Jump to content
 

New uniform shelters coming to many small and medium stations near you.


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Be interesting to hear what those who condemn it would build instead.

 

Designing a station that pleases customers, and functions well, without costing a fortune to build, and keeps well, without spending ten fortunes on maintenance, is no easy job.

The basic design is ok but it’s the details that are missing from the image that make you wonder if they are addressed. Staff need shelter from wind in such an open design and somewhere to put all the paperwork and notices you have to display in any workplace these days. We have three 4ft square noticeboards, one is purely H&S requirements, another is operating notices and info which would include disability and assist lists for platform staff and then the staff notices for rosters etc. Glass walls don’t work with notice boards ;) 

They’ll probably issue them all with iPads to replace paper and save the environment . . . 

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

They’ll probably issue them all with iPads to replace paper and save the environment . . .

 

That's more or less, and with greater or lesser degrees of success, what TfL have done.

 

One thing that teases at my mind about NR's role in station design is how they ensure a properly joined-up philosophy with the TOCs, and, very crucially, with ticketing arrangements, which I think are "industry wide". NR at its worst is very disconnected from "the fare paying customer", and they could so easily foul this up by starting at the wrong end of the equation, with an infrastructure-owner perspective, rather than a customer perspective.

 

The TfL, and to be honest most other metros, approach to station design is tightly tied-up with customer focus, ticketing philosophy, and staffing philosophy, particularly because the way ticketing is dealt with has a massive influence on what customers need to do at stations, and its hard to see how the national rail industry in Britain can make radical changes to key aspects of stations without cutting through the insane jungle of fare-structures and ticketing-formats that it is buried in at the moment - that jungle consumes vast amounts of staff time and effort, puts potential users off, inconveniences actual users, and in the process dictates certain things about station design.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how easy it would be to clean and maintain that impressive clock. There does not seem to be any easy access for a cherry picker in that layout (although I suppose that could be arranged in practice).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
17 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

My first reaction was that it doesn't offer shelter from the wind, but I think it might include a longitudinal glass partition/screen that should eliminate cross winds, I'm less sure about longitudinal winds though.

 

A few things I like about it: the clear sight-lines with few "nooks and crannies" in which lurkers can lurk, which create a threatening atmosphere for a lot of customers after dark particularly; the "chimney", which is a really good "flag", giving the place a "street presence"; the way the passenger flow appears to work.

 

Overall, it reminds me strongly of suburban stations on the Copenhagen S-train, which work really well for "board, alight, transfer-mode", which is what stations are actually for. And, to me, it looks like a concept drawing, showing the general form of the design, so I would expect it to be used as a "box of lego", with particular stations being configured to suit individual sites/needs.

 

As to access for disabled users, its a legal requirement, so although it might not be immediately obvious, I'd be gobsmacked if it wasn't there. how JC can tell whether or not it has toilets in the version shown, I'm not at all sure.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Be interesting to hear what those who condemn it would build instead.

 

Designing a station that pleases customers, and functions well, without costing a fortune to build, and keeps well, without spending ten fortunes on maintenance, is no easy job.

 

The thing is, station design isn't a one-size-fits all area - the needs for a suburban or metro station (high footfall, frequent trains, short waiting times) are very different from those of stations handling longer-haul services (less frequent trains, more people waiting, changing, greater likelyhood of passengers needing assistance). This looks much more like a design for the former, attempting to be both.

 

As to what I'd build instead - I'd start by actually looking at existing stations and seeing what works well and what doesn't. Longitudinal winds can be a big problem in a lot of more exposed stations. Just try changing trains at Barnham midwinter (plenty of others too, that's just one I know fairly well). You also need facilities for staff, toilets, catering - even on a commuter station people will expect to be able to get a coffee on their way to work. Signage needs to be clear, especially if all your stations are going to look very similar - make sure you can always see a name from any train window as the train stops. 

 

You talk of few nooks and crannies for lurkers, but those bus-shelters look awful for that - just one unsavour character would be enough to make many people uncomfortable, wheras a bigger shelter would give more room to spread out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yay, more bland, uninspiring, lifeless unpleasant designs. They're everywhere already and already make me significantly depressed. As for "well what would you do then?", the implication being that that's all that can practically be done these days, that just kills off any hope for a pleasanter place to be in the future too (not that I had any left anyway).

