You are on page 1of 84

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

Foreword
Foreword

Railway stations have perhaps never enjoyed the profile they have had until the last few years. In
recent times we have had both the Better Rail Stations Report published by Government (November
2009), Network Rails Action Stations research (J anuary 2010) and continuing contributions from
important stakeholders in the railway as to the importance and needs of passengers at stations.
The contribution to the journey experience that stations can make
is very clear. Passengers expect and deserve an experience at
railway stations, through service, facilities and access, which adds
to their end-to-end journey experience. Research shows that
integration with others, modes, convenient facilities, readily
available information and, critically, an environment which is
pleasant to move around and wait in are significant influences on
both the attractiveness of rail and determinants of passenger
satisfaction.
It is important that the industry develops a consistent and effective
approach to objective led design and planning of stations.
Network Rail is developing a series of guidelines that will provide
promoters, sponsors, project managers and technical contributors
with clarity over the approach that it sees as good practice.
I would encourage you to embrace this Station Capacity Assessment Guidance as well as other
documents to be published during the course of 2011 to help the nation design, evolve, build and
maintain stations which optimise the value of rail for passengers, local communities and the nation.


Mike Goggin
Director, Stations & Customer Service
Passengers expect
and deserve an
experience at
railway stations,
through service,
facilities and access,
which adds to their
end-to-end journey
experience

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Executi ve Summary
Executive Summary

This document provides practical guidance to Network Rails station capacity assessment requirements
relating to the planning and design of the public areas of its station premises.
Network Rail is responsible for handling hundreds of thousand passengers a day at its Managed
Stations and for those stations pedestrian planning and design is of strategic importance and not just a
technical consideration. It affects safety, operational performance, financial results and Network Rails
reputation.
As a railway company Network Rail has to facilitate and manage the safe movement of large numbers of
people conveniently and efficiently and the size and design of the stations must therefore balance
capacity provision and costs effectiveness.
Station Capacity can be described as the ability of a station and its associated spaces and facilities to
safely, comfortably and conveniently accommodate and circulate the numbers of people expected to
use the station.
By carrying out station capacity assessments Network Rail can optimise its station layouts, plan for
growth and right size its facilities. It can also demonstrate that its stations are safe, comfortable to use,
and easy to navigate with a minimum of operational management. The outputs from the assessments
can enable Network Rail to make station designs efficient, and cost effective whilst simultaneously
freeing up space for other uses such as retail or supporting development.
Capacity assessments of existing stations are used to identify the
reasons for any current or predicted congestion and to identify
priorities and mitigation measures to extend the life of a station by
increasing its capacity and making it more comfortable. For new
stations an early appraisal and intervention provides much better
value than retro-fixes. Most value can be obtained during the early
GRIP stages 2 and 3 for new stations but it also applies to existing
stations. During these stages there is still flexibility to optimise
between cost and performance in the design, and the design can
then be tested to 'see' how it works under different scenarios or
means of operation. At later stages the design is mostly fixed and
the impact pedestrian planning can have is limited.
This guide promotes a consistent best practice approach to capacity assessments in planning and
designing public areas in stations especially elements such as platforms, concourses and footbridges. It
will help to create the optimum sizing and relative arrangement of waiting areas, decision making points,
circulation spaces and other station facilities within a station: it will also help to ensure that a station
design is provided with:-
- right sized public spaces and facilities
- safe, effective and convenient access to train services
- safe, effective and convenient operation and management of the station
- clear circulation routes with minimum travel distances
- circulation spaces free from unnecessary obstructions
- good lines of sight and
- no avoidable dead ends or hiding places
- a predictable plan for growth


For new stations
and major
redevelopments an
early appraisal and
intervention
provides much
better value than
retro-fixes.
Executi ve Summary
The document is divided into two volumes. Volume One provides information on necessary station
space planning and dimensional criteria, This describes, for example, requirements for:
- the planning of concourses and consequential spatial requirements that need to be catered for
(see section 2.4.3;
- the planning and design of access and interchange arrangements (see section 2.4.4)
- the determination of platform widths (see section 2.4.5).
- the implementation of revenue protection gates (see section 2.4.2);
Volume Two describes a standardised approach to station capacity assessments and explains the
difference between the two key methodologies, i.e. static analysis and dynamic modelling. The
objectives of a station capacity assessment will vary from one project to another but typically these
would include:
- Assessment and optimisation of new designs
- Evaluation of proposed refurbishments to existing
infrastructure
- Optimisation of existing infrastructure
- Operational planning and crowd management
- Development of congestion relief schemes
- Retail planning
- Significant timetable changes or introduction of longer trains
- Safety assessments and evacuation planning
- Contingency planning
- Business Case development (for example for the next Control
Period)
- Support for Statutory/Regulatory Authority approvals
Volume Two also explains the importance of a clear remit and what
this should consist of and what outputs or deliverables are required
in order to articulate, analyse and effectively communicate the
results. It also provides a table with interpretation guidelines.
Last but not least, it is important to stress that it is necessary to correctly interpret the results of any
capacity analysis and that it is essential for any modeller and reviewer to have a good understanding of
human behaviour, crowd dynamics and indeed the principles and limitations of technical capacity
assessments before concluding any interpretations or recommendations. The creation of a spreadsheet
or a simulation model is not the end in itself: It is the interpretation and the consequential professional
advice that counts. Ultimately it is this last action that addresses the safety and commercial objectives of
the project.
A good
understanding of
human behaviour
and crowd
dynamics, as well
as the principles
and limitations of
simulations, is
needed to correctly
interpret the
results.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Contents

Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Background........................................................................................................................ 11
1.2 Space Planning Policy.................................................................................................... 11
1.3 Application of this Guidance ............................................................................................ 14
1.4 Structure of the document ................................................................................................ 14
2 Volume One: Planning Guidelines................................................................. 15
2.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 15
2.2 Station Categories .............................................................................................................15
2.3 Planning Criteria ................................................................................................................ 16
2.3.1 Passenger demand .................................................................................................. 16
2.3.2 Passenger types....................................................................................................... 17
2.3.3 Station Failure .......................................................................................................... 18
2.4 Station Capacity Planning Guidelines Normal Operations ......................................... 19
2.4.1 External Elements .................................................................................................... 19
2.4.2 Revenue Protection Gatelines................................................................................. 19
2.4.2.1 Gatelines - Introduction.....................................................................................................19
2.4.2.2 Gatelines for through platforms .........................................................................................20
2.4.2.3 Gatelines for terminating platforms....................................................................................21
2.4.2.4 Other Gateline Considerations ..........................................................................................22
2.4.3 Concourse Activities................................................................................................ 23
2.4.3.1 Travel Information provision..............................................................................................24
2.4.3.2 Ticket-issuing Arrangements.............................................................................................25
2.4.3.3 Passenger Facilities ..........................................................................................................25
2.4.3.4 Clear walkway through concourse spaces ........................................................................26
2.4.3.5 Station concourse headroom.............................................................................................26
2.4.4 Access and Interchange .......................................................................................... 27
2.4.4.1 Passageways. ...................................................................................................................27
2.4.4.2 Changes in level Introduction. ........................................................................................27
2.4.4.3 Changes in level ramps. .................................................................................................28
2.4.4.4 Changes in level stairways.............................................................................................28
2.4.4.5 Changes in level escalators............................................................................................29
2.4.4.6 Changes in level lifts.......................................................................................................29
2.4.4.7 Run-offs.............................................................................................................................30
2.4.4.8 Headroom for access and interchange..............................................................................31
2.4.5 Platforms...................................................................................................................31
2.4.5.1 Platforms General Principles. .........................................................................................32
2.4.5.2 Platform widths platforms as waiting areas ....................................................................33
2.4.5.3 Platforms as passageways................................................................................................35
2.4.5.4 Platform Access and Egress points...................................................................................35
2.5 Station Planning Guidelines Abnormal Conditions ..................................................... 35
2.5.1 Abnormal conditions adjustments to planning requirements........................... 35
2.5.2 Demand considerations........................................................................................... 36
2.5.3 Abnormal situation................................................................................................... 37
2.5.3.1 Emergency Evacuation......................................................................................................37
2.5.3.2 Perturbation.......................................................................................................................38
2.5.3.3 Construction.......................................................................................................................39
2.5.3.4 Special Events...................................................................................................................40
3 Volume Two: Station Capacity Assessment Guidance ............................... 41
3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 41
3.2 Objectives of a Station Capacity Assessment ................................................................ 41
3.3 Standard approach to station capacity assessments .................................................... 41
3.4 Determining the Requirement for Capacity Assessments ............................................. 42
3.5 Data collection ................................................................................................................... 43
3.5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 43
3.5.2 Demand Data ............................................................................................................ 43
3.5.2.1 Data collection...................................................................................................................44
3.5.2.2 Station Entries & Exits Counts...........................................................................................45
3.5.2.3 Origin-Destination Demand Matrix....................................................................................45
3.5.2.4 Unique tracking survey data, additional counts and validation counts within the station..46
3.5.2.5 Gateline Data.....................................................................................................................46
3.5.2.6 J ourney Time Survey.........................................................................................................46
3.5.3 Demand forecasting................................................................................................. 46
3.5.3.1 Planning for Demand Growth............................................................................................46
3.5.3.2 Defining a Growth Scenario for Rail Passengers ..............................................................46
3.5.3.3 Defining a Growth Scenario for Retail Footfall ..................................................................47

3.5.3.4 Other Growth Scenarios....................................................................................................47
3.5.3.5 Planning Horizons & Contingency.....................................................................................48
3.5.4 Appraisal Considerations ........................................................................................ 48
3.5.5 Layout Drawing Inputs............................................................................................. 48
3.5.6 Site Visit .................................................................................................................... 49
3.5.7 Other Information and Assumptions ...................................................................... 49
3.6 Base Case, Option and Scenario Definition .................................................................... 50
3.7 Developing a Tender Brief................................................................................................. 50
3.8 Static analysis .................................................................................................................... 51
3.8.1 Definition................................................................................................................... 51
3.8.2 Objective ................................................................................................................... 51
3.8.3 Purpose..................................................................................................................... 51
3.8.4 Process ..................................................................................................................... 51
3.9 Dynamic Modelling ............................................................................................................ 53
3.9.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 53
3.9.2 Modelling Methodology ........................................................................................... 54
3.9.3 Data Inputs and Assumptions................................................................................. 56
3.9.3.1 CAD drawing......................................................................................................................56
3.9.3.2 Passenger Demand Data..................................................................................................56
3.9.3.3 Composition of Passenger Populations.............................................................................56
3.9.3.4 Train service information...................................................................................................57
3.9.3.5 Gateline configuration........................................................................................................57
3.9.3.6 Escalator orientation..........................................................................................................57
3.9.3.7 Operational information.....................................................................................................57
3.9.3.8 Customer Information Screens (CIS) and Signage...........................................................57
3.9.3.9 Ticket purchasing points and service assumptions ...........................................................58
3.9.3.10 Lift Assumptions ................................................................................................................58
3.9.3.11 Secondary revenue facilities..............................................................................................58
3.10 Model outputs .................................................................................................................... 58
3.10.1 Density maps (also referred to as Level Of Service (LOS) or Service Factor
maps) ................................................................................................................................... 58
3.10.2 Space utilisation maps............................................................................................. 59
3.10.3 Flow rates analysis .................................................................................................. 59
3.10.4 Clearance times........................................................................................................ 59
3.10.5 Journey times ........................................................................................................... 59
3.10.6 Evacuation maps and/or evacuation times ............................................................ 60
3.11 Auditing Models ................................................................................................................. 60
3.12 Modelling Analysis and Interpretation ............................................................................. 61
3.13 Modelling Documentation and Deliverables.................................................................... 61
3.13.1 Model Plan ................................................................................................................ 61
3.13.2 Site Visit technical note........................................................................................... 67
3.13.3 Model Validation report............................................................................................ 67
3.13.4 Audit report ............................................................................................................... 68
3.13.5 Modelling Report ...................................................................................................... 68
3.14 Business Case Analysis.................................................................................................... 69
3.15 Project closure................................................................................................................... 69
Appendix A - Glossary..................................................................................................................... 71
Appendix B Determining the Requirements for a Station Capacity Assessment.................... 72
Appendix C Tender Remit Structure............................................................................................75
Appendix D Static Anal ysis Audit Checklist ............................................................................... 76
Appendix E Audit Report .............................................................................................................. 79
Appendix F Static Assessment Report Template....................................................................... 81
Appendix G Modelling Report Template ..................................................................................... 83
3.16 Appendix H - Timetable Template .................................................................................... 84
3.17 Appendix I Relevant Documentation............................................................................. 85

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Contents
Figures

Figure 1.2-2 Visualisation of Level of Service and colour code (SPSG, v4 of March 1998)....................12
Figure 2.4-1 Platform Functional Zones..................................................................................................33
Figure 3.9-1 Modelling Methodology.......................................................................................................54

Tables

Table 2.4-1 Recommended Concourse Space Requirements................................................................23
Table 2.4-2 Level Change Requirements ...............................................................................................27
Table 2.4-3 Ramp Gradient Requirements .............................................................................................28
Table 2.4-4 Recommended Run-offs and Run-ons.................................................................................30
Table 2.4-5 Platform General Principles .................................................................................................32
Table 2.5-1 Abnormal Operations Planning............................................................................................35
Table 2.5-2 Abnormal Operations Planning............................................................................................36
Table 2.5-3 Demand assumptions for abnormal operations ...................................................................36
Table 3.13-1 Model output interpretation................................................................................................64


1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The Station Capacity Assessment Guidance describes the process and importance of capacity analysis,
modelling and assessment in the planning and design of stations on the national rail network in the UK.
It is applicable to all categories of stations although it is likely to be more frequently used where there is
a potential for congestion.
This guidance promotes a consistent best practice approach to capacity analysis in the planning and
design of public areas in stations especially elements such as platforms, concourses and footbridges.
The guidance provides:
- a standard approach to station capacity analysis and assessments
- station planning and design advice and standards
- space requirements for public areas in stations
- the opportunity for consistent good practice in the validation of station design using the appropriate
pedestrian modelling technique if and when appropriate
Consistent application of this guidance supports industry and Network Rail objectives, namely:
- the development of consistently high performing stations that support safe movement of people,
high-levels of train performance and passenger satisfaction
- the reduction in the cost of stations through the development of a consistent approach to planning
and design and the eradication of uncertainty during design development.
- the provision of improved information for the planning of the rail network and its stations through the
development of a library of reference material owned by Network Rail
Station Capacity can be described as the ability of a station and its
associated spaces and facilities to safely and conveniently
accommodate and circulate the numbers of people expected to use the
station.
This is a living document which will be continuously updated to reflect
ongoing research and consultation, changes in legislation, additions in
scope and the ever-changing environment. In many cases it should be
read in conjunction with other existing or soon to be published
documents including:
- Guide to Station Planning & Design
- Network RUS (Stations) and
- Network Rail Managed Stations Wayfinding Guidelines
Any suggestions users may have for improvement in this guidance will
be welcomed and should be emailed to stations@networkrail.co.uk
subject: Station Capacity.
1.2 Space Planning Policy
In the interest of passengers safety and comfort it is Network Rails policy that space for normal
operations in stations shall be planned to:
a) Optimise passenger comfort, satisfaction and safety
b) Minimise congestion
c) Be resilient to surges in patronage and train service disruption and
d) Provide opportunities for additional trading or railway activities where possible and
appropriate in overall support of the railway service
Station Capacity
can be described
as the ability of a
station and its
associated
spaces and
facilities to safely
and conveniently
accommodate
and circulate the
numbers of
people expected
to use the station.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
12
The principal purpose of station planning is therefore to provide a station that meets its objectives see
Stations Planning & Design Guide. The policy is to create a station with the optimum sizing and relative
arrangement of waiting, decision and circulation spaces, and station facilities with:
- safe, effective and convenient access to train services
- relevant facilities
- safe, effective and convenient operation and management of the station
- clear circulation routes with minimum travel distances
- freedom from obstructions
- good lines of sight and
- no avoidable dead ends or hiding places
The acknowledged transport industry measure for pedestrian spatial requirements was developed by
J ohn J Fruin Ph.D.
1
in the early 1970s. This measure refers to the relationship between the density of
groups of people and the speed with which they can move or circulate: these are expressed as levels of
service and a visual representation of this is illustrated in Figure 1.2-2.

