Why all? If you're coming from the south/east then clearly its a shorter distance/journey time.
Ok sorry, most.
I've said before that if the station waits until there is capacity, there's a real chance that Interchange will just be left to rot because there's little point spending money on a station that has capacity constraints that aren't easily solvable.
I'm sorry but you keep dancing around this issue. How are you going to increase capacity down the Calder Valley by building a station at St James? Save a short realignment, it will be the same line, same speeds, same restrictions, same service patterns, all the way from Leeds to Manchester.
It could be cancelled but in my line of work we have to assume the government will do what they say and work towards their policy plan.
<cough> HS2 <splutter>
I've looked into the buses more and there's ~40 bus services per hour (combined both directions) already stopping at stops next to the market. Thats pretty accessible, you wouldn't even necessarily have to move the stops.
Have you looked at the range of buses though? Quite a lot of those services start at the Interchange / City Centre, and those that cross the city only serve relatively narrow corridors. So for most it would involve a change of bus rather than a 2 minute walk to the station. And again there's that busy road, which you'd have to cross to get city centre and beyond bound services. Damn that road eh? Keeps acting like, oh I don't know, a major barrier?
There's not likely to be significant willingness to walk further in Stockport than Bradford, that's the point. I could list loads of other cities with stations further way than what is being proposed in Bradford. It really will make very little difference to usage.
What's the obsession with Stockport? As I've repeatedly said, the area proposed is not in a good area. Don't take my word for it, organise an office trip there. It is light industrial, and pretty run down with a very busy road passing along it's Western edge. I worked in the area over a decade ago, and I for one wouldn't be walking in from the east or the south, especially at night. And I don't spook easily. Even from the centre it's up quite a steep incline, past what would be the old station, and over said busy road and then a bit more of a climb. It is how the locals would describe as being grim. Certainly nothing to improve things for most punters, it would be a major downgrade.
As things stand your offering is build the new station, and hope the area suddenly springs into life with new developments. But what if they don't? What if all that happens is the station gets built next the fat rendering unit, and becomes an even worse advert for the city? Does your company have any renders for that scenario, with what can be rather noxious smells drifting down your shiny new platforms? I'm going to guess not. It's bad enough for the city when the wind blows in from the east and across the centre. But sending people up there every day, a great way to attract growth....
Again. Bradford Gateway is a hangover from the long dead high speed line that was NPR. Bradford Councillors have clung onto the concept through pure vanity, they must have their shiny new station no matter what. Even if it does end up being labelled "Britain's smelliest railway station". That's because they can't see beyond the end of their noses, and haven't even given a second thought about the cost. But the cost is what will kill it stone dead. People in Bradford couldn't give a stuff about a new station, just do up the stations that are there, add facilities, better connectivity with existing transport etc etc. Then spend the rest of the money on actually making improvements, that's what most will tell you.
And don't worry, once Gateway is put onto the dusty shelves next to West Yorkshire trams to be forgotten, there'll be other lofty aspirations from other councils despite to show off lovely renders of how things might look, before realising they can't afford them. Your industry is in no danger any time soon. You'll get to play with designs for decades to come.
That's partly my point that station frequency and destination choice is far more important to developing centres than the area station. At interchange its pretty certain that you're stuck with a relatively poor station, a new station potentially enables a far better service to more destinations.
A new station, on the same line, but only through rather than requiring reversals. How does that improve frequency and destinations? As above, if there's no other improvements along the line, there is no scope for more services.
