New stations leak like a sieve

[Deepgreen]

It seems like every subway replacement I've ever seen has made the relevant station experience worse, with Leeds and Reading setting the standard with half-mile hikes into the sky some distance down the platform from where you need them. East Croydon is a new low though. In addition to having been needlessly exposed to the elements, the bridge is far higher than the subway was low, and has steps pointing away from most of the train (or all of it on most slow line departures), meaning that you have to navigate a narrow (and slippy) bit of platform to get to it, often while walking against the flow of passengers. It's like they decided that the lengthy recommended changing times at the station were a good thing, and should be reinforced by the architecture.

I imagine the height of the new bridge was specified to allow OHLE at some point, but its design is shockingly poor. Who signs these things off? Incidentally, I remain amazed that East Croydon still has four platforms with no tactile strips or yellow lines! The paving was finished on platforms 3 - 6 ages ago but nothing has happened since. How does such a busy station escape this treatment for so long (and why wasn't the tactile work done as part of the re-paving scheme)?!

 

[geo]

It seems like every subway replacement I've ever seen has made the relevant station experience worse, with Leeds and Reading setting the standard with half-mile hikes into the sky some distance down the platform from where you need them. East Croydon is a new low though. In addition to having been needlessly exposed to the elements, the bridge is far higher than the subway was low, and has steps pointing away from most of the train (or all of it on most slow line departures), meaning that you have to navigate a narrow (and slippy) bit of platform to get to it, often while walking against the flow of passengers. It's like they decided that the lengthy recommended changing times at the station were a good thing, and should be reinforced by the architecture.

From my rather limited experience, the new(ish) footbridge at Haywards Heath appears to be in improvement compared to the seemingly consistently wet subway it replaced. Although, as noted elsewhere, it appears to have gone with function over form (not that this is necessarily a bad thing).

 

[Deepgreen]

From my rather limited experience, the new(ish) footbridge at Haywards Heath appears to be in improvement compared to the seemingly consistently wet subway it replaced. Although, as noted elsewhere, it appears to have gone with function over form (not that this is necessarily a bad thing).

A very good thing if the two are taken to be mutually exclusive (which they are not). East Croydon seems to have gone for neither!

 

[Ships]

I'll add Salford crescent to the list of new canopies which are as much use as a chocolate fireguard!

 

[Bungle965]

I'll add Salford crescent to the list of new canopies which are as much use as a chocolate fireguard!

The bridge from the ticket office to the platforms looks very much unfinished. There is not even a roof to it!
Leaving it open to the elements.
Sam

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

 

[Mojo]

New railway stations seem to cost more than they have ever done before, but seem to be of increasingly poor quality.

 

[Stew998]

From my rather limited experience, the new(ish) footbridge at Haywards Heath appears to be in improvement compared to the seemingly consistently wet subway it replaced. Although, as noted elsewhere, it appears to have gone with function over form (not that this is necessarily a bad thing).

Although (on-topic for this thread) it already leaks!

 

[HowardGWR]

I imagine the height of the new bridge was specified to allow OHLE at some point, but its design is shockingly poor. Who signs these things off? Incidentally, I remain amazed that East Croydon still has four platforms with no tactile strips or yellow lines! The paving was finished on platforms 3 - 6 ages ago but nothing has happened since. How does such a busy station escape this treatment for so long (and why wasn't the tactile work done as part of the re-paving scheme)?!

Have you tried asking them?

 

[Deepgreen]

New railway stations seem to cost more than they have ever done before, but seem to be of increasingly poor quality.

Quite - and new/repair work at existing stations is shoddy too. There seems to be no-one whose job it is to set or check quality, or even undertake snagging. So many basic simple jobs are left unfinished or wrongly-completed and the observational skills of the station staff who purport to undertaken regular checks must be questioned.

Take a tiny, very minor example local to me (aside from the glaring ones already mentioned) - Reigate station was repainted many, many months ago, but many of the painted surfaces still carry wet paint warning stickers. To remove them would take the station staff a few minutes but, no; they have been ignored and probably will be left in place ad infinitum, ruining their warning purpose! So - some people will assume that wet paint warnings are old and not applicable somewhere else, sit down and...

 

[AM9]

There are about 2500 stations on the network so mention of about 20 (so far) or so is hardly that an indication of widespread station rain protection (less than 1%).

