Redevelopment Plans for Liverpool Street - Development Policy Going Backwards

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Not just me then, I thought I was maybe mad. I dislike the present Liverpool St strongly. It's too small, it looks straight out of the 1990s, it's cluttered and crowded. It has a fancy building but it's mostly fake-old. This could well improve it.

Yes agreed. I think the plans make a 1990s dingy, greenhousey station look far more contemporary. The station entrance with the massive canopy looks amazing.

 

[HSTEd]

I've not really had much experience with Liverpool Street, is this reconstruction badly required?
I'd have thought Crossrail would have eaten up a lot of the traffic and reduced crowding in the surface station now that the bulk of the Shenfield commuters are gone.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes agreed. I think the plans make a 1990s dingy, greenhousey station look far more contemporary. The station entrance with the massive canopy looks amazing.

Like an aircraft hangar IMO.

And lets opine how long the railway is likely to benefit from this development.

Sure enough, it will get a one off payment. But will it be allowed to keep any rent towards the running of the railway ?

No chance, like the railway arches, the Establishment couldn't countenance anything becoming an income stream to fund a public service. The rights will be flogged off to make money for some foreign private equity fund.

 

[Meerkat]

The current building has it's pros and cons but the new design won't get rid of the north platforms, south tube entrance and east and west exits that lead to a clashing of four different crowds that make getting to your train like being in a ring of bumper cars. All it will do is clear some floor space by replacing the upper mezzanine with a solid floor with less light. White paint does not replace sunlight. Ultimately investment consortiums almost always get their way so I wouldn't expect to see opposition heard.

The big upper concourse and three sets of stairs/escalators means that those coming in at the top level can drop down nearer to their platform so there should be less conflict with those crossing between platforms and south tube access. Also there are three entrances from Liverpool St so regulars from the south can enter nearer to their platform.

 

[yorksrob]

The big upper concourse and three sets of stairs/escalators means that those coming in at the top level can drop down nearer to their platform so there should be less conflict with those crossing between platforms and south tube access. Also there are three entrances from Liverpool St so regulars from the south can enter nearer to their platform.

What if they want to go to WHSmith instead.

Outside of the commuter belt, prople have been happy to stroll and buy.

 

[Benjwri]

But will it be allowed to keep any rent towards the running of the railway ?

The companies that are spending 1.5bn get that right. As it stands the users of the station get a 450 million refurbishment for free, at no cost to the taxpayer. The building was never going to make that much money as it is, and the government would never fund a project like this.

 

[takno]

The companies that are spending 1.5bn get that right. As it stands the users of the station get a 450 million refurbishment for free, at no cost to the taxpayer. The building was never going to make that much money as it is, and the government would never fund a project like this.

Realistically a large chunk of this supposed benefit sounds like it's going to be either neutral or net-negative to the users. If you spend 20 million on lighting to make up for the lack of natural daylight then that would still go in the "450 million refurbishment", but it's arguably actually knocked more than 20 million off the value of the place.

 

[WAB]

You make a fair point, and something like it would be the ideal situation, however I think this is the best daylighting situation possible given the constraint of having to build the office/hotel block above, in order to finance the project. I don't think it should be neglected that the project is a huge positive for the station overall, and less daylight isn't a reason to stop a project which will be a positive for the station. Realistical the project won't go ahead without the attached office/hotel block, and therefore any project will involve the removal of part of the train shed roof.

If it doesn't turn out to be as airy as the developers are claiming to get support, what's the fallout for them? They still make the profit, and the public is stuck with a grim station.

 

[Benjwri]

Realistically a large chunk of this supposed benefit sounds like it's going to be either neutral or net-negative to the users. If you spend 20 million on lighting to make up for the lack of natural daylight then that would still go in the "450 million refurbishment", but it's arguably actually knocked more than 20 million off the value of the place.

I agree that not all that money is going towards the users directly, but I think this idea it is going to be a dark horrible place is just totally untrue. There are people who like and people who hate the current design, and there will be the same for the new one. Its

If it doesn't turn out to be as airy as the developers are claiming to get support, what's the fallout for them? They still make the profit, and the public is stuck with a grim station.

i don’t think by any stretch of the imagination it’ll be grim. If you read through the planning documents there have been a lot of simulations done to ensure that it’s not going to be dark or dingy, and I think that these claims are just stemming from a distrust of developers, when in reality they have nothing to gain from creating a’grim station’, and that would lead to huge reputational damage for an architect who is very highly regarded.

