Leeds Station Improvement

[takno]

I really do not think it is impossible.

And even so, if you miss your train and have allowed the appropriate connection time, you should be able to continue your journey without any detriment ...assuming of course you are only travelling with an amount of luggage that you can reasonably carry.

It’s probably about 500m in total, and the average person walks at 4km/h, which looks pretty comfortable to me.

The average person is presumably not stuck behind a massive crowd of people waiting at the barriers, or randomly milling around outside the Starbucks kiosk. Even if that was taken into account, fully half of people walk at less than the average speed. In any case it's 500m across, plus a lift up to the bridge, and a lift back down. The horizontal distance is largely irrelevant.

 

[Eric]

I really do not think it is impossible.

And even so, if you miss your train and have allowed the appropriate connection time, you should be able to continue your journey without any detriment ...assuming of course you are only travelling with an amount of luggage that you can reasonably carry.

It’s probably about 500m in total, and the average person walks at 4km/h, which looks pretty comfortable to me.

That’s the same attitude that I had when attempting to make my way from 1b to 16/17. If the station was empty you could just about do it with 10 minutes connection time. With 100s and maybe 1000s inside the station I know from experience it is not physically possible.

If Leeds is serious about being a major Interchange station then it needs better access for passengers transferring between platforms.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That’s the same attitude that I had when attempting to make my way from 1b to 16/17. If the station was empty you could just about do it with 10 minutes connection time. With 100s and maybe 1000s inside the station I know from experience it is not physically possible.

If Leeds is serious about being a major Interchange station then it needs better access for passengers transferring between platforms.

Absolutely. Assume you're dragging a wheeled suitcase (or if you're not a sadist, carrying a large holdall): If your train terminates at the West end of P0/1 (stacking is common at the Wellington platforms) and you're catching a service from 16 or 17 on a normal day, you first have to walk c.100m up that platform, fighting through the queues for the ticket window (as so many end up without tickets even with the penalty fares scheme); then fight through the scrummage outside the gateline as you walk the 50m or so to the lifts (which also means walking across the path of those heading to or from the bridge. You then have to hope that the lift is (a) already at platform level, and (b) able to take you and your luggage on the first go. You then have to get through the crowds at the narrowest part of the bridge (due to the lifts being placed where they are rather than against the wall, which wastes half the available width) and dodge the Starbucks queues whilst having people constantly walking against you or sideswiping you as they head to/from the stairs/escalators. You then repeat the lift situation before you get to 16. If you need 17, you then have to still fight through the crowds of inevitably delayed TPE passengers to get to your train.

If you've a 10 minute connection, good luck with that!

 

[Eric]

Absolutely. Assume you're dragging a wheeled suitcase (or if you're not a sadist, carrying a large holdall): If your train terminates at the West end of P0/1 (stacking is common at the Wellington platforms) and you're catching a service from 16 or 17 on a normal day, you first have to walk c.100m up that platform, fighting through the queues for the ticket window (as so many end up without tickets even with the penalty fares scheme); then fight through the scrummage outside the gateline as you walk the 50m or so to the lifts (which also means walking across the path of those heading to or from the bridge. You then have to hope that the lift is (a) already at platform level, and (b) able to take you and your luggage on the first go. You then have to get through the crowds at the narrowest part of the bridge (due to the lifts being placed where they are rather than against the wall, which wastes half the available width) and dodge the Starbucks queues whilst having people constantly walking against you or sideswiping you as they head to/from the stairs/escalators. You then repeat the lift situation before you get to 16. If you need 17, you then have to still fight through the crowds of inevitably delayed TPE passengers to get to your train.

If you've a 10 minute connection, good luck with that!

Very nicely put. The main problem we encountered first is the distance and secondly the sheer amount of people crowding around, be it the entrance to the escalators/lifts, shops on the bridge or directly in front of the escalators/lifts/steps down on the platforms.

I don’t think anyone would disagree with Leeds having a 15 minute connection time. It’s definitely more troublesome than Birmingham New Street and Manchester Piccadilly.

 

[Iskra]

The average person is presumably not stuck behind a massive crowd of people waiting at the barriers, or randomly milling around outside the Starbucks kiosk. Even if that was taken into account, fully half of people walk at less than the average speed. In any case it's 500m across, plus a lift up to the bridge, and a lift back down. The horizontal distance is largely irrelevant.

The average person would have 2.5 mins spare on that journey. It might not seem like it but that’s a long time.

I accounted for the need to use lifts. You’d still be able to do it.

The station is rarely crowded on the concourse side.

You’ve used the most extreme example from platform 1b to 16/17 and the vast majority would have no problem. If the vast majority have no problem, why should the connection time be changed considering how many potential journeys it could slow, when the small minority who may have an issue, could just use common sense and allow more time on their journeys to change?

No drama required.

