Big city defunct stations - future potential

[William3000]

During the closures of the 1960s many large regional cities lost large termini or central stations. Many of these were vast cavernous buildings with train sheds spanning multiple lines. At the time railways were undergoing rationalisation but with the huge increase in rail usage and growing populations together with the need to reduce car use to avoid clogging up cities could any of these have a future - in either a partial form? Some of these seem impossible given development that has occurred substantially but others may have possibilities

From north to south (Liverpool slightly out of place). But if stations aren’t reopened how do we increase capacity to meet growing demand.

Edinburgh Princes Street - area developed - no need

Glasgow Buchanan Street - better off expanding Queen Street

Glasgow St Enoch’s - shopping centre being redeveloped - is there potential for a small station to take pressure off central either on the through line just to the east or some terminating platforms?

Blackpool Central could the line through Blackpool South be extended to serve the football ground and the town centre - two platform station?

Leeds Central services consolidated and Leeds City expanded - site developed

Manchester Exchange site developed but Victoria may benefit from some additional platforms if possible while retaining the Arena

Manchester Central successful conference centre and track bet obliterated by tall buildings

Sheffield Victoria theoretically possible if the line is used in some way to have a small city centre station there

Nottingham Victoria Great Central railway gone

Leicester Central Great Central railway gone

Liverpool Exchange much of approach still there and could theoretically for basis for a new high speed line across the North but facing wrong direction

Liverpool Central High Level ditto high speed railway but shopping centre there but maybe potential for expansion of low level station

Norwich City line and track bed now used as a walking trail - theoretically possible but poorly connected to main Thorpe station. Heritage operation probably more likely albeit very slim.

London Broad Street - redundant and built on - line now used by overground to the north providing suburban services

Southampton Terminus - line still in place to serve the docks and could theoretically form part of a future metro network with a couple of platforms but seems highly unlikely

 

[faltskog36abba]

Where would the additional platforms fit into Manchester Victoria?.

 

[Chester1]

Where would the additional platforms fit into Manchester Victoria?.

To the North West of platform 6. It was looked into around the time of Northern Hub. It was poor value compared with improving Stalybridge and Rochdale and running more trains through Victoria.

I don't understand the emotional need to rebuild old railway buildings for railway use. Its rarely the best option because traffic flows have changed tremendously since they were closed. Even ones that superficially look like a good idea don't make sense after proper investigation. A good example would be Manchester Mayfield. By the time you have done massive works to deal with all the conflicts created it was always cheaper to build next to platform 1 at Piccadilly. That is why Network Rail hasn't had any interest in its ongoing redevelopment.

 

[Topological]

There are some where you could make a very outside case:

• The old shed at Bristol Temple Meads for terminating services from Parkway direction (e.g. a fast London, or additional Birmingham / Cardiffs)
• Preston RES platforms
• Crewe platform 12 island (needs more joining up with the northbound WCML and probably some adjustments to give access to the avoiding lines to get underneath the Shrewsbury line.
• Birmingham Moor Street (being done)
• Oxford Rewley Road (though not quite in the same location because the site has been built on) to add capacity for terminating EWR trains.

There are probably a lot more. However, all of them are at existing stations. I cannot think of any cases where the capacity would be added on a completely different site.

 

[faltskog36abba]

To the North West of platform 6. It was looked into around the time of Northern Hub. It was poor value compared with improving Stalybridge and Rochdale and running more trains through Victoria.

I don't understand the emotional need to rebuild old railway buildings for railway use. Its rarely the best option because traffic flows have changed tremendously since they were closed. Even ones that superficially look like a good idea don't make sense after proper investigation. A good example would be Manchester Mayfield. By the time you have done massive works to deal with all the conflicts created it was always cheaper to build next to platform 1 at Piccadilly. That is why Network Rail hasn't had any interest in its ongoing redevelopment.

OK thank you for explaining that, I remember reading there were plans for additional platforms at Victoria but didn't know the details. I think the Victoria Station office building would be a great hotel, But the cost must be Massive.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If you were spending crazy money to expand Manchester Victoria, it'd be silly to constrain what was possible by retaining the arena. It would be easier to build a replacement arena elsewhere in the city. As an added bonus you'd be making the platforms (both existing and new) at Victoria a much more pleasant environment.

 

[Topological]

If you were spending crazy money to expand Manchester Victoria, it'd be silly to constrain what was possible by retaining the arena. It would be easier to build a replacement arena elsewhere in the city. As an added bonus you'd be making the platforms (both existing and new) at Victoria a much more pleasant environment.

