Possible plans for Edinburgh Waverley station?

[Philip Phlopp]

Especially if you added in an escalator for the American tourists, that long walk up from Princes Street is a killer.

In all seriousness, Waverley desperately needs sorting. It's too complex and the lack of circulation space is showing, especially during the festivals. If the cost of that is the loss of a few cast iron girders, and moving the pillars around/replacing them like for like with a modern equivalent, then by all means it should go ahead.

I'm all for historical sympathy, but the only part of the station with any real legacy is the booking office, and that doesn't look like it's ever going to go. This redevelopment is probably going to sort the station for the long term, barring any platform alterations for a future high speed line, but that is decades away. Personally, I say about time.

It's entirely possible to expand Waverley without it having to look like a jumped up Adshel bus shelter.

It is possible to build and rebuild stations whilst maintaining and enhancing the underlying architectural merit.

 

[waverley47]

It's entirely possible to expand Waverley without it having to look like a jumped up Adshel bus shelter.

It is possible to build and rebuild stations whilst maintaining and enhancing the underlying architectural merit.

I do agree somewhat, look at the new buildings at Queen Street or Kings Cross to see the the attraction of keeping the old architecture in place. The problem is that I'd argue there's a lack of architectural merit in Waverley in the first place. The only architecturally significant part of the station, from an everyday users point of view, is the booking office. Who stops to look at the pillars, or admire the lattice work on the bridge.

The new designs without shops throughout the station, look far more sympathetic than the original concept. There's new space, new light, and the monstrosities dotted around the station (Costa, enterprise and whsmiths especially) have gone. If the price to pay is a new glass bridge and more escalators, then I don't see what the problem is. It's likely that it will be designed to be sympathetic, and to me the main gripes on here seem to be about a new glass roof, which lets face it, is likely to be basically the same as the old one.

 

[najaB]

They could probably do a better job of the castle as well. I mean if they flattened the site properly you could get a nice modern office in with level access from the George V Bridge.

Haha, very funny. Now, seriously, Waverley Station is a working building first and foremost. If the roof is an impediment to its function then the roof has to go.

Why not build a new roof that in a hundred years people will be saying "It's one of the finest examples of 21st Century design" and argue that it needs to be kept? After all, the grand Victorian structures that we are talking about keeping wouldn't exist if the Victorians hadn't demolished what was there before to construct them.

 

[EllieAquitrain]

Just finished reading through this thread, and I have a few thoughts.

Moved to Edinburgh from London a year ago. Barely remember my only previous visit, but now Waverley is effectively my local, walkable station.

On the ramps: it seems crazy to me that cars were once clogging up the concourse! I've only really known the station in its current layout.

I almost always enter/exit on Market Street. The entrance is shockingly unimpressive - if I couldn't see the rail infrastructure before reaching the entrance it would be less impressive than many suburban stations near my London home. As such, I'd be thrilled with the proposed revamp.

One short-term issue I have is that much better signage is needed for southbound onwards foot travel. The first time I exited on Market Street I had no reason to realise there were shallow, relatively ways to access the Old Town and points south thereof by foot so I resigned myself to using the Scotsman Steps. Long-term a North Bridge entrance to the station would be a godsend - I hope provision is being made for this in the current works (I believe it's basically just a refurbishment?). I live close enough that southward bus travel isn't necessary but if it were, I'd find it a right faff to get between a bus and the platforms.

Finally, I'd also welcome a link roughly at the height of the station roof which is useable by bike. Currently cycling from north to south across the city centre involves prohibitively long and/or steep hills; such a link would do much to mitigate that.

 

[Mordac]

Just finished reading through this thread, and I have a few thoughts.

Moved to Edinburgh from London a year ago. Barely remember my only previous visit, but now Waverley is effectively my local, walkable station.

On the ramps: it seems crazy to me that cars were once clogging up the concourse! I've only really known the station in its current layout.

I almost always enter/exit on Market Street. The entrance is shockingly unimpressive - if I couldn't see the rail infrastructure before reaching the entrance it would be less impressive than many suburban stations near my London home. As such, I'd be thrilled with the proposed revamp.

One short-term issue I have is that much better signage is needed for southbound onwards foot travel. The first time I exited on Market Street I had no reason to realise there were shallow, relatively ways to access the Old Town and points south thereof by foot so I resigned myself to using the Scotsman Steps. Long-term a North Bridge entrance to the station would be a godsend - I hope provision is being made for this in the current works (I believe it's basically just a refurbishment?). I live close enough that southward bus travel isn't necessary but if it were, I'd find it a right faff to get between a bus and the platforms.

