Station masterplans

[cle]

Bit of a broader topic, but I was thinking about the recent piecemeal improvements to strategically / economically very important stations such as Oxford and Cambridge, and also Cardiff - a platform added here, an extra exit there, etc - and look at at the navigational craziness and incremental nature (amidst a longer boom) of Stratford. Or even smaller places like Bristol Parkway.

I then thought about the Reading work. Or Old Oak - and when there is money to do it right: once and well.

Curious then about how people would tackle some of these stations. If there was Reading-style ambition / money and lack of NIMBY BS - what would you do at Oxford, Cambridge, Cardiff... or others which are constrained but could see more change / high potential (Watford Junction, St Albans, Guildford, Redhill, Tottenham Hale, MKC, High Wycombe, Leicester - southern bias here but I think Stockport is another one with a ton of potential. Sheffield obviously) - - - - that only a transformational budget could achieve. What would you do?

I've left the Manchester stations out of the above but they varying all need a lot of help - the strategic ambition has been there but quashed by the previous government.

 

[Topological]

Crewe

Use the land on the island where platform 12 is to create two new platforms at a higher level. Bridge over the WCML and drop down onto the Manchester line so that there are no conflicts.

This will allow London/Birmingham to Manchester to cross, plus the TfW trains to go across Crewe conflict free. Manchester to Birmingham/London would remain through platforms 1 and 5.

The biggest cost with this is that the current road crossing would rule out the necessary gradients. The solution here is to close the road and route a new road crossing over the whole line a bit further north between the retail park and the A532.

The current bridge would still exist from the East to provide access to the station.

That is a big expenditure but should help things run more smoothly.

 

[The Planner]

Crewe

Use the land on the island where platform 12 is to create two new platforms at a higher level. Bridge over the WCML and drop down onto the Manchester line so that there are no conflicts.

This will allow London/Birmingham to Manchester to cross, plus the TfW trains to go across Crewe conflict free. Manchester to Birmingham/London would remain through platforms 1 and 5.

The biggest cost with this is that the current road crossing would rule out the necessary gradients. The solution here is to close the road and route a new road crossing over the whole line a bit further north between the retail park and the A532.

The current bridge would still exist from the East to provide access to the station.

That is a big expenditure but should help things run more smoothly.

Thats an awful lot of money for 3tph in total, and you still have a conflict at the southern end.

 

[Topological]

Thats an awful lot of money for 3tph in total, and you still have a conflict at the southern end.

True, though this is a money no object thread.

Conflict on the south is getting the northbound fast across the slows?

IF one of the Birmingham to Manchester came via Crewe it would help another train.

How many does Reading help? 2 tph from the B&H plus the XC in both directions? London to the B&H is on the South side of the formation anyway, in the same way as Manchester to London is already on the East side.

 

[The Planner]

True, though this is a money no object thread.

Conflict on the south is getting the northbound fast across the slows?

IF one of the Birmingham to Manchester came via Crewe it would help another train.

How many does Reading help? 2 tph from the B&H plus the XC in both directions? London to the B&H is on the South side of the formation anyway, in the same way as Manchester to London is already on the East side.

No, presumably your southbound TfW is using the new platform and crossing the Manchester?

 

[cle]

For me, the Oxford situation is most in need of a big bang. Cambridge got the 7/8 island, and has sufficient platforms and lines for the services today. It's wired. The issue is expansion of the city / employment locations (hence North and South), and capacity up at Ely for growth. Plus the Stansted single tunnel / platform lengths.

Oxford to me is where Cambridge was 10-15 years ago.

There is rail growth for sure (Chiltern joining with 2tph, then the competing GWR 80x renaissance of journey times) - and more coming , in the form of EWR which will see an initial 2tph but eventually more.

Getting more speculative, there are talks of Cowley, of wires bringing back the Didcot semis, of wiring to Hanborough or the second London fast running beyond the Cotswolds. Not to mention reinstatement of two XC per hour, and now, ambitions to run an hourly Bristol all week. Add the longer plans of an Oxford-Moor Street, and beyond, Chiltern to OOC perhaps. It's a lot, even if some threading / through-running is added.

Some of these are more sure than others, but it all adds up to a lot more activity. And Oxford is behind Cambridge economically too. Some of the Thames Valley tech is in Reading, so there is cannibalization. A lot of the immediate undeveloped land is flooded - and the NIMBYs are far stronger. But Oxford still has huge potential to leverage its reputation into more tech/bio/whatever activity. The Science and Business Parks are one, and I think Oxford Parkway will shortly be (once EWR starts) a perfect location to develop more commercial and more housing.