 

[DarloRich]

The average person would have 2.5 mins spare on that journey. It might not seem like it but that’s a long time.

I accounted for the need to use lifts. You’d still be able to do it.

The station is rarely crowded on the concourse side.

You’ve used the most extreme example from platform 1b to 16/17 and the vast majority would have no problem. If the vast majority have no problem, why should the connection time be changed considering how many potential journeys it could slow, when the small minority who may have an issue, could just use common sense and allow more time on their journeys to change?

No drama required.

Exactly. A vast overreaction from other posters to none issues.

 

[yorksrob]

Very nicely put. The main problem we encountered first is the distance and secondly the sheer amount of people crowding around, be it the entrance to the escalators/lifts, shops on the bridge or directly in front of the escalators/lifts/steps down on the platforms.

I don’t think anyone would disagree with Leeds having a 15 minute connection time. It’s definitely more troublesome than Birmingham New Street and Manchester Piccadilly.

I see your point, however a longer connection time ends up meaning a load of connections that would otherwise be valid, become invalid.

 

[Eric]

I see your point, however a longer connection time ends up meaning a load of connections that would otherwise be valid, become invalid.

0/1 to 16/17 might be an extreme but how do National Rail reach their recommended connection times?

If someone of normal ability walks it at average pace and it takes 8/9 minutes do they still decide 10 minutes or will they raise it?

 

[yorksrob]

0/1 to 16/17 might be an extreme but how do National Rail reach their recommended connection times?

If someone of normal ability walks it at average pace and it takes 8/9 minutes do they still decide 10 minutes or will they raise it?

I'm not sure how they work it out, however if you have limited mobility, you can select a longer connection time on some journey planners.

 

[Eric]

I'm not sure how they work it out, however if you have limited mobility, you can select a longer connection time on some journey planners.

I didn't know this? Can you share with me how to do that? On some advance tickets on the national rail website, it usually factors in the minimum time, not factoring any mobility issues. Thank yo Rob.

 

[yorksrob]

I didn't know this? Can you share with me how to do that? On some advance tickets on the national rail website, it usually factors in the minimum time, not factoring any mobility issues. Thank yo Rob.

There's a button on National Rail Enquiries which allows you to change the connection time. It's in the expanded section where you can choose via points and choose TOC's etc.

 

[30907]

I didn't know this? Can you share with me how to do that? On some advance tickets on the national rail website, it usually factors in the minimum time, not factoring any mobility issues. Thank yo Rob.

Or you can catch an earlier Northern train into Leeds (unless it is a reservable service, technically - of which there are very few on 1-5).

 

[quantinghome]

Among other interesting stuff this says:

I hope this means that the "common concourse" is east of the existing main bridge which would become redundant on completion. With hindsight building that at the western end of the shed with stairs/escalators one side only was a mistake. The new one needs two sets of escalators and stairs down to each existing platform, to the left and right as viewed when ascending from the existing concourse. HS2 platforms and hopefully a southern exit would be straight in front.

I'm rather worried by the hint that retail and amenity space would be in or accessed through this concourse, as it really needs the space for passenger circulation. There's a risk of repeating the mistakes of Manchester Victoria on a larger scale.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and all that. The existing bridge would have been designed in the late 90s. Passenger numbers have tripled since then. I think it was put there because there was an existing bridge used for parcels?

The new concourse looks massive. I can't see there being a problem with retail space. The plan envisages direct access to commercial developments from the concourse as well.

 

[yorksrob]

If you think the bridge is narrow, you should have seen the subway !!

The thing about the bridge is that only at the most, a third is used for passenger movements. Half of it is taken up by waiting and retail outlets, so there's plenty of room along it.

The issue is the limited access too and from the platforms. One escallator and one staircase. This could be alleviated by clearing off the deck and providing steps/escallators along the west side.

 

[Bantamzen]

One possibility not yet mentioned yet is realigning / moving the barriers from their current position. If the WH Smiths unit was relocated, the concourse / platform toilets combined, there would be more room for barriers, information kiosks etc. This would have the added advantage of making the eastern footbridge more useful as services stopping at the east end wouldn't be spilling passengers into the paths of passengers getting off at the west side.

 

[tbtc]

I don’t think anyone would disagree with Leeds having a 15 minute connection time

I see your point, however a longer connection time ends up meaning a load of connections that would otherwise be valid, become invalid.

I'm with @yorksrob here - a fifteen minute minimum connection time would mess up a number of existing connections - this seems like a complete over-reaction for the sake of the tiny minority of people connecting from one extreme of the station to the far side (much like the obsession on here with the handful of people travelling from one end to the other on a through service like Newcastle - Manchester Airport or Edinburgh - Plymouth or Holyhead - Cardiff).