I suspect that if you were going to demolish the arena to build more platforms that the new air rights would form a valuable contribution to the project. Given the regeneration to the north of Victoria more permeability through the site would be very welcome. Whether you would get skyscraper type apartment blocks up there I do not know, but there are enough nearby.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I suspect that if you were going to demolish the arena to build more platforms that the new air rights would form a valuable contribution to the project. Given the regeneration to the north of Victoria more permeability through the site would be very welcome. Whether you would get skyscraper type apartment blocks up there I do not know, but there are enough nearby.

We should be very cautious about allowing rampant over-site development given the negative impact it tends to have on the passenger experience. If the MEN Arena was to be demolished I wouldn't favour placing another structure over the top of Victoria station platforms. Not unless the developers were making the railway an offer it would be daft to refuse.

 

[simonw]

There are some where you could make a very outside case:

• The old shed at Bristol Temple Meads for terminating services from Parkway direction (e.g. a fast London, or additional Birmingham / Cardiffs)
• Preston RES platforms
• Crewe platform 12 island (needs more joining up with the northbound WCML and probably some adjustments to give access to the avoiding lines to get underneath the Shrewsbury line.
• Birmingham Moor Street (being done)
• Oxford Rewley Road (though not quite in the same location because the site has been built on) to add capacity for terminating EWR trains.

There are probably a lot more. However, all of them are at existing stations. I cannot think of any cases where the capacity would be added on a completely different site.

The original electrification plans to Temple Meads includes the reopening of the "shed"

 

[Topological]

We should be very cautious about allowing rampant over-site development given the negative impact it tends to have on the passenger experience. If the MEN Arena was to be demolished I wouldn't favour placing another structure over the top of Victoria station platforms. Not unless the developers were making the railway an offer it would be daft to refuse.

I don't use Victoria that often, but do use Birmingham New Street. Yes, it is nice to see the sky, but since the trains are using more electric power and cleaner diesel, the fumes are not what they were when I was first using those stations. It won't be that long* until Northern replace the last of their old 15x

If there was a way for air rights to pay for additional through platforms at Victoria then that should definitely be explored seriously.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I don't use Victoria that often, but do use Birmingham New Street. Yes, it is nice to see the sky, but since the trains are using more electric power and cleaner diesel, the fumes are not what they were when I was first using those stations. It won't be that long* until Northern replace the last of their old 15x

If there was a way for air rights to pay for additional through platforms at Victoria then that should definitely be explored seriously.

I agree the pollution issue will become less and less of an issue as time goes on, but I'd still prefer natural light. Though everything has its price of course.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

If you were spending crazy money to expand Manchester Victoria, it'd be silly to constrain what was possible by retaining the arena. It would be easier to build a replacement arena elsewhere in the city. As an added bonus you'd be making the platforms (both existing and new) at Victoria a much more pleasant environment.

The Arena now has significant competition from Co-op Live in the east of the city, so it will be interesting to see how it fares. Of course, if Picc-Vic Mk 2 - and variants thereof - ever happen then expansion of the main-line surface stations will not be necessary.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Arena now has significant competition from Co-op Live in the east of the city, so it will be interesting to see how it fares. Of course, if Picc-Vic Mk 2 - and variants thereof - ever happen then expansion of the main-line surface stations will not be necessary.

Competition can't come soon enough. If that arena wasn't already there, nobody in their right mind would suggest building a new arena on top of a major railway station. Indeed it was only the short-sighted downgrading of Victoria that allowed it to be built, and that mistake needs correcting. Some might argue that it's a good location due to the transport links, but being right on top of the station doesn't allow crowds to disperse at the end of the event. You only have to look at how much better Wembley Park and Wembley Central stations cope, compared to Wembley Stadium station.

 

[Chester1]

Competition can't come soon enough. If that arena wasn't already there, nobody in their right mind would suggest building a new arena on top of a major railway station. Indeed it was only the short-sighted downgrading of Victoria that allowed it to be built, and that mistake needs correcting. Some might argue that it's a good location due to the transport links, but being right on top of the station doesn't allow crowds to disperse at the end of the event. You only have to look at how much better Wembley Park and Wembley Central stations cope, compared to Wembley Stadium station.

Victoria needs six through platforms. The reduction in the station went a bit too far but it wasn't miles off. Victoria doesn't need to be the same size as Piccadilly.

 

[Krokodil]

The old shed at Bristol Temple Meads for terminating services from Parkway direction (e.g. a fast London, or additional Birmingham / Cardiffs)

Wasn't that the plan?

Crewe platform 12 island (needs more joining up with the northbound WCML and probably some adjustments to give access to the avoiding lines to get underneath the Shrewsbury line.

Ditto, wasn't that part of the plan for HS2?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Victoria needs six through platforms. The reduction in the station went a bit too far but it wasn't miles off. Victoria doesn't need to be the same size as Piccadilly.

