Opinion
The final stage of the King’s Cross redevelopment is well underway, with all but two sections of the former concourse roof demolished. Contractor Murphy and its demolition experts AR Demolition have been removing the 1970s roof that once covered the land between the Euston Road and Lewis Cubitt’s original frontage, leaving the site open for the first time since the Victorian period. The 2,500 sq metre
previous projects show that diverting passengers is rather like diverting a river; you have to go with the flow. While the contractors would have preferred one work site, instead of two, the impossibility of closing an access point used by a large proportion of the station’s passengers meant the channel had to be created. Given the tidal nature of travel to and from the Tube, there has never been the need to have flows separated, as the weight of passengers does that naturally during the morning and evening peaks.
Interestingly, the nature of the passengers using a station can have an effect on how effective signage can be during periods of redevelopment. Leisure travellers tend to be less aware of where to go, and will follow signage much more attentively than commuters, who are programmed to follow the same routes they have always done. They still adapt quickly however, with the most effective form of communication being people, preceded by early warnings in the form of signage on platforms and announcements on trains. When the new western concourse opened at King’s Cross in March 2012, teams
were employed to engage with the travelling public personally, using giant foam hands to direct them into the new building. Toc’s played their role too, with on-train announcements, posters, leaflets, web information and that most modern form of communication, Twitter.
Another important lesson from the past is that passengers adapt better to one big change to their route in or around a station than many little ones. For that reason, the Nottingham station redevelopment project set up new passenger flows in October 2012, which will stay in place until the project is complete in early 2014.
The former main entrance has been largely closed off, leaving one access route for those requiring step-free access. Temporary ticket facilities have been created at the former milk dock along the side of the station and a temporary footbridge erected. These arrangements will remain until the redeveloped station is revealed in all its glory, with a new glazed concourse in the porte cochere, and a brand new concourse to the south. The high water mark for judging passenger flows was the Olympic and Paralympic Games last year, where Olympic ticketing information was combined with event locations and commuter flows to draw up station ‘hot-spots’ and a colour coded map for passengers, showing what times should be avoided and where. While much important information is still gleaned through
Page 16 March 2013
concourse has been replaced by the stunning western concourse, three times the size and providing massively improved facilities and interchange. When it is completed in the autumn, the new 7,000 sq metre King’s Cross Square will bring to an end a £550 million project that has been on the go since 2007.
people standing at stations with counters, pedestrian flow modelling software can also help design alternative flows, with a variety of different programmes available to help. The representation of passengers can be virtual reality or just red dots depending on the programme used, and they can be programmed to behave in different ways; with a certain percentage carrying heavy luggage, some with visual impairments and others just lost. Interestingly, modelling passenger flows is a much easier task
on the Underground, thanks to the data gleaned from Oyster cards, which can track individual journeys and habits over years and years. When smart-ticketing is eventually installed on the national rail network, similar data will help develop stations of the future.
Project teams also work closely with station staff, fire safety officers and passenger groups in designing routes, as there is no substitute for experience of a station and the types of people who use it.
One aspect of stations that can now be worked on without impacting passenger flows is the roof. The restoration of the main train shed at King’s Cross presented a particular challenge, as the project team not only had to replace the glazing, but also strip 32 layers of paint – most of it lead based – while working above people’s heads.
Scaffolding was erected to run on ‘rails’ fitted to the station walls and abutments many metres above track level, so it could be moved along as the work progressed without the need to impede passengers with scaffolding at ground level. Both sides of the roof were enclosed so the paint dust could be safely extracted, and the enclosed space was also heated so the paint could be applied and dried in the winter. It’s the kind of solution that passengers are not always aware of, barring the gloomier train shed while the work is carried out, but that means our most important stations can function fully while simultaneously being taken apart and improved. Now the biggest challenge that Network Rail faces at its stations lies a mile or so further south, at London Bridge. Where the project team at King’s Cross was able to create a new platform (platform 0) in the old cab road, the project to rebuild London Bridge has no such luxury. Taking two or three platforms out of use at a time will allow the team to gradually dismantle the current station and create a new one, with greater capacity and better passenger flows (including a street-level concourse bigger than the pitch at Wembley). But to do it will require changing passenger flows and rerouting trains until 2018. It’s a challenge, but one that Network Rail and its contractors are well used to facing.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116