could then take all the harrogate/airdale/wharfdale trains, with the wakefield and calverdale trains now using the current p1-6 along side EC. Thus realistically you get an extra through platform with the release of number 8?
Build platform 18 so that p17-18 cant take all the services towards woodlesford (maybe some calverdale. Then you could have 7 through platforms and not need to terminate anything on them.

 

[HSTEd]

I could see a Crossrail style system in Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham and probably Cardiff (for the Valley Lines).

It would be very much mroe expensive than new city centre surface stations but would be far less disruptive to the city and be far more useful.

 

[Ivo]

Manchester should have had a Crossrail -esque system back in the 1970s in the form of the Picc-Vic Tunnel. But for various reasons, such as cost, it never happened. It wasn't a perfect idea though; its route didn't go particularly close to several major destinations, including Oxford road among others...

 

[exile]

In Europe Berlin probably has the best cross-city rail network though as this is all on viaducts it could be seen as unsightly. The main east-west line is elevated with a north-south main line at low level crossing this route at Hauptbahnhof. Paris's RER was something of an afterthought and it's still a pain getting between the main termini. Madrid has some cross-city trains passing between Atocha and Chamartin.

 

[HSTEd]

Manchester should have had a Crossrail -esque system back in the 1970s in the form of the Picc-Vic Tunnel. But for various reasons, such as cost, it never happened. It wasn't a perfect idea though; its route didn't go particularly close to several major destinations, including Oxford road among others...

Unfortunately there is no practical way now to have a Thameslink type line now as far as I can tell.....
There is no really single axis that can generate the trains neccesary to fill the core. (Best I can do is try and divert everything via the Styal Line in South Manchester and couple it up near Salford Crescent, then trying to run the line via the centre of Manchester and then along Oxford Road).

 

[Eagle]

Unfortunately there is no practical way now to have a Thameslink type line now as far as I can tell...

The Ordsall Chord is effectively the same, though.

 

[142094]

Was that the Whitehall station, around ten years ago? One of the most recent station closures in the UK (albeit it was only opened for a short period!)

Aye there was that (could be a good idea to bring it back in), but a few years back I can remember someone saying that an extra platform or two could be built to the west of the station, with a walking route between those and the main entrance. There is a fire escape route that goes along towards the Holbeck Viaduct, which could be possibly where it could go.

There is a lot of spare land at the west of the station, but it depends on how to link it to the current station.

 

[John55]

If you look you could probably fit another 3-4 terminus platforms one the car park, just put the car park above the station, car parks are much easier to move. These could then take all the harrogate/airdale/wharfdale trains, with the wakefield and calverdale trains now using the current p1-6 along side EC. Thus realistically you get an extra through platform with the release of number 8?
Build platform 18 so that p17-18 cant take all the services towards woodlesford (maybe some calverdale. Then you could have 7 through platforms and not need to terminate anything on them.

I spent an idle moment or two looking at the departures from Leeds between 17:00 and 18:00 on Monday evening. A very simple analysis of departures shows the following;

Direction.............No of
......................departures

East............. .......9
North west.... ......13.............Aire Valley & Harrogate
West............. .....11.............Transpennine (Bradford & Huddersfield)
South west.... ..... 8..............Wakefield & Castleford

There are 2 tracks east of Leeds and 6 west of Leeds.

From the above it doesn’t look as though there is a shortage of platforms as an average of only 3 departures use each platform in the busiest hour. (This assumes 17 platforms although NR actually divides the station into 40 platforms with the various suffixes)

More of an issue is probably how to use the platforms that do exist in the best way. If the platforms at Leeds were used as intensively as those at Charing Cross the number of evening departures could be doubled. From the above I suggest any forthcoming expenditure might be better spent on additional track at the west side of the station to separate out further the traffic flows with non-conflicting junctions.

 

[LE Greys]

A pity the Birmingham Grand Central idea never happened, it would have been really useful to combine everything somewhere where there was plenty of space and HS2 could have been integrated properly. As it is, the Midland Metro unfortunately prevens Snow Hill from absorbing some of the traffic coming in from Wolverhampton, particularly the former GWR lines out to Telford, Shrewsbury and the Cambrian. Sheffield is another good candidate, to absorb the former-LNER lines by running them through Tinsley instead of Meadowhall. This would give Rotherham two stations, by sending the former-LMS lines through Masborough instead of Central. This division of traffic would be useful if one or other was electrified. With suburban stations, Edinburgh has loads that could be useful. Duddingston & Craigmillar, Newington, Blackford Hill, Morningside Road and Craiglockhart on the suburban would be very suitable for a light-rail service. Leith Central is another possibility.

A lot of the 'raionalisation' ideas made the major mistake of shoe-horning services from two or more stations into one without allowing for expansion or providing decent junctions at both ends of the station.

 

[mister-sparky]

The only problem is that very few trains from the east terminate at Leeds - just about everything goes through.
Really what is needed is a station to the west to handle all the terminating services.

sounds like Leeds Central to me....

 

[Altrincham]

Derby could have benefited from having another station on the line south of the city (after Peartree). A Parkway station at Stenson Fields could have served those living in the sprawling south-west of the city (and surrounding areas).

 

[tbtc]

I spent an idle moment or two looking at the departures from Leeds between 17:00 and 18:00 on Monday evening. A very simple analysis of departures shows the following;

Direction.............No of
......................departures

East............. .......9
North west.... ......13.............Aire Valley & Harrogate
West............. .....11.............Transpennine (Bradford & Huddersfield)
South west.... ..... 8..............Wakefield & Castleford

There are 2 tracks east of Leeds and 6 west of Leeds.