 

Now I just need to guess how long it'll be before someone comes along and tells me that my likes and dislikes are objectively wrong so having the gall to find modern design unbelievably depressing is entirely my fault because someone else's subjective opinion has decided it's objectively great and what we should all look forward to.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nick C said:

The thing is, station design isn't a one-size-fits all area

 

I haven't read anyone say that it is. Which is good, because they'd be wrong if they did.

 

What I see looking at that concept drawing is a suburban station, but it isn't hard to imagine how the lego-bricks could be used to create a small town station, or a low-patronage "halt". I'd struggle a bit with those lego-bricks for an "intercity" station, but then it seems very specifically not to be pitched at that purpose.

 

I agree with you about longitudinal winds, and I still do wonder if that concept is weak on that point.

 

Enclosed waiting areas are always a conundrum, but I don't think they've done too badly with that glass box: its near the gate-line, where you'd expect the staff-member to be; it would be pretty hard to hide in it, given that its a fish-tank; size is a function of patronage and maximum waiting-time, so train-service frequency; if you put all the enclosed waiting in one place, it tends to cause bunching of customers when a train arrives ........... but, if at conceptual level the idea is a fish-tank, that's probably the best that can be done.

 

The lack of signage in the drawing is very odd - I wonder if it is because TOCs like to brand their signs, or simply because the architects are showing an architectural concept, and aren't signage bods.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Reorte said:

the implication being that that's all that can practically be done these days,

 

No. it is an open question.

 

One of the the options for general architectural feel, leaving aside layout, sight-lines etc, has got to be the use of more traditional materials, like those NSE ones highlighted by a previous poster - even using relatively small areas of brick and tile can give a far more vernacular look to a building, which a lot of people seem to find cosier, less stark.

 

Another clear option is to create a "box", a big, enclosed space, rather than the very un-enclosed approach of this concept. The treatment of the "box" can vary - starkly bauhaus, all glass, feature timber-beam roof trusses inside, a tent-type structure, there are a host of ways of doing it, and the shape can be one of many, circular was a vogue thing for a period, for instance, but the key point is that it encloses, rather than exposes.

 

All the options have pros and cons. I'm just fishing for which ones people suggest, and why.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
21 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

No. it is an open question.

 

I've long realised that I'm going to have an instinctive strong negative reaction to anything that'll realistically get built these days, so I've got no realistic suggestions. Yeah, it might be pointless miserable moaning but that's the state I'm left in.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

The basic design is ok but it’s the details that are missing from the image that make you wonder if they are addressed. Staff need shelter from wind in such an open design and somewhere to put all the paperwork and notices you have to display in any workplace these days. We have three 4ft square noticeboards, one is purely H&S requirements, another is operating notices and info which would include disability and assist lists for platform staff and then the staff notices for rosters etc. Glass walls don’t work with notice boards ;) 

They’ll probably issue them all with iPads to replace paper and save the environment . . . 

Advertising boards too. Whether for leaf fall, season tickets or Mickey D's.

 

Ruin the artists impression of course but it's the world we live in.

 

C6T. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit torn on this.  I quite liked the ethos of the Modernisation Plan, having read back on old architecture books, and the modular steel/glass/brushed concrete designs that could be adapted to various stations and sites.  When well-installed and well-maintained, they looked good.  But that's the crux of it; so much architecture here starts with a good idea, then is filtered through a fine mesh of Government interference, low-priced materials, and budget-cuts to result in something really basic and uninspiring, that will probably cost three times as much as the 'fancy' design in terms of ongoing maintenance, and weather very poorly.  And whilst I hate the idea of perfectly functional historic buildings being dropped to be replaced with this new design, it ought to be a marked improvement for places like, say, Dudley Port where an exposed bus shelter offers no real protection from the elements.  Though I'd equally agree with the comments about worrying about shelter from the wind and rain provided by this new design, and if the canopies are actually too high to keep the rain off.