Finally, I'd also welcome a link roughly at the height of the station roof which is useable by bike. Currently cycling from north to south across the city centre involves prohibitively long and/or steep hills; such a link would do much to mitigate that.

What would be really awesome would be a lift to North Bridge. Sadly I imagine heritage concerns wouldn't allow that to happen.

 

[YorksLad12]

The new designs without shops throughout the station, look far more sympathetic than the original concept. There's new space, new light, and the monstrosities dotted around the station (Costa, enterprise and whsmiths especially) have gone. If the price to pay is a new glass bridge and more escalators, then I don't see what the problem is. It's likely that it will be designed to be sympathetic, and to me the main gripes on here seem to be about a new glass roof, which lets face it, is likely to be basically the same as the old one.

Oh, those concessions will soon be back as soon as the costs start to rise. The same happened at Leeds Station Southern Entrance; extra concessions on the footbridge in order to generate income and offset some of the increased costs. And it wasn't the widest footbridge to start with. There was even talk of some sort of coffee cart in the ground floor / Dark Arches entrance in the bay over the river at one point.

 

[najaB]

Oh, those concessions will soon be back as soon as the costs start to rise.

I suspect the idea is to move them out of the circulation space, not to eliminate them entirely. I wouldn't be surprised if Waverley Mall got completely incorporated into the station.

Edit: Actually, looking at the images posted previously, that exactly what's happening.

 

[takno]

I suspect the idea is to move them out of the circulation space, not to eliminate them entirely. I wouldn't be surprised if Waverley Mall got completely incorporated into the station.

That I could get on board with. Given the speed at which princes street is already dying and the new centre just around the corner, it's a complete waste of space using Waverley mall for shops.

 

[InOban]

Finally, I'd also welcome a link roughly at the height of the station roof which is useable by bike. Currently cycling from north to south across the city centre involves prohibitively long and/or steep hills; such a link would do much to mitigate that.

That's in the plans - read the map carefully. They don't point out that it's replacing a bridge which was temporarily removed many years ago.

And a lift to the North Bridge is also included. I only wish there were two on either side of the bridge so that bus passengers wouldn't have to cross the road.
The Scotsman steps are certainly a decent workout! And quite dangerous when wet having been resurfaced in marble as an Art project

 

[NotATrainspott]

That I could get on board with. Given the speed at which princes street is already dying and the new centre just around the corner, it's a complete waste of space using Waverley mall for shops.

It would be shops but I'd expect they would be more closely targeted at the rail passenger market. A few of the shops from the old St James Centre migrated into the Waverley Mall when it was closed for development, and they'll most likely want to migrate back again.

One interesting factor might be the servicing arrangements for the Waverley Mall. Today it's done via an internal ramp from Waverley Bridge. If that is not only going to be pedestrianised but effectively become an outdoor concourse for the station, then it seems unlikely the existing Waverley Mall layout can survive. If it'll end up being serviced as part of the station, then the frontage towards the station can be opened up and made into part of the attraction. I could imagine two levels of cafes and restaurants all with a view of the Old Town.

 

[Siemens Trains]

Yes that is very interesting. Hopefully that means a solution to the Calton tunnels is in place for all those trains to be able to use the platforms.

Also interesting that current platform 18 is the new plan for an additional through platform on the northern part of the station. What benefits would this have? Easier for through services from Borders to Fife for example?

Not sure if linking the Borders and Fife Circle for commutor convenience would be a major consideration for platform 18. I think making a new through platform at 18 rather than 12 was suggested because more generally there's always likely to be more capacity on the north side of Haymarket than the south. Princes St Gardens and Haymarket junctions are viewed as weak links. Assuming the Calton issues can be improved this allows easier positioning of through trains from the Berwick & Newcastle side to stations like Edinburgh Gateway/Airport, Glasgow Queen St (via Almond Chord), Aberdeen and so on. Another through platform for the south of Haymarket might make less sense at present, but as others mentioned it could be added if necessary in future.

 

[Voyager lad]

So I’ve been reading through the thread and looking at the plans and have a few thoughts; firstly, a lift from North Bridge to the station really would be a god send. Considering the bridge runs right over the station, the fact it takes 10-15 mins to walk to at busy times is just silly. More circulation space is desperately needed as well; last night I was in the station and it was physically impossible to keep a 1m distance and the station wasn’t even that busy

 

[och aye]

In news that should surprise no one, Edinburgh World Heritage aren't too happy with the plans. No doubt the Cockburn Association will follow suit with some moan about the loss of the roof and columns.

