UK's 'best and worst' railway stations named

[gavin]

Just looking on BBC news at a passenger survey for UK stations and Glasgow Queen Street has been named Britain's most unpopular railway station following the survey late last year

Glasgow Queen Street has been named Britain's most unpopular railway station in a survey of passengers. Independent watchdog Transport Focus took the views of more than 28,000 people at 56 stations for its ranking. Only 58% of travellers were "satisfied" with Queen Street, Scotland's third busiest station. Glasgow Central nearby made the top 10 with a 91% approval. London King's Cross achieved a 96% score and was the most popular station, just above neighbouring St Pancras.

Most unpopular
Glasgow Queen Street - 58%
Gatwick Airport - 66%
Oxford - 67%
Clapham Junction - 69%

Most popular: Top 4
London King's Cross - 96%
London St Pancras - 95%
Birmingham New Street - 92%
Reading - 92%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44023411

 

[Francis]

The full list is in the Guardian. It's not clear whether Transport Focus chose the stations to be graded - what criteria were this 56 selected on. Why Amersham, for instance, but not Carlisle or Preston or Crewe? Or did they come below the 56 mentioned?
Some of the leaders show the effect of fine architecture: Kings Cross, St Pancras and Marylebone...but Birmingham New St, hardly, at least at platform level. Glasgow Queen St got a bad rating because it's still in the process of being rebuilt, and in any case it's on a tightly restricted site. Maybe they should have kept hold of Buchanan St. and joined the two with travelators?

Satisfaction ratings of 56 railway stations in Britain, according to Transport Focus:
1. London King’s Cross 96%
2. London St Pancras 95%
3. Birmingham New Street 92%
4. Reading 92%
5. London Marylebone 91%
6. Liverpool Central 91%
7. Beaconsfield 91%
8. Sheffield 91%
9. Manchester Piccadilly 91%
10. Glasgow Central 91%
11. London Blackfriars 91%
12. York 91%
13. Edinburgh 90%
14. Newcastle 90%
15. Amersham 90%
16. Leicester 89%
17. Newark North Gate 89%
18. London Paddington 88%
19. Heathrow Airport Terminals 1,2,3 88%
20. London Fenchurch Street 88%
21. Richmond (Surrey) 88%
22. Bath Spa 88%
23. Heathrow Terminal 5 88%
24. Liverpool Lime Street 87%
25. High Wycombe 87%
26. Leamington Spa 87%
27. Cambridge 87%
28. London Liverpool Street 87%
29. Nottingham 86%
30. Milton Keynes Central 86%
31. Peterborough 86%
32. Derby 85%
33. Moorfields 85%
34. Leeds 84%
35. Brighton 83%
36. London Charing Cross 83%
37. London Bridge 81%
38. Chester 81%
39. St Albans 81%
40. London Waterloo 81%
41. Bristol Temple Meads 81%
42. London Euston 81%
43. London Cannon Street 79%
44. Coventry 77%
45. East Croydon 77%
46. Stratford (London) 76%
47. Cardiff Central 75%
48. Hull 73%
49. Highbury And Islington 72%
50. London Victoria 72%
51. Wimbledon 71%
52. Barking 70%
53. Clapham Junction 69%
54. Oxford 67%
55. Gatwick Airport 66%
56. Glasgow Queen Street 58%

 

[DanTrain]

Manchester Piccadilly and New Street both seem higher than I’d have guessed - I’ve never much liked either of them.

 

[HowardGWR]

This was a dreadful article in the papers. The headline should have read 'most of Britain's big stations highly appreciated by more than three quarters of users'.
Apart from the nonsense of Queen St (which should not have been included in the survey), even Gatwick got more than two thirds satisfied (66%).

 

[oldman]

The dreadful thing is that the 'research' was published in the first place. Give the newspapers clickbait and they will use it.

 

[Howardh]

No comment on the list - but I'm sick to the back teeth of Manchester Airport's station; and judging by my experience I'm not the only one! Worst aspect is having two trains on the same platform, and people waiting at the end for a train which then turns up on a completely different platform - and either an inaudible announcement or (as someone told me last week) none at all, so they are stranded unknowingly - until they get fed up and ask staff with the reply "it went from another platform...". The info displays are IMO inadequate, and seating areas are sparse. Not the greatest introduction th the UK ever for visitors. At least the toilets are reasonable.

No doubt someone will tell me I'm wholly wrong and that it's fantastic and runs smoothly all the time. All I can reply is I spent half-an-hour staring fondly at the Metrolink side instead....grrr.

 

[700007]

The full list is in the Guardian. It's not clear whether Transport Focus chose the stations to be graded - what criteria were this 56 selected on. Why Amersham, for instance, but not Carlisle or Preston or Crewe? Or did they come below the 56 mentioned?
Some of the leaders show the effect of fine architecture: Kings Cross, St Pancras and Marylebone...but Birmingham New St, hardly, at least at platform level. Glasgow Queen St got a bad rating because it's still in the process of being rebuilt, and in any case it's on a tightly restricted site. Maybe they should have kept hold of Buchanan St. and joined the two with travelators?