Figure 1.2-2 Visualisation of Level of Service and colour code (SPSG, v4 of March 1998)

1
J ohn Fruin researched crowds in the early 1970s. His book Pedestrian Planning and Design has been cited in
many of the present guidelines for pedestrian planning. His research has become the standard for many subsequent
building design and planning operations. References to Fruin have been universally accepted.
Figure 1.2-1 Visualisation of Level of Service and colour code (SPSG, v4 of March 1998)

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

13
Network Rail, however, also looks at other performance criteria to evaluate station designs such as
station dwell and journey times as described below:
- clearance times at escalator landings and staircases off a platform
- clearance times at revenue protection barriers
- waiting times at ticket vending machines and ticket windows
- dwell times in accessing, reading and understand passenger information
- interchange times to access other modes of transport
- journey times from entrance to platforms
- journey times between interchanging trains
- journey times between other transport providers
All the different performance criteria together should produce sufficient space to allow free flow of
passengers through public areas and to give reasonable comfort in waiting areas. This approach to
space provision should provide an optimal balance between convenience, safety and other demands.
Station capacity should be determined by the space requirements of all activities including:
- ticket purchase
- retailing
- vending (machines)
- provision of passenger information to passengers for their rail and/or onward journeys
- passage through any gateline
- wayfinding
- access to and from platforms
- waiting for trains
- boarding and alighting from trains
- accessing other modes of transport, e.g. accessing the London Underground
Capacity assessments are an integral part of the station planning process. They are often a critical
element in determining whether station designs will provide required levels of service for current,
opening year and future demand. More detailed analyses, typically using simulation models, can be
used to demonstrate the economic benefit of undertaking station improvement schemes as well as to
test changes to operational regimes or evacuation strategies.
The main objectives of pedestrian planning and modelling exercises are, inter alia:

- to reasonably minimise any safety risk related to congestion and people movements within the
station, its interchanges and its operational boundaries
- to assess the capacity of critical points
- to assess capacity constraints at stations
- to assess the implications of emergency and perturbed situations, such as train service delays
- to consider how an area may operate in future years with forecasted movements
- to assess significant timetable changes
- working up retail proposals
- highlighting design issues and influencing design
- understanding where the movement of people needs to be managed
- determining where wayfinding/ directional signs or other methods to direct people are required
- determining if and where peoples decision point is according to their direction and destination
- determining operational control mechanisms during major events
On the assumption that a capacity assessment has not already been carried out for whatever purpose, it
should generally be carried out as early as possible in a project that impacts on passenger flows (i.e.
GRIP 2) as this is when emerging requirements and designs can be most (cost) effectively directed and
influenced. The later in the programme the assessment is carried out, the more detailed the proposals
are and the more expensive it will be to make significant changes to the design. It should also be noted
that capacity and people movement assessment should be a continuous process and not considered
complete. Seemingly minor changes to a design can have significant implications on people movement
and/or capacity of the station.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
14
1.3 Application of this Guidance
The Station Capacity Assessment Guidance should be used by all people involved in designing a station
and carrying out capacity assessments. This includes but is not limited to:
- Promoters
- Network Rail Sponsors
- Network Rail Project Managers
- Station Managers
- Transport planning consultants
- Engineers
- Architects
- TOC staff working on gating schemes
This guidance applies to all new stations, new assets within existing stations and altered assets within
existing stations. It has been developed such that the guidance document applies to surface or
subsurface stations. The guidance is also relevant to different types of station and usage, e.g. heavily-
used large stations or smaller franchised stations.
There are many applications for station capacity assessments but the most common usage would be on
projects such as major capacity driven enhancements, major station rebuilds, smaller scale capacity
enhancements, platform extensions, significant timetable changes, finding suitable locations for retail
units, revenue protection gateline installations and longer term capacity studies.
1.4 Structure of the document
The Station Capacity Assessment Guidance document is divided into two volumes:
Volume One of this guideline document applies to the spatial aspects of station planning in public areas
within stations and for evacuation. This provides the spatial information required by an architect or other
designer to produce an outline station design of sufficient detail to provide a cost estimate and to feed
into a passenger modelling/station capacity analysis process: it also provides information that can be
used to identify the operational station footprint and to ensure that station proposals meet relevant
safety standards and criteria such as those contained in the ORR/ HMRI Railway Safety Principles and
Guidance (Part 2 section B Guidance on Stations)
Volume Two provides guidance to consultants responsible for performing station capacity assessment
studies. This sets out an acceptable approach to undertaking station assessment studies to provide a
clear and consistent, set of Network Rail requirements in terms of the approach, analysis and
documentation for such studies.
These assessments will establish space planning requirements and should be used to develop an
overall station design. As an example the assessments can provide data to the station designers
regarding platform width requirements, staircase and footbridge widths, concourse space sizing and, at
a more detailed level, the requisite number of, for instance, revenue protection gates.


2 Volume One: Planning Guidelines
2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this volume is to define the spatial requirements and the operational criteria for public
areas within Network Rail stations. It is designed to apply equally to new stations, new assets within
existing stations and altered assets within existing stations.
For this volume, a station is defined as a facility on the Network Rail network served by passenger train
services where people can board and alight those services. It therefore excludes the following types of
railway station:
- Light rail stations
- London Underground stations
- Private/heritage railway stations
- Goods-only stations
- Closed railway stations
This document applies to station planning in public areas within stations for normal operations,
construction, perturbation and evacuation. It does not include requirements for operational staff or other
occupants/ tenants movement and accommodation.
It is acknowledged that some of this guidance may not be achievable for existing or even new stations. If
this is the case, the proposer should undertake an appropriate risk assessment to demonstrate that the
risks introduced by the station change are as low as reasonably practicable.
2.2 Station Categories
Whilst not strictly related to the type of capacity assessments that might be undertaken at any particular
station the current categorisation of stations may have some bearing on the station design
requirements and these are therefore described in this section.
There are currently six station categories in use by Network Rail and the rail industry. The categories
were developed in the late 1990s and have not been amended subsequently but remain the default
categorisation system for stations at this time:
Category A: National Hubs the largest stations in the UK, serving the most important cities. They
provide the highest number of facilities
Category B: Regional Hubs stations generally serving important cities and towns
Category C: Important Feeder provide regional connectivity or service significant commuter areas
Category D: Medium Sized Staffed stations serving local populations or commuter pick up points
Category E: Small Staffed stations serving smaller local populations or commuter pick up points
Category F: Small Unstaffed stations with infrequent services serving mainly rural or low density
areas
For the purposes of this document, these classifications have been assumed to be appropriate.
However, it should be noted that there is often significant size and facility variation between stations of
the same category so analysis and assessment should always be undertaken on a station-by-station
basis and should always be driven by the number of people using the station. For example Doncaster
may be a Category A station but only handles 3,780,314 passengers per year (2008/09 ORR data)
whereas Paisley Gilmour Street is a Category C station but handles 4,688,360 passengers per year
(2008/09 ORR data).

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
16
2.3 Planning Criteria
Further guidance on the general objectives for station planning can be found in Network Rails Guide to
Station Planning and Design (anticipated May 2011). However, this section provides a summary of the
key issues in regard to planning of public spaces at stations.
Space for normal operations in stations shall be planned to minimise congestion and be resilient to
surges in demand and train service disruption. Station size shall be determined by the space
requirements of all activities taking place within the station. These include:
- ticket purchasing
- secondary revenue, utilising i.e. retailing and catering facilities
- revenue protection installations, e.g. gatelines
- wayfinding
- access to and from the platforms
- obtaining train and general travel information
- waiting for trains (either on the platforms or in a concourse area)
- boarding and alighting from trains
It should be noted that staff accommodation requirements may have a significant impact on station
sizing; however this is not considered in this document. Similarly this document does not contemplate
the implications on size requirements for servicing of the stations facilities or trains. However, these
should be taken into account by the designer in consultation with Network Rail.
Station planning should also ensure that passenger routes within a station are:
- obvious or intuitive
- convenient and minimise travel distances and changes in level
- free from obstructions
- have good lines of sight
- avoid dead ends and hiding places.
New stations should be designed to ensure that persons of reduced mobility can move between station
access points and trains via step-free routes.
It is important to note that planning criteria and requirements differ according to the category or size of
the station. For example, a large London terminus will have many more requirements for facilities and
circulation space than a small rural station. Furthermore, the sizing of stations in category F (Small-
Unstaffed), for example, is more likely to be driven purely be operational/ railway considerations than the
sizing of stations in category A (National Hub) which may be driven by demand considerations and other
commercial opportunity considerations.
2.3.1 Passenger demand
Generally, station planning assessments should be based upon passenger demand from the busiest
time periods. Where forecast data is used, reference should be made to section 3.5.2 of this document.
Where forecast data is not readily available or clear, Network Rails Economic Analysis Manager,
Network Planning should be consulted.
The following concepts of demand are used in this document:
Peak Minute Flow the demand passing through an element of a station in the busiest minute of the
traffic day.
This will normally occur during the AM or PM peak periods (although not necessarily). Where possible,
this should be derived from observational survey data: however it is acknowledged that this will not
always be feasible. Where data of this resolution is not available, the Peak Minute Flow can be
estimated as follows (further guidance on this is provided for the relevant elements in the sections
below):
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

17
- For flows towards a platform, the Peak Minute Flow can be estimated by dividing the observed peak
15 minute flow by 15 (or by dividing the observed peak 5 minute flow by 5, if available)
2

- For flows away from a platform (or group of platforms), the Peak Minute Flow can be estimated by
using 50% of the maximum alighting load from the maximum number of concurrent train arrivals (in
most calculations this will represent a single train arrival)
3

Total Number of Exiting Passengers The number of people alighting from the maximum possible
number of concurrent train arrivals during the busiest 15 minute period of the traffic day. The busiest
train should have its alighting load increased by 25% to factor in delays to the service.
It is important to note that for many large stations on the network it is not possible to have concurrent
arrivals on all platforms at the same time, as train operations are generally constrained by the capacity
of throat into the station
4
. However, it might still be possible for a number of them to arrive concurrently
and these may be on adjacent platforms.
Total Number of Entering Passengers The number of people boarding the maximum possible
number of concurrent train departures during the busiest 15 minute period of the traffic day. The busiest
train should have its departure load increased by 25% to factor in delays to the service.
In general, the busiest periods in the traffic day will be the weekday AM and PM peak periods. Analysis
should be undertaken for both periods separately. However, for some stations (particularly those close
to sporting or leisure venues), the busiest periods may be at other times of day or at the weekend. If this
is the case, analysis may also be undertaken for these periods. It is important to note that the period of
absolute peak demand may not necessarily correspond with the period of greatest stress on the station.
For example, weekend periods in leisure areas may be more significant as the train service may be less
frequent and the passengers are likely to be less familiar with the station.
2.3.2 Passenger types
A range of different passenger types use the railway stations in the UK. These include the following:
Commuters/ Business travellers those people who are familiar with the station, tend to travel during
the peak periods, require little assistance, and will choose to spend as little time as possible in the
station
Leisure travellers those people who use the station infrequently, tend to travel outside the peak
periods, require more assistance and may make more use of the facilities within the station than
commuters. Dwell times are likely to be longer than those relating to commuters or business travellers.
Passengers in wheelchairs those people who have specific requirements for step free access.
Physical or cognitive mobility impairment those people who have physical or cognitive
impairments which impact on their ability to move within, or navigate, a station environment. They may
require more space, more time, or staff assistance.

2
For stations with a significant number of terminating platforms, this may underestimate Peak Minute Flow, however
this is compensated for in the relevant calculations.
3
The 50% assumes that it takes approximately 2 minutes to alight a train and clear an immediate platform area.
4
The LU gateline calculations assume that a train arrives in every platform concurrently which is possible for LU
stations where (in general) each platform serves a different track. This is not always physically possible for Network
Rail stations where multiple platforms may be served by the same single line, so the guidance here recommends
using the maximum number of concurrent arrivals that could take place during the busiest fifteen minute period.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
18
People with medium sized luggage those people who may require more space but are otherwise
not restricted in their movement.
People with large sized luggage those people who require more space, move more slowly and are
limited as to the routes they can take through the station environment.
Parents with small children includes those people pushing children in prams or pushchairs as well
as family groups with ambulant but slow-moving children.
It should be noted that these classifications are generalisations, and individual customers may fall into
multiple categories (for example, leisure travellers with large luggage). However it is important to
consider the customer make-up when undertaking a capacity assessment (more detail on this is
provided, where relevant, below).
At larger rail stations, especially Managed Stations, there are also a lot of passengers that travel in
groups. These can either be a group of children or adults. Sometimes these groups may carry luggage
and take up a lot of space. If a station is known for being particularly popular with groups then this
should be considered in the assessment.
2.3.3 Station Failure
It may not always be possible to plan an ideal or optimised station layout and in some cases there may
be a failure to comply with the core requirements of recognised good practice as defined in this
document. The definition of such station failure in regard to capacity will vary considerably between
stations. However, there are three broad categories of station capacity failure which can be applied to all
stations:
Failure to meet requirements where the station fails to meet the criteria stipulated in this document.
It is acknowledged that, due to physical constraints or pre-existing conditions, many stations (or
proposed stations) will fail to meet these requirements. If this is the case, a derogation or relaxation
needs to be sought against the requirements depending on which requirement cant be met. Such a
request should incorporate a risk assessment demonstrating that any risks introduced by failing to meet
the criteria are as low as reasonably practicable. This may be accompanied by static analysis or
dynamic station modelling which demonstrates that the failure to meet the requirements does not cause
a significant adverse effect on station operations.
Failure of design where the station not only fails to meet the criteria stipulated in this document but
also requires significant staff intervention or station control to operate without incurring significant
passenger delay or compromising safety, e.g. where staff have to open a gateline on a regular basis
because it has become overwhelmed by passenger numbers. (Note: this mainly applies to normal
operation as a gateline may be operated differently on special event days/ perturbation/ construction)
Absolute failure where the station fails to operate on a regular basis, even with staff intervention.
This will lead to trains being held outside the station, causing significant service delay, or maybe station
evacuation.
It should be acknowledged that some of the criteria in this document have been derived from existing
standards, i.e. platform width, and if those can not be met a formal request for derogation needs to be
submitted to the relevant authority.


