Sheffield Station: Should it be rebuilt?

[TheGuy77]

As there have been many conflicts with ticket gates, and with the station not being rebuilt in 150 years, I think Sheffield station should be rebuilt. Of course, this plan will be very controversial, considering the building is grade 2 listed. But with new open access operators and possible Northern Connect, I do beg to differ. What do you lot think?

 

[Iskra]

Yes, but keep the facade. Needs to be redone at the same time as the track/platform layout is relaid to improve capacity and the efficiency of through services, although the full Meadowhall-Dore corridor realistic needs looking at at the same time, so probably a bit too ambitious to be realistic .

 

[TheGuy77]

Perhaps rebuilding the station and footbridge to be in the style of the facade could work?

 

[yorksrob]

Absolutely not.

As well as being architecturally impressive, it actually has very good facilities for a passenger.

All the platforms have level access to indoor waiting facilities, buffet facilities, toilet facilities and good cover from the elements. It's one of my favourite stations to use.

It could probably do with a wider or additional footbridge though.

 

[SynthD]

It’s been an adaptable station, with remodelling, addition of the tram and a pub. Part of the local tradition seems to be maintaining the public access through, despite the ticketless travel and changing priorities in the rest of the country. Why do you suggest a rebuild rather than a second foot bridge?

 

[Halifaxlad]

How many platforms does Sheffield need ?

 

[Nottingham59]

How many platforms does Sheffield need?

That's not clear. I think what Sheffield does need are

• another footbridge, divided into public and paid sides
• four tracks north to at least Nunnery Junction
• three tracks south to Dore, with safeguarding for a fourth
• two (and preferably four) platforms lengthend to accommodate 400m trains
• safeguarding of the land to the east of the tram line, to allow the tram tracks to be slewed across to give space for two more platforms in the station

These don't all need to be done in the short term, but any work on the station should be compatible with these ambitions.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It’s been an adaptable station, with remodelling, addition of the tram and a pub. Part of the local tradition seems to be maintaining the public access through, despite the ticketless travel and changing priorities in the rest of the country. Why do you suggest a rebuild rather than a second foot bridge?

Its a nice airy station that is pretty free flowing compared to how many of its peer group have been so heavily modified so they can kettle passengers. EMR St Pancras being a prime example.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The current layout of the station is not a particularly efficient use of the space available. The large number of non-platform tracks is unnecessary now that there's much less freight traffic and all passenger traffic is DMUs. If you were building the station from scratch on the same site today, you wouldn't replicate the layout it has now. Sure, some of the middle roads are used for stabling... but again, that isn't where you'd choose to put your sidings given the choice.

 

[Halifaxlad]

wo (and preferably four) platforms lengthend to accommodate 400m trains

Why 400m long trains, where would these be arriving from and where would these be going ?

 

[YorksLad12]

Depends on what you mean by "rebuilt". Platform 2C could do with being extended. An additional bay at the north end would be useful; at the moment, if the 1715 doesn't leave 1B on time we have to do the shuffle over to P2 for the 1721 XC, which is more than a little annoying - one way would be to build out P1 and use one of the through roads, similar to the way Huddersfield was done, decades ago. A route off 1A to get around a train on 1B might be useful. Better (any!) access to the sidings from the higher-numbered platforms would be useful.

The other footbridge was supposed to be rebuilt as a foot- and cycle-bridge as part of the plans from six years back, and the area pedestrianised, which would allow the operators/GBR to put a gate line in at either end of the station footbridge.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2024 ==

safeguarding of the land to the east of the tram line, to allow the tram tracks to be slewed across to give space for two more platforms in the station

The tram lines are significantly higher than the railway lines!

 

[JamesT]

Why 400m long trains, where would these be arriving from and where would these be going ?

400m long trains implies HS2 rolling stock, a resurrection of the Eastern leg? Or at least the shrunken version where it joins the classic network at East Midlands Parkway.

 

[Topological]

The platforms at Sheffield are long, so some building out could presumably be done with both 1 and 2.

Platform 5 is not much use at the south end because departures moving over to the up line need to use the points well north of the south end. The old lengths worked for HST so presumably with the 810 it would only be an issue for 10-cars.

Platform 6 does not seem to work as a terminating platform for trains from the south, so could be "built out" to leave a bay at the north end.

Platform 8 has a bend in it, but I think the geometry is hard to restore the old layout and place a bay at the north end.

All of those extra north facing bays would presumably be useful for the timetable.

Requires a lot of pointwork though.

A design that had more through platforms might be better, but that would mean demolishing some of the islands and I can see why that would be less popular. However, like Cardiff Central, the needs of the operational railway should take precedent over the architecture from a past operational need.

 

[Ianigsy]

It’s not the station itself- that whole north-east side of the city centre has evolved into a nasty knot of road and rail routes which needs rethinking along with the steep access to the city itself. The cement train derailment a while back also showed up some quirky legacies in the signalling which prevent Midland being used as a fully flexible bi-directional station.

 

[Nottingham59]

Why 400m long trains, where would these be arriving from and where would these be going ?

As I see it, the design decisions made by HS2 mean that 400m length trains are going to become standard, over time, for wide parts of the GB network. I hesitate to say "predictions" but these are my aspirations:

• Within five years of HS2 phase 1 opening, we should see 400m platforms at Crewe, Preston, Warrington BQ, Carlisle, and 400m trains going through to Edinburgh.
• Within 15 years, 400m platforms at Manchester (at a new HS2 station, or at Piccadilly or Victoria). The economics strongly favour longer trains, even if they don't go over a high speed line.
• Within 20 years, there will be some connection from HS2 to either the Birmingham-Derby line or at East Midlands Parkway. The first of these is cheapest and therefore the most likely. Both options will benefit from 400m platforms at Derby and Sheffield. By this stage the HS2 main leg will be full, and people will be asking why they didn't build it as a four-track railway. Sheffield won't get more that 1tph from HS2. To get capacity to London, that train needs to be 400m long.
• Within 25 years, there will be a need for a second 400m-capable terminus in central London, and an urgent need for 400m trains on the East Coast routes to Leeds and Newcastle - either on the ECML or via the full HS2 Eastern leg.

So to answer your question, 400m trains at Sheffield will go to Birmingham and London to start with, followed some years later by Leeds and Manchester. If you're going to rebuild Sheffield, you need to include those routes into your plans.


And of course 400m platforms can always be used as two bay platforms end-to-end. The Sheffield Area Strategic Advice Refresh (October 2022) shows a large number of services terminating from the north and from the south, and one each reversing northwards and southwards every hour. Extending the station lengthways allows capacity to be increased without extending the station sideways which would involve a lot of digging into the hillside where the tramlines are now.

 

[Halifaxlad]

one way would be to build out P1 and use one of the through roads, similar to the way Huddersfield was done, decades ago.

wasn't p1 built out many years ago anyway in this fashion hence the platform canopy extension ?

The economics strongly favour longer trains, even if they don't go over a high speed line.

I do agree although I don't believe the economics strongly favor 400m long trains, if anything the economics favour 300m long trains!


Getting back to rebuilding Sheffield, the only platforms that I would rebuild are 6/7 & 8!

I would certainly look at...

getting rid of the two roads between 5 & 6.

Putting a new bay in adjacent to P7

Putting another two North facing bays in between 6 & 8

 

[yorksrob]

One thing that could be done to increase flexibility - the centre roads could be used to divide the through platforms in two. This way, a train could go round another waiting in the other end of the platform.