Possible plans for Edinburgh Waverley station?

[gingertom]

I saw in a building and architecture forum that Cameron Toll was mentioned as a possible new large railway station to ease capacity issues for Waverley and Haymarket, I'm pretty certain I read it in Skyscrapercity Edinburgh rail developments section, and it's a piece by a John McClellan of the Scotsman newspaper.

Cameron Toll's a bit out of the way and not served by rail. Not saying it couldn't be, but how does he propose this development will ease capacity at the big 2?

 

[385001]

I saw in a building and architecture forum that Cameron Toll was mentioned as a possible new large railway station to ease capacity issues for Waverley and Haymarket, I'm pretty certain I read it in Skyscrapercity Edinburgh rail developments section, and it's a piece by a John McClellan of the Scotsman newspaper.

Cameron Toll's a bit out of the way and not served by rail. Not saying it couldn't be, but how does he propose this development will ease capacity at the big 2?

The South Sub passes by Cameron Toll but I doubt there is space for a large railway station unless Inch Park is massacred.

I believe space on Old Dalkeith Road has been been reserved for possible tram extension to the Infirmary.

 

[najaB]

I saw in a building and architecture forum that Cameron Toll was mentioned as a possible new large railway station to ease capacity issues for Waverley and Haymarket...

It's a bit of a distance from the city center, is it not?

 

[NotATrainspott]

A station at Cameron Toll would also be a complete waste of time from a transportation perspective. The benefit gained would be marginal, as almost no passengers would actually want to go to or from there. Secondary stations can be very worthwhile for cities but normally if you're not in the dense urban core, it's best for it to be out where the trunk road network provides easy access from the surrounding region. Edinburgh Park and Gateway stations fulfil that role well for Edinburgh, while Cameron Toll would be in the worst of both worlds. It would simultaneously be too far from the city centre and too difficult to reach by road for anyone to use it.

 

[gingertom]

The South Sub passes by Cameron Toll but I doubt there is space for a large railway station unless Inch Park is massacred.

I believe space on Old Dalkeith Road has been been reserved for possible tram extension to the Infirmary.

can't see what use there is in having a large station at Cameron Toll. On the south sub yes but poor connections to the west and east. Unless there's a north/south tunnel planned to reach underneath Waverley?

 

[Siemens Trains]

A station at Cameron Toll would also be a complete waste of time from a transportation perspective. The benefit gained would be marginal, as almost no passengers would actually want to go to or from there. Secondary stations can be very worthwhile for cities but normally if you're not in the dense urban core, it's best for it to be out where the trunk road network provides easy access from the surrounding region. Edinburgh Park and Gateway stations fulfil that role well for Edinburgh, while Cameron Toll would be in the worst of both worlds. It would simultaneously be too far from the city centre and too difficult to reach by road for anyone to use it.

While I agree Cameron Toll might not be a particularly successful station, I don't quite follow what you mean with the examples of Gateway and Park Stations. Neither of these are justified by being close to the M8 or A720. Strictly speaking, Gateway isn't near a trunk road, but imagine you mean the busy Gogar roundabout from which you can only pick up or set down passengers. Both stations are close to employment centres, shopping centres, and on the tram line. Cameron Toll has shops, is near some university buildings, and maybe has a whiff of a tram line in many decades, so maybe some market can be perceived. However it seems quite difficult to contrive a useful passenger train service around the South Sub - it mirrors the loss-making 38 bus route.

 

[takno]

While I agree Cameron Toll might not be a particularly successful station, I don't quite follow what you mean with the examples of Gateway and Park Stations. Neither of these are justified by being close to the M8 or A720. Strictly speaking, Gateway isn't near a trunk road, but imagine you mean the busy Gogar roundabout from which you can only pick up or set down passengers. Both stations are close to employment centres, shopping centres, and on the tram line. Cameron Toll has shops, is near some university buildings, and maybe has a whiff of a tram line in many decades, so maybe some market can be perceived. However it seems quite difficult to contrive a useful passenger train service around the South Sub - it mirrors the loss-making 38 bus route.