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

19
2.4 Station Capacity Planning Guidelines Normal Operations
2.4.1 External Elements
Although this document is principally concerned with activity within the station, it is important to
acknowledge the station-related activities that take place external to the station but mainly within the
station boundary.
Access to the station from Underground/ Metro services, buses, trams, taxis, car pick up/set down, car
parking, pedestrian routes, and cycle and motorcycle parks, should be as level as possible allowing full
step-free access where needed. It should be via clearly signed entrances which are wide enough to
cope with the flows (whether the entrance points be passageways - see Section 2.4.4.1, stairways - see
Section 2.4.4.4, or escalators - see Section 2.4.4.5), now and into the future (see Section 3.5.3), and
should immediately confer reassurance on the customer that they have arrived at the correct station.
The main entrance and other subsidiary entrances must be visible and obvious to all users from as far
away as possible.
Walking distances from set-down points must be as rational and convenient as possible. Good
positioning and clear sighting of the essential facilities from principal points of access is imperative in the
interests of customer convenience and unimpeded movement.
Security is an important aspect of the design of the area around a railway station and the various forms
of access arrangements may be affected by short and longer term security considerations. Depending
on the size and location of the station being studied it is advised that consultation should be undertaken
with the British Transport Police and other relevant security authorities at an early stage in each project
life-cycle.
For those customers meeting and greeting, picking up and setting down, particularly first time users of
the station, a well planned layout that can be understood upon arrival is essential. It is important that the
routes into the station are clearly identified and that arrangements for setting down, parking and
accompanying those travelling to the concourse and platform areas are logically arranged so as to allow
efficient use of the space available.
Facilities to be incorporated into this area include but are not limited to:
- Weather protected walking routes between modes where reasonable
- Clear segregation of pedestrians and vehicles
- Sheltered waiting areas for buses, taxis etc
- Luggage trolley points
- Level, step-free access
- Train service information
- On going travel information, e.g. bus timetables
- Locality information
- Station identification signage and the National Rail symbol
- Secure, identifiable boundaries
- Appropriate security devices, e.g. CCTV
- Station clock
- Secure cycle and vehicle parking in closest proximity to station
Further information on aspects such as cycle and car parking, can be found in the relevant station
related Network Rail documentation (see Appendix I Relevant Documentation).
2.4.2 Revenue Protection Gatelines
2.4.2.1 Gatelines - Introduction
A number of stations across the network include revenue protection gatelines or Automatic Ticket
Gatelines (ATGs). It is acknowledged that a number of different types of ATG exist across the network,

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
20
varying either by manufacturer or by size (some stations now have Wide Aisle Gates, or WAGs to
facilitate free movement of people with luggage, or in wheelchairs, or with children).
However, it is assumed for the purposes of this document that the following calculations apply equally to
all types of ATG (operating in a single direction see below) and a flow rate of 25 people per minute per
gate
5
is used throughout.
For flow rates of Wide Aisle Gates please refer to section 2.4.2.4.
Two methodologies for calculating the required number of ATGs are provided:
- Through platform gatelines typically the platforms are served by relatively frequent services.
These gatelines should be cleared of alighting passengers within 2 minutes of the first alighter
arriving at the gateline to ensure that alighting loads from subsequent train arrivals do not overlap.
This obviously depend son how far the gateline is located from the platform.
- Terminating platform gatelines typically the platforms are served by trains that fully empty upon
arrival. The volumes of people alighting tend to be much greater, however there tend to be a much
greater gap between train arrivals allowing more time to clear the gatelines
2.4.2.2 Gatelines for through platforms
6

The formula for calculating the required number of ATGs in a gateline serving through platforms is split
into three parts:
- The first part calculates the number of gates needed to accommodate the ENTRY flow through the
gateline
- The second part calculates the number of gates needed to accommodate the EXIT flow through the
gateline
- The third part of the formula adds either one or two additional gates to the combined number of
ENTRY and EXIT gates calculated in parts one and two to account for servicing and redundancy
The formula for the total number of gates in each gateline
7
is as follows:
X
Passengers rofExiting TotalNumbe
roundup
EntryFlow
roundup + |
.
|

\
|

+ |
.
|

\
|
2 25 5 25
min 5

During calculations the entry and exit flows from the same time period should be used. If forecast
demand flows are not available, then current demand levels may be used. It is recommended that a
20% increase is applied to the current demand. However in most circumstances demand forecasts will
be available. The inputs for the ATG formula are:
- The peak 5 minute ENTRY flow
- Total number of exiting passengers as described in Section 2.3.1 above the formula assumes that
all exiting passengers should be able to pass through the gateline in two minutes
- X=1 if the total (without X) is less than or equal to 10 gates, or X=2 if the total (without X) is greater
than 10 gates

5
As per RIS-7701-INS Rail Industry Standard for Automatic Ticket Gates at Stations; Issue One Draft 3d; November
2010; Section 2.5.1.1
6
The section is based primarily on the London Underground station planning standard 1-371
7
Many stations have multiple gatelines. If these gatelines serve separate platforms it is important that these
calculations are undertaken separately for each one. If multiple gatelines serve the same platforms, then the total
number of ATGs required can be split between the various gatelines in accordance with a surveyed or calculated
demand split. However it is recommended that a separate X factor is applied to each individual gateline to account
for servicing
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

21
The number of exiting passengers should be extracted from individual train alighting load survey data for
each train service. It is important to note that those passengers interchanging between trains without
passing through the gateline should be excluded.
The minimum number of ATGs should be three in each gateline.
Gatelines should be sited so that all gates are readily accessible to passengers moving in an expected
manner through the ticket hall and entry or exit gates should be grouped to one side of the gateline, to
minimise crossflows.
It is not recommended to place gates on the platform if a single vertical circulation core provides the only
access to the platform and the platform is an island platform of minimal width with high flows and with
station structures nearby. Gatelines on platforms pose a safety risk should the platform not clear quickly
enough.
2.4.2.3 Gatelines for terminating platforms
Gatelines serving terminating platforms tend to experience different flow characteristics from those
serving through platforms with shorter periods of very intense activity, so the calculations are adjusted to
take this into account.
The formula for calculating the required number of ATGs in a gateline serving terminating platforms is
split into three parts:
- The first part calculates the number of gates needed to accommodate the ENTRY flow through the
gateline
- The second part calculates the number of gates needed to accommodate the EXIT flow through the
gateline
- The third part of the formula adds either one or two additional gates to the combined number of
ENTRY and EXIT gates calculated in parts one and two to account for servicing and redundancy
The formula should be used twice, initially, once to calculate the number of gates needed in the AM
peak, and then again to calculate the number of gates required in the PM peak. If a station has a high
level of usage (i.e. tourist, shopping, etc) then the busiest period of gateline activity may be found to be
outside the AM and PM weekday peak times, in which case a third calculation for the number of gates
should be undertaken. The highest figure from all of these calculations should be used as the required
number of ATGs.
The formula for the total number of gates in each gateline
8
is as follows:
X
Passengers rofExiting TotalNumbe
roundup
s gPassenger rofEnterin TotalNumbe
roundup + |
.
|

\
|

+ |
.
|

\
|
4 25 5 25

During calculations the entry and exit flows from the same time period should be used. The inputs for
the ATG formula are:
- Total number of entering passengers terminating stations typically function such that passengers
wait in a concourse area before being called to their train service. If this is the case the total number
of entering passengers should be as defined in Section 2.3.1 above. The formula assumes that all
boarding passengers should be able to pass through the gateline in five minutes. For terminating
stations that do not function with a concourse accumulation area (in other words, where passengers
wait on the platforms), the total number of entering passengers should be assumed to be the peak
5 minute entry demand for that gateline
- Total number of exiting passengers as defined in Section 2.3.1. The formula assumes that all
exiting passengers should be able to pass through the gateline in four minutes
9


8
As comment 3 above.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
22
- X=1 if the total (without X) is less than or equal to 10 gates, or X=2 if the total (without X) is greater
than 10 gates
The number of exiting passengers should be extracted from individual train alighting load survey data for
each train service.
At termini, additional queuing space needs to be provided adjacent to the gateline to accommodate
passengers waiting to pass through.
This should be designed to accommodate the maximum number of queuing passengers at a density of
0.45m per person (LoS D).
This is a higher density than that considered acceptable for queuing areas in other parts of the station
(such as concourse holding areas or platforms) reflecting the relatively short time people wait in this
area. The maximum number of queuing passengers should be calculated as 60% of the total number of
exiting passengers (as defined above)
10
for the paid side of the gateline and 60% of the total number
of entering passengers for the unpaid side.
The minimum number of ATGs should be three in each gateline.
Gatelines should be sited so that all gates are readily accessible to passengers moving in an expected
manner through the ticket hall and, in general, entry or exit gates should be grouped to one side of the
gateline, to minimise crossflows. However, for some large gatelines serving multiple terminating
platforms, it may be more appropriate to alternate clusters of entry and exit gates along the length of the
gateline. If this takes place, however, it is important to ensure that the different clusters are clearly
marked using overhead signage.
2.4.2.4 Other Gateline Considerations
Where Wide Aisle Gates (WAGs) are installed and used in bi-directional or first-come-firstserved
mode the throughput of the gate should be reduced to 7 passengers per minute to reflect the
significantly slower machine operation time. If they are uni-directional a flow rate of 12 passengers per
minute should be used.
Additional gateline equipment may also be required. Where standard-width ATGs are fitted, an
additional combined manual gate and luggage port should be provided to allow passengers with
luggage or other forms of reduced mobility to pass through the gateline. These are not necessary for
gatelines where WAGs are installed. Many stations also have the requirement for an equipment gate to
enable mobility buggies, machinery or servicing vehicles/trolleys to pass through. The sizing of these
gates is dependent on their usage requirements and should be assessed on a station by station basis.
Other equipment that may be required in a gateline includes for following:

9
A four minute egress period is recommended for gatelines serving terminating platforms. This reflects a number of
issues including the typically higher volumes of people alighting trains on terminating platforms, the time it takes to
alight terminating services, the desire to regulate flow into the rest of the station and the time it takes to walk from the
far end of the train to the gateline (i.e. 250m at an avg. walking speed of 80m per minute =3.1 minutes). Individual
TOCs may wish to adjust this to their targets but only if less than 4 minutes. At Waterloo it was agreed with SSWT
that 3 minutes was the right amount of time. When queuing back exceeds the 3 minutes then the gates will be
opened because of safety reasons.
10
60% is the maximum number of exiting passengers in this waiting area calculated on the assumption that it takes
two minutes for all alighting passengers to reach the area, and the gateline provides sufficient capacity to allow all
exiting passengers to pass through within four minutes
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

23
- Gateline Attendants Point (GLAP), or other place of safety for the gateline staff
- A control unit to facilitate remote operation of the gateline and to allow for all gates to be opened in
an emergency
- Smart card readers
2.4.3 Concourse Activities
For the purposes of this document a concourse is defined as a space within a station away from
platforms and circulation routes where a range of station activities take place. It is generally regarded as
the heart of a station and as such provides access to a wide range of facilities and other station areas.
A station concourse is an enclosed area that can usually be secured outside operating hours. A number
of different activities take place in a station concourse although this is likely to vary depending on the
category and size of the station:
- Information gathering (enquiry desks/leaflet displays/timetables/departure boards)
- Ticket selling
- Waiting for trains
- Retail and refreshment outlets
- Exhibitions/displays
- Passenger toilets
- Platform access
- Station egress
The station concourse, probably more than any other area of the station, fosters and defines the overall
impression of the station. The concourse should be perceived as welcoming and helpful in respect of the
passengers needs. Table 2.4-1 below summarises the recommended spatial requirements for concourse
area provision. The space requirements are general and site specific circumstances mean that the
requirements can be adjusted if a good explanation can be provided:

Table 2.4-1 Recommended Concourse Space Requirements
Concourse
Element
When is the element
required?
Space Requirement if element is present
Timetable board All stations, without
exception
2.0m clear space in front of timetable or information boards should be
provided
Customer
Information
Screens
Generally Category A-C
stations (through stations)
Where customer information screens are provided sufficient clear space
needs to be provided in front of the screens for passengers to digest the
information and determine their next course of action. These areas should be
designed to be large enough to accommodate 10% of the peak 15 minute
station entry and exit
11
demand at a density of 1.0m per person (LoS B).
Passenger
Information Point
Generally Category A and
B stations
2.0m clear space in front of the passenger information point should be
provided
Concourse
Accumulation
Concourse Accumulation
Area
Where customers wait for trains in the concourse (typically at termini
stations), accumulation areas should be provided. These should be designed
to be large enough to accommodate 100%
12
of the peak 15 minute Total

11
10% of the exit demand is incorporated within this calculation to reflect the fact that space needs to be provided for
people waiting to collect people from arriving train services.
12
This depends on what kind of station it is. London Cannon Street is a commuter station and may therefore not
require a big accumulation area. It should be observed as part of the survey how CIS is used currently at the station
and a different percentage can be suggested.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
24
Table 2.4-1 Recommended Concourse Space Requirements
Concourse
Element
When is the element
required?
Space Requirement if element is present
Area Number of Entering Passengers (as defined in section 2.3.1c) at a density of
1.0m per person
13
. Where multiple accumulation areas are provided, this
space requirement should be split between the areas in accordance with the
likely loadings of each of the areas.
Clear walkway
through
concourse
All stations, without
exception
A clear and direct walkway through the concourse between the entrance/exit
points and the platforms should be provided. This should be designed to
accommodate the peak minute two way flow through the concourse at a rate
of 40 passengers per minute per metre. In all cases a minimum clear width
through the concourse of 2.0m should be preserved.
Ticket Machines Most stations with possible
exception of Category F
The queuing distance in front of each ticket machine should be 4.0m. This
should be located outside of other passenger accumulation or circulation
space, and may need a queuing system to regulate flows.
Ticket Office Category A-E stations The queuing distance in front of each ticket window should be 4.0m. This
should be located outside of other passenger accumulation or circulation
space, and may need a queuing system to regulate flows.
ATMs Wherever appropriate The queuing distance in front of each ATM should be 4.0m. This should be
located outside of other passenger accumulation or circulation space, and
may need a queuing system to regulate flows.
Secondary
Revenue
Generally Category A-C
stations, but also some
category D stations
Any space provided for secondary revenue should be additional to space
provided for any other station activity
14
. Where facilities such as newspaper
stands or coffee outlets are provided within concourse areas, they should be
located away from the main flows through the concourse and should not
compromise any of the space requirements identified in this document. Any
queuing for secondary revenue facilities should be located outside of other
passenger accumulation or circulation space, and may need a queuing
system to regulate flows.
Run-offs and run-
ons
All stations where
gatelines, escalators or
staircases are present
The following run-offs and run-ons should be provided in a concourse area:
Gateline: 6m
Escalator: 6m
Staircase: 4m
Further information on run-offs is provided in Section 2.4.4.7 below.
Other station
elements
Wherever appropriate There are a number of other elements that may be located within station
concourses. These include waiting rooms, seating areas, public toilets, baby
changing facilities, and left luggage/lost property offices. These facilities
should be located away from the main flows through the concourse and
should not compromise any of the space requirements identified in this
document.