From the above it doesn’t look as though there is a shortage of platforms as an average of only 3 departures use each platform in the busiest hour. (This assumes 17 platforms although NR actually divides the station into 40 platforms with the various suffixes)

More of an issue is probably how to use the platforms that do exist in the best way. If the platforms at Leeds were used as intensively as those at Charing Cross the number of evening departures could be doubled. From the above I suggest any forthcoming expenditure might be better spent on additional track at the west side of the station to separate out further the traffic flows with non-conflicting junctions.

Good work.

It would be more efficient to split Leeds into three/ four stations like Waterloo effectively is run as separate stations (with parallel lines).

The Airedale/ Wharfdale/ Harrogate lines are fairly easy to make self-contained (apart from the couple of East Coast services from London to Bradford Forster Square/ Skipton/ Harrogate).

For example, if you restricted the Neville Hill services to only the Bradford Interchange/ Huddersfield routes then you'd avoid conflicting movements like the current XC service from the Wakefield Westgate line to the Neville Hill line.

But would the efficiency savings be worth the inevitable complaints?

I did come up with something similar for Birmingham New Street (which should be able to deal with many more services if not for conflicting movements), but I didn't think it'd be popular with the direct links that it chopped.

 

[GingerSte]

My tuppence worth...

We could do a lot to separate the flows at Leeds by building a short chord to take the trains from Bradford Interchange to where the four tracks from Armley currently join (roughly speaking: Copley Hill to Whitehall Road. This would take roughly 400 metres of viaduct and not require any land take (except from possibly either Leeds Council or the Highways Agency).

I would then extend the throat of Leeds Station to the North and add two (or perhaps even 4) for the displaced Harrogate and Shipley lines. This would take approximately 500 metres of viaduct. The new lines would then use some of the existing platforms and/or have new ones where the car park is currently situated.

I would also add another line to this throat to separate the Woodlesford line services from the Huddersfield ones.

(I know this might interfere with my idea for having the HS2 terminus there, but you could have low-level for Harrogate and Shipley lines and high-level for HS2.)

So the existing lines A to F into Leeds station would become E to L (excluding I), and you would have

A-B (New) Harrogate Line into new platform
C-D (New) Shipley Line into new platforms and existing platforms 1 to 2
E-F (formerly A-B) Caldervale Line into existing platforms 3 to 4
G-H (formerly C-D) Wakefield Line into existing platforms 5 (local) 6,8,9 (Long distance) and 10 (local)
J-K (formerly E-F) Huddersfield Line services onto existing platforms
L (New) Woodlesford Line onto existing platform 17.

This would mean that the Caldervale services would be cut off from the Neville Hill line. I think that this is worth it in this instance, as it would create masses of capacity. There may still be a clash for the Cross Country services, but that could hopefully be lived with.

(I think I've said the above in a previous post, but I can't find it.)

As for passenger capacity, I'm not aware of a huge problem on the concourse or the platforms (someone please tell me if I'm wrong). The proposed southern entrance would help a lot in that regard, though. I think it would take approximately 20% of passengers, who would also benefit from a shorter walk. If there are problems at the ticket barriers, then that area can be opened up by getting rid of the shop there (I think it's a sandwich shop), and providing more barriers.

However, having said all that, personally I don't think that the biggest problem for rail in Leeds is Leeds Station. It has already been mentioned that the biggest constraint for travel is the length of the trains. Once we have got rid of the 1,2 and 3 coach trains and replaced them with 6 coach trains and we still have a problem, then it will be time to get the chequebook out. Rolling stock is what we need! (And I say this as a civil engineer, who would probably benefit more from bridge/station works!)

 

[Batman]

Birmingham already has two Cross City lines (the Cross City line and the Snow Hill lines).

This can be expanded further though.

A WCML timetable re-cast could re-create the Wolverhampton-Coventry stopping service (doable once HS2 is built) and there are the plans for a Worcester - Tamworth cross city service.

You can also link the 2tph Walsall service in with Cross City South and have 8tph to Longbridge. That's doable if you have flyovers and underpasses to isolate the Cross city line from the mainline at King's Norton, Longbridge (for access to the turnback siding, and possible at Barnt Green) with regional and Cross COuntry trains being diverted on to the Camp Hill line and Cardiff and Hereford trains being diverted to Snow Hill via the Bordesley Cord. But that would mean a Worcester-Tamworth cross city service is no longer possible.

 

[Eagle]

Further to the above it might be prudent to link the 1tph to Walsall via Soho (normally run by 170s) with the 1tph Inter stopper, thus replacing a DMU with an EMU.

 

[Rational Plan]

In regards to Leeds, if Crown point is to become a four platform terminus for High Speed, how about adding a couple of platforms for the classic services. You'd keep all trains to London at one station and free up some space on the through platforms.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Do you want to reproduce the situation in Bradford where two stations face each other across the city centre requiring a significant walk from one to the other? At least in Birmingham the Midland & LNWR built stations which could be merged into one 100 years later but sadly the GWR ended up a few hundred yards away.

In Manchester, you had the situation of Manchester Victoria/Exchange, Manchester London Road and Manchester Central being three city-centre station complexes totally unconnected, as the example of Bradford you cite above, which were historically situated as such because of three large railway companies jealously guarding their own main-line station site in the city.

At least the Bury Metrolink service now links Manchester Victoria and Manchester Piccadilly stations, with the heavy-rail hope of the Ordsall Chord still to come into fruition.