Stevenage: could we see a rebuild of the station, and could this lead to improved services?

[mr_jrt]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/stevenage-platform-5.146540/

On the upside, also means any temptation to sell off any excess land is effectively nipped in the bud, leaving more for any eventual full rebuild later.

 

[Brissle Girl]

On the upside, also means any temptation to sell off any excess land is effectively nipped in the bud, leaving more for any eventual full rebuild later.

Not sure I understand. What might be needed in the future here?

 

[mr_jrt]

Not sure I understand. What might be needed in the future here?

I swear I've read mention of a full rebuild of some sort down the line, hence the weird arrangements with platform 5's gateline(s) and the overbridge. Could be wrong, of course.

 

[Meerkat]

I swear I've read mention of a full rebuild of some sort down the line, hence the weird arrangements with platform 5's gateline(s) and the overbridge. Could be wrong, of course.

isn’t that just continuing this line through to become a loop, rather than any extra lines?

 

[Brissle Girl]

isn’t that just continuing this line through to become a loop, rather than any extra lines?

Agree, I can't see anything else is needed at the Langley Jn end of the line once this is complete. There was a reference to a Platform 6 and track redoubling earlier, but I really can't see what that would achieve either. The current project achieves separation from the main line and is sufficient for a 30 min service, which is all that is likely to be needed for a fairly lightly used stretch of line. In fact, with only 150 seconds WTT to get Langley South Jn, it could even facilitate a 15 min service with around 10 mins turnaround time if needed, not that it's ever likely to be.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

In fact, with only 150 seconds WTT to get Langley South Jn, it could even facilitate a 15 min service with around 10 mins turnaround time if needed, not that it's ever likely to be.

If the long-rumoured London Overground takeover of Great Northern’s inner-suburban routes from Moorgate ever happens, who knows? When I used the North London Line many moons ago, who would have believed places like Finchley Road & Frognal, Hackney Wick etc would get 6-8 trains per hour, and the trains would be carrying the numbers of people that they do? The NLL was a route that was listed for closure in the Beeching Report, remember, and used to have 2-car DMUs, dilapidated stations with crumbling platforms (!), and a poor service.
If TfL were to operate trains beyond Hertford North, good publicity e.g. ‘4 trains per hour to Stevenage, for easier connections to Cambridge, Peterborough and the North’ at Enfield Chase, Bayford etc, might produce surprising results...

 

[Brissle Girl]

If the long-rumoured London Overground takeover of Great Northern’s inner-suburban routes from Moorgate ever happens, who knows? When I used the North London Line many moons ago, who would have believed places like Finchley Road & Frognal, Hackney Wick etc would get 6-8 trains per hour, and the trains would be carrying the numbers of people that they do? The NLL was a route that was listed for closure in the Beeching Report, remember, and used to have 2-car DMUs, dilapidated stations with crumbling platforms (!), and a poor service.
If TfL were to operate trains beyond Hertford North, good publicity e.g. ‘4 trains per hour to Stevenage, for easier connections to Cambridge, Peterborough and the North’ at Enfield Chase, Bayford etc, might produce surprising results...

That's a very good challenge back, especially if the enhanced service could be done in marginal time.

Although even if we get to that level of service it could still be accommodated with the new infrastructure. And if it were felt that it was inadequate then I expect the cost of any further infrastructure enhancements would rule it out. After all, look at the effort there's been to get the current improvements done just to maintain the existing service, and even that wasn't done in time to prevent the hiatus in service for a year.

 

[Bald Rick]

If the long-rumoured London Overground takeover of Great Northern’s inner-suburban routes from Moorgate ever happens, who knows? When I used the North London Line many moons ago, who would have believed places like Finchley Road & Frognal, Hackney Wick etc would get 6-8 trains per hour, and the trains would be carrying the numbers of people that they do? The NLL was a route that was listed for closure in the Beeching Report, remember, and used to have 2-car DMUs, dilapidated stations with crumbling platforms (!), and a poor service.
If TfL were to operate trains beyond Hertford North, good publicity e.g. ‘4 trains per hour to Stevenage, for easier connections to Cambridge, Peterborough and the North’ at Enfield Chase, Bayford etc, might produce surprising results...