Satisfaction ratings of 56 railway stations in Britain, according to Transport Focus:
1. London King’s Cross 96%
2. London St Pancras 95%
3. Birmingham New Street 92%
4. Reading 92%
5. London Marylebone 91%
6. Liverpool Central 91%
7. Beaconsfield 91%
8. Sheffield 91%
9. Manchester Piccadilly 91%
10. Glasgow Central 91%
11. London Blackfriars 91%
12. York 91%
13. Edinburgh 90%
14. Newcastle 90%
15. Amersham 90%
16. Leicester 89%
17. Newark North Gate 89%
18. London Paddington 88%
19. Heathrow Airport Terminals 1,2,3 88%
20. London Fenchurch Street 88%
21. Richmond (Surrey) 88%
22. Bath Spa 88%
23. Heathrow Terminal 5 88%
24. Liverpool Lime Street 87%
25. High Wycombe 87%
26. Leamington Spa 87%
27. Cambridge 87%
28. London Liverpool Street 87%
29. Nottingham 86%
30. Milton Keynes Central 86%
31. Peterborough 86%
32. Derby 85%
33. Moorfields 85%
34. Leeds 84%
35. Brighton 83%
36. London Charing Cross 83%
37. London Bridge 81%
38. Chester 81%
39. St Albans 81%
40. London Waterloo 81%
41. Bristol Temple Meads 81%
42. London Euston 81%
43. London Cannon Street 79%
44. Coventry 77%
45. East Croydon 77%
46. Stratford (London) 76%
47. Cardiff Central 75%
48. Hull 73%
49. Highbury And Islington 72%
50. London Victoria 72%
51. Wimbledon 71%
52. Barking 70%
53. Clapham Junction 69%
54. Oxford 67%
55. Gatwick Airport 66%
56. Glasgow Queen Street 58%

Are they sure this is correct??
Barking is a mess of a station, so is Euston. I also don't know how grim Fenchurch Street made it onto the list so high up. Just my opinion anyway.

King's Cross definitely deserves 1st spot, has to be one of the nicest stations I know. Blackfriars also deserves its high spot, Liverpool Street and Waterloo could be higher.

But I don't see this study as very credible.

 

[59CosG95]

Not quite sure how Wimbledon made the list...possibly the fairly cramped layout?

 

[rdeez]

The full list is in the Guardian. It's not clear whether Transport Focus chose the stations to be graded - what criteria were this 56 selected on. Why Amersham, for instance, but not Carlisle or Preston or Crewe? Or did they come below the 56 mentioned?

The Guardian article says "The independent transport watchdog surveyed more than 28,000 passengers and the list comprises 56 stations where at least 100 people responded." - so it sounds like they set 100 responses as the minimum for inclusion in the report and the 56 stations are where they achieved this.

That only partially answers the question of course - there's no mention of which, if any, additional stations they conducted surveys at and didn't get at least 100 responses.

 

[stuart]

I'm sure "Glasgow QS comes 56th out of 2,500 (or whatever the exact number is) UK railway stations" wouldn't have made such an alluring headline. But it is a nonsense to include a station that's in the midst of a complex refurbishment, and which is served by a single operator which has come in for its own fair share of criticism over the past few years.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The top 4 are the ones NR has recently rebuilt and spend oodles of money on, so it's just as well they are "liked".
I don't know how anyone could vote for Liverpool Central (#6, 91%) - it's just a big underground cavern.
At least the two stations which were previously reputedly the worst are not on the list - Wakefield Kirkgate and Manchester Victoria.
Personally I'd give Manchester Oxford Road a kicking, with Piccadilly P13/14 not far behind.
Woeful facilities for the footfall in both cases.

 

[DuncanS]

QS is still providing nearly 100% of services despite the fact the station is being rebuilt around the platforms at present. I suspect the people complaining about QS are the same people who think it should currently have marble staircases and gold embossed departure boards.

Personally I'm shocked that New Street is so highly thought of.

 

[Domh245]

Not quite sure how Wimbledon made the list...possibly the fairly cramped layout?

In my experience, Wimbledon has been full to bursting for a few years now, and given the recent bad form on the SWML, plus the Waterloo blockade, commuters won't have been particularly happy when they were interviewed.

 

[ScotTrains]

Glasgow Queen Street gets a thumbs down from me due to the permanent removal of First Class lounge facilities. All major terminus stations should have a First Class lounge!

 

[59CosG95]

In my experience, Wimbledon has been full to bursting for a few years now, and given the recent bad form on the SWML, plus the Waterloo blockade, commuters won't have been particularly happy when they were interviewed.