2.4.3.1 Travel Information provision
It is vital that customers can establish their travel requirements as soon as they arrive at the station
although the type of information provided will vary depending on the station size or category. As a bare
minimum all stations should provide timetable information in a clear and conspicuous location close to

13
Concourse accumulation areas are provided in front of information screens, so no additional space is required in
front of the information screens in these areas.
14
For more detail on secondary revenue facilities within stations see The Retail Design Guidance which will be
publish by summer 2011
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

25
the station entrance. This location should provide sufficient space for passengers to peruse the train
times without impeding the flow of other passengers into and out of the station. At larger stations train
information is generally provided through customer information system (CIS) screens although there is
still a requirement to display printed timetables at a convenient point. These systems are used both by
people wishing to catch trains and by those waiting for people alighting trains. It is worth noting that
some of these screens are located at a height such that the line of sight preserves a walking route
immediately in front of the screen. The space requirement identified in Table 2.4-1 is for the main CIS
screen within the concourse for stations that do not have concourse waiting (typically through stations
where passengers wait for trains on platforms). It is acknowledged that secondary CIS screens are often
provided in stations. Adequate space should be provided in front of such screens to allow people to
stand without impeding the passage of other passengers through the station.
For stations which have concourse waiting (typically termini), customers are generally expected to wait
in front of the CIS screens (main departure board) before their platform is announced. The space
requirement identified in Table 2.4-1 indicates that this accumulation area should be sufficiently large to
accommodate 100% of the peak 15 minute total number of entering passengers (as defined in Section
2.3.1) at a density of 1m per person but can be reduced if it is a commuter station. This is to ensure
sufficient holding capacity to manage service disruption without the need to invoke a station closure (see
Section 2.3.3).
At the larger stations summary departures information is often provided in convenient points around the
concourse and sometimes with the facilities, e.g. restaurant areas, although these are unlikely to cause
significant accumulations of passengers.
2.4.3.2 Ticket-issuing Arrangements
Arrangements for issuing tickets at stations will vary depending on a range of factors including:
- Station category higher categories are more likely to have a greater range of ticket-issuing
facilities including ticket machines as well as separate ticket-issuing windows for travel on the day
of purchase and for travel at a later date
- Passenger demand at stations stations with very low patronage are unlikely to have any staffed
ticket-issuing arrangements and may even have no machines, whereas stations with high
patronage are more likely to have both machines and windows
- The nature of the passenger demand at stations stations with a high proportion of commuters will
require fewer ticket-issuing facilities than stations with a low proportion of commuters but similar
overall patronage
- The nature of the train services at the station stations served by long-distance services are more
likely to have staffed ticket windows, whereas commuter stations are more likely to have ticket
machines
- The organisation responsible for operating the station or running the train services
Assessment of the number and nature of ticket issuing facilities at stations will need to be undertaken on
a station-by-station basis using knowledge of ticket-issuing requirements taken from survey data and
business data where this is not commercially confidential possibly by involving the relevant TOC.
2.4.3.3 Passenger Facilities
Station facilities should be planned to be both convenient for passengers and station users and also to
maximise secondary income where this applies, i.e. station retailing and advertising. However these
must be planned without adversely affecting the passenger journey time through the station or the
passenger travel experience.
In respect of these aspects the following considerations should be applied:
- Retailing opportunities such as restaurants and shops should be maximised without impeding
essential passenger flows or accumulation areas
- Advertising/Sponsorship shall not interfere visually with directional signing or other wayfinding
mechanisms or clues

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
26
- Secondary revenue generating shall be located where they do not impede essential passenger
flows
- Public toilets stations shall be assessed for need on an individual basis
- Platform furniture platforms shall have adequate seating facilities, but these must not impede
movement along platforms or through concourse spaces

2.4.3.4 Clear walkway through concourse spaces
It is important to maintain a clear walkway through station concourses so that passengers can pass
between station entrances and platforms and vice versa unimpeded by waiting passengers, or other
obstacles. The width of this can be calculated as follows:
m
ExitFlow PeakMinute EntryFlow PeakMinute
width Clear
(

+
=
40
_

Where Peak Minute Entry Flow is defined as the average minute flow into the station during the busiest
fifteen minute period (=Peak 15 Minute Entry Flow/15) and Peak Minute Exit Flow is defined as either:
- The maximum per minute flow through the exit gates in the ticket gateline (number of ticket gates x
25 people per minute) for gated stations or
- The maximum per minute flow from the platforms. Where survey data does not exist for this it can
be defined as the combined alighting loads from the maximum number of concurrent train arrivals
multiplied by 50% to reflect the fact that it takes time to alight a train and clear a platform area.
15

- A minimum obstacle-free route shall have a free width of a minimum of 1.60m.
16
This does not take
into account additional width that may be required for passenger flows.
The clear walkway through the concourse should be highlighted on a map of the station that also shows
where the accumulation areas are.
2.4.3.5 Station concourse headroom
Other than the minimum headroom criteria required for safety purposes there is no legislated headroom
criteria relating to the passenger assembly spaces within main line railway stations. Whilst possibly
acceptable in transient spaces or very small concourses where dwell times are short, these minimum
dimensions are not, however, necessarily appropriate in concourses over 500m
2
or areas of significant
passenger accumulation.

All stations are different but guidance on the relationship between concourse area and height can be
gained from operational and historic experience. It is also permissible to vary the headroom within a
concourse so long as the variations below the minimum required relate to transitional spaces or where
there is no dwell time.

As a rule of thumb, there should be a minimum headroom of 5 metres over concourses up to 500m
2
and
an additional height of 1 metre for every 500m
2
thereafter up to a maximum height of 15 metres. Beyond
this, architectural judgement will need to be made as to the most appropriate height.

For very small concourses e.g. below 100m
2
it may be permissible to reduce the height to 3.5 metres
but in this instance consideration should be given to the availability of natural lighting through side
windows etc.

In each instance cited above, consideration needs to be given to the provision of train or passenger
information where this is suspended overhead. The headroom available may affect the size of displays
and thereby impact on viewing distances, accumulation spaces and passenger circulation routes.

15
It is acknowledged that there may be upstream capacity constraints that regulate the rate at which alighting
demand arrives in the concourse. If this can be demonstrated through calculation, the peak minute exit flow can be
defined as the maximum throughput permitted by these capacity constraints.
16
Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice, Department for Transport and
Transport Scotland, v 02 September 2010
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

27
2.4.4 Access and Interchange
Passageways, intermediate concourses, escalators, passenger conveyers, lifts, stairs and ramps should
be arranged to minimise walking distances and to make the wayfinding through the station as obvious
as possible. All routes should be free from obstructions and should avoid recesses that could harbour
litter or provide possible hiding places
The width requirements for passenger circulation routes provided in this section are intended to apply to
all stations equally, wherever the relevant element exists. However, it is acknowledged that for some
stations, the demand is so low or the physical constraints are such that the minimum dimensions given
may be unachievable. However, any scheme which introduces elements which do not meet the
minimum requirements should be subject to a risk review to demonstrate that the risks introduced are as
low as reasonably practicable.
The DfT Code of Practice requires an unobstructed main circulation route with a minimum width of 1.6m.
2.4.4.1 Passageways.
Passageway width should be determined as follows:
m
Flow PeakMinute
wayWidth WayPassage Two
|
.
|

\
|
+ = ) 3 . 0 2 (
40

m
Flow PeakMinute
wayWidth WayPassage One |
.
|

\
|
+ = ) 3 . 0 2 (
50

The above formulae include an allowance of 0.3m which is to be applied to either side of the demand
driven width. This is applied to account for the friction effect of passageway walls which causes
pedestrians to move more slowly in the area immediately adjacent to solid objects
17
. Where central
barriers are provided in passageways to divide passenger flows, 0.3m should be added to the
passageway width.
The minimum width of a passageway should be 2m between finishes. Where a central barrier is fitted,
the minimum width either side of a central barrier should be 1.6m between barrier and wall finishes. The
width of a passageway between junctions should be uniform along its entire length.
2.4.4.2 Changes in level Introduction.
Notwithstanding the need to provide step free access throughout a station environment, it has been
established that, in respect of optimising passenger flows, the ideal means for providing changes in level
is as shown in Table 2.4-2 below:
Table 2.4-2 Level Change Requirements
Height of Change in Level Means
Less than 0.5m Ramp
0.5m to 3m Stairway
3m to 5m Stairway or escalator if the benefits are
justifiable
5m or greater Escalator or lift

17
The London Underground station planning standard refers to this as an Edge Effect to take account of the space
pedestrians leave to avoid touching the walls.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
28
Generally, although this is not always possible, no single escalator or lift should provide the sole means
of changing level resilience should be provided to allow for servicing.
2.4.4.3 Changes in level ramps.
Where internal ramps are provided the maximum vertical rise should generally be no more than 0.5m,
unless the ramp is a secondary means of access. The width should be calculated in the same was as
that for a passageway unless the gradient is steeper than 1 in 20. In this case a 10% reduction in the
flow rate should be assumed. Where a ramp exceeds 3.3m
18
in width a central handrail should be
provided
All public ramps should comply with the maximum gradients stipulated in Table 2.4-3
19
:
Table 2.4-3 Ramp Gradient Requirements
Length of Ramp Max. gradient
10m 1:20
5m 1:15
Where the total vertical rise of a ramp is greater than 0.5m, a horizontal landing should be provided
every 0.5m rise. Every second landing should also include a change in direction of at least 30. If this is
not achievable some other means of slowing an uncontrolled descent should be provided.
Ramps should have a consistent gradient.
2.4.4.4 Changes in level stairways
Stairway width shall be determined as follows:
m
Flow PeakMinute
seWidth WayStairca Two |
.
|

\
|
=
28

m
Flow PeakMinute
seWidth WayStairca One
|
.
|

\
|
=
35

All dimensions are measured between handrails. If the stairway has one or more central handrails, 0.3m
should be added to the overall width for each central handrail
Staircases on the main route in the station shall have a minimum obstacle-free width of 1,60m
measured between the handrails.
20
The minimum width requirement does not take into account
additional width that may be required for passenger flows.
Where stairways have a top, bottom, or intermediate landing, the landing length should be at least equal
to the widest stair width (measured between handrails). After two successive flights either a change in
direction of at least 30 should be provided, or a landing of at least 4m should be provided.

18
Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice, Department for Transport and
Transport Scotland, v 02 September 2010
19
Source: London Underground Stairways and Ramps standard 1-133
20
Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice, Department for Transport and
Transport Scotland, v 02 September 2010
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

29
2.4.4.5 Changes in level escalators.
The number of escalators required for any one direction is as follows:
|
.
|

\
|
=
100
OneWayFlow PeakMinute
calators NumberOfEs
21

The calculated number of escalators should be rounded up to the next whole number if the first number
after the decimal point is more than 2, and rounded down otherwise.
Ideally an acceptable level of queuing at escalators is 0-15 seconds on a concourse and 0-30 seconds
on a platform.
For the purposes of capacity analysis, it should be assumed that passenger conveyors or travelators
function in the same way as escalators.
2.4.4.6 Changes in level lifts.
Lifts can be provided as either the main method of vertical circulation, or as a step free access route.
Absolute lift capacity is given on a plate installed on the inside of each lift (Plated Capacity). This,
however, is driven by the weight carrying capacity of the lift rather than the physical space available.
Where the lift is intended to be used primarily by unencumbered passengers, 70% of the plated capacity
should be used to determine the number of lifts required. Where the lift is intended to be used by
persons with reduced mobility, 25% of the plated capacity should be used. It is acknowledged that in
most cases lifts will be used by a combination of customer types. Therefore the actual percentage
capacity ratio used should be interpolated between these two extremes. A survey will help to determine
how many passengers would be using the lift. The number of lifts to be provided is given by:
(min) ime LiftCycleT
Lifts CapacityOf
gLifts in s U Passengers PeakMinute
fts NumberOfLi
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
Where Peak Minute Passengers Using Lifts is derived from the peak minute flow in the peak direction
along the link served by the lift multiplied by the proportion of people expected to use the lift
22
. Capacity
of Lifts is derived from the Plated Capacity multiplied by capacity ratio (as defined above). Lift Cycle
Time is the time in minutes for the lift to travel a complete cycle (including waiting time at each level).
The number of lifts should always be rounded up.
A waiting area at a density of 0.45m per passenger waiting should be provided in front of lift doors used
for entry only. If the same doors are used for entry and exit, the waiting area should be 0.8m per
passenger waiting. This area shall prevent passenger flows in adjoining areas from being disrupted.
Where this waiting area is outside, it should have a canopy. As a minimum there should be a clear
space of at least 1500mm x 1500mm
23
outside the lift entry / exit.


21
Escalator capacity is defined as 100 passengers per minute, based on a standard width escalator. If survey data is
available indicating that a different capacity would be more appropriate, this can be used. For example, where a large
proportion of escalator users have luggage, a lower flow rate would be more appropriate
22
It is acknowledged that, in rare cases, the contra peak direction may have a higher percentage of lift users than the
peak direction. In this a calculation should be undertaken to understand the peak direction for lift users.
23
Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice, Department for Transport and
Transport Scotland, v 02 September 2010

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
30
The number of waiting passengers can be calculated as follows:
fts NumberOfLi
ime LiftCycleT gLifts U Passengers PeakMinute
ngers itingPasse NumberofWa
(min) sin
=

Where lifts discharge directly towards a platform edge and the doors are closer than 5m from the
platform edge, a barrier should be provided between the lift and the platform edge which is not less than
2m from the platform edge.
2.4.4.7 Run-offs
It is important to provide run-off (and indeed run-on) space in front of escalators, gatelines and
staircases to pull passengers away and provide a clear landing area for following passengers. These
areas provide orientation time (to allow passengers to move clear and decide where to go next),
decision/action time (to decide which gate/escalator to use or to get tickets out/put them away), and
queuing time (where passengers can accumulate safely). Table 2.4-4 provides a list of recommended
minimum run-off/run-on lengths for various station elements. It is acknowledged that in many cases
these minimum lengths may be difficult to achieve. In these cases a risk assessment should be
undertaken to ensure that any risks introduced are as low as reasonably practicable.
Table 2.4-4 Recommended Run-offs and Run-ons
Run off/ Run on types Min. lengths (see below for variable lengths)
Escalator/travelator to gateline 8m-12m
Gateline to escalator/travelator 8m 12m
24

Escalator/travelator to escalator/travelator 8m 12m
Passageway/street exit/concourse/platform to
escalator/travelator
6m
Escalator/travelator to passageway/street
exit/concourse/platform
6m
Escalator/travelator to stairway 6m 10m
Stairway to escalator/travelator 6m 10m
Gateline to passageway/concourse/street/platform 6m
Passageway/concourse/street/platform to gateline 6m
25

Stairway to gateline 6m 10m
Gateline to stairway 6m 10m
Stairway to passageway/street 4m
Passageway/street to stairway 4m

24
Where the capacity of the gateline is less than the capacity of the escalator (3 ATGs per escalator or fewer) a
shorter length of 6m would be sufficient.
25
For gatelines at termini stations (or stations where the gateline is known to be a capacity constraint), the run-on
space should be calculated as per Section 2.3.1c
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

31
Run off and run-on distances given in the above table should be in addition to dimensions calculated for
the individual elements. Run-offs leading to passageways should be before any change in direction or
reduction in width of the passageway and before any other passageways leading off the passageway.
Table 2.4-4 includes a number of variable length run-offs and run-ons. These are dependent on the level
of passenger flow:
- Light flow: where the maximum peak hour flow through the relevant area of the station is less than
1000 passengers the lowest minimum dimension should be adhered to
- Heavy flow: where the maximum peak hour flow through the relevant area of the station is greater
than 3000 passengers the highest minimum dimension should be adhered to
- Medium flow: where the maximum peak hour flow through the relevant area of the station is
between 1000 and 3000 passengers the run off length should be calculated using:

m
ow PeakHourFl
Off Run OffLength Run
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
500
1000
min

2.4.4.8 Headroom for access and interchange
The headroom in passageways and over ramps, stairways and those escalators/travelators installed in
atriums should not be less than 3.0m (measured to the lowest point of a suspended ceiling, signage or
equipment) however for local obstructions, (over lengths of less than 2m) a head height of 2.4m would
be acceptable.
The headroom over those escalators or travelator installed in shafts should not be less than 2.3m over
both landings and over the whole length of the escalator/ travelator.
2.4.5 Platforms
Platforms at Network Rail stations can be divided into two distinct categories for the purposes of
capacity assessment:
- Platforms functioning as waiting areas the vast majority of platforms on the UK rail network
function as places for people to wait for trains. As such they need sufficient capacity to
accommodate all waiting passengers without obstructing the walking route for passengers alighting
from trains or passengers wishing to walk along the platform to board at the platform ends.
- Platforms functioning as passageways at some termini stations, passengers are required to wait
on the station concourse rather than on the platform. They are then called to the train once the
platform is announced and the train is in situ.
Due to the significant amount of variation between platforms on the network, the guidance provided here
is intended to be general and as all encompassing as possible. However, it is recommended that
individual stations are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It is worth noting that some platforms,
regardless of the category within which they fit, are used by people wishing to access other parts of the
station, but without using the platform to board or alight train services.





Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
32
2.4.5.1 Platforms General Principles.
26

Table 2.4-5 shows the general principles that should apply to all types of platform:
Table 2.4-5 Platform General Principles
Element General Principle
Platform Length Sufficient to accommodate the longest train that could call at the station, plus an
allowance for inaccurate stopping, normally 2m (or 5m at mainline stations and termini)
Platform Width Sufficient for the greatest number of passengers likely to use it at any time (see below
for more detail on platform width)
Single Face platform
(speeds less than 165
km/h)
Not less than 2.5m wide
Single Face platform
(speeds greater than 165
km/h)
Not less than 3.0m wide
Island platform (speeds
less than 165 km/h)
Not less than 4.0m wide
Island platform (speeds
greater than 165 km/h)
Not less than 6.0m wide
Columns/Obstructions Should be at least 2.0m clear of the platform edge
Headroom At least 2.5m to structures and platform signs for a width of at least 2.0m from the
platform edge over the entire length. At least 2.3m for distances greater than 2.0m
from the platform edge.
Yellow Line Should be provided at least 1.5m from the platform edge where high speed trains pass
at speeds greater than 100 mph/ 165km/h or where freight trains pass through the
station at speeds greater than 60 mph. In addition warning signs need to be put up. If
the position of a yellow line is likely to lead to overcrowding, it is permissible to reduce
the distance between the yellow line and the platform edge. The risk from aerodynamic
effects of passing trains should be mitigated. Appendix D of GI/RT7016 gives advice
on the factors that should be taken into account in a risk assessment.
For the purposes of this section a platform is defined as the place at which a train stops within a station.
In most cases, this will be the same as the entire physical length of the platform. However it is
acknowledged that there are some platforms on the network which are never served by trains long
enough to occupy the full length. Furthermore, there are some stations on the network (e.g. Edinburgh
Waverley or Cambridge) where the platforms are so long that they can serve two (or more) trains
concurrently. For the purposes of capacity analysis, these should be considered as multiple platforms.

26
Many of these come from ORRs Railway Safety Principles and Guidance Part 2b.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

33
2.4.5.2 Platform widths platforms as waiting areas
A platform functioning as a waiting area for trains can be divided into a number of functional zones
(Figure 2.4-1). Each of these zones has its own width requirement, and the total required width of the
platform should be defined as A+B+C+D
27
. It is recommended that the platform length is divided into
blocks corresponding with carriage lengths. The width for each carriage block can then be defined
independently of the length of the train.
Figure 2.4-1 Platform Functional Zones


The Yellow line zone exists on platforms where high speed or freight trains pass without stopping and
corresponds to a minimum clear width of 1.5m (see Table 2.4-5). This width should be consistent for the
entire length of the platform. It should be demarcated by a coloured (usually yellow) line on the platform,
and appropriate signage. Passengers are assumed to enter this zone only when boarding and alighting
train services. Where the speed is less than stated above, a yellow line is not required but may still be
considered by the TOC responsible for the station.
The waiting zone should be sufficiently sized to accommodate all waiting passengers at a maximum
average peak minute density of 0.65m per person per carriage block of the platform.
It is acknowledged that there will be pockets of density greater than this as passengers will congregate
around train door areas, particularly when trains are in the platforms; however this is considered
acceptable for short periods. Therefore:
m
h BlockLengt
ng BlockLoadi
h eBlockWidt WaitingZon
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
65 . 0


27
It should be noted that for some stations, the width requirement for some of the zones may be zero. However, in all
cases, the total width of the platform should be in accordance with the widths in Table 2.5.
Figure 2.4-2: Platform Functional Zones

Yellow Line Zone
Waiting Zone
Circulation Zone
Activity Zone
PlatformAccess/ Egress
D
C
B
A

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
34
Where Waiting Zone Block Width is the width of B (in Figure 2.4-1) for each carriage block of the
platform, Block Length corresponds to the length of each carriage of the train, and Block Loading is the
maximum volume of people waiting for a train in that particular carriage block
28
. This information should
ideally be captured through an observational survey of the platform. It is not possible to produce typical
boarding distributions that apply to all platforms on the Network Rail network as boarding distributions
vary according to time of day, length of train, the weather and passenger knowledge of their destination
station. However, if a distribution has to be estimated the following principles should be followed:
- The highest levels of Boarding loads tend to be close to the platform access points
- Boarding loads tend to be higher under covered sections of platform
- If trains of varying stock length use the platform, the highest levels of platform accumulation tend to
be in the core section of the platform (the area served by all trains regardless of length)
- If the trains serving the platform have first and second class carriages, the highest levels of platform
accumulation tend to be at end served by the second class end of the train
- If the platform is served principally by commuter trains serving a terminus station, the end of the
platform served by the front of the train is likely to have a heavier level of accumulation than the end
of the platform served by the back of the train
- If the trains serving the platform have high proportions of reserved seating, platform loading
distributions are more likely to be relatively even
The circulation zone provides space behind or in front of the waiting zone for passengers to move to
and from the platform without being encumbered by waiting passengers or those boarding and alighting
train services. The width of this zone should be calculated as follows:
m
Flow PeakMinute
nZoneWidth Circulatio |
.
|

\
|
=
40

where Peak Minute Flow corresponds to the flow to, from, and through each platform block. This
includes anybody passing along the platform but not using that platform to board and alight train
services.
The minimum width of this circulation zone is 1.0m, allowing space for two flows to pass, single file.
The activity zone at the rear of the platform includes space for a variety of activities, including but not
limited to the following:
- Seats for waiting passengers
- Retail/catering units or machines
- Ticket machines (see requirements in Table 2.4-1)
- Timetables (see requirements in Table 2.4-1)
- Advertising space
This zone should be sized to provide enough space for the activities taking place such that they do not
impinge on the requirements of the circulation or waiting zones.
A minimum of 0.3m should be incorporated for this zone to reflect the fact that some customers choose
to wait leaning against the fence/wall at the back of the platform.
It is important to note that a station platform is rarely divided into these neat zones. However, providing
the space outlined above for each function should result in efficient platform operation.
Undertaking the width calculations for individual carriage blocks identifies the maximum width of the
platform. Ideally, platforms should be of a uniform width along their entire length. Where this is not the

28
The waiting area width is calculated solely using the Boarding Load. When a train arrives in a platform boarders are
prepared to accept higher densities, thereby freeing up space for alighting customers to access the circulation zone
towards the rear of the platform.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

35
case, a risk assessment should be undertaken, with supporting calculations, to demonstrate that any
risks imported are as low as reasonably practicable.
2.4.5.3 Platforms as passageways
Some terminating platforms do not have the requirement for a waiting zone (as defined above) as
passengers wait in a concourse before being directed to board a train. In these cases, the platform will
not require a safety zone either, as the platform will not have high speed or freight trains passing
through it. Such platform widths, therefore, are driven by the maximum volumes of flow along them:
m fect FrictionEf
Flow PeakMinute
dth PlatformWi
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
40 29

Where the Peak Minute Flow is the maximum two way flow passing along the busiest section of the
platform. This includes the people passing along the platform but not using it to board and alight train
services. Ideally this will be based on observational survey. However in the absence of such data it
should be estimated as 50% of the maximum load of the longest arriving train(s), plus 20% of the
maximum load of the longest departing train(s)
30
. A friction effect of 0.5m should be added to each
platform edge to reflect the fact that train doors may be open, representing obstacles to flow, and the
fact that passengers tend to avoid walking too close to the platform edge.
Ideally such platforms should be of a uniform width along their entire length. Where this is not the case,
a risk assessment should be undertaken, with supporting calculations, to demonstrate that any risks
imported are as low as reasonably practicable.
2.4.5.4 Platform Access and Egress points
It is acknowledged that platform access and egress could be via a number of different sorts of station
element for example, via escalators, stairways or passageways. As such platform access and egress
points should be calculated using the relevant calculation from Section 2.4.4. In all cases the peak
minute flow should be driven by the alighting load from the busiest train.
2.5 Station Planning Guidelines Abnormal Conditions
2.5.1 Abnormal conditions adjustments to planning requirements
Table 2.5-1 presents the adjustments to planning requirements considered acceptable during abnormal
operations.
Table 2.5-1 Abnormal Operations Planning
Element Perturbation Evacuation Construction Special Events
Passageway (one-way) 65 pax/m/min 80 pax/m/min 65 pax/m/min 65 pax/m/min
Passageway (two-way) 50 pax/m/min n/a 50 pax/m/min 50 pax/m/min
Stairway (one-way) 43 pax/m/min 56 pax/m/min 43 pax/m/min 43 pax/m/min

29
If the flow along the platform can be demonstrated to only ever operate in one direction at a time, the flow rate can
be increased to 50 people/m/min
30
The letter s in parentheses reflects the fact that terminating island platforms could have two trains arriving on
them concurrently.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
36
Table 2.5-2 Abnormal Operations Planning
Element Perturbation Evacuation Construction Special Events
Stairway (two-way) 35 pax/m/min n/a 35 pax/m/min 35 pax/m/min
Escalator 110 people 120 people
31
110 people 110 people
Concourse Accumulation
Area
0.45m/pax n/a 0.8m/pax 0.8m/pax
Concourse through route 65 pax/m/min 80 pax/m/min 50 pax/m/min 50 pax/m/min
Platform Waiting Area 0.28m/pax n/a 0.45m/pax 0.45m/pax
Platform Circulation Route 65 pax/m/min 80 pax/m/min 50 pax/m/min 50 pax/m/min
Ticket Gates
32
25 pax/gate 50 pax/gate 25 pax/gate 25 pax/gate
The requirements outlined in Section 2.4 relate to station performance during normal conditions.
However, it is important to ensure that a station continues to function acceptably during the following
scenarios:
2.5.2 Demand considerations
Table 2.5-3 summarises the impact on the demand used in assessment for each of the abnormal
operations scenarios defined above
33
:

Table 2.5-3 Demand assumptions for abnormal operations
Operational
scenario
Implication for passenger demand
Service
Perturbation (Cat
A-C stations)
Passengers entering the station should be assumed to continue to do so during the period of
service perturbation and accumulate on the platforms or concourses depending on the station
(unless station management plans specifically make alternative arrangements). Following the
period of the perturbation, passengers will board the trains according to the capacity available
(and the destinations of following train services) it may take several trains to clear the backlog
for busy stations.
The trains arriving at each platform after the end of the period of perturbation will do so at the
minimum headway permissible by the signalling system (taking into account platform dwell
times) until normal service is resumed.
Service Passengers entering the station should be assumed to continue to do so and accumulate on the

31
In an evacuation, escalators should be assumed to continue to operate in the direction they were doing before the
evacuation started. Where an escalator is stationary, it should be assumed to operate with the same capacity as a
fixed stairway.
32
Apart from during evacuation where the gates will be open, it depends on gateline strategy and crowd control plan
and how the station wants to handle revenue protection in abnormal circumstances
33
A knowledge of train loadings is important when analysing abnormal operations,
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

37
Table 2.5-3 Demand assumptions for abnormal operations
Operational
scenario
Implication for passenger demand
Perturbation (Cat
D-F stations)
platforms (unless the station management plans specifically make alternative arrangements).
Passengers will board the trains arriving following the cancelled service according to the
capacity available (and the destinations of following train services) it may take several trains to
clear the backlog, as the cancelled train may have a significant impact upstream of the station in
question.
The trains arriving at the platform after the cancelled train will be more heavily loaded, so train
arrival loads will have to be increased until the impact of the cancellation is no longer felt.
Train on Fire
Evacuation
The evacuation load should be assumed to include the following:
Occupancy at time of evacuation should be based on peak usage with 5 minute delay to the
scheduled train service in the busiest direction only
In addition to the above all occupants of a crush-loaded train (on fire), plus those normally
expected to alight from the next train in the other direction or any other lines
34

All exit routes can be counted as available for use and escalators continue to run as before the
emergency
Passengers cannot pass along the platform or through the train past the source of the fire
Anybody else within the station that will need to be evacuated in accordance with the station fire
evacuation plan.
Station on Fire
Evacuation
35

The evacuation load should be assumed to include the following:
Occupancy at time of evacuation should be based on peak usage with 5 minute delay to the
scheduled train service in the busiest direction only
The exit route with the greatest capacity should be discounted (as it could be blocked by fire)
Passengers waiting to board plus those normally alighting from the next train in each direction
should be evacuated
2.5.3 Abnormal situation
2.5.3.1 Emergency Evacuation
Station evacuation where everyone within the station (or part of the station) has to be evacuated.
Station design should take into account the following two emergency worst case scenarios:
1. Train on fire in station.
- In this case, the evacuation load (the platform and train loads) should be clear from the
immediate area (the platform) within four minutes and should reach a fire protected route
within six minutes if the platforms are underground. Surface station platforms should be
evacuated in a maximum of eight minutes and the whole station should be evacuated in no
more than twelve minutes
2. Fire within the station structure.

34
If it can be demonstrated that trains arriving at the station are never crush loaded (for example, at the country end
of commuter lines), the load of the busiest train on the traffic day should be used. This load should be doubled to take
account of a previously cancelled service.
35
Evacuation scenarios should be defined on a station by station basis and in consultation with the stations fire
evacuation plan and Network Rail.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
38
- Surface station platforms should be evacuated in a maximum of eight minutes and the
whole station should be evacuated in no more than twelve minutes.

