How to improve Euston station

[Peter Sarf]

Thats quite complicated, as the concourse is a good 3 metres above street level - would entail some fairly major construction. Nevertheless i would like that too!

At three metres above street level already I feel a footbridge over Eversholt Street coming on. Perhaps even a raised walkway all the way into the side of St Pancras.

Really a route to StPancras would come of a new concourse half way up the platforms.

Brainstorming :-

How about rebuilding the platforms well above street level, concourse below (ala StPancras international). After all the tracks rise all the way up Camden Bank. Nice airy platforms but then we are more likely to see passengers spending time in the dungeon below than on the platform anyway.

Time to correct history perhaps and make Euston a through station with a bloated terminus somewhere cheap South of the River (probably as far out as Croydon or further indeed perhaps more than one branch South of the river).

More realistically a Crossrail solution bringing the LNWR (ie non-intercity) trains under London and out in to Kent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There was talk of putting the Tring/MKC stoppers onto actual Crossrail, but it wasn't popular as it would have split the station you needed to go to for trains to the same place (which isn't an issue at Paddington because Crossrail also calls there downstairs). But that would only give you 4tph reduction, it wouldn't make a massive difference.

 

[GJMarshy]

On the train shed front I wouldn’t be too bothered how it looks, as long as the concourse is an impressive gateway!

That’s probably the best thing you can do at Euston. Expand the concourse, split arrivals/departures as best you can and provide a large wide-open space with some kind of focal architectural point. At the moment the only focal point is the coffered ceiling.

Assuming a new concourse is built it needs to be spacious and impressive. I’d take that over decades of disruption to rearrange tracks on the throat to enter into varying levels. It just needs to function and be the gateway it should be.

 

[A S Leib]

as it would have split the station you needed to go to for trains to the same place

Whilst that's already the case for stations with services to Victoria and London Bridge (/ Cannon Street, Charing Cross, Blackfriars). I think for Harrow & Wealdstone that would have been an improvement, with Paddington always being the fastest route for central London and the Met line staying for Harrow – Euston Road, probably better for Watford, Hemel and Tring (City services) and worse for Leighton Buzzard, Bletchley and non-Avanti Milton Keynes for the reason you mentioned.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst that's already the case for stations with services to Victoria and London Bridge (/ Cannon Street, Charing Cross, Blackfriars). I think for Harrow & Wealdstone that would have been an improvement, with Paddington always being the fastest route for central London and the Met line staying for Harrow – Euston Road, probably better for Watford, Hemel and Tring (City services) and worse for Leighton Buzzard, Bletchley and non-Avanti Milton Keynes for the reason you mentioned.

With Milton Keynes-Euston and Watford Jn-Euston being by far the biggest flows on the route (and would both have ended up split), the interests of that rightly took priority.

While I do like the civility of boarding at a terminus (back when Euston actually was civilised) I could absolutely see an argument for Crossrail 2 taking these trains out of Euston as that would have a station at Euston too.

 

[RailWonderer]

Thats quite complicated, as the concourse is a good 3 metres above street level - would entail some fairly major construction. Nevertheless i would like that too!

I was thinking Zurich HbF style so no wall at all down Eversholt St so you just walk into the station and onto platform 1 the entire way. Other gates could be barriered but you would make it far more open plan, even if you had to do some major reconstruction (I'm thinking the steps up to the councourse level M&S that demonstrates that three meter high difference).

 

[The exile]

I imagine the Metropolitan Line is in the way but - double the length of the platforms - new bufferstop end becomes arrivals, train then draws northward once ready to departure end. Passenger flows can thus be segregated and passengers let onto the departure end platform immediately it is known which platform the arriving train is coming into. DC line platforms can presumably be left “as is”. Then start again on top with a new concourse and a restored Arch.

 

[Bald Rick]

At three metres above street level already I feel a footbridge over Eversholt Street coming on. Perhaps even a raised walkway all the way into the side of St Pancras.

Listed buildings in the way.