 

What strikes me is the problem of vandalism; the 70's/80's brick/concrete shelters were drab and uninspiring, and often covered in graffiti, but at least they were solid enough to stay standing.  We had a phone box on the end of our road which was finally removed last year because as fast as the phone company were replacing panes of glass, the local idiot teenagers were smashing them again.  An adjacent bus shelter suffers similarly.  Nice and airy as the new station looks, it strikes me as a hell of a lot of inviting targets for maliciously-hurled bricks.  Maybe not too much of a problem if your inner-city suburban station is manned and has sentry-cameras everywhere, but what about if this design is used for unstaffed spots?

 

The more I look at it, the more it looks like something clip-together with as few complex/curved components as possible, that maybe Playmobil would produce.  I'm aware I'm not a professional architect so unable to offer up a finished alternative to it though off the top of my head.  However, having seen Government-led specifications for the rail industry has so far resulted in non-functioning trains with no proper catering facilities and ironing boards for seats, I assume these new stations will start shedding panes of glass in light breezes, rust, or spontaneously catch fire/dismantle themselves/open a portal to Hades six months after being built ;) 

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bored teens are brilliant at finding ways to ruin stuff, lobbing a brick through glass is so passé though. One cheap "diamond" ring and these stations will soon be festooned in all sorts of vibrant male genital artistry and the low-down on how their personal relationships are panning out, 4eva.

 

C6T. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/05/2021 at 10:41, Nick C said:

There's also no facilities for staff (presumably no staff - and with barriers, therefore impossible for many disabled people to use), no toilets, no catering outlets,

 

Perhaps people should try looking at some of the other press images - https://riba.app.box.com/s/9m7s9o9bhwydkw5g55icxk5myl9mujr3 where for example it can be seen a catering/food outlet provided...

 

They also provide some platform pictures to be critical of.

Edited by mdvle
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Vernacular" architecture advocates always amuse me.  They coo and gush about St Pauls, or in railway circles St Pancras, completely oblivious to the fact neither of these buildings in any way reflected the "vernacular" that surrounded them.  In fact, there is somewhere a very funny (for us Planners) Planning Committee report advocating the refusal of St Pauls Cathedral as being of an inappropriate size, potential to cause congestion, the non-vernacular architecture and materials and detrimental affect on the amenity of neighbouring property.  St Pancras, which let's not forget was a second-hand design having failed to win the architectural competition for a Government building, was finished in an architectural style that was avant=garde for the era, not a particularly British architectural style, dominates the much simpler and classical King's Cross, and used non London bricks creating the 19th Century equivalent of a contemporary high tech building in the Cotswolds.

The BR small traditional station developed by NSE and used extensively in West Midlands rebuilds was good, but not particularly cheap to build.  It had a nice presence, was logical and was capable of many variations to suit the needs.  However there is a lot of pressure on Network Rail and other partners funding rail investment to reduce cost and if we're not careful, we could soon be back to a platform, Adshel and ticket machine.  If this design can be adapted and modularised to enable cost effective development, including integration with the wider public realm outside the station to create a welcoming sense of place, which will rely on local authorities being able to secure funds for paving and environmental works, it could make for a good solution.  In any case, the majority of stations being looked at for rebuilding or new build won't be "inter-city" rail heads.  Virtually all the re-opening proposals or plans for new stations are for local services, where traditionally the DfT has often bullied the providers into accepting unstaffed bus shelter halts (I can say with some pleasure that during my time in peripherally being involved in new stations in the West Midlands  that apart from the Chase Line, our Councillors resisted their attempts to unstaff the network and preferred to have either the brick chalet style staffed stations or custom designs like on the Jewellery Line, but that came at a cost), and that is the alternative you WILL get left to the DfT's tender mercies.  I hope this comes out as a cost effective solution that funding agencies can accept for their new local stations as the alternative will be far worse.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
42 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

These stations look very like the standard DB AG design for the same purpose — Faller do a kit of it.

 

Quite agree, I thought so too - I was looking for some pictures of that (real, not the Faller kit).  It was a few years ago they came out with it I think, basically a red cube and a ticket machine?