 

[Deepgreen]

There are about 2500 stations on the network so mention of about 20 (so far) or so is hardly that an indication of widespread station rain protection (less than 1%).

It IS, however, an indication that new builds are not fit for purpose!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Have you tried asking them?

Yes - several times. I received the usual non-committal rubbish from Southern about it being done before the project finishes (it did finish months ago and the work remains un-done!). Pointless to even ask as they never provide a remotely relevant or helpful response. It takes at least two attempts just get past the stock machine-generated replies.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Threads like this one make me glad that the rather grubby but functional roof at Huddersfield is not planned for refurbishment or replacement!

 

[SodTheDrummer]

Threads like this one make me glad that the rather grubby but functional roof at Huddersfield is not planned for refurbishment or replacement!

Makes me worry that when Bolton's canopies are 'altered' as part of the electrification works, they will be altered in such a way as to let a torrent of rain through! :roll:

 

[PHILIPE]

Makes me worry that when Bolton's canopies are 'altered' as part of the electrification works, they will be altered in such a way as to let a torrent of rain through! :roll:

They'll probably be consultants and architects asked first rather than just go to a contractor and say build us something simple which works.

 

[Muzz]

I imagine the height of the new bridge was specified to allow OHLE at some point, but its design is shockingly poor. Who signs these things off? Incidentally, I remain amazed that East Croydon still has four platforms with no tactile strips or yellow lines! The paving was finished on platforms 3 - 6 ages ago but nothing has happened since. How does such a busy station escape this treatment for so long (and why wasn't the tactile work done as part of the re-paving scheme)?!

It appears the platform also has problems

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/southern-rail-closed-newly-resurfaced-platforms-as-ice-was-more-difficult-to-treat/story-30027057-detail/story.html

Slippery platforms were closed at East Croydon as staff struggled to remove ice from the new surfaces.

As temperatures plummeted to below freezing at the station at about 8pm on Monday evening, Southern Rail decided to close platforms one and two as ice formed.

The rail company explained the new surfaces which had been recently laid at the station were making the ice "more difficult to treat", so stopped passengers coming onto the platforms for safety reasons.

 

[AngusH]

I'm not sure the problem is unique to railways, the concept of rain seems to be increasingly ignored in many areas of construction.

For example, one of the towns near me repaved the high street, but the new paved parking area seems to have no drains and so forms a large puddle whenever it rains.


It's mystifying ...

 

[sheff1]

I'm not sure the problem is unique to railways, the concept of rain seems to be increasingly ignored in many areas of construction.

It's mystifying ...

In days of yore things were designed and built by engineers who understood conditions on the ground and could adapt plans etc on the hoof if necessary. Now things are designed by people sat in front of screens who want something 'pretty' but have no real understanding of what will happen in the outside world. The things are then built/erected by people following the 'pretty' design to the letter with no power or incentive to query aspects which clearly will not function effectively.

Gross over simplification, I know, but you get the drift.

 

[All Line Rover]

Does the concrete footbridge at Crewe station leak? My experience of using the station suggests that it does not.

When was the footbridge constructed?

 

[takno]

In days of yore things were designed and built by engineers who understood conditions on the ground and could adapt plans etc on the hoof if necessary. Now things are designed by people sat in front of screens who want something 'pretty' but have no real understanding of what will happen in the outside world. The things are then built/erected by people following the 'pretty' design to the letter with no power or incentive to query aspects which clearly will not function effectively.

Gross over simplification, I know, but you get the drift.

To be fair the customers probably don't specify waterproof and non flooding in the requirements. Old fashioned dullard firms may just think those things are implied, but they will never win buffs bids against modern thrusting dynamic firms who realise they can get away without providing them

 

[AndrewE]

Does the concrete footbridge at Crewe station leak? My experience of using the station suggests that it does not.

When was the footbridge constructed?

Which footbridge? The one at the Nantwich Rd (North) end doesn't leak, and I don't think the south end one does either.
However there is a problem that afflicts most non-underground stations and that is condensation, both on platforms and from roofs.

When warm moist air arrives after a very cold spell we get condensation on floors and other parts of structures with any significant thermal mass. This leads to treacherous conditions on terazzo floors, and on older bitumen platform surfaces too. Steel structures like those supporting canopies also drip like mad, in fact last week I was looking for the source of the raindrops at Crewe and Stockport, only to realise it was water falling off the underside of the platform canopies!

