£50m revamp for 'worst stations' (BBC News)
 

Ten railway stations in England, including Manchester Victoria and Clapham Junction, are to get £50m to carry out urgent improvements.

More from BBC News...

They just interviewed him on the radio this morning at Clapham junction. He is going to visit all 10 problem stations today no doubt meeting the local media at each, and if everything goes to schedule should finish his journey about 10pm (he clearly has a lot of faith in the network). I am no fan of any Politician but he does seem to be one of a very few ministers in recent years that gets his hands dirty and moves things on. He was voted minister of the year last week apparently. One of the papers was suggesting at the weekend that he may stay on in a transport role even if the Governemnt changes next year.

I admit that my experience of stations is limited to those in the West Midlands and on the West Coast Main Line but my initial reaction to many I see is that rather than vast refurbishment they just need a bit of TLC,a lick of paint.I worry that we will spend vast sums of money making hallmark stations look stunning whilst leaving the vast majority of stations that the vast majority of people use still looking unloved and uncared for.Spreading the money around will make a major difference to the network as a whole

I didn't think Crewe was that bad the last few times I have been there. I will have to look a bit harder next time I visit.

In my experience Crewe isn't a bad looking station, but it leaks like a collander whenever it rains, which seems to be everytime I'm there!

Perhaps its the roof the money is being spent on ?

uk worst rail stations
 

the top ten worst rail stations was announced today,stockport,wigan north western,liverpool central,even clapham junction-given a station its size doesnt have waiting rooms,and doesnt have full roofing over the platforms,remember posing there as a eurostar shot past many moons ago..other stations were mentioned,but manchester victoria came out as uk's worst station,the roof leaks onto the concourse and the toilets are a disgrace,no shelters on platforms 1-3,network rail are spending 50 million on the 10 worst[big deal]another lick of paint and another patch up job me thinks,was surprised stockport was there,and more surprised man vic was voted top grot spot,years ago i went through wakefield kirkgate and the place was a dump,has it been done up?any thoughts about this news?are there worst stations out there?

Why start a new thread when there is already one on the same topic ?:(:D

http://www.railwayforum.net/showthread.php?t=6100

Can a moderator combine the two sections ?

The Two threads are now Combined,Gents

All the best,Ian

I don't think Stockport is that bad.
This stations has just had a load of improvements including a new platform numbered "0"

i heard the news about the ten worst stations on the tv,my first thought was post thread on the forum,stupid me,didnt realise one had been started,ive never been good on computers,i will learn with practice..soz.

You should see what we have in Bedford they tore down a listed station to build something a kid could design .

I'm not sure that the so called worst ten are in fact the worst but I do I think perhaps that we have been conditioned to railway stations (a bit like bus stations) being somewhat scruffy, dirty and even locked toilets, buildings and platforms often in need of a good clean and coat of paint, leaking roofs, litter and weed strewn tracks etc., etc. The fact that a building may be old is no excuse for neglect.

The question is why do we find it acceptable, especially now that fares are so high. Would we use an airport if the terminal was as run down as some of these stations and the runway was covered in weeds and litter? I hardly think so.

Sounds like you are describing Heathrow terminal 2, which finally closed this week for among other things the very reasons you describe :D

Most major stations are vastly better places than they were in the 70's, when nearly all were horribly dirty, a legacy of century of steam. Its all too easy to forget how bad things were then. I think we expect mush higher standards today though hence the investment.

Pesmo: Have you set foot on Peterborough Station of late? We went there a few weeks back and having returned home found that we had both come to the same opinion of it; it needs a good going over with a yard-brush followed by a wash down with a hose.:eek: The whole place was filthy. Platforms, Stairs, Walls, Windows and Roofs. The staff responsible need to be taken up the line to Grantham and shown how a station can look with a bit of TLC by people who care. It may be just an odd one out on the ECML as having visited Doncaster, York and Darlington in the last 18 months they were nowhere near as bad.:cool:

Regards, 62440.:D

Only been to Peterborough once recently and my only memory is how bloody cold it was as the platform semed quite exposed !

I wouldn't argue with that, we were only waiting about 15 minutes and were relived to get out of the "breeze" and onto the train, must be hellish in winter.:eek:

Regards, 62440.:)

You are of course quite right - overall things are better than in the BR days of steam but the situation is very patchy. If some can do it, why can't they all?

It may well be that our expectations are higher these days. However, although I'm sure there is generally less grime, I think there is more litter. Just as in the streets, people are more careless with their litter both on trains, stations and pretty well everywhere. Mind you it wasn't helped when litter bins were removed from stations some years ago for so-called security reasons. I say so-called because I'm not sure it made stations any safer (there are plenty more nicks and crannys where devices could be hidden) but it certainly made them dirtier. I understand that in Northern Ireland where the threat might be assumed to be much greater, litter bins were not removed.