I can sympathise with that, considering it's been my local station for nearly 16 years now! Most of Joe Public would be less likely to have patience with NR for the Blockade in the summer (whether under SWR or SWT), but I agree that the "congestion relief" promised for CP6 can't come soon enough.
Or better still, the long-term rebuild program for CR2 (assuming it goes ahead) will be good (once it's finished. I know it's gonna be HELL during construction).

 

[route:oxford]

I suspect the people complaining about QS are the same people who think it should currently have marble staircases and gold embossed departure boards.

Even the daftest weegie would be aware that marble staircases would be treacherous in a city with a climate like Glasgow.

 

[Stopper]

Glasgow Queen Street was pretty poor even before the works started. A cramped, dark, busy station where the platforms are only announced very late on, leading to a scramble through the barriers.

 

[B&I]

I don't know how anyone could vote for Liverpool Central (#6, 91%) - it's just a big underground cavern.

The above-ground waiting area is pleasant but not very practical, given the susbequent squeeze at busy times to reach the platforms. That underlines the main problem with Central - it just hasn't the space for the people it handles. Redevelopment with 4 widish platforms, and preferrably natural ligjt at platform level and a new entrance tp the south, is essential.

 

[Iskra]

I'm actually surprised St Pancras didn't come out top.

Also quite surprised that Sheffield is popular. To me it's congested, cold, cramped, quite exposed to the elements, with confusing internal passenger flows, generic inadequate catering units that generally have exposed seating, obtuse and disinterested ticket staff and a severe begging problem. Other than that, it's alright.

 

[Failed Unit]

Glasgow Queen Street was pretty poor even before the works started. A cramped, dark, busy station where the platforms are only announced very late on, leading to a scramble through the barriers.

True. It was grim before the building work started. Can see why it is at the bottom now but that is really because of the building work. Wonder what it will be like when it is finished. Not a station you want to spend long at currently.

 

[peri]

I don't see why Hull is 9th from bottom. It seems perfectly ok to me and no barriers.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I don't see why Hull is 9th from bottom. It seems perfectly ok to me and no barriers.

I also was surprised by Hull, always struck me as a decent little station, nice mixture of grand design, facilities (especially given the interchange) and practicality. There's certainly worse city centre stations out there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

MKC is hardly a *nice* station. It's functional, but it's still the classic "passing through a gentlemen's lavatory at 125mph" and pretty chilly in winter. I always thought it a shame they couldn't have rebuilt it with a high vaulted roof similar to the Midsummer Place shopping centre up the hill from it when it was expanded with the extra platforms; all they did was built a bit on the end exactly the same as it was.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm actually surprised St Pancras didn't come out top.

Quite possibly because the domestic provision is actually quite poor, being a long walk away and with an inadequate amount of platforms. I'd take St Pancras if I wanted to stand looking at a fancy building, I'd take Euston if I wanted a functional station (albeit with an entirely avoidable silly scrum).

And Marylebone...that of course is the gentleman's London terminus.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are they sure this is correct??
Barking is a mess of a station, so is Euston.

Euston might not be pretty but it is very functional (save the stupid scrum which occurs at near enough every London terminus) - in particular it is warm in winter and cool in summer and doesn't stink of human faeces when it's hot like Paddington does. And the "Great Hall" is actually quite impressive in a different way to the original.

 

[TheEdge]

Personally I'm shocked that New Street is so highly thought of.

I'm not, personally I love going through it now. Normally sat in Yo Sushi with a Sapporo beer and some nice sushi watching the world go by. The platforms are still dark but now that the "concourse" (I guess) is a nice place when compared to the awful old one that doesn't matter as there is no reason to go down more than a few minutes before our train

 

[Howardh]

Another omission, Huddersfield (can't cats vote??) unless there simply weren't enough repliues.

 

[greyman42]

I am surprised Leeds does not fare better. Anyone know why?

 

[Matt_pool]

I'm also surprised how Liverpool Central is so high up the list. When it's busy there's a terrible bottleneck at the bottom of the escalators on platforms 1/2, not helped by people who congregate right at the bottom of the down escalator to wait for their trains.

Then there's the ticket office which also doubles as a shop, meaning that if you have to buy a ticket and yo are in a hurry you could be held up by people in front of you buying newspapers, cigs and Mars bars!

I don't know how much they spent the other year refurbishing Central, but to me platforms 1 and 2 still resemble a morgue.

And I'm surprised at where Liverpool Lime Street is on the list. The queues at the ticket office can get long at times, and the ticket office staff aren't that good. At least the new ticket barriers are better than the bottleneck that used to occur, but the gateline staff still just grunt at you!

And there's been no ATM's there for months. They were in a stupid place anyway, halfway up platform 7! The retail and catering options aren't too good for such a large station.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

And there's been no ATM's there for months. They were in a stupid place anyway, halfway up platform 7! The retail and catering options aren't too good for such a large station.

Go to Sainsburys across the road, I was told when I enquired where they had put the bank ATMs.
Hopefully they will return when the refurb is finished.
One top mark I would give for Lime St is for the toilets. Very clean, well maintained, cheery cleaners.