 

[All Line Rover]

The Nantwich Road footbridge.

 

[AndrewE]

The Nantwich Road footbridge.

Do you mean that the actual footbridge roof leaks (about 20 years since it was rebuilt, I think) or that the floor gets lots of condensation on it, or maybe you mean the booking hall roof (or floor?)

Where roofs do leak a lot of the problems are down to blocked gutters (which I agree are a consequence of both the design and the subsequent maintenance.)

[P.s. Sorry, I misread your original comment. There are lots of roofs that rain water from the inside especially Manchester Pic, but equally lots of water penetrates from neglected gutters!]

 

[tsr]

Incidentally, I remain amazed that East Croydon still has four platforms with no tactile strips or yellow lines! The paving was finished on platforms 3 - 6 ages ago but nothing has happened since. How does such a busy station escape this treatment for so long (and why wasn't the tactile work done as part of the re-paving scheme)?!

I queried this and was told that the station does not need yellow lines because the linespeeds are not high enough. It makes you wonder why so many bay platforms or those elsewhere on lines with slower speeds have them, but that is the answer I was given.

I can't comment for tactile strips, which to be honest I would otherwise have hoped would be required at all new or refurbished platform edges, though I have not consulted any applicable standards at all recently.

 

[All Line Rover]

Do you mean that the actual footbridge roof leaks (about 20 years since it was rebuilt, I think) or that the floor gets lots of condensation on it, or maybe you mean the booking hall roof (or floor?)

That it does not leak. It might not be the height of architectural style, but it is functional and probably didn't cost anywhere near as much to build (taking into account inflation) as modern-day footbridges.

 

[AM9]

It IS, however, an indication that new builds are not fit for purpose! ...

Not all of the posts are, and whilst some praise the Victorian station's perfection versus more contemporary structures, how many here can personally back up their claims that there weren't issues with the rainworthyness of stations 100 years ago.

 

[JohnElliott]

Not all of the posts are, and whilst some praise the Victorian station's perfection versus more contemporary structures, how many here can personally back up their claims that there weren't issues with the rainworthyness of stations 100 years ago.

The canopy on platforms 1/2 at Horsted Keynes was built relatively recently to the 1882 design, so that provides a useful comparison. The identical canopy on platforms 3/4 is the 1882 original; that certainly leaks, and money is being raised to repair it.

 

[Deepgreen]

Not all of the posts are, and whilst some praise the Victorian station's perfection versus more contemporary structures, how many here can personally back up their claims that there weren't issues with the rainworthyness of stations 100 years ago.

I think it can be taken as read that 100 years ago, at least the platform canopies would have covered the full width of platforms! At Reading and London Bridge, for example, several feet of platform remain uncovered, and even dead vertical rain soaks the platforms, let alone slanting preciptitation. It is an odd safety culture indeed that allows the most dangerous part of the platform (the edge) to become wet!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I queried this and was told that the station does not need yellow lines because the linespeeds are not high enough. It makes you wonder why so many bay platforms or those elsewhere on lines with slower speeds have them, but that is the answer I was given.

I can't comment for tactile strips, which to be honest I would otherwise have hoped would be required at all new or refurbished platform edges, though I have not consulted any applicable standards at all recently.

I think you have been told the same pack of lies as I was - as you say/imply, there are countless platforms around the country that have both tactiles and yellow lines and where the line speed is very low (termini, for a start!). At East Croydon, trains can and do pass through platforms 3 - 6 at up to 40 mph or so, not much different to platforms 1 and 2, where the recent platform raising works have included yellow lines and tactiles.

The main purpose of the yellow line is to warn passengers to stand back, not just from fast trains, but from any train/edge, especially at somewhere as busy as EC, where despatch requires a clear view of the platform/train interface. Tactiles have much the same purpose. To claim that they aren't required there is simply laughable! Given the haphazard and incredibly protracted platform and canopy works at EC, I suspect they were forgotten about during specification and/or construction! For such a major station, the footbridge, platforms (3-6) and exit ramps' glass coverings are a lesson in ineptitude.

