• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Sunderland railway station.

FalkirkMackem said:
Exiled in Falkirk for a while
I’m born and bred Sunderland
Not that it should matter

It looks bloody awful, as I said earlier in this thread it’s like the interior of the old crowtree.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t look awful at all…you’re just a moaner living in the arse end of a different country
 

Boris Bear said:
It doesn’t look awful at all…you’re just a moaner living in the arse end of a different country
Click to expand...

you can have your opinion I can have mine.

It looks cheap and no other major city would be happy with it, yet some people in Sunderland will be happy because it’s an improvement on what was there. That doesn’t make it “lovely”
 
mackem35 said:
Using your argument what was the point of the millennium bridge in Gateshead? You can walk a few mins and cross the swing bridge. I can't recall people on here complaining about the money on that but build it in Sunderland and its a waste of time and money, only on a match day ! Last time I walked across the Wearmouth bridge with the dog, very surprised at how busy it was with pedestrians. Aquatic Centre, Stables, the SoL, new housing, Esports Centre and the building academy all going on the Sheepfolds and what about the people from the North side who want to get into the city centre. The footbridge is about as practical as you can get, so not like x million on some vanity design.
Click to expand...

I don't think there was any point to the millennium bridge or the millennium dome in London or the Garden Bridge Boris Johnson wanted to build in London. I think they are vanity projects by local or national government. They have access to an unlimited source of money ( the taxpayer ) and probably never got Lego or Meccano when they were kids.

I'm neutral about the new station building, it's neither worse nor better than I expected. I simply think the priority was the track and that hasn't been tackled.
 
Last edited:
PinzaC55 said:
It's irrelevant to my question whether the bridge is a council asset my question is whether it brings any tangible benefits for the £31 million it costs ? I don't personally see being able to take a shortcut across the river on a match day as a good spend of all those millions.

The issue with the station is that it is clogged up with Dinky trains and heavy trains and this is preventing more services which bring real economic benefits to the city by making it more accessible by public transport. Its beyond my ability to prove that to you of course.
Click to expand...

Osklen said:
If it’s irrelevant then your question is irrelevant as there isn’t any known funding available for the below ground station as far as anyone is aware?

I guess will there be tangible benefits by just adding the 4 platforms? Is it guaranteed we will see better rail services? You would hope so even if it is just more metro services per hour? Hopefully more grand central journeys though I guess that would depend on east coast mainline capacity.

Hopefully we can have both in time.
Click to expand...

Isn’t this a case of what comes first and you both have valid points?

If we want to increase visitor numbers and expenditure, then we need both good infrastructure and quality destinations/ venues for people to want to come and see.
 
Kevj said:
Isn’t this a case of what comes first and you both have valid points?

If we want to increase visitor numbers and expenditure, then we need both good infrastructure and quality destinations/ venues for people to want to come and see.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely. We need both but sometimes funding dictates that you take the money whilst you can. Ideally there would be an agreed strategy with network rail (and there may well be).
 
Kevj said:
Isn’t this a case of what comes first and you both have valid points?

If we want to increase visitor numbers and expenditure, then we need both good infrastructure and quality destinations/ venues for people to want to come and see.
Click to expand...

I can't see how a £31 million footbridge which will allow anyone without a fear of heights to access the SOL on match days will be a good investment.
I could see how £31 spent on a new hotel, flats or for example improving High Street East would be a good investment.
That's my point.
 
PinzaC55 said:
I can't see how a £31 million footbridge which will allow anyone without a fear of heights to access the SOL on match days will be a good investment.
I could see how £31 spent on a new hotel, flats or for example improving High Street East would be a good investment.
That's my point.
Click to expand...

Ah, it’s not just match days though.

The other planned developments mean there should be a draw to this part of town on a more regular basis if the businesses which choose to locate there have any chance of being a success.

It’s about accessibility and whilst some will use the Metro for one stop, others will prefer to walk. The Town bridge and back to say the development at the stables is a long walk from Keel Sq.

These investments become a white elephant if no one uses them because it’s difficult to get to or there’s nowt else around to extend the experience.

I don’t disagree that there are other equally important things which need to be developed, preferably in parallel, but if that’s not possible for a variety of reasons, then any progress is worthwhile celebrating.
 
Last edited:
Osklen said:
Also isn’t the biggest issue here that even if the platforms are reopened then network rail would need to enforce additional services? Or is there already demand for this?


Makes sense. What’s your views on having a more comprehensive metro services south of the west that perhaps linked up with Durham?
Click to expand...
I would welcome any more additional direct rail connections for Sunderland. Increasing these will be an important driver in making the City a more attractive place to invest in and relocate jobs to.

Just re: Network Rail and ‘enforce new services’. Rail franchises are set by DfT and bidders look at the whole package of what services they will be committed to provide. Inevitably, some services are profitable while others may be effective cross-subsidised by the franchise as a whole because they provide a social or economic development benefit.

However, guess who speaks for Sunderland currently when it comes to DfT consulting on which places and which services should be included in rail franchises? It’s Nexus and their successor body!
 
PhilY said:
I would welcome any more additional direct rail connections for Sunderland. Increasing these will be an important driver in making the City a more attractive place to invest in and relocate jobs to.

Just re: Network Rail and ‘enforce new services’. Rail franchises are set by DfT and bidders look at the whole package of what services they will be committed to provide. Inevitably, some services are profitable while others may be effective cross-subsidised by the franchise as a whole because they provide a social or economic development benefit.

However, guess who speaks for Sunderland currently when it comes to DfT consulting on which places and which services should be included in rail franchises? It’s Nexus and their successor body!
Click to expand...
Is it possible that SCC can speak directly to DfT or does it have to be regional? Because we'll get bugger all with them in charge. Bit like T(w) DC. Things only improved when we removed ourselves from their shackles.
 
EDGE said:
Is it possible that SCC can speak directly to DfT or does it have to be regional? Because we'll get bugger all with them in charge. Bit like T(w) DC. Things only improved when we removed ourselves from their shackles.
Click to expand...
I’m sure they could speak to DfT but it’s Nexus which is the nominated public transport authority for rail on Wearside….which I think is madness

Realistically, we need to be asking questions of the successor transport team within the new Combined Authority which will assume Nexus’ powers to ensure that promotion of the economic development of the City, including by the addition of new direct rail services (which requires the mothballed platforms to be reopened and no doubt some investment in track/signalling*) is prioritised.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of the forthcoming new Combined Authority can help?

*(while brand new rail infrastructure, such as direct connections to Durham/Washington/etc would be useful, the cheapest and therefore most realistic way to get new direct rail services would be the re-opening of the platform capacity coupled with inclusion of Sunderland on Transpennine/Cross Country franchises, which could also improve connections for Hartlepool/Teesside).
 
Wilfy said:
Well there’s only so many aluminium profiles. Have you seen Brent Cross station? Only cost ten times more than Sunderland station.
Click to expand...

You don't build with aluminium profiles then for major city centre transport hubs.

Just cover it in glass and pay someone to get up and clean it every week.

Not difficult, but costs money. They just went for the very cheapest option here and people are happy because it's an improvement on what it was.
 
Walter Ego said:
Another wonderful experience. Simply can’t fault it. Except the numb fuckers who are perplexed by modern technology such as staircases.

People whingeing about it looking empty. Good. Less for the feral children who make using that station so unpleasant to vandalise.
Click to expand...
I can't tell if this is meant to be positive or negative
Boris Bear said:
It doesn’t look awful at all…you’re just a moaner living in the arse end of a different country
Click to expand...
It looks completely bland at best, you can't honestly pretend otherwise
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top