Why would TfL spend a load of its cash operating extra services well outside London? Stevenage to Hertford is hardly equivalent to inner London in terms of traffic potential.

 

[swt_passenger]

Why would TfL spend a load of its cash operating extra services well outside London? Stevenage to Hertford is hardly equivalent to inner London in terms of traffic potential.

I suggest people like the idea because they assume they’ll get new trains, probably orange ones, and Oyster PAYG with cheap fares, hopefully with their station in zone 6. Also there’ll be no delays, 100% reliability, 10 tph to Moorgate, etc etc. The truth is obviously somewhat different...

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I suggest people like the idea because they assume they’ll get new trains, probably orange ones, and Oyster PAYG with cheap fares, hopefully with their station in zone 6. Also there’ll be no delays, 100% reliability, 10 tph to Moorgate, etc etc. The truth is obviously somewhat different...

Why would TfL need to spend more to serve Watton and Stevenage, than they would if terminating at Hertford North?
Operationally, it could make sense to reverse at Stevenage rather than at Hertford North. Any new post-GTR franchise would surely include a mandatory requirement to serve Watton-At-Stone and Stevenage, if only to avoid media headlines about huge sums of money spent creating a platform at Stevenage that no trains use!!
The Hertford loop is now effectively segregated from the ECML, as trains can run on the former freight lines between Finsbury Park and Alexandra Palace. Even if they don’t serve Harringay or Hornsey, that would hardly set a precedent for London Overground services. The present Liverpool Street to Chingford services do not call at Cambridge Heath and London Fields.

 

[Aictos]

I suggest people like the idea because they assume they’ll get new trains, probably orange ones, and Oyster PAYG with cheap fares, hopefully with their station in zone 6. Also there’ll be no delays, 100% reliability, 10 tph to Moorgate, etc etc. The truth is obviously somewhat different...

I be happy with just 4tph Hertford to London Monday to Saturday with 2tph continuing onto Stevenage then on Sundays have 2tph (3tph at a push) which don't terminate at Hertford and continue to Stevenage.

Is that possible?

Monday to Saturday
2tph London to Hertford
2tph London to Stevenage via Hertford

Sunday
2tph London to Stevenage via Hertford (increased to 3tph only if viable)

The Hertford loop is now effectively segregated from the ECML, as trains can run on the former freight lines between Finsbury Park and Alexandra Palace. Even if they don’t serve Harringay or Hornsey, that would hardly set a precedent for London Overground services. The present Liverpool Street to Chingford services do not call at Cambridge Heath and London Fields.

Because the Hertfords need to serve both Hornsey and Harringay due to the Welwyns not stopping there despite as you and indeed I have said multiple times that as the Hertfords are segregated from Finsbury Park northwards it makes more sense for them not to stop at those stations and have the Welwyns stop there instead.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why would TfL need to spend more to serve Watton and Stevenage, than they would if terminating at Hertford North?

Because it’s further. More units, more maintenance on them, more drivers, more electricity, more track access charges. At least a million extra per year, probably twice that.

 

[57Tonic]

Because it’s further. More units, more maintenance on them, more drivers, more electricity, more track access charges. At least a million extra per year, probably twice that.

With the Cross/purple/Lizzy Line now going out to Reading, Stevenage is about the same distance (only an estimated guess), and Welwyn to Croydon as a TfL Metro.

 

[mr_jrt]

Extending the new 5th track through Hitchin station to the flyover could restore those Letchworth terminators (and yes...I'm joking!)

 

[TrafficEng]

<Snip> Since the land in question appears to be in railway ownership and there are no obvious major earthworks in that area, probably cheaper and easier just to let the track arc out rather than trying to bring it back closer or replacing the mast in question with another longer/wider portal. I assume the piling to the left of the photo was part of this scheme to create level ground for the new track, but that is to do with where the track goes near the turnout and would still be needed whatever course it took between there and the station.