2.5.3.2 Perturbation
Service perturbation is defined as a significant delay to the service leading to increased waiting in the
station environment (either on the platforms or the concourses)
36
. The definition (and indeed the impact)
of service perturbation varies on a station by station basis. As a generalisation, however, perturbation
can be defined as follows:
- For category A, B, or C stations (or for lower category stations where the train service is 4 trains per
hour or greater), a service perturbation represents a complete cessation of train services for a
fifteen minute period (it may only affect a certain service group if services are bundled together, for
example rail services into Waterloo are divided into suburban, main line and Windsor Line
services). For the purposes of assessment of station performance, the busiest fifteen minute period
should be used.
- For category D, E, or F stations, a service perturbation represents a complete cancellation of a train
service. For the purposes of assessment of station performance, the busiest train service should be
assumed to be cancelled.
During perturbation station management follows the procedures outlined in their crowd management
plan. The crowd management plan details a number of levels with controls for each level.
As an example, at Waterloo, the three most serious levels, where Network Rail starts to put physical
control measure in place are as follows (bearing in might that it might not affect the whole station but
one side of it):
Level 3 (15-30 minute delays with probably recovery):

- No obvious movement of people other than in area three meters from building walls
- Potential Opening of gates due to barrier line congestion (with loss of revenue)
- Removal of retail seating areas
- Stop/reverse escalators to slow number of passengers coming onto concourse




36
A service perturbation in this context refers to a significant disruption, it is acknowledged that minor delays happen
frequently, and should be considered as part of normal operations.
Level 3 (15-30 minute delays with probably recovery):

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

39
Level 4: 30-59 minutes delay where recovery is unknown

As above plus:
- Call BTP for assistance above normal provisions
- Contact LUL/Waterloo East to ask that they be ready to not permit to stop in Underground/Waterloo
East
- Potential Closure of Exit 4
Level 5/6: > 60 minute delay - evacuation

As above plus:
- Preparation for/ deliver partial or full evacuation
Whether a perturbation scenario is required or not should be agreed with the project team first and the
outcome of the perturbation analysis should be discussed with the project team and station
management. In most cases the existing crowd management plans can be changed to reflect the impact
the proposal has on crowd control, i.e. one result could be that a proposal has led to a smaller sized
concourse and a direct result of this is that the concourse now fills up quicker during perturbation than it
has been previously the case. As a consequence the crowd management plan needs to be amended in
a way that the different levels kick in earlier.
In terms of what time period should be assessed, on London termini the worst time period for
perturbation is likely to be in the PM peak. On a through platform the worst time period could be an AM
peak when passengers are accumulating on the platforms.
If the planning requirements above cannot be fulfilled a risk assessment should be carried out.
2.5.3.3 Construction
Station construction is defined as a situation where elements of the station are under construction for a
finite period of time leading to the required passenger space being compromised.
Depending on the size of the station and the impact the various construction stages have on passenger
flows, it will be necessary to assess what exactly the impact is and how it can be mitigated should it
cause problems.
The requirements of a construction assessment should be discussed with the project team, station
management and the Senior Station Capacity Specialist.
Level 5/6: no pictures exists
Level 4: 30-59 minutes delay where recovery is unknown:



Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
40
In terms of what time period should be assessed, on a London terminus the worst time period for
assessing construction impact on a concourse is in the PM peak. If the construction site is on the
platforms then the worst peak would be the AM peak. On a through platform the worst time period could
be an AM peak when passengers are accumulating on the platforms.
2.5.3.4 Special Events
Special events are events taking place in the vicinity of the station that lead to a temporary increase in
station patronage.
Crowds, or large concentrations of people, occur frequently near major sporting or entertainment
venues. A major sporting or entertainment event can attract around 70,000 avid fans depending on the
size of the venue. Large transportation terminals such as Waterloo and Victoria Station accommodate
around 300,000 passengers each weekday.
It is difficult to describe the psychological and physiological pressures within crowds at maximum
density. When crowd density equals the plan area of the human body, individual control is lost, as one
becomes an involuntary part of the mass. At occupancies of about 7 persons per square meter the
crowd becomes almost a fluid mass.
Although the terms crowd management and crowd control are often used interchangeably, there are
important differences. Crowd management is defined as the systematic planning for, and supervision of,
the orderly movement and assembly of people.
Crowd control is the restriction or limitation of group behaviour. Crowd management involves the
assessment of the people handling capabilities of a space prior to use. It includes evaluation of
projected levels of occupancy, adequacy of means of ingress and egress, processing procedures such
as ticket collection, and expected types of activities and group behaviour.
Architects and engineers typically give minimal attention to the movement of people in initial building
design, beyond compliance with local building codes. Code compliance does not guarantee that a
building will function well during normal assembly use or emergency egress. Designing for crowd
management requires that projected maximum occupancy levels of a space be correlated with the
movement capabilities of all corridors, stairs, ramps, escalators, and other facilities. For stations near a
stadium or similar crowd attracting venue, station management will have to prepare a crowd
management plan. The plan should establish the assembly and people movement capabilities of all
aspects of the venue, movement patterns, identify possible problem areas, and generally describe how
the design will accommodate normal and emergency crowd movement. Flow capacities of corridors,
stairs, passenger conveyors, and waiting spaces, have been established by a number of sources
37
.
The scope should clearly state if special events need to be considered as part of the assessment since
a passenger count will need to be carried out on a special event day. These may not take place
regularly and waiting for an event to happen could have an impact on the programme.


37
Section taken from The causes and prevention of crowd disasters by J ohn J Fruin 1993

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
41
3 Volume Two: Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
3.1 Introduction
The purpose of Volume Two is to provide guidance to project managers and consultants and other
interested parties responsible for scoping and producing station capacity assessment studies.
The aim of this document is to ensure a consistent and acceptable approach when undertaking station
capacity assessment studies, so that everybody involved in station capacity assessments understands
what is required in terms of approach, analysis and documentation.
Volume Two covers the following:
- The objectives of undertaking a station capacity assessment
- The recommended approach to carrying out a capacity assessment
- When to carry out a static or dynamic modelling
- Data requirements, and the means for collecting data
- The scenarios to be tested
- How to carry out a static analysis
- How to carry out dynamic modelling
- Validating and Auditing analysis or model outputs
- Interpretation of model outputs
- Deliverables and Documentation
3.2 Objectives of a Station Capacity Assessment
The objectives of a station capacity assessment will vary from one project to another. Typically the
objectives may include:
- Assessment and optimisation of new designs
- Evaluation of proposed refurbishments to existing infrastructure
- Optimisation of existing infrastructure
- Operational planning and crowd management
- Development of congestion relief schemes
- Retail planning
- Assessing impacts of significant timetable changes or introduction of longer trains
- Safety assessments and evacuation planning
- Contingency planning
- Business Case development (for example for the next Control Period)
- Support for Statutory/Regulatory Authority approvals
3.3 Standard approach to station capacity assessments
When determining the need for or application of an assessment, the following approach should be
adopted:
- Step 1: Determine what the objective of the study is
- Step 2: Determine the requirement for a capacity assessment, i.e. does the project proposal effect
passenger flows significantly?
- Step 3: Determine whether this assessment should be a static analysis or a dynamic assessment
and review this judgement with the Senior Station Capacity Specialist
- Step 4: Determine what data is available and what needs to be collected make sure everyone
agrees to the assumptions and inputs
- Step 5: Consult with Network Rail Economic Planning on what forecast demand should be used
and what scenarios should be analysed

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
42
- Step 6: Write remit for consultant and review this with the Senior Station Capacity Specialist
- Step 7: Depending on the analysis get it validated and audited (by the consultant) and get it
reviewed by the Senior Station Capacity Specialist or an external auditor
- Step 8: Submit the deliverables of the static analysis and dynamic assessment to the Senior
Station Capacity Specialist for review and acceptance

3.4 Determining the Requirement for Capacity Assessments
The requirement for a capacity assessment should be determined by the Network Rail Project Manager
and should be reviewed by the Network Rail Senior Station Capacity Specialist, with due consideration
being given to the station category, GRIP stage and, most importantly, the scheme proposals.
Where necessary Network Rail utilises the A to F station categorisation but since this list has not
recently been updated there might be some inconsistencies within it. In general the station category is
very likely to inform the nature of the assessment required. It is more likely that dynamic modelling will
be appropriate at higher category, larger stations and static analysis at smaller, lower category, less
heavily-patronised stations.
The station categories are explained in Volume One section 2.2.
In terms of scheme proposals, the more the work affects pedestrian flows the more likely it is that a
dynamic model is required. For example, a significant station improvement scheme undertaken at a
category A station will almost certainly require dynamic modelling, whereas a renewal scheme for a
category F station may require no analysis at all. The key determining factor is the degree to which the
scheme impacts on pedestrian movement during and post construction.
Typical examples for illustrative purposes only are:
Example 1. London Bridge is a Category A station with a patronage of approximately 50million
passengers per year (ORR data for 2008/09). The scheme proposal is a capacity enhancement
project which, amongst other things, adds a new platform and substantially changes the access
arrangements to the platforms. Due to the complexity of the project, a dynamic model is being build to
help inform the design process and to validate the final design. It will also be used to simulate fire
evacuation scenarios as well as construction phases that have an impact on passenger flows. Ideally
the model building would have begun with the Base Model in GRIP2.
Example 2. Wimbledon is a Category B station with a patronage of approximately 15.2million
passengers per year (ORR data for 2008/09). The proposal is to increase capacity as the station
suffers from congestion at peak times. As part of the GRIP2 study a passenger survey should be carried
out to analyse the current flows. A static assessment should also be carried out in GRIP2 to then see
what the requirements for a future station would be. If these requirements cannot be provided and
congestion is going to be a serious issue a dynamic model (LEGION) can be build in GRIP3 to help
inform the design process and to validate the final design. It will also be used to simulate fire evacuation
scenarios as well as construction phases that have an impact on passenger flows.
Example 3. Liverpool Central is a Category C station with a patronage of approximately
19.6million passengers per year (ORR data for 2008/09). The proposal is to de-clutter the platforms,
relocate CIS and provide the station with a better concourse layout. Since the station is very busy,
especially at weekends with shoppers, it is recommended to carry out a modelling exercise using a
dynamic model (LEGION).
Example 4. St Albans is a Category D station with a patronage of approximately 6.2million
passengers per year (ORR data for 2008/09). The proposal is a platform extension and refurbishment
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

43
of the ticket hall as well as an introduction of lifts. This could be carried out as part of a static
assessment.
Example 5. Salford Central is a Category E station with a patronage of approximately 222,000
passengers per year (ORR data for 2008/09). The problem at the station is overcrowding. The
proposal is to de-clutter the island platform and possibly to move the ticket office from the platform onto
a bridge. The access bridge would be rebuilt. The analysis could be carried out using a static
assessment.
The Network Rail Project Manager has to consider which GRIP (Guide to Rail Improvement Projects)
stage the project is in. The stage in the project life cycle will influence the amount of capacity analysis
required. The earlier in the GRIP stage a capacity assessment can be carried out; the clearer we are
about what needs to be done to increase capacity at a station and the more we can influence the
design. This is especially important if Network Rail is preparing a bid for the next Control Period.
The application of pedestrian investigation and analysis for station capacity assessments in relation to
GRIP stages is applicable during GRIP stages 2 to 6. Pedestrian assessments are particularly relevant
for GRIP stages 2 and 3. If construction stages are being assessed then this should be progressed in
GRIP 4/5 depending on when the contractor is appointed.
The project manager should fill out the form in Appendix B and submit this to the Senior Station
Capacity Specialist for review before going ahead.
3.5 Data collection
3.5.1 Introduction
If a requirement for more detailed station capacity analysis is identified a range of data will need to be
collected.
Data requirements will vary from one project to another depending on the project objectives, the type of
assessment and the level of detail required, as well as the extent of the station being analysed e.g. an
entire station as opposed to a limited area of a station environment. Where available, existing demand
data should be used, as long as this data is up to date, the accuracy has been verified and it is fit for
purpose for the assessment.
The Project Manager should review the list in Appendix B Step 6 to identify if the data/information is
readily available and start the process of requesting it. All data gaps need to be identified and need to
be included in the remit to the consultant who will have to allow for the costs of collating the information.
The data required includes:
- Demand data as described in section 3.5.2
- Demand forecasting as described in section 3.5.3
- CAD drawings of the station as described in section 3.5.5
- Site Visit as described in section 3.5.6
- Other information and assumptions as described in section 3.5.7
The following sections outline the specific data elements and the potential data collection or data
sources that can assist the project team.
3.5.2 Demand Data
Passenger demand data is a key input to any station capacity assessment. This data can come from
observed passenger numbers (surveys), gateline data, or can sometimes be inferred from rail network
forecasting models.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
44
Generally, the following datasets are required for a station capacity assessment:
- Station entry and exit flows (passengers, retail users and greeters)
- Origin/ Destination (OD) demand matrices
- Peak minute flow at key locations
- Passenger counts at key locations (e.g. gatelines, stairs, escalators, junctions
- Passenger journey times
- Boarding and alighting figures (for passenger distribution)
Key sources of demand data include:
- Train Operating Companies (TOCs) The TOCs hold various datasets which could be of use in
establishing the demand data for an assessment (i.e. gateline data, passenger counts, or ticket
sales data). However, due to the commercially sensitive nature of this data, obtaining this data
should be facilitated through the Network Rail project manager
- Network Rails Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS), DfT and TOC business cases for transport
infrastructure. Network Rails Planning function should be contacted by the NR Project Manager to
establish the availability and suitability of data from these sources (contact Economic Analysis
Manager)
- Third party stakeholders such as operators of other modes of transport or facilities that interface
with the station (for example, in London, Transport for London and London Underground). Access
to data held by other stakeholders should be sought through Network Rail
- Network Rail passenger counts: A survey might have been carried out previously for another
project. If the timetable and patronage has not changed significantly the data could be reused after
applying a growth factor if relevant
If demand data is required to undertake a station capacity assessment, the above opportunities to obtain
this data should be investigated before determining the need to undertake a passenger demand survey.
In all cases, the Network Rail Senior Station Capacity Specialist should be consulted to determine the
availability of any existing data and its suitability for the purposes of carrying out the assessment.
If the relevant data required to undertake the assessment is not available, passenger surveys should be
considered in order to collect the necessary data. This will then form part of the remit. It should be
clearly stated in the remit that no current data is available and that either Network Rail or the consultant
need to collect the data. In the tender document the consultant will be required to suggest a
methodology for carrying out the survey. Data collection is explained in the following section.
3.5.2.1 Data collection
The main purpose of a passenger flow survey is to collect the data used to specify the volume of
passengers passing through a station in specified time periods in specified time intervals, and to
establish the origin-destinations patterns (in the form of a matrix). The surveys can also aim to collect
data to be used for subsequent matrix and model validation.
It is important that careful consideration is given to the safe operation and planning of a survey. The
objectives should be clearly understood and a methodology defined prior to undertaking any data
collection, so the appropriate data is collected and is relevant to further pedestrian flow assessments.
The consultant is required to provide a Method Statement which will be signed by the Station Manager.
This document should describe in detail how the survey will be set up (i.e. if cameras need to be
installed), the coverage of the survey, the number of people that are required to carry out the survey,
briefing and signing in procedures.
The data collection survey should also provide a comprehensive description of the internal station
circulation; the congestion area, queuing patterns and movement onto the surrounding street network
and interchange facilities.
The following steps should be considered prior to undertaking a data collection survey.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

