Stations
rules for all elements of a station - whether at the platforms, concourse, or retail areas. There are some major wayfinding challenges at the new London Bridge station. The main concourse is at a different level from the platforms, while the station has multiple entrances, a separate concourse for terminating platforms and a layout that puts columns and supporting structures in the way of sight lines. At such a complex hub, it is important to establish passenger orientation from the outset, and then to maintain this as they pass through different areas of the station. To overcome the challenges, research
is being undertaken by CCD, NR’s Ergonomics team, architects Grimshaw and designers Maynard about passengers, their behaviour and journey needs. These studies demonstrate how passengers will interact with the architecture and spaces within the station; for example, what information they might need to reach the Underground network from a train arriving from Gatwick Airport. The data has subsequently been
used to map all the decision points throughout the station enabling the team to define passenger information requirements and information hierarchy at each point. The aim is to provide passengers, whether regular commuters, infrequent rail users or passengers with reduced mobility, with the smoothest and easiest guided route from point to point. One of the main features of the new
station will be the new, larger central concourse which will change the appearance and dynamics of the station. The original arches are being removed, with the tracks now being supported by
“The aim is to make the wayfinding system unobtrusive - interchanges will be intuitive, improving passenger flow through the station.” David Watts
structural pillars, and the space will also contain lifts and escalators to take passengers to and from the platforms. While these do obstruct sight lines, they are also noticeable elements of the concourse, so will become part of the wayfinding helping to guide passengers through the space.
Complexity The complexity of the station layout
has also led CCD to consider how best to build passengers’ visual awareness and to understand where they are within the station. Throughout the station the aim is that at key nodes such as junctions or changes in level, wayfinding should help the passenger make the right decision at the right time and with confidence. By taking this approach, passenger confidence can be
increased, and they are better able to move to where they need to get to - whether that’s a platform, or out to the local streets. Another element is the concept of ‘concise signs’ which give passengers the information they need at any particular point, rather than their final destination. For example, to avoid having passengers dwell on a platform on arrival, they will be guided off the platform to a more open area where they can be provided with the information they need to the next point in their journey. The aim is to make the wayfinding
TheredevelopedLondonBridgestationisscheduledtobecompletedin2018. 52
system unobtrusive - interchanges will be intuitive, improving passenger flow through the station without the need to make conscious decisions. For example, it should be simple for someone to enter the station from Tooley Street, look at the customer information system to find the next train to Bedford, buy a ticket, then a coffee, before passing through the ticket barriers to reach the correct platform. The wayfinding system at London Bridge, conceived at the outset of the station planning process and which places the needs of the station users at its core, will be a substantial leap forward for the railway industry. The station architecture, wayfinding system and needs of the travelling public are being integrated as never before. The irony is that if it works as well as expected, few of the passengers, wherever they are coming from or going to, will even notice it. Importantly it forms part of the industry’s strategy to look at passengers’ entire journey as a way of gauging customer satisfaction. IRJ
IRJ September 2013
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