It was me that mentioned a possibility of a future platform 6 and doubling, although I didn't go into details as I thought that might be too much of a speculative idea. But in making the comment I had in mind things like the piling you mention. It is difficult to tell just from photos, but if that piling needed to be moved back to make room for a second track then it would make the future project more 'interesting' than the current one - e.g. with the space required for the piling plant now occupied by an operational railway. Perhaps there is enough space though.

Skimpot flyer has already covered much of what I was thinking in terms of possible future needs, but additionally I wonder whether having a longish length of single track may maintain some of the operational problems the scheme was intended to overcome. To avoid going too far OT I won't go into details, but I feel there are some similarities with the problems on the Mill Hill branch of the Northern Line. TfL were willing to take relatively drastic action to resolve the worst of that situation.

The other thing not covered in the discussion above is that capacity constraints on the line through Welwyn will be difficult to resolve. The kind of lateral thinking TfL like to adopt might 'create' capacity by encouraging passengers to use the less well used Hertford route instead.

Because it’s further. More units, more maintenance on them, more drivers, more electricity, more track access charges. At least a million extra per year, probably twice that.

That isn't necessarily a disincentive to TfL. The mode shift benefits of providing higher frequency services to a simple consistent pattern sees them running lightly used buses and underground services with the cost of doing so a secondary consideration.

 

[jon0844]

I suggest people like the idea because they assume they’ll get new trains, probably orange ones, and Oyster PAYG with cheap fares, hopefully with their station in zone 6. Also there’ll be no delays, 100% reliability, 10 tph to Moorgate, etc etc. The truth is obviously somewhat different...

Years ago, TfL taking over would have been great for a number of reasons that have happened anyway.

We have the new trains. We have contactless to WGC and Hertford on the inners. We have more trains (with more to come at weekends and then more trains in general come the new signalling).

TfL taking over now is more political than anything else. New livery but no other changes that I can think of.

Talk of LO taking over existed since 2006, and for a long time it was a no-no, then possible around the time of GTR taking over, then when GTR had the problems it did. But since then, things have improved and now TfL has no money.

So LO could be some way off, unless Grant Shapps is still transport secretary come the GTR contract expiry, and decides to make it happen so Brookmans Park can get 6, 8 or 24tph (in any case, I'm told he uses Potters Bar these days so probably doesn't care so much about Brookmans Park as he once did).

I swear I've read mention of a full rebuild of some sort down the line, hence the weird arrangements with platform 5's gateline(s) and the overbridge. Could be wrong, of course.

There are/were some grand plans for the area, but like everything (perhaps also like TfL taking over), things change. I believe there are plans going through for a major overhaul of the town centre, but the plans for the station, part of the leisure centre car park and rumours that even the theatre would get knocked down, as part of some massive new shopping centre/station/residential complex seems to have gone quiet as it relied on funding from multiple organisations.

Now with Brexit looming, we have to see how the economy fares. I suspect no more station work will happen until the plans are properly drawn up and approved/funded. It's good that NR funded the platform 5 works ahead of schedule, or else that may never have been done.

 

[malc-c]

Indeed - like the one in post #512, it looks like it'll be a Simply Supported Anchor (or SSA), replacing the Mid Point Anchor (MPA) termination on the existing mast nearest the camera in post #511. The benefit of these is that they don't need a back-tie arrangement - at the cost of a considerably longer-than-average pile.
The "rake" as it's known is also deliberate; my suspicion is that the across-track forces imparted via the cantilever (once registered) will pull the mast towards the track, so this will compensate them. Note also that the existing structure has a "pull-off" registration on the cantilever - the existing one behind it (and, I suspect, the new cantilever we're discussing) will be "push-off".

EDIT - to compensate for the increased span length between the new structure and the old one beyond the footbridge on the Down Slow (P4), I suspect that an assembly from the bridge might have to be employed.
(Emphasis on the word "might".)