45
Stage 1: Investigate whether previous surveys have been undertaken, if so when, what information was
collected and is it relevant to the proposed assessment. The Network Rail Project Manager and Senior
Station Capacity Specialist should be contacted to establish what data has already been collected.
Stage 2: Although there may be data available (e.g. entry/exit points, gateline counts) the existing
dataset may not be sufficient or relevant to the study, in which case it will be necessary to commission
specific surveys, for example at stations where:
- there are multiple routes (for example, between platforms and interchange facilities, etc.), or
multiple ingress and egress routes to the station. Surveys should be used to obtain the distribution
and magnitude of all flows between key access points
- the profiles of boarding and alighting along platforms are particularly critical to provide a valid
assessment of the scheme especially where platforms are used for waiting
- there are significant flows disruption associated with the location of customer information screens,
retail outlets, kiosks etc
- at locations serving special events (e.g. sporting venues)

To carry out a data collection for pedestrian flow there are two main techniques available;
- manual counts at key locations (during the peak periods)
- video data collection
The assessment of the method to use is important. Video counting can be more precise and creates
lasting evidence/empirical material. This has to be weighed up against the advantages of a manual
count which is easier to implement and simpler to analyse. Traditionally manual counts have been used
for data collection on Network Rail stations.
3.5.2.2 Station Entries & Exits Counts
During the planning of the scope of data collection, consideration should be given to the relevance of
collecting data for all pedestrian flows within the station. It should be noted that in some cases entry and
exit flows alone would be sufficient to provide a valid assessment.
The level of traffic within the 3-hour peak period is not constant; it varies significantly within the peak and
the pattern of this variation differs between stations. Station entry and exit counts should therefore be
used to establish entry and exit profiles by 15-minute period.
3.5.2.3 Origin-Destination Demand Matrix
An O-D matrix should identify the major flows between each platform and station entrance and exit
locations and other transport interfaces (e.g. LUL, Bus station, Taxi rank, etc). The matrix should be
defined for a standard period of the day, usually during a weekday, AM peak (7.00-10.00), PM peak
(16.00-19.00) and inter-peak (10.00-16.00) to capture peak and off-peak periods of activity. Counts
should be continuous and recorded at 5-minute intervals to accurately capture activity, accounting for
the variance in transport departure/arrival times.
The day the survey is carried out will affect the quality of the data collected, in particular it is important to
be aware of one-off events, for example train service disruptions, bank holidays, school term times or
sporting events. In addition a validation count should be carried out which would be used to validate the
data collected on the main survey day.
The survey should comprise counts and related observations throughout the station and the immediate
environment. Should a passenger survey be required on a project, the overall methodology, number of
surveyors, count locations and supervisors should be put forward in the tender document and be
discussed with the Network Rail Project Manager and Senior Station Capacity Specialist.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
46
3.5.2.4 Unique tracking survey data, additional counts and validation counts
within the station
The collection of pedestrian tracking data for key routes is often required during the development of an
O-D matrix. It helps in establishing the distribution of flows at key junctions/entrances within the station.
This level of detail is paramount to developing a robust O-D matrix. This could be done using a
following approach or a questionnaire. In both cases a large enough sample should be achieved that
covers all areas of the station and not just two platforms.
Additional counts should also be carried out for the validation stage of an O-D matrix. These counts
should not be used in the initial development of the O-D matrix but used to assess the validity of the O-D
matrix and discrepancies with the observed data: in other words, this is a checking procedure to assure
quality control.
3.5.2.5 Gateline Data
Should a revenue protection gateline already exist, automatically collected data might be available. If
there is no gateline, manual ticket checks might take place. Gateline data is used to develop or validate
an O-D matrix.
3.5.2.6 Journey Time Survey
The collection of pedestrian journey time between points for major interchanges and egress routes can
be used for validation purposes (static and dynamic pedestrian assessment study) and also business
case analysis.
These should be collected in free flow conditions and at peak times.
3.5.3 Demand forecasting
3.5.3.1 Planning for Demand Growth
National Rail stations serve a number of different markets. At most stations on the network the vast
majority of users are accessing rail services, but this is not always the case. Large stations can be retail
destinations in their own right, attracting a significant number of visitors who do not use rail. Some
stations may provide access to other transport modes, such as the entrance to the London Underground
network at Euston, and others may generate footfall simply by offering the quickest walking route
between two locations.
Even within these broad markets, the needs of station visitors will vary. For example, a commuter
arriving at a major rail terminus in the morning peak may simply wish to exit the station as quickly as
possible, but the same passenger may have different requirements for the return journey home, such as
the provision of a suitable waiting area with train service information.
NR Sponsors, NR Project Managers and Consultants must be clear on the different markets served by
stations before considering growth scenarios. Ideally, the size and needs of each market should be
defined during the data collection stage. They should also consider how the markets might vary in size
at different times of the day for example, stations with well-developed retail facilities may experience a
surge in non-rail footfall at lunch time.
3.5.3.2 Defining a Growth Scenario for Rail Passengers
Several factors should be considered when defining a growth scenario for rail passenger throughput at
stations, for example:
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

47
- When is the station at its busiest? For stations serving well-developed commuter markets this is
often the high-peak hour in the morning. But for other stations, such as those serving major
venues, this could be during special events.
- What are the key drivers of underlying growth in the market during the busiest hours? For
commuter stations this could be city-centre employment growth, but for stations serving special
events planned changes to the capacity of the venue might be a material consideration.
- Are there any local reasons why the station might out or under-perform underlying growth in the rail
market? Examples may include significant residential or commercial development close to the
station.
- What likely changes in transport supply-side factors could influence the overall volume of rail
demand at the station? For example, will investment schemes generate or abstract demand from
the station (in both the short & long term)?
- Are there any likely changes in transport supply-side factors which could alter the peakiness of rail
demand at the station? For example, train lengthening on routes with significant on-train crowding
could influence the pattern of demand, resulting in passengers pulsing through stations in greater
numbers (even if aggregate levels of demand do not significantly change).
These effects could be more material than underlying growth in the market: put simply, a 12-car train
can carry 50% more passengers than an 8-car train.
There is also considerable merit in testing station capacity against the likely maximum throughput of the
train service. This might be achieved by assuming that all high-peak hour services are at capacity.
In some cases the definition of a longer-term demand scenario may be straightforward. For example, it
might suffice to assume the long-run growth rate of the market without recourse to detailed modelling.
In other cases (particularly where transport supply-side factors are changing) a form of modelling may
be required. The rail industry has developed a range of modelling tools MOIRA, Planet, LTS/ RailPlan,
CMS Passengers and the Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook.
It is recommended that the best approach be discussed with the Network Rail Economic Analysis
Manager.
3.5.3.3 Defining a Growth Scenario for Retail Footfall
NR Sponsors, NR Project Managers and Consultants should make a considered judgement of the likely
growth in retail footfall at stations. Consideration should be given to:
- any changes planned to the volume, location, and type of retail provided at the station
- any significant land use changes planned in the vicinity of the station, for example, a significant
office development
Common-sense assumptions on growth should be developed in response to these considerations.
3.5.3.4 Other Growth Scenarios
The above considerations all refer to the central or most likely growth scenario. Additional scenarios
or sensitivities may also be required, for example a high-growth scenario.
For most smaller schemes the same growth scenario will apply under both the Base Case and each
scheme option; for major redevelopment schemes, however, higher growth may apply under a scheme
option than under the Base Case, due to the extra journeys generated by the development or service
provision.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
48
3.5.3.5 Planning Horizons & Contingency
Irrespective of standard planning horizons and contingency assumptions, the demand growth scenario
should also be cross-checked against any known cost thresholds.
By way of example, consider a 60-year planning horizon with a forecast 75% increase in demand, to
which a further 25% contingency is added (therefore 100% growth in demand in total). A lower level of
contingency could be acceptable if it were established that the full 25% would break the station to the
point where a significant step change in cost is incurred.
3.5.4 Appraisal Considerations
From a business case perspective, the selection of future years needs to take account of DfT appraisal
guidelines, WebTAG, which state (at April 2010
38
) that business cases should not assume any
underlying demand growth after 2026. From a business case perspective, therefore, selected future
years should not include any year after 2026. However, from a planning perspective, an (additional) later
future year may be appropriate (see above).
The selection of future years should also reflect the availability of existing forecast data, where relevant.
For example, where forecast data from a Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) is used, the end year for the
forecast should be one of the specified years.
Please contact the Economic Analysis Manager for more information on demand forecasting and
business case analysis.
3.5.5 Layout Drawing Inputs
Almost all assessments will require a definition of the physical layout of the area being assessed;
typically this information is provided by means of an electronic drawing. It is critical that the drawing
accurately reflects the physical dimensions of the space and all obstacles to pedestrian movement.
The source of the electronic drawing will vary from project to project depending on the associated work
streams. However, for the purposes of facilitating an appropriate audit trail, all drawing files should be
issued by the Network Rail Project Manager for the project.
The drawings for existing station infrastructure (as-built plans) can often be inaccurate or incomplete,
and might not accurately represent the space being assessed.
Therefore, it is important that the details and accuracy of any electronic information provided for the
purpose of an assessment are verified.
During a site visit, the dimensions of several key locations should be measured and compared with the
corresponding dimension on the drawing. The drawing should also be checked to confirm it includes all
the relevant station furniture. For electronic drawings relating to future design options, key dimensions
should be checked with the design team to confirm accuracy.
Where relevant, sections through key level changes (stairs and escalators) should be provided, to
confirm the accurate representation of these level changes in the model.
If a CAD drawing is to be used in dynamic modelling assessment, a process of preparing the drawing
might be required. This may involve:
- Removing information not relevant to the movement of passengers

38
Please check the latest version of WebTAG to see if this approach is still applicable.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

49
- Consolidating the layer structure of drawing into a manageable and more easily understood format
(with as few layers as possible)
- Checking that the drawing is correctly orientated, scaled and laid out, and where changes in level
occur the links between the levels are accurately reflected
- Binding any XREF files (external files referenced in the main CAD file) so the CAD file becomes a
single stand-alone file containing all relevant CAD information. This eliminates the risk of XREF
information being lost when the CAD file is transferred. Where possible, the person generating the
CAD drawing should be requested to bind the XREF files prior to issue
In the case of Legion, the preparation of the CAD drawing is a very important step in the process of
developing a model; this preparation has a significant bearing on the modelling efficiency and accuracy.
The consultant appointed to undertake the dynamic modelling is expected to have the knowledge,
expertise and resources to prepare the CAD drawing in the appropriate manner.
The typical CAD drawing formats are .dxf (generic format), .dwg (AutoCAD) and .dgn (Microstation), and
most software accepts at least one of these formats (and is some cases all three). Generally the
preferred formats are .dxf and .dwg.
The final CAD drawing should be signed-off by the Network Rail Project Manager prior to continuing with
an assessment, to confirm it is accurate and fit for purpose, particular if the assessment involves
dynamic modelling.
3.5.6 Site Visit
For the assessment of existing station infrastructure, it is highly recommended that a site visit is
undertaken early in the assessment process. If the assessment is to involve dynamic modelling, it will be
a Network Rail requirement that the appropriate members of the modelling team undertake a site visit,
and that the timing of these site visits corresponds as closely as possible with the time periods being
modelled. The consultant must make provision for site visits within their project methodology and
programme. It is recommended that the consultant seeks advice from station management (NR or TOC)
in terms of station operations and issues they might have. The NR Project Manager may take part in this
meeting.
A site visit should look to cover the following items:
- Identifying discrepancies between the CAD layout and the actual station layout. CAD drawings are
often not up to date or incomplete. Measurements of key dimensions should be made to verify the
accuracy of the CAD drawing, and the presence of station furniture or other obstacles should be
noted
- Informing or confirming modelling assumptions
- Understanding the direction and magnitude of the key flows within the station, queuing patterns,
any interface with other modes of transport or stakeholders facilities, etc
- Meeting station manager or shift station managers for a detailed description of the operational
management in place at the station, discussing key congestion issues and evacuation strategy
- Existing signage and influence on pedestrian flows
- If it is required, scoping of a passenger survey to identify key locations and information that needs
to be collected, and identifying the logistical requirements to undertake the survey
- Photographs to assist validation and improve reporting
- Small scale surveys of factors such as retail usage, ticket sales, platform/ train loadings, train
stopping positions and usage of CIS screens
The appropriate Network Rail representative should be consulted in connection with obtaining the
relevant permissions to gain access for any site visits.
3.5.7 Other Information and Assumptions
In addition to the passenger demand data and the CAD drawings, the following information is also
required to affectively carry out a station assessment:

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
50
- Train service information specified either in the form of train timetables or train frequencies
(number of trains per hour to service headways), for each platform
- The configuration of various station elements, such as the operational direction of escalators and
ATG gates
- Operational assumptions relating to relevant station crowd-control measures, staff intervention
strategies, implementation of one-way routes (or systems) etc
- The location of customer information screens (CIS) and other information points, which have an
influence on passengers decisions, activities and waiting behaviour
- The signage plan (location of signs) that will influence the routes and behaviour of passengers (and
the degree to which passengers follow these signs)
- Ticket purchasing locations (automated ticket machines and ticket office windows), service rate
assumptions and method of queuing/queuing behaviour
- Where applicable, the assumptions relating to lift capacities, lift boarding and alighting rates, and lift
cycle times
- The location and patronage of secondary revenue facilities, and resulting queuing behaviour
The above can be collected by the consultant on a site visit: the train timetable (current and future),
however, will need to be provided by the NR Project Manager.
3.6 Base Case, Option and Scenario Definition
When determining the requirements of a station assessment study, careful consideration must be given
to the scenarios that need to be assessed. Identifying these tested will be determined by the
circumstance and requirements of the project and which GRIP stage the project is in, but may include
the following:
- Definition of Base Case and scheme option(s)
- Base year usually the year for which observed survey data is available
- Future year demand growth scenarios and demand sensitivity tests
- Perturbation tests
- Evacuation tests
- Construction phase scenarios
- Wet weather scenarios
- Special events tests
3.7 Developing a Tender Brief
The tender brief should clearly set out the following with respect to the assessment required:
- The objectives of the assessment
- The methodology for the analysis
- The availability of input data, and whether the collection of additional data is required
- The scope of the analysis; whether the assessment needs to cover the entire station domain or only
a sub-section of the station, or whether external areas need to be included
- The scenarios to be assessed
- The analysis and list of outputs required
- Documentation requirements, particularly if the assessment is to involve dynamic modelling
- The client timeframes and deadlines
The project brief should clearly outline the anticipated approach to the assessment and Network Rails
expectations in terms of analysis, outputs and documentation. The brief will provide a common
reference against which the bidding consultants will be required to respond, and therefore the more
specific the brief is in terms of the above details the more consistent the tender responses should be.
This, ideally, should assist the Network Rail client in evaluating and comparing tender responses.
Under certain circumstances it may be necessary or relevant for the consultant to propose a
methodology for undertaking the assessment. The consultants should be made aware of these
guidelines, in particular Network Rails expectations in terms of review and auditing. The Project
Manager should include some budget and time for an external audit of the base year model. The
Senior Station Capacity Specialist can advise on how this should be done.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