Aye, pre rebuild it was a bit bigger than it needed to be, especially once the decision was made to convert the Bury line to Metrolink... but the loss of the 5th & 6th through platforms to make way for the support structure of the arena was a massive own-goal. Hindsight is always 20:20 though.

 

[William3000]

Victoria needs six through platforms. The reduction in the station went a bit too far but it wasn't miles off. Victoria doesn't need to be the same size as Piccadilly.

The problem with Piccadilly is that it probably has too many east facing platforms and nowhere near enough through platforms. Victoria’s rationalisation was definitely a step too far and it could certainly benefit from more through platforms now, though I appreciate the trams have reduced the overall need. In a perfect world Victoria would probably have two east facing bays, 6 through platforms and two west facing bays.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2025 ==

Aye, pre rebuild it was a bit bigger than it needed to be, especially once the decision was made to convert the Bury line to Metrolink... but the loss of the 5th & 6th through platforms to make way for the support structure of the arena was a massive own-goal. Hindsight is always 20:20 though.

It used to have 17 platforms I believe. But it could certainly do with more now, particularly as Central has no prospect of ever reopening and with Piccadilly the issue isn’t with east facing platforms - more could be provided to the north of the station but it’s the lack of through platforms. Between them 13 and 14 take about 45% of the traffic at Piccadilly

 

[AlastairFraser]

Blackpool Central could the line through Blackpool South be extended to serve the football ground and the town centre - two platform station?

Blackpool Central's site would be better used for housing and light commercial uses tbh.
There's a plan to convert the Blackpool South branch to tram as far as Kirkham and Wesham that has mentioned here before that would make a lot more financial sense (more frequent service than the current branch, more infill stations to raise ridership, better integration with local buses, more paths available to Blackpool North etc.).
Link here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-50955520

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Aug 2025 ==

Sheffield Victoria theoretically possible if the line is used in some way to have a small city centre station there

Perhaps Sheffield Victoria could be reopened as part of the tram-train to Stockbridge plan, with tram train joining the road network as on-street trams here, albeit reopened as a tram train style station, similar to the station at Rotherham Parkgate.

 

[xotGD]

One station that did come back from the grave was Birmingham Snow Hill.

And St Pancras was pretty much on life support at one point before becoming "London Hbf".

 

[The exile]

The original electrification plans to Temple Meads includes the reopening of the "shed"

That end of Temple Meads could definitely do with something to relieve congestion at that end, but I suspect the cost / benefit would not be favourable. The problem with the Brunel(+) trainshed is that it’s in the wrong place - if at all practical I’d be looking at one or two Cambridge style mid platform crossovers to allow aces to and from the east end to even numbered platforms when the odd numbered one is occupied.

 

[YorksLad12]

Perhaps Sheffield Victoria could be reopened as part of the tram-train to Stockbridge plan, with tram train joining the road network as on-street trams here, albeit reopened as a tram train style station, similar to the station at Rotherham Parkgate.

The Stocksbridge route would broadly parallel the existing route, which is why I don't rate it as likely. However...

... with Victoria being nowhere near anything else, a possible tram-train solution would be to build a viaduct over the A61 and connect the line from Victoria into the exiting viaduct coming down from Nunnery. That gives the option of running into Cathedral or Sheffield Station, as well as reviving a low-level, two platform Sheffield Victoria.

I recently said elsewhere that if Whitehall Place hadn't been built (or built the way it has been) you could convert the Harrogate Line to tram-train, reuse the old viaduct and put in a stop at (Leeds) Central, which is where Harrogate/Ripon services used to terminate before 1967. This would also free a couple of platforms at Leeds (City). But that train has long since sailed.

 

[cle]

Wasn't that the plan?


Ditto, wasn't that part of the plan for HS2?

The Bristol Superfasts are gone for now but there are plans for more up Filton Bank - Henbury loop in theory, an additional Cardiff service, Moor St as part of Connect…

You could relocate XC terminators there too. If the Oxford service went hourly, they could be in the original shed. It seems received wisdom that any expansion would remain via Bath.

Crewe’s western side could definitely do a little more in theory.

One station that did come back from the grave was Birmingham Snow Hill.

And St Pancras was pretty much on life support at one point before becoming "London Hbf".

I remember getting off a Sheffield service around the year 2000, and it felt like a dying smelly backwater. Amazing to see now.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

Nottingham Victoria Great Central railway gone

Shopping centre on the site, which incorporates the station clock tower (everything else was demolished).

Leicester Central Great Central railway gone

Sort of! The station was built raised on a wide viaduct-type structure, which is still there. The entrance was built into the lower level of this, and that's also still there. Up on the raised station itself the platforms and structures have gone and it's used for light industrial purposes. The railway ran on long viaducts through much of the city, bits of which are still there.