Looking at the night shot, it would suggest to me that possibly the wires over platform four could be supported from the new masts (apologies for the terminology, but I don't work in the industry), and the old masts removed, given the placements. - It would make for a neater installation

 

[TrafficEng]

Talk of LO taking over existed since 2006, and for a long time it was a no-no, then possible around the time of GTR taking over, then when GTR had the problems it did. But since then, things have improved and now TfL has no money.

So LO could be some way off, unless Grant Shapps is still transport secretary come the GTR contract expiry, and decides to make it happen so Brookmans Park can get 6, 8 or 24tph (in any case, I'm told he uses Potters Bar these days so probably doesn't care so much about Brookmans Park as he once did).

I won't go into detail because it is probably off-topic and/or a speculative idea, but the issue from a London perspective is the requirement to deliver transport capacity increases to enable the level of development and intensification North London has been identified as needing to provide. The re-imagining of the northern half of CrossRail2 to better address the capacity constraints in this area (vs Hackney) is part of that bigger picture. Therefore what happens to the Great Northern services needs to be viewed in the context of integration with CR2.

For some people, TfL operating a metro-style service to WGC (divorced from the ThamesLink-core services) has some advantages - perhaps enough to overcome the political reluctance to hand more railway over to the London Mayor. The relevance of that to Platform 5 is that TfL operated metro-style services may then follow on the Hertford Loop as a consequence of changes elsewhere. Watch this space.

TfL having "no money" isn't necessarily accurate, or indicative of what might happen in the future.

There are/were some grand plans for the area, but like everything (perhaps also like TfL taking over), things change. I believe there are plans going through for a major overhaul of the town centre, but the plans for the station, part of the leisure centre car park and rumours that even the theatre would get knocked down, as part of some massive new shopping centre/station/residential complex seems to have gone quiet as it relied on funding from multiple organisations.

Now with Brexit looming, we have to see how the economy fares. I suspect no more station work will happen until the plans are properly drawn up and approved/funded. It's good that NR funded the platform 5 works ahead of schedule, or else that may never have been done.

Ignoring Brexit, the backers of major regeneration projects and shopping centre developments won't necessarily allow the state of the economy to affect their plans. If anything, a recession might make it more likely for developments like this to happen as the investors know that a recession in the construction industry provides scope for a lower-cost build, coupled to which the timescales for design, planning and construction will typically span periods of recession. So the developer not only gains through lower construction costs, but the sparkly new development is completed just in time for the economic recovery.

This work providing platform 5 is unlikely to be the last we see at Stevenage.

 

[jon0844]

A massive regeneration of Hatfield was scrapped last minute by the economic downturn. As may happen at Stevenage, the eventual works are far different and - as one might expect - centred around residential properties rather than the promised retail and leisure work.

WGC is now all about flats, while I believe the primary developer for Meridian Water walked away.

I have little faith in the station being upgraded for some time unless NR goes it alone.

 

[Bald Rick]

For some people, TfL operating a metro-style service to WGC (divorced from the ThamesLink-core services) has some advantages - perhaps enough to overcome the political reluctance to hand more railway over to the London Mayor. The relevance of that to Platform 5 is that TfL operated metro-style services may then follow on the Hertford Loop as a consequence of changes elsewhere. Watch this space.

TfL having "no money" isn't necessarily accurate, or indicative of what might happen in the future.

But, there isn’t capacity on the ECML slow lines for any more services, short of slowing down the non Moorgate services on the slows to be all stations or thereabouts.

And TfL don’t have any money for capital projects. At least not for new ones that aren’t already in their capital plan. They don’t even have money for resignalling the Picadilly, or new fleets for the Bakerloo / Central. Crossrail has seen to that.

