Reading Station improvements

[whole diary]

[EBrown]

Removed.

[paul7575]

I suppose that unless they've done something that absolutely prevents them being lengthened, it could be done later? 

It seems to me that initially, any typical sized through services using the relief lines will be able to stop fully alongside the canopies anyway, and the normal platforming will presumably see most HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) using the mains.  Of course HST's aren't that much longer than the relief platform canopies anyway?

In the case of the terminating trains, I suppose it will all come down to whether or not they have to sit between arriving and leaving at the London end of the platform away from the canopy, to allow for the country end to be used simultaneously, eg for XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) reversals (as discussed at length previously).  If not they'll be able to sit alongside a canopy as well...

Paul

[ellendune]

The canopies seem as per the planning application drawings, on the reliefs they are about 150m on a 250m platform.  They extend west about the same distance as the P8/9 and P10/11 canopies.  They do appear short relative to the east end perhaps because the existing islands are somewhat longer than them, and maybe also look short because of the end on view - the sloping roof over the escalators (yet to be fitted) accounts for a significant proportion of the length as far as I can work out.

Pual, thanks again for being the provider of hard information.  My point remains that platforms without canopies reflects an assumption that it's OK for people to get on and off trains in the wet.  And that insufficient attention has been given to the H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) and station dwell time issues associated with people congregating in an area shorter than the train they intend boarding. 

I accept some canopies at some stations (eg Pangbourne) have been shortened over the years because of maintenance issues, but I can't see any excuses for installing short canopies on new-build platforms.

Remember these are the relief line platforms and that 150m is more than enough for 6 car 165 and I think it would get all the passenger doors of an unlengthened HST^▸ (High Speed Train) set under the canopy.  I therefore do not see what the problem is.  

If they start running longer trains or using the platforms for two long trains at once then they can, as Paul says, still be lengthened.

[bobm]

As a side point, why is it not OK to get off a train in the rain?

It is not the end of the world but in the context of the huge Reading scheme it would be good to provide shelter not only for those exiting a train but also those waiting to board.  As has been pointed out, in times of wet weather people will tend to wait in the covered area before moving down the platform when the train arrives and possibly delay its departure.  Wet surfaces are also prone to freezing which does have H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) considerations.

Agreed it is not the biggest issue in the Reading project, but still valid to raise it.

[John R]

Rather large stations such as SFA and STP do not have an issue with this. The passenger flow during the Olympics was worse, and surprise surprise, no one was injured.

Please get off your health and safety horse unless you have evidence that:
a) It hasn't been risk assessed (hint, SFA has been, so you'll probably find that RDG^‡(resolve) has too)
b) There is actually a danger posed (hint no one was injured at SFA during the Olympics in this way)
c) You have a serious amount of knowledge in this specific area, perhaps a relevant qualification in health and safety and a damn good reason why you haven't spoken to network rail about it.

Seems a bit of a harsh response. I wouldn't expect someone to have to raise an issue with Network Rail before giving an opinion on the Coffee Shop.

And as for SFA and STP, IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly), there was very little rain during the Games, so any experience there is irrelevant. (Though it seems a bit of a red herring.)

[Jonty]

Seems silly not to do a "proper" job first time and provide canopies for the whole platform.

Plat 3 seems esp Exposed if the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) trains will still use it ( as I bet they will)...

[ellendune]

As a side point, why is it not OK to get off a train in the rain?

It is not the end of the world but in the context of the huge Reading scheme it would be good to provide shelter not only for those exiting a train but also those waiting to board.  As has been pointed out, in times of wet weather people will tend to wait in the covered area before moving down the platform when the train arrives and possibly delay its departure.  Wet surfaces are also prone to freezing which does have H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) considerations.

Agreed it is not the biggest issue in the Reading project, but still valid to raise it.

But I do not believe anyone needs to be waiting for or getting out of the train in the wet.  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6405.msg120548#
 

Plat 3 seems esp Exposed if the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) trains will still use it ( as I bet they will)...

But the first diagram of services prodced early on (http://richardwillisuk.wordpress.com/2009/05/03/building-a-new-21st-century-reading-station/) shows the XC services using the mainline platforms. The short canopy should be adequate for a 3 car 165.

[onthecushions]

I expect that a canopy's role is more to shelter waiting customers than those alighting.

It's a pity that a modern overall roof couldn't be provided for some part of the platforms, near the concourse. Leeds City has this, giving a much improved passenger experience.

It's marvellous to see, anyway. Well done NR^» (Network Rail - home page).

OTC

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Good heavens, some people are getting theselves in a state about canopies.  BTW^▸ (by the way), EBrown, I hold a NEBOSH Diploma, though I don't think any one needs to be barred from posting on an issue just because they may not have a relevant qualification.   

If there's a platform then it's fair to assume a train will stop alongside it at some point. We did discuss a few pages back whether the RL platforms would operate like the island at Southampton, ie terminating trains from both directions occupying the platform at the same time - if this is the case there will certainly be trains or parts of trains outside the canopies. 

Thank you to those who acknowledge that this is a fair point to make.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

... and there is a Network Rail Guide to Station design at http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/6368.aspx which includes, on page 37, the comments: 

Inclusion of noise mitigation techniques and design of effective climate protection through platform canopies and covered pedestrian routes will ensure that station users are protected from unpleasant experiences and provide a positive ambience and journey experience for all.

Mitigate risks arising from climatic conditions (e.g. the impact of summer sun or water on floor surfaces) for reasons of safety and ease of use.

But I'll say no more on canopies.  I agree with those who say that the new station looks great.

[Jonty]

Just because XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) trains are not immediately slated to use Plat 3 doesn't mean that they, or indeed other trains which do not even know about, in 10,20,and 30 years won't.

Surely it is reasonable to 'future-proof' as much as possible, as adding canopies on an ad-hoc basis later will be hugely more expensive than building one now...

[ellendune]

Just because XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) trains are not immediately slated to use Plat 3 doesn't mean that they, or indeed other trains which do not even know about, in 10,20,and 30 years won't.

Surely it is reasonable to 'future-proof' as much as possible, as adding canopies on an ad-hoc basis later will be hugely more expensive than building one now...

More expensive - yes, but I do not think hugely more expensive.  The way economists value expenditure made now, that will not be needed until some time in the future would show it to be far cheaper to wait even if there was certainty that it would be used by XC. 

Please remember this is a time when the railway is under extreme pressure to reduce costs and putting canopies on bits of platform that the brief says will only be infrequently used by trains that would need them would not be a priority.  Only by credible control of costs will the railway be trusted to receive further investment.

[Not from Brighton]

It would take more than a canopy to protect me from all the "unpleasant experiences" I've suffered on a station platform over the years!

[pfneeves]

Was expecting to get off the train on Platform 2 this morning to find that the rest of the roof had been removed. But that was not the case. So it looks as though users of Platforms 1 & 2 will have another week when they have partial shelter when waiting for trains.

On a different note does anyone know if the existing platforms are going to be refurbished in anyway (besides getting a new canopy of course)?

I also spotted that some of Platform 7 has been dug up and cemented over again near the newsagent. Something tells me that more of this may happen if the green spray paint writing is anything to go by.

[broadgage]

Whilst in a perfect world all platforms would be under shelter, in todays economic climate I can think of more important uses for the money.
Including buying an extra train ! and yes even one more could make a difference, not by any extra timetabled services but by reducing cancellations and short formations "due to lack of rolling stock"