 

[Chester1]

The problem with Piccadilly is that it probably has too many east facing platforms and nowhere near enough through platforms. Victoria’s rationalisation was definitely a step too far and it could certainly benefit from more through platforms now, though I appreciate the trams have reduced the overall need. In a perfect world Victoria would probably have two east facing bays, 6 through platforms and two west facing bays.

If you gave enthusiasts the choice between reopening a Manchester station and platforms 15 and 16 project there would probably be a majority for the former. I supported platform 15 and 16 and it is still a good idea in the longer term but with hindsight it would have been a waste of taxpayer money 10 years ago. The focus on longer train lengths was a better medium term solution.

It used to have 17 platforms I believe. But it could certainly do with more now, particularly as Central has no prospect of ever reopening and with Piccadilly the issue isn’t with east facing platforms - more could be provided to the north of the station but it’s the lack of through platforms. Between them 13 and 14 take about 45% of the traffic at Piccadilly

17 platforms for Victoria would be crazy today. Nearly every closed or shrunk station in this thread was unnecessary once the network was nationalised. Manchester and Salford city centres never needed eight stations. It doesn't really need five. If the stations didn't already exist then a station the size of Oxford Road but at the location of Deansgate would be better.

 

[Krokodil]

The Bristol Superfasts are gone for now

Shame really, whenever I've gone from my parents' house in North Somerset to Paddington the train has been rammed. Some extra capacity would come in handy, leaving the existing service emptier for passengers joining at Bath, Chippenham etc.

If you gave enthusiasts the choice between reopening a Manchester station and platforms 15 and 16 project there would probably be a majority for the former. I supported platform 15 and 16 and it is still a good idea in the longer term but with hindsight it would have been a waste of taxpayer money 10 years ago. The focus on longer train lengths was a better medium term solution.

Oxford Road should be (and I believe that it actually is) a higher priority than increasing the number of through platforms at Piccadilly.

The plans we saw on here a while back technically reduced the number of platforms from five to three, but will allow services to flow much more smoothly without the overlap issues.

 

[Topological]

Shame really, whenever I've gone from my parents' house in North Somerset to Paddington the train has been rammed. Some extra capacity would come in handy, leaving the existing service emptier for passengers joining at Bath, Chippenham etc.


Oxford Road should be (and I believe that it actually is) a higher priority than increasing the number of through platforms at Piccadilly.

The plans we saw on here a while back technically reduced the number of platforms from five to three, but will allow services to flow much more smoothly without the overlap issues.

Off topic for this thread, but if the wires ever get completed through Bath then the Didcot terminators could continue via Bath to Bristol Temple Meads to add capacity. Would also allow more connections for Oxford from Bristol.

The current "fast" services could then skip Didcot Parkway and probably one could skip Swindon as well.

That is based on the assumption that no additional paths can be found into Paddington and that the Bristol via Parkway paths are not available anymore.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I suppose that Birmingham Curzon Street is the most extreme example of a former passenger station coming back from the dead.

Ironically the current HS2 plans in relation to the site mean that it will remain a missed opportunity in various directions.

 

[Chester1]

Oxford Road should be (and I believe that it actually is) a higher priority than increasing the number of through platforms at Piccadilly.

The plans we saw on here a while back technically reduced the number of platforms from five to three, but will allow services to flow much more smoothly without the overlap issues.

Those are positive but the biggest gain of the budget rebuild is allowing longer trains. Oxford Road fixes maximum train lengths in much of the North West at 6 x 23m or 5 x 26m. It can't even fit 8 x 20m without fouling points. This is OK for now but will become a significant problem. Ordsall Lane junction should be grade separated before Piccadilly 15 and 16. Had the Northern Hub plan been built we would have had 16tph of short trains crossing multiple flat junctions. Ordsall Lane is the easiest to do because all the land required is owned by Network Rail. Its too late to buy sufficient land to grade seperate Castlefield Junction and the Ardwick flyover floated nearly 20 years ago would be a collosal project. Victoria is at the bottom of the list. Its current size isn't ideal but its managable.

 

[Krokodil]

Oxford Road fixes maximum train lengths in much of the North West at 6 x 23m or 5 x 26m

And even then throughput is incredibly restricted because six car trains occupy the full overlap in platform four, plus the full platform (at least as far as the signalling is concerned) at Picc. Realignment of Oxford Road, plus resignalling of the area would shorten headways considerably.

 

[JKF]

Any uses for Bath Green Park (extant and restored, but used as a car park) or Bristol St Philips (low rise and dated office/industrial unit on site, most of approach track still there under vegetation as used for access to waste depot a few years back)