Yes it won’t be at light as with the train shed roof, however obviously over the platforms this will still be in place, but it will still be bright, at a very similar level to the new London Bridge station, which I don’t think anyone has criticised for being dark.

 

[takno]

Yes it won’t be at light as with the train shed roof, however obviously over the platforms this will still be in place, but it will still be bright, at a very similar level to the new London Bridge station, which I don’t think anyone has criticised for being dark.

The new London Bridge station is pretty dingy. It's just kind of unpleasant in so many ways that the darkness doesn't really register. Luckily the biggest part of the reason for the rebuild was to make my trains run straight through it, so I have no need to see it much anymore.

Also worth bearing in mind that the station it replaced was also thoroughly dingy throughout, which isn't the case here.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

There certainly are, for example by removing some of the remaining structure that are on the main concourse, like the help desk (people can go to the ticket office for queries instead). Or removing the shops between the concourse and the platforms to create a wider gateline

Well, it seems like they are doing this now regardless of the approval of new development or not. Full details in the linked story.

Liverpool Street station to replace food kiosks with more ticket barriers

Getting to the trains at Liverpool Street station could be a lot easier as Network Rail is planning to increase the number of ticket barriers by removing some of the food kiosks that sit alongside the platforms.

www.ianvisits.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

Well, it seems like they are doing this now regardless of the approval of new development or not. Full details in the linked story.

Liverpool Street station to replace food kiosks with more ticket barriers

Getting to the trains at Liverpool Street station could be a lot easier as Network Rail is planning to increase the number of ticket barriers by removing some of the food kiosks that sit alongside the platforms.

www.ianvisits.co.uk

That‘s a big deal, thise kiosks make a fortune for NR.

 

[Turtle]

The new London Bridge station is pretty dingy. It's just kind of unpleasant in so many ways that the darkness doesn't really register. Luckily the biggest part of the reason for the rebuild was to make my trains run straight through it, so I have no need to see it much anymore.

Also worth bearing in mind that the station it replaced was also thoroughly dingy throughout, which isn't the case here.

That‘s a big deal, thise kiosks make a fortune for NR.

The new London Bridge station is pretty dingy. It's just kind of unpleasant in so many ways that the darkness doesn't really register. Luckily the biggest part of the reason for the rebuild was to make my trains run straight through it, so I have no need to see it much anymore.

Also worth bearing in mind that the station it replaced was also thoroughly dingy throughout, which isn't the case here.

Dingy?
You should have tried using the pre-1973 station, although admittedly that hadn't really recovered from WW2 bomb damage.

 

[Benjwri]

The new London Bridge station is pretty dingy. It's just kind of unpleasant in so many ways that the darkness doesn't really register.

It’s seemed pretty nice every time I have used it, definitely nothing I would call dark, although perhaps that’s because I’m not used to the high standards which seem to be help for London compared to almost every station elsewhere in the country.

 

[Trainbike46]

I've not really had much experience with Liverpool Street, is this reconstruction badly required?
I'd have thought Crossrail would have eaten up a lot of the traffic and reduced crowding in the surface station now that the bulk of the Shenfield commuters are gone.

liverpool street works fine, there's some things that could be improved but similarly there's no urgent need to do anything. It certainly works better than certain other london terminals *cough* Euston *cough*

 

[Dr Hoo]

liverpool street works fine, there's some things that could be improved but similarly there's no urgent need to do anything. It certainly works better than certain other london terminals *cough* Euston *cough*

I think that you’re setting the bar very low by having to compare Liverpool Street to Euston.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

I think that you’re setting the bar very low by having to compare Liverpool Street to Euston.

Although true, and Liverpool gets busy, it seems to cope ok and never found an issue. I think there are more pressing need to spend money on

 

[Dr Hoo]

Although true, and Liverpool gets busy, it seems to cope ok and never found an issue. I think there are more pressing need to spend money on

Possibly yes, but a City property developer is hardly going to turn round and say, “You’re right, we’ll spend our £450 million of station upgrade money at Tavistock, Hawick, Lampeter (or wherever) instead”, so we just end up with nothing.

 

[Trainbike46]

I think that you’re setting the bar very low by having to compare Liverpool Street to Euston.

It is significantly better than Euston though, but I agree Euston is a low bar!

What I meant is that while there are ways in which liverpool street could be improved, it works and there is no urgent need to change anything, so no need to rush into a deal with a developer that will make some things worse (by putting massive oversite development on top of the station)

ps nice signature re going quickly

 

[Jimbo]

Hi Everyone, Do we know how many objections there were yet please? Thanks.