 

[swt_passenger]

I queried this and was told that the station does not need yellow lines because the linespeeds are not high enough. It makes you wonder why so many bay platforms or those elsewhere on lines with slower speeds have them, but that is the answer I was given.

Many yellow lines were painted originally to warn of opening slam doors, and have been overtaken by events. Probably easier to repaint than actively remove.

The current group standard is fairly unambiguous on the requirement relating to aerodynamic effects of passing trains - there are two decision points, required above 60 mph for freight trains, and above 100 mph for passenger trains.

So on most of the "Southern" you should only see yellow lines for relatively fast passing freight trains.

Source: https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GIRT7016 Iss 5.pdf

That standard does not call for yellow lines to encourage standing back, it does however require the platform edge to be highlighted, (usually white line on the coping) and tactiles to be fitted.

 

[AM9]

I think it can be taken as read that 100 years ago, at least the platform canopies would have covered the full width of platforms! At Reading and London Bridge, for example, several feet of platform remain uncovered, and even dead vertical rain soaks the platforms, let alone slanting preciptitation. It is an odd safety culture indeed that allows the most dangerous part of the platform (the edge) to become wet! ...

As far as Reading goes, the canopy must be far enough back to clear the pantograph horns. Just like many lines being electrified without rebuilding canopies. Other than a bit of serious forward planning (or extreme material frugality) London Bridge doesn't currently need OLE type clearances.

Through stations also need clearance for freight, particularly at container corner height. There was a serious out-of-gauge strike at Basingstoke in 2008 caused by loading a 'hi-cube' container on a standard height flatbed. Although caused by an operating error, the gradual trend of establishing larger and larger 'W' freight loading gauge trains will result in canopies being trimmed back along the routes affected whether OLE or not.

The thread is really about leaking roofs though and over the past five decades I've stood on many platforms built in pre-grouping days where the rain has been steadily gathering in puddles under the supposedly sealed roof so it's not really a feature specific to new stations.

 

[Deepgreen]

As far as Reading goes, the canopy must be far enough back to clear the pantograph horns. Just like many lines being electrified without rebuilding canopies. Other than a bit of serious forward planning (or extreme material frugality) London Bridge doesn't currently need OLE type clearances.

Through stations also need clearance for freight, particularly at container corner height. There was a serious out-of-gauge strike at Basingstoke in 2008 caused by loading a 'hi-cube' container on a standard height flatbed. Although caused by an operating error, the gradual trend of establishing larger and larger 'W' freight loading gauge trains will result in canopies being trimmed back along the routes affected whether OLE or not.

The thread is really about leaking roofs though and over the past five decades I've stood on many platforms built in pre-grouping days where the rain has been steadily gathering in puddles under the supposedly sealed roof so it's not really a feature specific to new stations.

'Forward' is the only type of planning possible. The London Bridge example is exactly my point - some sort of design decision has been made and implemented without any apparent consideration of the purpose of the canopies.

I simply don't accept that OHLE and fit-for-purpose canopies cannot co-exist if proper design is undertaken on the interface.

However, if leakage, rather than unwanted ingress, is to be the only topic on this thread, so be it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Many yellow lines were painted originally to warn of opening slam doors, and have been overtaken by events. Probably easier to repaint than actively remove.

The current group standard is fairly unambiguous on the requirement relating to aerodynamic effects of passing trains - there are two decision points, required above 60 mph for freight trains, and above 100 mph for passenger trains.

So on most of the "Southern" you should only see yellow lines for relatively fast passing freight trains.

Source: https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GIRT7016 Iss 5.pdf

That standard does not call for yellow lines to encourage standing back, it does however require the platform edge to be highlighted, (usually white line on the coping) and tactiles to be fitted.

This is very obviously not the case, then. At East Croydon, for example, the only two platforms that have yellow lines/stripes applied are the two that are least likely to see any freight movements (1 and 2)!

Yellow lines have become a standard item, such that recorded announcements broadcast system-wide refer to standing back behind them, even at locations where they don't exist.

The lack of them, and tactiles, at EC, when they exist at all/nearly all the other stations along the route remains a nonsense, given the extensive works to re-pave platforms 3 - 6 and the extreme busy-ness of the station. If the 'standard' really is "fairly unambiguous" (a meaningless phrase rather like "almost unique") then it is not being applied properly.