Overnight people would find that their connection into the half hourly London service was no longer valid, meaning a wait of over half an hour, making train travel look a lot less attractive (we enthusiasts know how to read and cross-reference timetables, so we can spot when there's an "illegal" connection, but a lot of people who use online journey planners will see a wait of forty minutes at Leeds and be turned off using the train)

A new bridge from the bay platforms in the north west of Leeds station over to the TPE platforms in the south west wouldn't solve the problem of the muddle of people congregating around the area immediately inside the barriers - they wouldn't use such a bridge - it'd only be useful for the minority making connections like Harrogate to Castleford. You'd have to close the whole western throat for a while (days? weeks?) to install such a bridge over all of the lines, just for the sake of people who can't do a couple of hundred yards in ten minutes - such people exist, I'm not denying it, I have some in my family, but it really would be the tail wagging the dog. And that's assuming that there's space at the western end of platform 16 etc for a bridge to "land"!

My own suggestion would be something much simpler/ cheaper/ faster to implement - a gate at the north eastern corner of the station onto New Station Street - closer to the Brewery Tap - so that people would access the station close to the eastern footbridge over the tracks, which would circulate people a lot better inside the station and distribute people a lot better along trains (since so many people crowd around the doors closest to the western footbridge). No ticket office etc required (there's that existing facility by the current main entrance) - just one person staffing a handful of barriers - providing a much faster way of accessing the station from the Trinity direction.

Keep it simple, focus on quick wins that benefit the majority - whilst I sympathise with inform people who struggle to get from the Harrogate to Castleford platforms I don't believe that there are sufficient to warrant spending millions of pounds and temporarily closing the western side of the station to give them a facility that wouldn't solve the bigger problems in the station (the crowds around the main entrance.

 

[edwin_m]

I'm with @yorksrob
Overnight people would find that their connection into the half hourly London service was no longer valid, meaning a wait of over half an hour, making train travel look a lot less attractive (we enthusiasts know how to read and cross-reference timetables, so we can spot when there's an "illegal" connection, but a lot of people who use online journey planners will see a wait of forty minutes at Leeds and be turned off using the train)

To add to that it wouldn't be possible to book an Advance involving an illegal connection and the second part of a split ticket wouldn't be honoured if the first half arrived late. There may be scope to look at selective extension of connection times for those pairs of services that use opposite sides of the station, but it's a bit of a slippery slope. The answer is probably around the "use longer connection times" option in journey planners, which should perhaps be made more prominent and added to any that don't have it.

 

[Bantamzen]

I'm with @yorksrob here - a fifteen minute minimum connection time would mess up a number of existing connections - this seems like a complete over-reaction for the sake of the tiny minority of people connecting from one extreme of the station to the far side (much like the obsession on here with the handful of people travelling from one end to the other on a through service like Newcastle - Manchester Airport or Edinburgh - Plymouth or Holyhead - Cardiff).

Overnight people would find that their connection into the half hourly London service was no longer valid, meaning a wait of over half an hour, making train travel look a lot less attractive (we enthusiasts know how to read and cross-reference timetables, so we can spot when there's an "illegal" connection, but a lot of people who use online journey planners will see a wait of forty minutes at Leeds and be turned off using the train)

A new bridge from the bay platforms in the north west of Leeds station over to the TPE platforms in the south west wouldn't solve the problem of the muddle of people congregating around the area immediately inside the barriers - they wouldn't use such a bridge - it'd only be useful for the minority making connections like Harrogate to Castleford. You'd have to close the whole western throat for a while (days? weeks?) to install such a bridge over all of the lines, just for the sake of people who can't do a couple of hundred yards in ten minutes - such people exist, I'm not denying it, I have some in my family, but it really would be the tail wagging the dog. And that's assuming that there's space at the western end of platform 16 etc for a bridge to "land"!

My own suggestion would be something much simpler/ cheaper/ faster to implement - a gate at the north eastern corner of the station onto New Station Street - closer to the Brewery Tap - so that people would access the station close to the eastern footbridge over the tracks, which would circulate people a lot better inside the station and distribute people a lot better along trains (since so many people crowd around the doors closest to the western footbridge). No ticket office etc required (there's that existing facility by the current main entrance) - just one person staffing a handful of barriers - providing a much faster way of accessing the station from the Trinity direction.

Keep it simple, focus on quick wins that benefit the majority - whilst I sympathise with inform people who struggle to get from the Harrogate to Castleford platforms I don't believe that there are sufficient to warrant spending millions of pounds and temporarily closing the western side of the station to give them a facility that wouldn't solve the bigger problems in the station (the crowds around the main entrance.