 

[yorksrob]

Possibly yes, but a City property developer is hardly going to turn round and say, “You’re right, we’ll spend our £450 million of station upgrade money at Tavistock, Hawick, Lampeter (or wherever) instead”, so we just end up with nothing.

How much of that £450 million upgrade actually improves the passenger environment though. A good deal of it seems to be degrading it.

As mentioned up thread, NR are already rearranging some of the kiosks to improve passenger flow, as has already happenned at Victoria. It's these sort of incremental improvements that should be the way forward.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I

How much of that £450 million upgrade actually improves the passenger environment though. A good deal of it seems to be degrading it.

As mentioned up thread, NR are already rearranging some of the kiosks to improve passenger flow, as has already happenned at Victoria. It's these sort of incremental improvements that should be the way forward.

I’m sure that some people on these forums would find a way of deploring ANY change to an old station. Hatred of St Pancras, London Bridge, Birmingham New Street, etc..

However, I was just quoting the original press release- viz £450,000,000 for station upgrades out of a £1,500,000,000 project.

 

[yorksrob]

I

I’m sure that some people on these forums would find a way of deploring ANY change to an old station. Hatred of St Pancras, London Bridge, Birmingham New Street, etc..

However, I was just quoting the original press release- viz £450,000,000 for station upgrades out of a £1,500,000,000 project.

I like the revamp of St Pancras as it retained the best bits, London Bridge is good but I miss the trainshed. Birmingham NS was a grimy hole, and the new shopping centre hasn't altered that aspect of it.

1think the difference is that all of those stations were due a major refurbishment, however successful it was, whereas with Liverpool Street, they largely got it right in the 1980's to my mind - they just need a bit of a change around to improve passenger flows.

You did answer my question though, so thanks.

 

[Mikey C]

I like the revamp of St Pancras as it retained the best bits, London Bridge is good but I miss the trainshed. Birmingham NS was a grimy hole, and the new shopping centre hasn't altered that aspect of it.

1think the difference is that all of those stations were due a major refurbishment, however successful it was, whereas with Liverpool Street, they largely got it right in the 1980's to my mind - they just need a bit of a change around to improve passenger flows.

You did answer my question though, so thanks.

Exactly. There's no mass criticism of Liverpool Street or demands that it needs to be rebuilt. This is entirely being driven by a property development scheme.

 

[Wolfie]

Exactly. There's no mass criticism of Liverpool Street or demands that it needs to be rebuilt. This is entirely being driven by a property development scheme.

Absolutely. Any station changes will be marginal at best and it may actually be worse.

 

[Bald Rick]

This is entirely being driven by a property development scheme.

It isn’t. There has been a passenger congestion relief project on the books for Liverpool St for ages, but eith ni means to fund it.

 

[trebor79]

It isn’t. There has been a passenger congestion relief project on the books for Liverpool St for ages, but eith ni means to fund it.

As someone who has regularly used Liverpool Street for a number of years, including rush hour, I can't say I've ever noticed it's particularly congested. There are often a lot of people there, and the mezzanine is largely wasted space (it would be better if some of those unites were removed and the mezzanine extended slightly with ramps down to the platforms), but it flows well. TBH the main issue is that there isn't exactly an overprovision of escalators and stairs if using the street entrances.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

As someone who has regularly used Liverpool Street for a number of years, including rush hour, I can't say I've ever noticed it's particularly congested. There are often a lot of people there, and the mezzanine is largely wasted space (it would be better if some of those unites were removed and the mezzanine extended slightly with ramps down to the platforms), but it flows well. TBH the main issue is that there isn't exactly and overprovision of escalators and stairs if using the street entrances.

That's my experience too, there are a lot of people but not really congested, I think one of the aspects is that most people are commuters so come in within 20 mins of their departure and go and sit on the train out of the way.

 

[yorksrob]

I ended up travelling through Liverpool Street this xmas due to the Cross being closed and I made sure to have a good look around on the Concourse.

It struck me once again just what a good job BR did in the 1980's. The roof is what a station roof should be and the new section enhances the beauty of the Victorian train shed beyond what it was within the constriction of the original buildings.

It will be a travesty if it is destroyed.

 

[Jimbo]

I ended up travelling through Liverpool Street this xmas due to the Cross being closed and I made sure to have a good look around on the Concourse.

It struck me once again just what a good job BR did in the 1980's. The roof is what a station roof should be and the new section enhances the beauty of the Victorian train shed beyond what it was within the constriction of the original buildings.

It will be a travesty if it is destroyed.

I couldn’t agree more.

I think how much more beautiful Cannon St might have been had the glass barrel-vaulted roof survived the War too.