My view - is that Oxford needs at least 5 through platforms (a side p6, the island 4/5 and the current 2/3 with the bay made through) - plus 2 Bicester-facing bays (p 0 and 1?) - with p4/5 used for turning the semi-fasts, 1tph London and 1tph Bristol, and 6 for all through services north. These 7 platforms should suffice if Cowley opened (this would have some loops/double platforms to enable 2tph at least)

A decent station building and possibly a roof should come, and showcase a station worthy of the place.

 

[The Planner]

For me, the Oxford situation is most in need of a big bang. Cambridge got the 7/8 island, and has sufficient platforms and lines for the services today. It's wired. The issue is expansion of the city / employment locations (hence North and South), and capacity up at Ely for growth. Plus the Stansted single tunnel / platform lengths.

Oxford to me is where Cambridge was 10-15 years ago.

There is rail growth for sure (Chiltern joining with 2tph, then the competing GWR 80x renaissance of journey times) - and more coming , in the form of EWR which will see an initial 2tph but eventually more.

Getting more speculative, there are talks of Cowley, of wires bringing back the Didcot semis, of wiring to Hanborough or the second London fast running beyond the Cotswolds. Not to mention reinstatement of two XC per hour, and now, ambitions to run an hourly Bristol all week. Add the longer plans of an Oxford-Moor Street, and beyond, Chiltern to OOC perhaps. It's a lot, even if some threading / through-running is added.

Some of these are more sure than others, but it all adds up to a lot more activity. And Oxford is behind Cambridge economically too. Some of the Thames Valley tech is in Reading, so there is cannibalization. A lot of the immediate undeveloped land is flooded - and the NIMBYs are far stronger. But Oxford still has huge potential to leverage its reputation into more tech/bio/whatever activity. The Science and Business Parks are one, and I think Oxford Parkway will shortly be (once EWR starts) a perfect location to develop more commercial and more housing.

My view - is that Oxford needs at least 5 through platforms (a side p6, the island 4/5 and the current 2/3 with the bay made through) - plus 2 Bicester-facing bays (p 0 and 1?) - with p4/5 used for turning the semi-fasts, 1tph London and 1tph Bristol, and 6 for all through services north. These 7 platforms should suffice if Cowley opened (this would have some loops/double platforms to enable 2tph at least)

A decent station building and possibly a roof should come, and showcase a station worthy of the place.

Id rather have Oxford North grade seperated first.

 

[cle]

What would you do on the network as relates to the topic? Big bang station rebuilds (vs incremental) ?

I wasn’t really thinking junctions etc so much as platforms, access, buildings. And sense of place.

 

[Dr Day]

Bristol Temple Meads. Love te Victorian architecture as much as anyone else and Bristol East upgrade has improved some things operationally but passenger circulation is poor, particularly at peak times. None of my ‘desire lines’ walking to or from the station entrance are easily navigable with traffic crossings in the wrong places or badly timed pedestrian phases at lights.

Something tells me there is former parcels space underneath which could be better used. The new entrance on the high number platform side will be good for those accessing the Temple Quarter/university buildings on that side but can’t see it doing much more for anyone else.

There are various master plans out there but not aware of any definitively happening. More than happy to be corrected!

 

[Topological]

No, presumably your southbound TfW is using the new platform and crossing the Manchester?

In the money no object solution the lines descend either side of the Manchester line to remove the conflict. A descent on either side of the Manchester line would avoid conflict, but that would be complete gold plating and so would never actually happen. This is a fantasy thread though.

 

[stuu]

How many does Reading help? 2 tph from the B&H plus the XC in both directions? London to the B&H is on the South side of the formation anyway, in the same way as Manchester to London is already on the East side.

Freight trains. Lots of aggregate trains crossing to the reliefs to and from London, as well as Southampton-Didcot-N container trains. Those were the major reason for the grade separation

 

[mrcheek]

Bristol Temple Meads. Love te Victorian architecture as much as anyone else and Bristol East upgrade has improved some things operationally but passenger circulation is poor, particularly at peak times. None of my ‘desire lines’ walking to or from the station entrance are easily navigable with traffic crossings in the wrong places or badly timed pedestrian phases at lights.

Something tells me there is former parcels space underneath which could be better used. The new entrance on the high number platform side will be good for those accessing the Temple Quarter/university buildings on that side but can’t see it doing much more for anyone else.

There are various master plans out there but not aware of any definitively happening. More than happy to be corrected!

totally agree.

Aesthetically, its as good as any major station in England.

But badly needs a revamp. so many conflicts of movement, the ends of platforms are terribly exposed, and the retail offering must be the worst of any major station.

But very difficult to get done in reality. Even the minor works going on lately have caused chaos at times.

 

[6Gman]

Crewe

Use the land on the island where platform 12 is to create two new platforms at a higher level. Bridge over the WCML and drop down onto the Manchester line so that there are no conflicts.

This will allow London/Birmingham to Manchester to cross, plus the TfW trains to go across Crewe conflict free. Manchester to Birmingham/London would remain through platforms 1 and 5.