Cameron Toll has some shops and a fairly big car park, and that's it. No offices or employment and nowhere really to put them, and the railway line is the exact opposite end of the shopping centre from the not-very-big uni campus. Add to that that the main bottlenecks are at the West end, and it's a slow windy amble round the line from Slateford. I would hesitate to describe it as the single stupidest idea I've ever heard, but probably not for very long.

 

[railjock]

It is a pretty bizarre suggestion.

 

[backontrack]

Agreed. If the powers that be want a station deep in the suburbs of Edinburgh that only serves a shopping complex, just rebrand Newcraighall as Fort Kinnaird, and be done with it.

 

[385001]

The ticket gates for platforms 11 & 12 are definitely operational.

There is nothing to stop you walking from platforms 11 to 7 but there is some temporary fencing between platforms 6 & 7 so it looks like some revenue protection can be done if required.

 

[railjock]

Agreed. If the powers that be want a station deep in the suburbs of Edinburgh that only serves a shopping complex, just rebrand Newcraighall as Fort Kinnaird, and be done with it.

There was discussion a decade so or go of an East Edinburgh ‘parkway’ type station near Newcraighall/Musselburgh so people could use ECML services with the benefit of car parking. Never came to anything and wouldn’t do anything for congestion at Waverley anyway.

 

[InOban]

But I think it would be very popular. ECML trains are generally not full leaving EDI.

 

[najaB]

There was discussion a decade so or go of an East Edinburgh ‘parkway’ type station near Newcraighall/Musselburgh so people could use ECML services with the benefit of car parking.

If you're going to go down that route then they should extend the tram out that far and make it the main Edinburgh station post-HS2. People can then use either the tram, bus or the Glasgow/Aberdeen/Fife trains to get to central Edinburgh.

 

[Clansman]

But I think it would be very popular. ECML trains are generally not full leaving EDI.

Unless they've came from Inverness, Dundee, Glasgow Central, or Aberdeen, before hand!

 

[13h202]

Once (if) HS2 is running, I think the logical secondary station in Edinburgh would be at the junction of Lothian Road and Western Approach Road. It would handle all the main high-speed InterCity routes to Glasgow, London (except LNER), Aberdeen etc. This leaves Haymarket and Waverley to boost their commuter services to a proper high-frequency. The track out of the city would require little tunnelling as it would run along Western Approach Road and tunnel under the short distance between where it ends and Slateford. The Cameron Toll idea is completely unworkable imo.

TL;DR Princes St. station you would have been a godsend right now.

 

[DPWH]

What about double decking the station, so you could have all the local services running on one level, and all the national services running on a deck above it? Expensive, yes, but everything would be in one place.

 

[backontrack]

Once (if) HS2 is running, I think the logical secondary station in Edinburgh would be at the junction of Lothian Road and Western Approach Road. It would handle all the main high-speed InterCity routes to Glasgow, London (except LNER), Aberdeen etc. This leaves Haymarket and Waverley to boost their commuter services to a proper high-frequency. The track out of the city would require little tunnelling as it would run along Western Approach Road and tunnel under the short distance between where it ends and Slateford. The Cameron Toll idea is completely unworkable imo.

TL;DR Princes St. station you would have been a godsend right now.

This. Absolutely this.

 

[najaB]

What about double decking the station, so you could have all the local services running on one level, and all the national services running on a deck above it? Expensive, yes, but everything would be in one place.

The idea of through tunnels has been raised a few times - it's a very expensive way to achieve the desired solution.

 

[gghdeo]

I’d posit that a new, separate HS station is not desirable. It’s far more user friendly to be able to group transport nodes together — that’s why we build interchanges where possible. Out-of-station transfers are a pain, especially as the distance increases. The only reason we’d end up with a brand new station for HS is if it were cheaper to do so. With infrastructure, we have a fantastic record of doing what’s cheapest, rather than what’s most beneficial or most user-friendly or most future-proofed.

Tunnels into Waverley sound expensive, but I imagine (without having any detail, at this stage), that this option would provide the best user experience.

 

[najaB]

I’d posit that a new, separate HS station is not desirable.

I'm not convinced that it's necessary, but the thinking is that it's not possible to provide the space/service frequency that's desired post-HS2 so the new station would replace Waverley as the main destination of trains from the south.