Really a route to StPancras would come of a new concourse half way up the platforms.

That is the plan

How about rebuilding the platforms well above street level, concourse below (ala StPancras international). After all the tracks rise all the way up Camden Bank.

Very, very expensive, disruptive (bith to the railway and the local community - would cause very busy roads to be severed) unpopular with neighbours, and into the issue of protected views from Primrose Hill

More realistically a Crossrail solution bringing the LNWR (ie non-intercity) trains under London and out in to Kent.

No space for that.

I imagine the Metropolitan Line is in the way but - double the length of the platforms - new bufferstop end becomes arrivals, train then draws northward once ready to departure end. Passenger flows can thus be segregated and passengers let onto the departure end platform immediately it is known which platform the arriving train is coming into. DC line platforms can presumably be left “as is”. Then start again on top with a new concourse and a restored Arch.

The platfroms are at ground level. Euston Road is in the way…

 

[HSTEd]

I don't think substantial further demolition is politically tenable, at least of stuff not integral to the station complex. I don't think anyone lives in the units in front of the concourse do they? That's purely commercial?

We have to work with the footprint we have already.

Total reconstruction is the most expensive and disruptive option, but probably provides the greatest capacity. And London could always do with more modern terminus capacity, even if it primarily allows rationalisation elsewhere.

 

[Tester]

I was thinking Zurich HbF style so no wall at all down Eversholt St so you just walk into the station and onto platform 1 the entire way.

Zürich HB style? - Good grief, we can't be having any of that

Irony aside - wouldn't that be wonderful!

 

[The Planner]

There was talk of putting the Tring/MKC stoppers onto actual Crossrail, but it wasn't popular as it would have split the station you needed to go to for trains to the same place (which isn't an issue at Paddington because Crossrail also calls there downstairs). But that would only give you 4tph reduction, it wouldn't make a massive difference.

It was the Trings. And the proposal was 6tph to/from Crossrail, which would have ruined the slow lines.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I was thinking Zurich HbF style so no wall at all down Eversholt St so you just walk into the station and onto platform 1 the entire way. Other gates could be barriered but you would make it far more open plan, even if you had to do some major reconstruction (I'm thinking the steps up to the councourse level M&S that demonstrates that three meter high difference).

Not having been to Zurich HbF I’m having difficulty in imagining this. Can you post a link or photo showing the ‘open side’. Basic internet info suggests that there is a ‘train shed’ over the surface platforms. Presumably this is just on pillars with no walls. Am I right in thinking that there is no concept of ‘barriers’, crowd control and so on; i.e. the station is wholly ‘open’ like York, Sheffield, Doncaster, etc.?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not having been to Zurich HbF I’m having difficulty in imagining this. Can you post a link or photo showing the ‘open side’. Basic internet info suggests that there is a ‘train shed’ over the surface platforms. Presumably this is just on pillars with no walls. Am I right in thinking that there is no concept of ‘barriers’, crowd control and so on; i.e. the station is wholly ‘open’ like York, Sheffield, Doncaster, etc.?

I don't recall Zuerich Hbf having a whole side open to the street, though as per all other Swiss stations there are no gatelines and all revenue protection is carried out on board, mostly by way of something analogous to Penalty Fares (which unlike here guards can issue, so if you board without a ticket there's a very high chance of getting caught).

However there is a downside of this, as also seen in Germany which doesn't "do" gatelines and does all revenue protection on board. That is, antisocial behaviour tends to spread from the street into the station, making it feel a less safe place to be. I think those who point out that a more open Euston would suffer from that are probably right - indeed it'd be nice to have a "railside" waiting area and toilets which would make it less susceptible and would mean the gateline could be passed in a more relaxed manner prior to boarding.

 

[Tester]

Not having been to Zurich HbF I’m having difficulty in imagining this. Can you post a link or photo showing the ‘open side’. Basic internet info suggests that there is a ‘train shed’ over the surface platforms. Presumably this is just on pillars with no walls. Am I right in thinking that there is no concept of ‘barriers’, crowd control and so on; i.e. the station is wholly ‘open’ like York, Sheffield, Doncaster, etc.?