 

[edwin_m]

Ignoring Brexit, the backers of major regeneration projects and shopping centre developments won't necessarily allow the state of the economy to affect their plans. If anything, a recession might make it more likely for developments like this to happen as the investors know that a recession in the construction industry provides scope for a lower-cost build, coupled to which the timescales for design, planning and construction will typically span periods of recession. So the developer not only gains through lower construction costs, but the sparkly new development is completed just in time for the economic recovery.

It is true that there is an opportunity from lower construction costs in a downturn, if you expect that the normal economic cycle would result in an upturn just as the project was completed.

But you can't just ignore Brexit here. If a developer decides that the downturn is not cyclic but in fact a long-term structural reduction in economic activity, as many of us expect from Brexit, then they are much less likely to invest because that payback just isn't going to be there. If the government's fine words are matched by actual public investment then this will give a fillip to the economy, but likely to be aimed at regions outside the south-east. The rise of internet shopping also means that we have a surplus of retail property nationally although I can't say whether this is a problem specifically in the Stevenage area. So I think at the very least there will be several years of hiatus while developers wait to see how things pan out before deciding whether to invest.

 

[hwl]

It is true that there is an opportunity from lower construction costs in a downturn, if you expect that the normal economic cycle would result in an upturn just as the project was completed.

But you can't just ignore Brexit here. If a developer decides that the downturn is not cyclic but in fact a long-term structural reduction in economic activity, as many of us expect from Brexit, then they are much less likely to invest because that payback just isn't going to be there. If the government's fine words are matched by actual public investment then this will give a fillip to the economy, but likely to be aimed at regions outside the south-east. The rise of internet shopping also means that we have a surplus of retail property nationally although I can't say whether this is a problem specifically in the Stevenage area. So I think at the very least there will be several years of hiatus while developers wait to see how things pan out before deciding whether to invest.

Retail property investors are trying to pull their money as as quick as possible so I can't see much investment going to start. One or 2 of the big players might have to be rescued from going under at the last minute at some point in 2020.

 

[TrafficEng]

But you can't just ignore Brexit here. If a developer decides that the downturn is not cyclic but in fact a long-term structural reduction in economic activity, as many of us expect from Brexit, then they are much less likely to invest because that payback just isn't going to be there. If the government's fine words are matched by actual public investment then this will give a fillip to the economy, but likely to be aimed at regions outside the south-east. The rise of internet shopping also means that we have a surplus of retail property nationally although I can't say whether this is a problem specifically in the Stevenage area. So I think at the very least there will be several years of hiatus while developers wait to see how things pan out before deciding whether to invest.

I was ignoring it only because this thread doesn't seem to be the right place to have a lengthy discussion about the merits (or otherwise) of Brexit, but I did want to make the point in general terms that the state of the economy is not necessarily a determinant of whether regeneration projects get started. In particular whether this might impact on the feasibility and/or timing of further improvements at Stevenage station.

(But FWIW, if a long-term structural reduction in economic activity is on the cards then neither the FTSE100 or FTSE250 are yet indicating this is expected in the short to medium term).

The problem in Stevenage is the town centre was a model for the 1960's/70's, but is well past its best before date. By modern standards the land-use planning is clunky. The principal shopping area is pedestrianised, but all at ground level leading to a long walk between shops at either end, and being open-air that walk is unpleasant in the rain or cold. I hope Stevenage-ites won't be offended if I refer to it as 'pretty grim'. In addition the older leisure facilities are dotted around the central area, apparently without too much thought. The railway station is severed from the town centre by a busy dual-carriageway, and this plus the railway sever the newer leisure facilities from the town centre. There is residential development in the centre, but again rather than being highly desirable flats within walking distance of a major station they are also 'pretty grim'.

What the town needs is a rationalisation of the land use, with modern (i.e. smaller) retail units all under cover, the leisure facilities regrouped, and the residential element reprovided in modern attractive blocks. There is considerable scope for densification with the existing sprawling shopping area (and ground-level car parking) being replaced with pure residential. And of course for the whole to be fully integrated into a modernised railway station as well as the leisure park beyond. I'm not sure how much of a factor internet shopping really is - some of the stores most likely to be impacted have already gone (e.g. M&S) leaving behind units which are useless in their current form. What remains is more to do with impulse buys and leisure-shopping.