Waverley station - our response to the 'Concept Masterplan' | Edinburgh World Heritage

The Waverley Valley forms a distinctive division between Edinburgh’s two exceptional urban phenomena – the organic medieval Old Town and the planned Georgian New Town. The valley, which consists of Waverley Station, as well as Princes St. Gardens East and West, is an integral element of our...

ewh.org.uk

The visuals which have been published together with the Concept Masterplan are misleading because they assume that large sections of Category ‘A’ listed building could be demolished. Needless to say, this principle has not been agreed.

The proposal does not take into account the impact on the surrounding environment of the Waverley Valley. This will be significant, not least the impact on key views, for example to the Firth of Forth, due to the raising of the roof by 2 metres.

 

[railjock]

In news that should surprise no one, Edinburgh World Heritage aren't too happy with the plans. No doubt the Cockburn Association will follow suit with some moan about the loss of the roof and columns.

Waverley station - our response to the 'Concept Masterplan' | Edinburgh World Heritage

The Waverley Valley forms a distinctive division between Edinburgh’s two exceptional urban phenomena – the organic medieval Old Town and the planned Georgian New Town. The valley, which consists of Waverley Station, as well as Princes St. Gardens East and West, is an integral element of our...

ewh.org.uk

Views to the Firth of Forth will unlikely be impacted by raising the Waverley roof by 2m, unless I’m missing something.

 

[385001]

Views to the Firth of Forth will unlikely be impacted by raising the Waverley roof by 2m, unless I’m missing something.

I must be missing something as well as I think the only place at street level you can really see the Forth and the Waverley roof is from North Bridge!

The image shown in the article looks like an elevated view from Jeffrey Street and you can't see the Forth from that angle because of all the buildings. You'd think EWH would at least show an image highlighting their concern.

When I'm next in town I'll take a few photos to see if they have a valid concern about that or if it's just the standard nothing can change in Edinburgh attitude. Unless someone beats me to it...

 

[NotATrainspott]

As I understand it, the railways have special legal powers which overrule normal planning policy. When NR submits documentation to local councils, it sometimes submits scans of the original Act of Parliament which authorised the railway in explaining its power to go ahead. What powers do they have to override a listed building? Of course, NR aren't normally going to go around demolishing listed buildings very much, but I can see there being conflicts like this where the only way to make the railway work would be to do things that would be utterly unacceptable in any other circumstance. If Waverley were just a listed market hall, no one would be allowed to knock it down to put in a slightly taller market hall.

 

[swt_passenger]

As I understand it, the railways have special legal powers which overrule normal planning policy. When NR submits documentation to local councils, it sometimes submits scans of the original Act of Parliament which authorised the railway in explaining its power to go ahead. What powers do they have to override a listed building? Of course, NR aren't normally going to go around demolishing listed buildings very much, but I can see there being conflicts like this where the only way to make the railway work would be to do things that would be utterly unacceptable in any other circumstance. If Waverley were just a listed market hall, no one would be allowed to knock it down to put in a slightly taller market hall.

You‘re referring to “permitted development rights”. In England and Wales alterations to listed buildings or structures on the railway still have to have a full planning application, but of course the law could be completely different in Scotland.

 

[385001]

I had a look around Waverley for those "key views" to the Firth of Forth. The only time I could see anything of the Forth was at the top of Market Street at The Mound. If you look closely enough at image 003 you can see the Bass Rock but raising the roof shouldn't do anything to block that out.

No doubt there may be plenty buildings on Market Street and Jeffrey Street where you can see the Forth from upper levels. But I'd argue the proposed or tweaked proposed development would improve the view from Jeffrey Street by getting rid of some (IMO) horrible concrete.

 

[eoff]

Airlink 100 is currently and apparently long term would be based at South St David Street, outside TKMaxx.

Bus tours and charters are departing from the north side of St Andrew Sqaure. Again, i believe this would be the long term plan. But, few regular bus services are departing from North St Andrew Square, so couldnt see both working long term.

I just saw this thread and have read up to this post. I have always been deeply suspicious that the council would do everything possilbe to nobble the 100 service. At non rush hour times it is the best way to get to the airport from the station. The LRT journey planner used to lie about how long the journeys took and ignore the fact the tram stops further from the terminal than the 100.

 

[eoff]

Interesting to see the "High-level cycle bridge", that must be lower than the original bridge from Jeffrey St to Calton Rd. And of course you have to pay for the height difference somewhere and Calton Rd is a low point.