Google street view is excellent for this.

Basically, on the north side of the station, one side of the pavement of Museumstrasse is the road, and the other side is Platform 18.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I imagine the Metropolitan Line is in the way but - double the length of the platforms - new bufferstop end becomes arrivals, train then draws northward once ready to departure end. Passenger flows can thus be segregated and passengers let onto the departure end platform immediately it is known which platform the arriving train is coming into. DC line platforms can presumably be left “as is”. Then start again on top with a new concourse and a restored Arch.

The Metropolitan line is under the Euston Road so all the way across the bus station to play with.

I don't think substantial further demolition is politically tenable, at least of stuff not integral to the station complex. I don't think anyone lives in the units in front of the concourse do they? That's purely commercial?

We have to work with the footprint we have already.

Total reconstruction is the most expensive and disruptive option, but probably provides the greatest capacity. And London could always do with more modern terminus capacity, even if it primarily allows rationalisation elsewhere.

Disruption could be relieved by using the HS2 platforms before HS2 needs (oh dear) them. Just some messing about in the station throat(s) as a staged approach is taken. The space that will be HS2 is a huge opportunity to re-jig Euston as a whole.

Come to think about it the demolished area on the West side of Euston should have become part of Euston ordinary. Then rebuild the middle area and move the rest of Euston ordinary onto it. Then build the HS2 platforms on the East side of the plot. Would have been a nice idea if thought of before the HS2 tunnels approach to Euston had been designed to be on the East side !.

I am sure it is not as simple as that though.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Google street view is excellent for this.

Basically, on the north side of the station, one side of the pavement of Museumstrasse is the road, and the other side is Platform 18.

OK. Used Streetview (which also shows a lot of 'internal' pedestrian-only areas so easy to get a good impression). Thanks, very helpful.

So I suppose it's another few issues for GBR to consider - should there be a complete national 'open station' policy, should 'guards' be expected to administer penalty fares on their own, should Euston be totally reconstructed on multiple levels even without HS2, etc..

 

[Tester]

OK. Used Streetview (which also shows a lot of 'internal' pedestrian-only areas so easy to get a good impression). Thanks, very helpful.

So I suppose it's another few issues for GBR to consider - should there be a complete national 'open station' policy, should 'guards' be expected to administer penalty fares on their own, should Euston be totally reconstructed on multiple levels even without HS2, etc..

Yes street view can be fascinating - lots of stuff to be seen beyond what you went looking for!

There is a perfectly reasonable argument to be made as to the appropriate degree of enclosure for a station, but it's good to dispel cries of, 'It can't be done!'.

 

[HSTEd]

I do wonder how much station we could get onto the Euston site (including ground cleared for HS2) with a total reconstruction.

A station that can stage passengers directly above the trains and transport them down a dozen sets of escalators could "service" trains very rapidly by modern standards, especially with broad islands allowing rapid exit (possibly from both ends).

I think a capacity much greater than would be required for the WCML+HS2 is probably achievable. Indeed, releasing my inner crayonista from a minute, I think you could probably swallow up the St Pancras MML operations if you wanted. That would obviously take a tunnel but might be worth it in connection with the eventual HS1 modernisation (ETCS and even 7 domestic platforms at St Pancras)

 

[Bletchleyite]

From the nonspeculative thread:

Some people use Euston for London Underground - Bus interchange as it's hypothetically a fast route. It must be a horrible interchange to make during even minor disruption, however.

In normal two-way use, that is probably one of the few use-cases that having moved the Tube entrance to the outside wall has improved.

FWIW the conflicts in the Tube ticket hall could be reduced by changing the layout of the gateline, which doesn't need to be as it is now hardly anyone needs to use the ticket machines any more. If you had it as entrance at the two sides and exit in the middle (with suitable barriers in place to direct people the right way - it would mean the 8-11 tunnel needing to be "walk on the right", the opposite of the norm) the crossovers of flows would be eliminated. It could be done the other way round but that would cause a blockage as people stopped before the gateline to decide which way to exit.