That exit on New Station Street has been used as a crowd-buster in the past. But it was only ever used for exiting passengers arriving at eastern end platforms. Make it a permanent feature and you'll end up with congestion along P8 as well as at the main ticket gates. But open up the southern concourse for more barriers and you can separate the flows more efficiently.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That exit on New Station Street has been used as a crowd-buster in the past. But it was only ever used for exiting passengers arriving at eastern end platforms. Make it a permanent feature and you'll end up with congestion along P8 as well as at the main ticket gates. But open up the southern concourse for more barriers and you can separate the flows more efficiently.

Besides, a permanent entrance to the East would likely expose the hideous Eastern footbridge as the inadequate relic from the 70s that it is. The access from the concourse needs improving, and the A-Z departure board could do with being elsewhere as it currently encourages people to congregate right between the bridge staircase and the barriers.

Extending the main bridge over the Wellington platforms* would aid interchanges, and as much as I find the Starbucks on the bridge very handy I'd happily forego it for better passenger flow.

*=the height difference between the former parcels platforms (0-3) complicates that slightly, but the Victorians managed to build the whole station on top of a river so modern engineers would surely be able to deal with that.

 

[Bantamzen]

Besides, a permanent entrance to the East would likely expose the hideous Eastern footbridge as the inadequate relic from the 70s that it is. The access from the concourse needs improving, and the A-Z departure board could do with being elsewhere as it currently encourages people to congregate right between the bridge staircase and the barriers.

Extending the main bridge over the Wellington platforms* would aid interchanges, and as much as I find the Starbucks on the bridge very handy I'd happily forego it for better passenger flow.

*=the height difference between the former parcels platforms (0-3) complicates that slightly, but the Victorians managed to build the whole station on top of a river so modern engineers would surely be able to deal with that.

Extending the main bridge wouldn't be a bad idea, as you say it would aid interchanges at the very least.

 

[Eric]

There was some good points in this article yesterday

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ed-to-sprint-by-late-platform-calls-zsfpkj379

Although Leeds isn’t the main station to have this problem it’s a fair article on the frustrations we as passengers have.

 

[matacaster]

Extending the main bridge wouldn't be a bad idea, as you say it would aid interchanges at the very least.

Perhaps a travelator wouldn't go amiss too.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Perhaps a travelator wouldn't go amiss too.

You'd definitely need to get rid of the retail outlets in that case... given the short distance between the islands in the centre, it'd have to be multiple short ones rather than one long one. Unless it was an "express" travelator dedicated to platform 16/17, in which case it'd probably need to be along the west side of the bridge rather than down the middle.

Multiple travelators for each direction, down the middle of the bridge, with clear signposts (and staff enforcement) instructing people to keep left if walking... that could work, for the most part. Especially if second staircases/escalators were added to the other side of the bridge, with one side being for going up and the other side for going down.

 

[yorksrob]

Besides, a permanent entrance to the East would likely expose the hideous Eastern footbridge as the inadequate relic from the 70s that it is. The access from the concourse needs improving, and the A-Z departure board could do with being elsewhere as it currently encourages people to congregate right between the bridge staircase and the barriers.

The seventies footbridge doesn't seem to involve as many steps as the new one. I'm guessing a replacement would need to be a lot higher and involve more steps. (Similar situation with the new footbridge at Wakefield Westgate which is like climbing the Eiger).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The seventies footbridge doesn't seem to involve as many steps as the new one. I'm guessing a replacement would need to be a lot higher and involve more steps. (Similar situation with the new footbridge at Wakefield Westgate which is like climbing the Eiger).

That's probably why the main bridge is so much higher. A replacement Eastern footbridge would need to be wider too, as the current one is barely big enough for the limited use it gets today.

 

[yorksrob]

That's probably why the main bridge is so much higher. A replacement Eastern footbridge would need to be wider too, as the current one is barely big enough for the limited use it gets today.

I've never seen it so crowded as to not be able to get through, personally.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I've never seen it so crowded as to not be able to get through, personally.

I have on occasion. I was more thinking of if usage of it was encouraged to take some of the pressure off the main bridge (or if a second access point and gateline were to be opened closer to it, as some have suggested) then the present structure would be swamped.

 

[yorksrob]

I have on occasion. I was more thinking of if usage of was encouraged to take some of the pressure off the main bridge (or if a second access point and gateline were to be opened closer to it, as some have suggested) then the present structure would be swamped.

Perhaps they could get around current clearance requirements by just widening the existing bridge.

 

[xotGD]

The congestion inside the main ticket barriers is mostly caused by the platform number for London trains not being announced until a few minutes before departure. Now I know why that is done, but giving the number but saying 'not yet ready for boarding' would get people shifted out of the way.

 

[yorksrob]

I see in a Christmas 'gift' NatWest have removed three of their cash points from the North concourse. Soviet style queues were already building up at the one remaining on the South concourse with any money left.

Given NatWest already own the other three, wouldn't it be nice if some of the other players in our feckless banking industry stepped in to fill the breach. Barclays, this means you.