Sunday 11 March 2012

Station Site Layout

A supporter asked me to provide a bit more detail as to the Station Site Plan. The diagram above is not to scale, neither has it been through any approval process, but it gives an idea as to what's in my head!


John Roberts said...

That's really helpful Bill. I notice the previously alluded to 1C makes an appearance - what's the thinking behind the extension?

Bill said...

Hi John,
1C is not on our radar at the moment, but is required if 10 coach trains are envisaged in the future. Personally I think an 8 coach platform is more than sufficient, but others in high places disagree and I'm a small voice in the debate.

Anonymous said...

Wasn't the original platform 2 building right beside the footbridge so one could walk from the building on platform 1 to platform 2 while always undercover?

Bill said...

As I said the drawing is just a sketch and not to scale - I have altered it to cover off this comment however.
There is good deal of discussion required as to the exact location of buildings/bridge etc. With the Signal Box where it is the signalman's view to the north is obstructed and there must be an optimum height for the signal box and the positioning of the foot bridge.

SWrural said...

I had a quick look at the website, as I thought it had all been decided. In other words I just thought it was the intention to more or less recreate what was there before.

It's just the issue of the signal box, isn't it?

Bill said...

The buildings will be replicas of the old as far as humanly possible!

Gavin said...

I find it such an interesting subject (new vs old) Do you build an exact replica of what was? or do you build something that looks the part but is bigger and has more facilities to attract more money and uses etc.

Do you have longer platforms to cater for longer trains? (possible incoming railtours one day hopefully) or is the extra time and money spent on the length not worth it? People can just walk through the train like at plenty of other places.

Do you try to build shops/restaurants/toilet facilities/museum rooms/function rooms. to keep money flowing in for the long term? Or are we missing the point completely and forgetting that were trying to re create a typical country station?

Take Consall station on the Churnet valley. Its so "quaint" and really shows what a quiet country station was all about. Where as the plans for Cheddleton station are quite different. New catering facilities, signal box with level crossing gate. Bigger sheds etc etc.

So i suppose the point im getting at is what story can Broadway tell that the other stations along the line dont already tell? Is it worth having every station Full of the same thing OR should every site be different?


Anonymous said...

There are rules about trains longer than platforms these days and risks that most are not willing to take. People really don't like running 7 carriages out of Winchcombe at present

Anonymous said...

Many, many thanks for this diagram. It really helps give some context to the postings about platform 1a (etc).
A version which was even slightly to scale with some distances would be even better but this helps a lot already.

Bill said...

Gavin and all,
You raise some interesting and very valid comments re the buildings and platforms. I suspect that a good deal more thinking and internal planning has to take place before submitting final Planning Application(s).

Just from a personal point of view I feel we should try and put back the style and size of buildings that were there before. The idea is that the GWSR services operated to and from Broadway integrate in with and grow Broadway's business opportunities and expand tourism in the Cotswolds. In this sense the Station is very much a transit point. Of course to rail and heritage enthusiasts it will be an attraction in itself.

The debate will continue until the final plans go in.