You would get some crossover from the up escalators against people coming in from the 8-11 flow but if the gateline was repositioned this would be in a much bigger area. Or changing the escalators round (to down, up, up, down) could avoid that too.

 

[Starmill]

It might actually be possible to remove most of those LU ticket machines and the ticket office nowadays - it depends if there's any equipment behind there that would be impossible / very expensive to relocate. There is room for some more gates and more circulation space despite the very awkward shape of the ticket hall. LU could probably get NR to agree to putting a machine upstairs even, although they might not be thrilled at it's security and even then unless it goes outside there's not much room to put some in. Clearly at least two machines would still be needed in the ticket hall, probably several more, but definitely not the number there are.

 

[Mojo]

For discussion regarding today's Network Rail / DfT announcement, please see this thread:

Euston overcrowding

The xx:46 LNR Crewe service is a big scrum maker, given its only one an hour. No idea why this service is often suppressed for so long, as when it is finally advertised, the doors have already been unlocked and train has been cleaned. Advertise services earlier, however keep the doors locked if...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

put some proper screens in the upstairs area, and create some more seating somewhere, such as in a current retail unit.

Not sure about seating, but taking out the corner unit on the 1-3 side like they did Boots will help. Possibly also remove that set of balcony stairs.

 

[HSTEd]

Are there many pictures of the parcel deck interior available to the public?

I am intrigued about what it looks like in there.
It seems any rebuild is going to have to either make use of it or remove it.

 

[jfollows]

Are there many pictures of the parcel deck interior available to the public?

I am intrigued about what it looks like in there.
It seems any rebuild is going to have to either make use of it or remove it.

https://rkccltd.co.uk/portfolio-item/euston-parcel-deck/ might be a good starting point?

 

[The Planner]

Are there many pictures of the parcel deck interior available to the public?

I am intrigued about what it looks like in there.
It seems any rebuild is going to have to either make use of it or remove it.

Its dirty old concrete with portakabin offices. There is little else.

 

[AndrewE]

Its dirty old concrete with portakabin offices. There is little else.

Sounds like a blank canvas... take out the portable buildings, scrub the floor and build what you want. The weatherproof roof comes for free...

 

[The Ham]

I do wonder how much station we could get onto the Euston site (including ground cleared for HS2) with a total reconstruction.

A station that can stage passengers directly above the trains and transport them down a dozen sets of escalators could "service" trains very rapidly by modern standards, especially with broad islands allowing rapid exit (possibly from both ends).

I think a capacity much greater than would be required for the WCML+HS2 is probably achievable. Indeed, releasing my inner crayonista from a minute, I think you could probably swallow up the St Pancras MML operations if you wanted. That would obviously take a tunnel but might be worth it in connection with the eventual HS1 modernisation (ETCS and even 7 domestic platforms at St Pancras)

A station above is a supper sized version of the Northern end bridge (a bridge like Reading) that I suggested up thread.

Personally I think at very busy stations, where there's potential to do so, such a layout (with wide platforms and good natural light to the platforms) is much better than trying to access from one end.

It's why it's slightly disappointing that more can't be done at Waterloo to use the mid platform tunnel to access trains (it appears to be mostly used as an exit route during the morning peak).

 

[The Planner]

Sounds like a blank canvas... take out the portable buildings, scrub the floor and build what you want. The weatherproof roof comes for free...

It does, but that probably needs a lot of work if it becomes public facing.

 

[AndrewE]

It does, but that probably needs a lot of work if it becomes public facing.

I was imagining something like an airport or shipping terminal building, where the only bit with any kind of decorative finish is literally the public-facing inside/interior.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It does, but that probably needs a lot of work if it becomes public facing.

It's also half way down the platforms (basically the outer half) so you'd need to build something to bridge the gap.