That would be a good start and should be relatively easy to do, as long as the new walkway location had other improvements such as better lighting.I wonder if the road carriageway and walkway might swap places, so travellers would only have to cross Moor St Queensway in front of the station, which I understand is to be improved as the major pedestrian gateway to the city centre for the Curzon St related developments.
The St Budeaux entrances are right opposite each other on the same road. There's no marked or signalled crossing here, in the middle of a fairly busy though thankfully low-speed junction complex. Moving the branch platform to the Plymouth side of the road bridge, then clearing and leveling the ground between it and the up main platform could effectively form a single island with a shared access from which all Plymouth-bound trains would depart.St. Budeaux Ferry and Victoria Road, looking at a map without having been there myself, is a case which wouldn't be built like that if starting from scratch but is too easy and much too quiet to be worth changing now.
This photo suggests pedestrian use of the tunnel may be significant. Note also the gent struggling up the stairs with luggage at top right. With the new access ramps at the Moor St end, that staircase is redundant now, so might be removed making some space for a low-level walkway on that side:
![]()
St Martin's Queensway - tunnel under the Bullring
From the front of the no 63 bus between Moor Street Queensway and St Martin's Queensway. Passing through the tunnel under the Bullring towards Birmingham New Street Station tunnel under the Bullring X64 bus heading in the other direction along St Martin's Queensway.flic.kr
A recent Tik Tok video on the subject pulls no punches:
If you replaced the two stations on the same line (Deepdene and Dorking West) with one, either it would no longer be a convenient interchange with Dorking (Main) for London services, as Deepdene is, or it would not be nearly as central to the built-up area, as Dorking West is. I'm pretty sure one of them would have been closed, or both closed and replaced by a central station if a convenient and cost effective solution existed....
I cannot see why that small town has two stations on the same line.
...
It's a bit grim but you're through it in no time so it's no big deal for me. No matter how many times I try the shopping centre route I get a bit confused** and have to look for signs, which delays me and means it takes significantly longer than going through the tunnel.Never found the walk that bad personally, but then again i live in Erdington so am used to urban decay and the smell of urine.
And the one linking Charing Cross too, although the last time I used that it felt very creepy with all the closed down businessesThere are a lot of suggestions for pedestrian tunnels linking stations in London. However the official policy in London seems to be against these. For example the useful underground links outside Waterloo have all been removed.
I think that was actually owned by Coutt's Bank who owned the building above, rather than TfL or Westminster City Council? And Coutt's wanted to use it for additional basement office space (though I can't imagine it's a particularly nice place to work with no natural light...)And the one linking Charing Cross too, although the last time I used that it felt very creepy with all the closed down businesses
An interchange halt, where the two lines physically cross would help but not replace the present two stations which offer convenience to local residents. The site for the three platforms required is agricultural land and would need at least pedestrian/single emergency vehicle access from Liverpool Rd. Still a lot cheaper than Baltic and would provide the Southport link long desired without increasing heavily subsided Northern train or track miles.Talking of the Mersey area, there has been talk of reintroducing the Burscough curves for decades, but more recently, which would take Merseyrail battery trains from Ormskirk to Southport, with Southport hit from two directions by Merseyrail. But merging the two stations, in such a small town as Burscough is, on two different lines, Ormskirk-Preston and Southport-Wigan, would be very difficult.
An extra stop adds journey time, and that might be a problem for block occupancy on the single line.An interchange halt, where the two lines physically cross would help but not replace the present two stations which offer convenience to local residents. The site for the three platforms required is agricultural land and would need at least pedestrian/single emergency vehicle access from Liverpool Rd. Still a lot cheaper than Baltic and would provide the Southport link long desired without increasing heavily subsided Northern train or track miles.
A very expensive high level travelator would get you from New St. to Moor St. in about 2 minutes.I love the double track, the Ormskirk (Rainford Jn!) bay, the idea of 777's batterying their way to sunny Southport via Meols Cop (and your superb graphics!)
I just wonder about affordability. I think a change of train should be reasonable - you expect it on LUL.
WAO
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Moving from the ridiculous to the sublime, the HS2 terminus, Moor Street and New Street are all relatively near but uncomfortably far for pedestrian interchange. What suggestions do posters have for easing this?
WAO
The closed section connecting to Adelaide Street wasn't especially useful as it's a lot easier (and nicer) to cross the roads on the surface, but they have kept open the long passageway connecting the station to the old Bakerloo Line Trafalgar Square station.And the one linking Charing Cross too, although the last time I used that it felt very creepy with all the closed down businesses