Transport Tycoon Forums

47434 wrote:

JamieLei wrote:Give us some examples of shopping malls built on top of a railway station in Britain that are successful and people enjoy. And I'm not talking about places like St Pancras that are built for railway passengers, but rather places that are built as a piece of the town centre.

Liverpool Central?

Good answer.
As for Westfield Stratford, that's not built on top of the station like you propose. As a general rule if you put a (excuse the norfolkism) Gret ole building on top of a station it becomes a dump. Sunderland, New Street, Snow Hill and many others are testament to that, they're generally dingy, unsavoury and uninviting.

Add to that list, Cannon Street and Charing Cross, they look impressive from the outside but the interiors are drab and dull.

Alan, What your proposing is to Replace all roads with railways?

True, Liverpool Central is good. But when both the lines are deep level, it's difficult to do that with something like New Street!

JamieLei wrote:True, Liverpool Central is good. But when both the lines are deep level, it's difficult to do that with something like New Street!

It's just about acceptable now they've tarted up the circulating area at the top of the escalators, but I wasn't making a serious suggestion. Much like New Street, the platform area is cramped and suffers from a lack of light. Considering the fact that 50% of the services arriving from the North on the Northern Line platforms termainate and reverse, it could really do with an extra pair of platforms... just a shame they didn't anticipate such rises in passenger numbers when they built it.

Ah I was thinking more of the shopping area above it. The platform is a dump, as you said. Reminds me of my local subway station in Kyoto.

Merseytravel really need to get rid of all that 70s-style yellow and brown panelling in the underground stations. The Jet-black flooring doesn't help the atmosphere either. At least the Kyoto station has better lighting and colour scheme- looks very 80s, rather than 70s!

Alan Fry wrote:There is a lot of tax evasion and avoidance in the UK (and other nations) and I proposed spending it on all public services

How about using it to reduce the tax rate altogether (without having to cut other things), so that ordinary people have more money in their pockets to spend in the economy?

You say you want to improve the appearance of certain stations then talk about building others UNDERGROUND!

Alan Fry wrote: There is a lot of tax evasion and avoidance in the UK (and other nations) and I proposed spending it on all public services

Oh, there's no doubt that there is a lot of tax avoidance, but I highly doubt that it's to the tune of e hundreds of billions of pounds you claim it to be.

Anyway enough of this rubbish, real world stuff is happening:
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Dundee ... ation.html

Now, I don't think you'll find a single person who likes the existing station but I can't say I'm a fan of the proposal here either...
The platforms need just as much work as the concourse, I assume they're listed by cleaning some of the pigeon guano away and maybe glazing over the cutting to make it more of an enclosed space rather than a damp windy tube that is more suitable as a wind tunnel for F1 teams may not go amiss...
At least they're getting rid of the game you can play where you watch the non-regulars try and spot where the doors from the platform into the ticket hall are!

This just struck me, if you bulldoze Birmingham city centre for more railways, relocating all the shops, there would be far less need for acees to Birmingham city centre. There'd just be several bloody great stations.

Badger wrote:This just struck me, if you bulldoze Birmingham city centre for more railways, relocating all the shops, there would be far less need for acees to Birmingham city centre. There'd just be several bloody great stations.

I made that point, Alan Fry seems to think that you'd only need to make the existing stations 50% larger in any city centre.
In the case of New Street it could do with that just to accommodate the existing services.

Sorry, missed that bit! Probably wiping the tears from my eyes from catching up with this topic

Just a quick question about Birmingham city centre: Aren't there any historic buildings that you simply do not want to rebuild?
Or is this one of these awful newly-built bauhaus-architecture city centres that everybody hates?

Birmingham New Street station is God-awful and needs to go. For a usage of 25 million a year, it's in a pretty sorry state and the disabled access to the platforms is simply demeaning and insulting (walk out the station, round the back of the taxi rank where it's all dark and damp, take a lift down to the basement where you'll find a dark damp passageway, find the lift that goes to your platform, take another lift).

There are some historic buildings in Birmingham that must be preserved. But in British terms, Birmingham is actually a relatively new city, only gaining significance 150 years ago. The oldest notable buildings are perhaps 100 years old.

Nowadays it's actually quite a nice place that people enjoy and are generally proud of. The redevelopment of the city centre is coming on nicely (the Big City Plan looks very exciting!) and there are some new iconic buildings that are redefining the city looking forward. Eg:





(Ok, the last one is cheating. It's what New Street will look like when it's redeveloped, and someone hangs a giant spotlight off the top of the Burlington Hotel)

doktorhonig wrote:Just a quick question about Birmingham city centre: Aren't there any historic buildings that you simply do not want to rebuild?
Or is this one of these awful newly-built bauhaus-architecture city centres that everybody hates?

I will let you make up your own mind after telling you THIS is one of Birmingham's most celebrated buildings:



This was before the Bull Ring was finished, and if you look in the bottom left, you can see catenary from New Street... So about building things on top of railway stations...

There are a few decent pieces of architecture in Birmingham. Moor Street is actually a pretty place and the Selfridges (which everyone wrongly calls "the Bullring") is a beautiful modern building. There are others dotted around too (St Pauls Square, etc). But otherwise it's a concrete city - rebuilt in the 1960s for (as Alan Fry rightly - for a change - points out) the motor car. This was when the concrete was pearly white and the place looked amazing - no one knew what happened to concrete back then haha.

Ah, ok, JamieLei's photos actually look quite good, although I'm not a fan of modern architecture.

All three of those buildings are stunning examples of new architecture.

I am confused. If the shopping area bit on the site which used to be occupied by the bullring has a bronze bull statue in it, it is not the bullring? Please explain because I am really confused now....

It is the bullring. The old one (which was s***) was knocked down and rebuilt.

Dave W wrote:All three of those buildings are stunning examples of new architecture.

They're great examples of how you can create identity and distinctiveness without necessarily being placeless, international and boring. The Gherkin is just as much part of London's skyline as St Paul's Cathedral, and yet one is old and the other one new. I'm a geographer rather than an architect but I believe that A LOT of disenfranchisement with modern architecture is that it's often too bland and international. In the olden days, each office building would be drawn up with the location and surroundings in mind, but today too often you just plonk your identikit glass-and-steel box there. Round the back of Birmingham Snow Hill station has pretty much gone that way unfortunately...