Waverley would continue to be the main station for 'Scottish' routes though with regular (say every 5-10 minutes) services between the two stations - with level boarding making the experience similar to (or perhaps easier than) navigating your way through Waverley with cases.

 

[gghdeo]

Yeah, so the question is, if more platforms are needed, where should they go? I’d still argue, at the moment anyway, that putting them underneath Waverley instead of a new station would be more convenient for most. It’s in the city centre, with the bus station nearby for non-local services, and trams plus local buses from all over the city in the vicinity. Adding an additional change for most people is not... optimal. Level boarding would be a silver lining though.

 

[najaB]

I’d still argue, at the moment anyway, that putting them underneath Waverley instead of a new station would be more convenient for most.

I'm also a fan of an underground station, truth be told.

 

[13h202]

While the convenience of having all transport modes in a single location is undoubtable, Waverley's topography would probably negate any benefit. Assuming the masterplan goes ahead as proposed and our underground HS station is built, there would be three levels in Waverley. Moving people from the HS platforms up to the mezzanine level would have to be done mostly by lifts since any escalators would be fairly long and inhibit trains on the current track level. The inevitable queues that would occur from this wouldn't be very desirable and screams rush hour on the tube. I can't see that being convenient for a HS passenger with suitcases and fellow travellers in tow. Not to mention the cost of tunnelling under a major city (Crossrail ) and the positioning of the portals.

 

[Siemens Trains]

I'm also a fan of an underground station, truth be told.

Would additional platforms really need to go underneath the existing station? Or is there scope to put any tracks above some lines that are there at the moment? From what I recall, there's little above platforms 8 and 9 at present. In fact parts of them aren't even covered. So they could maybe support something on top of them but below street level, or similar height to Market Street. Don't know what all the implications would be, but just a thought.

 

[najaB]

Would additional platforms really need to go underneath the existing station? Or is there scope to put any tracks above some lines that are there at the moment?

The problem with building over existing lines is losing use of those platforms for an extended construction period.

 

[route:oxford]

Moving people from the HS platforms up to the mezzanine level would have to be done mostly by lifts since any escalators would be fairly long and inhibit trains on the current track level.

Why are lifts such a problem? They work very well with HEx/TfL rail in London.

I'm a bit lost by your escalator issue too.

Either sounds better than finding myself at the Caledonian and trying to decide whether to walk to Waverley or Haymarket.

 

[gghdeo]

Tunnelling is expensive, but we have some invaluable infrastructure because we tunnelled. The technical aspects might make it far too difficult to add platforms to Waverley, and if that’s the way it pans out, then so be it. But we should aim for the best solution we can get, not the cheapest.

 

[13h202]

I don't think platform space is the primary issue but rather the approach in from the west, which the Dalmeny Chord can only fix for so long. Tracks above the current level wouldn't be possible due to the National Galleries directly to the west. Tunneling under the current lines is really the only option unless you go for a completely new station and alignment.

 

[Taunton]

Secondary stations can be very worthwhile for cities but normally if you're not in the dense urban core, it's best for it to be out where the trunk road network provides easy access from the surrounding region. Edinburgh Park and Gateway stations fulfil that role well for Edinburgh, while Cameron Toll would be in the worst of both worlds. It would simultaneously be too far from the city centre and too difficult to reach by road for anyone to use it.

Curiously, Edinburgh has long had what must be one of the best used inner (but not central) secondary stations in the country, in Haymarket. I can't think of another that works as well for main line services just two miles from the main station.

 

[gghdeo]

I don't think platform space is the primary issue but rather the approach in from the west, which the Dalmeny Chord can only fix for so long. Tracks above the current level wouldn't be possible due to the National Galleries directly to the west. Tunneling under the current lines is really the only option unless you go for a completely new station and alignment.

I see, yeah. If the ultimate aim is to increase capacity into Edinburgh, and that eventually boils down to lines, and then perhaps platforms (as a consequence?), then tunnels have to be seriously considered at that point, I’d think. Despite the cost, it may (possibly) be the cleanest and most comprehensive solution.