 

[Siemens Trains]

I just saw this thread and have read up to this post. I have always been deeply suspicious that the council would do everything possilbe to nobble the 100 service. At non rush hour times it is the best way to get to the airport from the station. The LRT journey planner used to lie about how long the journeys took and ignore the fact the tram stops further from the terminal than the 100.

Do you think many passengers actually travel between Edinburgh Airport and Waverley Station? Which other stations or airports will be their final destination?
I can understand travel between the airport and Gateway, Park or Haymarket for connections. But I don't see an obvious reason for many to use Waverley.

 

[eoff]

Do you think many passengers actually travel between Edinburgh Airport and Waverley Station? Which other stations or airports will be their final destination?
I can understand travel between the airport and Gateway, Park or Haymarket for connections. But I don't see an obvious reason for many to use Waverley.

I would assume city centre connections and as for other rail destinations you have the North Berwick and Borders lines + Dunbar. The bus service is quite busy and the frequency is high based on my pre-COVID experience, even very early in the morning.

 

[najaB]

The LRT journey planner used to lie about how long the journeys took and ignore the fact the tram stops further from the terminal than the 100

Closer to arrivals though so it's swings and roundabouts.

 

[najaB]

I can understand travel between the airport and Gateway, Park or Haymarket for connections. But I don't see an obvious reason for many to use Waverley.

Indeed. If I was to get a bus it would probably be the 747 from Halbeath or Inverkething, but for me Edinburgh Gateway + tram is much more convenient.

 

[Siemens Trains]

I would assume city centre connections and as for other rail destinations you have the North Berwick and Borders lines + Dunbar. The bus service is quite busy and the frequency is high based on my pre-COVID experience, even very early in the morning.

Yes, I suppose some passengers from Mid or East Lothian might use a train/bus combination for the airport. But the new Airlink terminus at South St David Street isn't really much further away. Just a single road to negotiate. And it's still closer than any tram stop if you're suggesting a pro-tram agenda from Edinburgh Council.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Closer to arrivals though so it's swings and roundabouts.

It's still a lengthy walk and a totally wasted opportunity given the tram can go right into the terminal.

 

[najaB]

It's still a lengthy walk and a totally wasted opportunity given the tram can go right into the terminal.

It's 100m from the tram stop to the front door.


(Screen capture showing distance from tram stop to door)

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It's 100m from the tram stop to the front door.

That's just to the front door, that's not close to baggage drop, check-in or security, it's another 100m anyway to get past the shops, left luggage and other junk before you get into the airport proper, the bit where the tram should be dropping you off directly.

If you've got a pollution free mode of transport that can go right into the building, that's where it should be. You should be stepping off the tram and finding baggage drop, check-in and security right in front of you. It should be easy. And on the way back, you should be coming out of arrivals and (on the other side of the tram) seeing a ticket machine and then the tram right in front of you.

I like the tram, I do think it's good, but it feels so half-hearted at the airport. It has the feel of something that was put where it is, and then the things that should have been built around it were cancelled, it feels unfinished somehow.

 

[Clansman]

It feels unfinished somehow.

Not to be deliberately silly sounding in any way, but is it because the walk to the terminal is simply outdoor?

Look at Birmingham International, the mode of transport (pods), despite being a greater distance from rail to terminal, is longer than Edinburgh, yet because it offers direct and outdoor-shielded links to departures it thus gives the illusion of a more direct transfer than what it actually provides. So basically, if you were to construct a fully indoor transfer from tram to terminal by, say, a travelator, that would give the illussion of greater connectivity than what the likes of yourself feel is lacking at Edinburgh?

Unless you're talking more ambitious, say a Manchester Piccadilly style cut and cover job to physically get the tram as close to the intended destination as possible?

 

[takno]

That's just to the front door, that's not close to baggage drop, check-in or security, it's another 100m anyway to get past the shops, left luggage and other junk before you get into the airport proper, the bit where the tram should be dropping you off directly.

If you've got a pollution free mode of transport that can go right into the building, that's where it should be. You should be stepping off the tram and finding baggage drop, check-in and security right in front of you. It should be easy. And on the way back, you should be coming out of arrivals and (on the other side of the tram) seeing a ticket machine and then the tram right in front of you.

I like the tram, I do think it's good, but it feels so half-hearted at the airport. It has the feel of something that was put where it is, and then the things that should have been built around it were cancelled, it feels unfinished somehow.

To be fair the airport has moved quite a long way in that direction since the tram opened. Domestic arrivals now comes out as close to the tram as it does the normal bus stop (although last time I went the bus was actually stopping somewhere past the tram due to more construction at the tram end.

None of which has s great deal to do with Waverley