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Sorry to be negative, but I'm underwhelmed.  The clock is good, but the rest? Canopies that won't actually protect anybody from the weather?  Useless.  Canopy supports apparently made from wood?  Not going to last on this soggy litlle island.  I could go on. 
This just reinforces my predudice that architects exist to win prizes from other architects and not to provide a built environment that's actually fit for purpose.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
16 hours ago, lmsforever said:

What a waste of money not fit for service ,did anyone notice the bus in the background looks like an lt Leyland National.  Its not April Fools Day is it  ?

I thought the whole thing looked like a concept drawing from a brochure for a 1960s new town. The frontage looks like some of the early publicity for Coventry station reconstruction. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

(I can say with some pleasure that during my time in peripherally being involved in new stations in the West Midlands  that apart from the Chase Line, our Councillors resisted their attempts to unstaff the network and preferred to have either the brick chalet style staffed stations or custom designs like on the Jewellery Line, but that came at a cost),

 

On that note, I was always impressed with Stourbridge Town when I was at college there.  A tiny little terminus, on what was effectively a long siding, with (at the time) a single-carriage DMU shuffling back and forth.  And yet it ended up with a very nicely designed little station building, manned too, where normally a simple concrete shelf and a bus shelter would have been expected.  OK so it had gone through the 'portacabin and bus shelter' phase when the GWR building had been dropped many years before, but it was nice to see a bit of money spent on the station when it was redeveloped again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ben B said:

 

On that note, I was always impressed with Stourbridge Town when I was at college there.  A tiny little terminus, on what was effectively a long siding, with (at the time) a single-carriage DMU shuffling back and forth.  And yet it ended up with a very nicely designed little station building, manned too, where normally a simple concrete shelf and a bus shelter would have been expected.  OK so it had gone through the 'portacabin and bus shelter' phase when the GWR building had been dropped many years before, but it was nice to see a bit of money spent on the station when it was redeveloped again.

That was actually one of the projects I was involved in.  We worked with the Dudley Borough artist Steve Field to design the paving, the glass blower statue, the railings and other features, and later when a toilet block was added, he designed that.  Ironically, it shortened the branch even further, as when the project first came up for funding, it was just to refurbish the bus station.  However, when we discussed the project with the operators and the team managing the bus station, they said what they really needed two extra bays and could keep the shelters going for a bit longer.  So to get two extra bays we had to rob a bit more of the branch - but in the end, a much better station, a safe pedestrian route to the underpass without having to dodge the buses, space for a loo which the old bus station never had, and less congestion in the bus station meant a much better result for all transport users even if they had to put up with the old 1970s bus station for a bit longer.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
12 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

 

The TfL, and to be honest most other metros, approach to station design is tightly tied-up with customer focus, ticketing philosophy, and staffing philosophy....

 

 

 

Well TfLs policy is to abolish ticket offices! I know that officially that allows staff to be re-deployed to 'front of house' activities - but such things are vulnerable when cuts need to be made.

 

The only reason TfL haven't' got rid of them on the Overground / TfL rail (loike on the Underground) is because of privatisation legislation designed to protect them and which includes an obligation to sell tickets for national rail services UK wide (not just TfL fare zones). 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Phatbob said:

Canopy supports apparently made from wood?  Not going to last on this soggy litlle island.  I could go on. 

 

I doubt the wood is structural - while wooden framed buildings (including blocks of flats) have come back into vogue in recent years, its most likely that in this case its likely trendy cladding on a steel structure

Link to post
Share on other sites

Positive comment - like I said, it's a concept. If it's modular it can be chopped/changed/extended to provide accommodation for staff and their noticeboards / Ipad chargers.

 

Less positive comment - It's not just TfW who think that actual staffed ticket offices are so last century/century before though. A chatbot on your phone can sell you national tickets and doesn't hide in the bit with the heater when it's cold. Likewise heaters and doors on waiting room just encourage people (not necessarily passengers) to hang about in them. You managed to get to the station in the cold without freezing to death, keep your coat on til the train arrives.

 

Much less positive comment - has anyone else noticed the D-train on one of NWR's 'visualisations' ? Self-combusting trains under a wooden canopy should be fun !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...