As a result, the redevelopment is likely to be driven by money from the Government/LA and receipts from all the lovely residential development that can be crammed into the currently poorly used space. I believe the extent to which the wider economic situation will impact on that is not as great as some of the other posters appear to believe. But maybe I'm too much of an optimist.

 

[Hadders]

My view is that Stevenage town centre is too large and will slim down to be smaller and more concentrated in area. We've already seen a number of shops close (e.g M&S and even the town centre branch of McDonalds!) These shops won't get replaced by other retailers, people go elsewhere or online for major shopping. That level of business is never coming back to the town centre.

We'll end up with more flats near the station. We've already seen it in small scale redevelopments (e.g the old land registry building) over the last few years but more will follow. I'd bet on the current library and the other former health service/council buildings nearby becoming residential. I could see new offices for the council - that will be more flats along with a couple of other office blocks (Swingate) and maybe a car park or two, and the bingo hall.

The station isn't that far from the town centre. It is the wrong side of the dual carriageway but it'll be mega bucks to divert it and relocate the theatre. I suspect they'll end up tarting up the bus station and the pedestrian bridge to the station.

There isn't much wrong with the leisure centre (other the clientele some nights of the week). You could argue that the car park is too big. Maybe replace with a multi storey on a smaller footprint releasing land for more flats.

As for the station the current ticket hall and concourse is on the bridge over the station. The stairs leading to the platform are much too narrow. To do the job properly needs a new or extended bridge over the railway to build new station facilities, with an additional set of steps down to the platforms. What we'll probably end up with is a bodge job of making the ticket office smaller, releasing more circulating space and a few more coffee shops!

 

[edwin_m]

There has certainly been a lot of densification and residential-led development in London itself and near to major commuter stations over recent years - just look at East Croydon for example. So it's not unreasonable to argue that Stevenage has similar potential, although it's over twice as far away and may have to wait for closer-in sites where the commuting cost is less so the developers can sell flats at higher prices. But I think if I was one of those developers (which I'm not, and I'd probably be hopeless if I was) then I would hold back to get some idea of where the economy is going.

 

[Hadders]

Biggest advantage for Stevenage is the journey time. 24 minutes to Kings Cross is faster than from some stations that are closer.

 

[TrafficEng]

Biggest advantage for Stevenage is the journey time. 24 minutes to Kings Cross is faster than from some stations that are closer.

Quite. Faster than the journey to Cockfosters where TfL plan to build 400 flats (for rent only).

Also (again bringing us back to platform 5) Stevenage has the potential for two (semi)independent routes into London allowing a relatively easy alternative if there is disruption on one. Places like Cockfosters are highly dependent on their one tube line. Although - being London - there are alternatives, these typically involve a torturous bus route to reach them.

 

[bramling]

There has certainly been a lot of densification and residential-led development in London itself and near to major commuter stations over recent years - just look at East Croydon for example. So it's not unreasonable to argue that Stevenage has similar potential, although it's over twice as far away and may have to wait for closer-in sites where the commuting cost is less so the developers can sell flats at higher prices. But I think if I was one of those developers (which I'm not, and I'd probably be hopeless if I was) then I would hold back to get some idea of where the economy is going.

One hurdle for densification is that local people generally don’t want it. People in the Home Counties don’t want the area to start resembling London, with the emergence of London-type problems like daily stabbings and chronic traffic congestion / pollution.

 

[Fred26]

Plans for Stevenage town centre have been sorted for a while now and work has started. For anyone interested, there's a unit in the town centre, near the fountain, that showcases the plans.

 

[jon0844]

Plans for Stevenage town centre have been sorted for a while now and work has started. For anyone interested, there's a unit in the town centre, near the fountain, that showcases the plans.

It's all in the main town, by the bus station, isn't it? The stuff over to the leisure park has gone on hold, if it ever got to any sort of planning stage?