The station is not functional in that it does not meet modern safety standards. It is currently handling 13 million pax pa and forecast to reach 20 million in the near future (it might already have reached that if not for Covid), and reaching 30 million in the medium term. The current layout is probably ok for 10 million pax at most, so a significant upgrade is required now and this must be future proofed.
Ok, understood. However, I would suggest that 'over-capacity' is a better term to describe such a suituation rather than 'non-functional' - have any of the ecocidal advocates of the proposed second M4 around Newport ever used the latter to describe the current M4 through south-east Wales?
The station definitely needs more eastbound platforms to accommodate increased passenger numbers.
Aren't the current platforms all now bi-directional? Indeed, I think platforms 4, 6, 7 and 8 are now signalled as part of the Cardiff Metro / ValleyLines in which case only 1 of the traditionally 'westbound' platforms (ie. platform 3) is still controlled by Cardiff Mainline.
The main constraint is the underplatform tunnels and their stairways to the platforms which are already danerously overcrowded at peak times. There are two complete solutions - a new underground concourse or a new over platform concourse - and a partial solution which is a new underground tunnel to platforms 1 & 2 only. I understand that the new underground concourse (linking platforms 0-8) has been ruled out (whether on technical or financial grounds I dont know).
Would new footbridges (not concourses, just normal footbridges) suplementing the existing tunnels not also be at least a partial solution?
2. The increased use of South entrance - which will become the main (only?) access for vehicles, taxis, coaches and future tram - with North entrance being for pedestrian access only including bus station. (This will help reduce impact to the existing station building).
Other subjective considerations include aspirations to improve passenger comfort with better weather proofing, and improving the first impression of arrivals at Wales's main gateway.
A full rebuild is needed with more eastbound platforms that can accommodate 10 plus carriages. Facilities are woeful, there’s no restaurants, bars, retail and it doesn’t showcase Cardiff or Wales.
The answer to this would appear to be a large new concourse on the south side with greatly enhanced catering and toilet facilities, replacing those on the platforms. However the potential future need for additional platforms south of platform 8 should be considered and allowed for. Additional indoor passenger space (for post-event queues) on the north side could be provided by moving the M&S to a new structure built on the car park above it and installing glass panels from the canopy 'skirt' around the front to the ground, effectively making the area under that canopy part of the northern concourse.
1. The need to extend Platform 0 (which will have a major impact on existing station building)
Is this really a 'need'? Looking at the bigger picture of traffic across the whole of the South Wales Main Line, rather than just at Cardiff Central in isolation, I remain unconvinced that platform 0 becoming the main platform for InterCity services towards Paddington is the best way forward. Indeed, the most logical routing for services from Swanline and Maesteg to Ebbw Vale (and possible future Metro extensions to Abertillery and Hereford) seems to be through platform 0. If I recall correctly, the consultation on the proposed new 'Burns review' stations between Cardiff Central and Severn Tunnel Junction stated that they would have 170m platforms - I'm pretty sure platform 0 at Cardiff Central could be extended to that length without impacting on the existing station building. A 260m platform 0 for 10-car class 800s/802s on the other hand would indeed probably require removal of a signficant part of the existing building, although even then it might be possible to extend it further westwards to avoid impacting the main building if the work was done in conjunction with a major remodelling of the western approaches (likely including part of Canton depot) which is likely be needed at some point anyway if the massive increase in service frequency that Network Rail envisaged before COVID has only been put back a few years.
It is not possible to meet all of these requirements while retaining all of the 'museum features' - something has to give.
There would need to be modern extensions alongside some of the heritiage aspects, which would impact the setting of them, but I still don't see that any
demolition is necessary; except perhaps if platform 0 needs to be longer than the new 'Burns review' stations - in which case I can only say that either the listing has failed or that a huge amount of money will need to be found to move the entire thing (except platforms 0 and 8) to a museum like St. Fagans. In theory, all the 'museum features' could be retained in that way, but it will not be cheap and I'm not sure where the best place to move them to would be.
Some sections are listed so these will need to be carefully moved to St Fagans for rebuild and this will increase cost of the project.
Pretty much all of it is listed. Only the relatively modern parts (platforms 0 and 8) are not. Unfortunately there does not appear to be a legal requirement to actually protect listed buildings, so I fear nobody will pay for the massive cost of moving it to St. Fagans and the most-complete big-4 major city station will be lost.