The biggest cost with this is that the current road crossing would rule out the necessary gradients. The solution here is to close the road and route a new road crossing over the whole line a bit further north between the retail park and the A532.

The current bridge would still exist from the East to provide access to the station.

That is a big expenditure but should help things run more smoothly.

Sorry, but as a Crewe resident the idea of closing the road and diverting it to somewhere to the north (where exactly?) is totally ridiculous.

Huge disruption, extensive demolition ... to assist a handful of trains. (It would also inconvenience passengers changing from those services to others.)

 

[Topological]

Sorry, but as a Crewe resident the idea of closing the road and diverting it to somewhere to the north (where exactly?) is totally ridiculous.

Huge disruption, extensive demolition ... to assist a handful of trains. (It would also inconvenience passengers changing from those services to others.)

Far enough north of the existing road to allow the necessary ramps. It looks like there is a gap that would work about 100m north of the existing road.

The platforms would be higher, but otherwise part of the existing station footprint.

Anyway, this is a fantasy thread rather than anything that is likely to be built

 

[cle]

Bristol is a good one, complex because it's historical - but ultimately in a less than ideal location, now improving due to sprawl / regeneration. Those other platforms fell out of favour when the 'super fasts' were reallocated, but it's not to say that they couldn't have another purpose. They definitely could turn another tph to Cardiff/Wales, and maybe a XC/Moor St addition, as mentioned in the big Birmingham plans.

At least the metro services (Portishead, Ashbury Down/4 track, Henbury loop) seem to be having positive momentum.

 

[mr_jrt]

Watford Junction - I'd rebuild the tired over-station block with a new landmark design, which would have the additional benefit of enabling platform 5 to be restored as a through platform. I'd then have the 5/6 island as the down/up fast (with the fast lines obviously realigned). That then lets you use 7/8 as a down slow island, and I'd rebuild 9/10 as an up slow island. Crossovers north and south to enable services to terminate in the centre lines as needed. For added flavour, a diveunder from the DC lines alongside the former south sidings to alongside the telephone exchange, then continuing to dive down under Orphanage Road. A new pair of underground platforms accessed down from the existing subway, with the line then routed in a cut and cover tunnel through the car park on the original branch's alignment, rising to ground level between the edge of the site and the Balmoral Rd. bridge. This then permits the whole area to be redeveloped as-per the existing master plan without the railway slicing through it.

 

[Magdalia]

Curious then about how people would tackle some of these stations. If there was Reading-style ambition / money and lack of NIMBY BS - what would you do at Oxford, Cambridge, Cardiff.

Cambridge got the 7/8 island, and has sufficient platforms and lines for the services today. It's wired. The issue is expansion of the city / employment locations (hence North and South)

I wasn’t really thinking junctions etc so much as platforms, access, buildings. And sense of place.

Outside the barrier line at Cambridge it has happened already. The area around the main station is a booming business district in its own right, with employment for thousands. There has also been significant residential development, both apartments and student accommodation.

As part of this redevelopment the station now has a piazza with decent facilities for onward connectivity: bus stops, taxi rank, car drop off zone and the multi storey cycle park. The piazza has hotels, bars, coffee shops, takeaways and convenience stores.

Inside the barrier line the main development has been the island platform 7/8. In a world of unlimited finance, Royal Mail on the east side would be bought out to provide the land for another double sided island. The technical report from the November 2024 East West Rail consultation shows the constraints of only using existing railway land.

In the world of unlimited finance there would be a second bridge at the south end, but the quick win that I would do is to replace the canopy on platforms 1 and 4. I remember this being constructed in the 1970s, and, having been built way back then, it is supported on pillars that obstruct passenger flows along the platforms. I would replace this with a new canopy on cantilevers, hopefully with a design more in keeping with the main station building, which is one of the oldest railway station buildings and a listed structure. Apart from railway workers, nobody got to see the station building from the railway side until island platform 7/8 opened; when the 1970s canopy was built it didn't much matter what it looked like but it does matter now.

 

[JohnElliott]

There already is a master plan to expand East Croydon from six platforms to eight, but if money were no object I'd have an underground box put in sized for four 12-car platforms (up Victoria, up London Bridge, down Brighton, down East Grinstead) with the aim of eventually putting long distance trains into tunnels under the existing alignments.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

There already is a master plan to expand East Croydon from six platforms to eight, but if money were no object I'd have an underground box put in sized for four 12-car platforms (up Victoria, up London Bridge, down Brighton, down East Grinstead) with the aim of eventually putting long distance trains into tunnels under the existing alignments.

I’d do the same, but for local services that run via West Croydon to create a kind of “Croydon Crossrail”. It’s insane that East Croydon has such poor connections to the local stations in South London.