51
All station capacity assessment remits must be reviewed by the Network Rail Senior Station Capacity
Specialist. All base models must be externally audited before they are being submitted to Network Rail.
A remit contents list can be found in Appendix C.
3.8 Static analysis
3.8.1 Definition
A static analysis is a numerical investigation used to assess the functionality of a station through the
application of mathematical formulae derived from industry planning standards. Historically, static
analysis was used in the absence of advanced computer modelling programmes. However, static
analysis has not been fully replaced and continues to serve a valuable purpose of projecting
performance of functional elements within a station. In this context, a static analysis refers to the
application of the guidelines documented in Volume One of this document.
3.8.2 Objective
Although static analysis typically treats each of these various elements of a station in isolation, every
effort should be made to anticipate and assess how the performance of the various elements affects
each other. Static analysis provides an expedient means of developing a high-level view of the
performance of a station or proposed scheme and has the added benefit of being a much quicker
process than dynamic modelling. These assessments do not require any simulation software or
advanced technology and are typically carried out through spreadsheet type models.
3.8.3 Purpose
Static analysis can provide either a preliminary analysis of a scheme to determine whether it meets the
appropriate planning standards or whether further analysis is required, such as dynamic modelling. It
should ideally be carried out in GRIP stage 2 to provide an initial high-level analysis of performance, to
determine any obvious and extreme failings in a design or proposed scheme prior to dynamic modelling,
and to provide a sense-check of the dynamic modelling outputs.
3.8.4 Process
This process is intended as a guide to undertaking static analysis for rail stations.
Step 1 Data collection and preparation; the data required for this study should be collected in
accordance with Section 3.5 and Appendix B Step 6.
Step 2 Research; it is recommended to take time to research the existing station by visiting the station
before commencing with any analysis. Through this the analyst will gain an understanding of the study
area from design drawings and relevant documentation. Some points for consideration when
researching the station:
- Has any previous work been undertaken? Is it possible to obtain previous reports, studies and
surveys or even models?
- From drawings study layout of station; number of platforms, ticket halls, location of gateline(s),
waiting areas, emergency exit locations
- Understand the current station and its problems (possibly by talking to station management and site
observations) and anticipate what passenger flow issues there might be in future; identify likely
routes pedestrians will take between origins and destinations, existing and potential conflicts
- Understand train services; how many trains operate during the peak periods.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
52
Step 3 Undertake a site visit in accordance with the guidance set out in Section 3.5.6.
Step 4 Static analysis; before undertaking a static analysis it is important to review information
obtained from research and site visits and agree with Network Rail in advance which station elements
are to be assessed. A sample static analysis inception checklist is provided in Appendix D. Assumptions
around passenger routing, demand and train frequencies should be agreed in advance with Network
Rail. These elements should then be analysed using a spreadsheet, network diagrams and the capacity
calculations given in Volume One of this document. If required, the outputs should include the outputs
required for the business case analysis, as follows:
For each scheme option and for the Base Case:
- Average journey times for each specified O-D and for each specified period of the day (e.g. AM
peak). J ourney time data to be provided for the base year and for specified future year(s). The
selection of future year(s) is discussed in Section 3.5.3;
- The number of passengers relating to each specified O-D and for each period, for the base year
and for specified future year(s).
- The base year static analysis should also be validated by comparing the outcomes with on-site
observations as described in Section 3.13.3

Step 5 Evacuation Assessment; where appropriate an assessment of evacuation capacity should be
undertaken for two scenarios as described in 2.5.3.1 of this document:

- Train on Fire
- Station on Fire
What exactly these scenarios contain should be discussed and agreed with the Head of Fire Safety
Policy who will assist with the coverage of the evacuation assessment, assumptions and likely
scenarios.
Step 6 Perturbation; where appropriate an assessment of a perturbed situation should be carried out
as described in Section 2.5.3.2 but the need for this should be discussed with the project team and
Senior Station Capacity Specialist.
Step 7 - Result documentation should include the methodology followed, all assumptions made in the
process of carrying out a static analysis, calculations, and results. Locations of assessment areas
should be clearly marked on an illustration of the study area.
The spreadsheet used to carry out the analysis must be submitted and be labelled to be self-
explanatory.
Static analysis must be verified and outputs reviewed by the consultants carrying out the assessment
(internal review) and will then be reviewed by the Senior Station Capacity Specialist before being signed
off. A suggested static analysis auditing checklist is provided in Appendix D.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
53
3.9 Dynamic Modelling
3.9.1 Introduction
Dynamic modelling
39
should not be seen as a replacement for static analysis, but rather as a more
detailed analysis to supplement the high-level appraisal static analysis provides. The advantage of
passenger flow modelling is that it generally treats all the physical elements that constitute a station
environment (or sub-section) as well as the passenger activities and behaviour patterns as a single
system, and is therefore able to capture the interaction between these various elements and activities. It
is also able to reflect the dynamic nature of passenger flows, and in the case of microscopic models, the
interaction between individual pedestrians. Dynamic models generally provide a richer, more detailed
level of analysis, which in turn provides a better understanding and more accurate view of pedestrian
circulation performance. The visual nature of these models also provides a good communication tool,
particularly when presenting to non-technical audiences.
A dynamic modelling assessment will either involve developing a passenger flow model from scratch, or
adopting (and possibly updating) an existing model, to simulate a set of scenarios relevant to the
infrastructure project in question.
This section covers:
- Network Rail recommended modelling methodology
- Data input requirements for dynamic modelling
- Development of a Model Plan
- Model validation
- Modelling analysis and outputs
- Auditing of models
- Documentation

39
For detailed best practice on how to build dynamic models please see Station Modelling with Legion Best Practice
Guide, London Underground, Issue v2, July 2009 and the Legion User Manual. It is expected that the appointed
consultant will have the relevant expertise and experience to use the selected software in the appropriate manner.
This does not remove the need for the appropriate level of review and auditing, regardless of the technology
selected. In the case of Legion, which is Network Rails preferred modelling software, London Underground has
developed a detailed and extensive best practice modelling guideline (reference document: Station Modelling with
Legion Best Practice Guide, London Underground, Issue v2, July 2009) in the absence of a similar Network Rail
best practice modelling guidelines, the London Underground best practice guide should be used by consultants when
developing a Legion model

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
54

3.9.2 Modelling Methodology
The recommended methodology for carrying out a dynamic modelling assessment for Network Rail is
summarised by the following flow diagram:
Figure 3.9-1 Modelling Methodology

In most cases, the first three steps can be performed concurrently, with the Model Plan identifying gaps
in the modelling data and the need for modelling assumptions. The Model Plan, in addition to setting out
the proposed methodology, should also document the input data sets and the assumptions to be used in
developing the model.
Step 1: Data Collection and Preparation
Establish the availability and suitability of any existing data, and if necessary, plan and carry out station
surveys to collect any additional or missing data required to undertake the dynamic modelling. The
modelling input requirements are covered in Section 3.5. Any station surveys should be planned in
consultation with Network Rail and the station operator. This step also involves preparing and formatting
the data according to the requirements of the modelling package being used.
Step 2: Modelling Assumptions
Determine and document the relevant modelling assumptions as set out in Section 3.5.7. This may
involve site visits and consultation with the relevant representative from the Network Rail design team.
Step 3: Model Plan
Develop a Model Plan in accordance with the guidance in Section 3.13.1. This document should record
all modelling inputs and assumptions, and set out the approach to developing the model.

Figure 3.9 1 Modelling Methodology


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

55
Step 4: Sign-off of Data Inputs, Modelling Assumptions and Model Plan
Before proceeding with the model development, the initial Model Plan should be signed off by Network
Rails Senior Station Capacity Specialist and the project team to confirm agreement of the modelling
input data and assumptions to ensure that the model development will be in accordance with Network
Rails recommended approach and best practice guidance, and to confirm that provision has been made
within the project programme for the appropriate quality assurance and auditing of the models.
This sign-off of the initial Model Plan should precede the model development to minimise the potential
for redundant work brought about by changes to the methodology, data or assumptions.
Step 5: Base Year Model Development
Unless otherwise agreed with Network Rail, the first stage of model development involves building a
Base Year Model (current year or earlier, depending on availability of data) in accordance with the
Model Plan.
This document does not provide technical guidance on how to build a model. This will depend on the
modelling software being used, and it is expected that the consultant appointed to undertake the
modelling will have the relevant expertise and experience to use the selected software in the appropriate
manner. Since Network Rail currently uses Legion to simulate stations, it is recommended that London
Undergrounds Best Practice guidelines
40
are used when developing the model.
Step 6: Base Year Model Validation
The next stage in the model development is the validation of the Base Year model. Model validation is
covered in Section 3.13.3, and the Base Year model can be considered validated if the variations
between the modelled outputs and the corresponding validation data are less than 10%. If the variations
are greater than 10%, the reasons for the variations should be investigated to facilitate improved
validation.
Step 7: Base Year Model Audit and Network Rail Sign-off
Network Rail requires that, before continuing with the scenario testing, the validated Base Year model is
audited to confirm it is fit for purpose. Section 3.11 sets out the auditing requirements and
responsibilities. This audit should be carried out by a qualified person who is independent of the model
development process (i.e. who has not worked on the same project). This person should be included
into the tender with an explanation on why they are qualified to audit their colleagues work. Network Rail
will consider this person as an auditor. If the person is not deemed to be experienced enough, NR will
recommend the consultant to appoint an independent auditor to do the internal review for them. The
Network Rail project manager is required to externally audit the model should it not have been externally
audited by the consultant. The Network Rail Senior Station Capacity Specialist only reviews but does
not audit the model.
Step 8: Scenario Modelling
Following Network Rail sign-off of the suitability of the Base Year model as a reference model on which
to base the scenario testing, the scenarios identified in the project remit are modelled. This may be an
iterative process, depending on the results of the scenario testing and whether the model outputs are
used to inform any design or operational changes. See section 3.6 for more information.



40
Station Modelling with Legion Best Practice Guide, London Underground, Issue v2, J uly 2009

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
56
Step 9: Model Outputs and Analysis
The generation of model outputs and the analysis of results should be carried out in response to the
objectives of the study, and should demonstrate whether the performance of the station meets the
planning standards. The outputs and analysis should also provide additional information and
understanding of the performance of the station or areas with respect to passenger circulation and
crowding. The outputs required also depend on whether a business case is needed or not. Refer to
section 3.10 and 3.12 for more information.
Step 10: Reporting
The reporting should provide a clear explanation of the performance of the station or area being
assessed, highlighting any key issues that may be contributing to poor passenger flow performance or
the failure to meet the planning standard (i.e. platform width) or recommendation (i.e. number of gates,
size of concourse). Where applicable, the reporting should provide professional judgement as to the
implications and potential sensitivity of design or operational changes, with the appropriate conclusions
and recommendations. The report will form part of the project deliverables as set out in Section 3.13.
3.9.3 Data Inputs and Assumptions
The modelling package adopted (currently Legion) will generally dictate the data input requirements and
what assumptions need to be made. The data inputs generally involve the following:
3.9.3.1 CAD drawing.
In case of Legion CAD drawings are used as a key input that defines the physical elements of the
model. Refer to section 3.5.5.
3.9.3.2 Passenger Demand Data
Passenger demand data needs to be provided in form of an Origin-Destination (OD) matrix and arrival
rates (or profiles) of passengers entering from each point of entrance to the modelled area (including
alighting from trains). These data sets are required for each of the time periods and scenarios to be
modelled.
Generally the OD Matrix will remain constant over the time period being modelled. However, in some
cases the OD matrix may vary over time within the modelled period, or different OD matrices might
apply to different passenger types or groups (e.g. a special event in combination with a normal
operations peak period). In such cases, the respective OD matrices will be required, formatted and
specified in the appropriate way depending on the modelling package being used.
Arrival rates or profiles are required for each entrance to the model, and can either be specified by
passenger types or aggregated. In the case of platforms, the arrival profile (passengers alighting trains)
should typically be specified as the number of passengers alighting from each train and the
corresponding train arrival time from the respective train timetable.
Where appropriate, initial populations (number of people at the start of the model period) within the
model area(s) may be required (or assumed).
For further information on passenger demand data please see section 3.5.2
3.9.3.3 Composition of Passenger Populations
Station users require differing spaces within which to manoeuvre. For example a business traveller
might have a small bag/ trolley, a normal commuter might carry a rucksack or handbag, leisure travellers
might carry different sized bags with them and then there are passengers with mobility restrictions. A
clear width of 1200 mm is required for wheelchairs whereas a clear width of 1000 mm is adequate for
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

57
people with ambulant disabilities (crutches). Two wheelchair users passing each other would need
around 1800 mm and a pram and a wheelchair user need a clear width of 1500 mm.
In addition the above groups are characterised by different walking speed. Walking speed is affected by:
- pedestrian characteristics such as age, gender and physical condition
- trip characteristics such as walking purpose, route familiarity, trip length and encumbrances
- route characteristics such as width, gradient, surfacing, shelter, attractiveness, pedestrian density
and crossing delays
- environmental characteristics such as weather conditions.
The vast majority of people walk at speeds between 0.8 metres per second (m/s) and 1.8 m/s (2.9
kilometres per hour (km/h) and 6.5 km/h). A fit, healthy adult will generally travel at a mean speed of 1.5
m/s, and the aged and those with mobility impairments travel more slowly, at around 1.2 m/s.
Passenger behaviour will also differ between people travelling on their own, in groups or with children.
Unfamiliarity with the station will also change their actions.
When preparing for the passenger survey a decision needs to be made how these different groups will
be accounted for. Some of the different passenger types can be modelled; other not (i.e. wheelchair
users, groups). The proportions of different passenger types (commuters/ business travellers v. non-
commuters v. passengers with mobility restrictions) that make-up the overall modelled populations
should form part of the model set up and should be discussed with the project team.
3.9.3.4 Train service information
Train service information needs to be provided in the form of train timetables or frequencies (trains per
hour or average headways) for each platform. The train timetables should be used to generate the
corresponding arrival profile for a platform.
Please use the timetable template in Appendix G to provide the timetable information to the consultant.
3.9.3.5 Gateline configuration
Should ATGs be installed, then the operational assumptions for the gates (direction of operation -
Inbound v. Outbound) specified for the various time periods being modelled should be provided to the
consultant. For future scenarios the consultant may suggest the number and configuration of gates
which will be agreed with the project team and be documented in the Model Plan.
3.9.3.6 Escalator orientation
The operational assumptions (direction of operation - Up v. Down) for escalators (and travelators)
specified for the various time periods being modelled should be provided to the consultant.
3.9.3.7 Operational information
Assumptions relating to relevant crowd management, staff intervention, implementation of one-way
routes (or systems) should be provided to the consultant.
3.9.3.8 Customer Information Screens (CIS) and Signage
The location of CIS and other information points, which influence where passengers go to find or wait for
information, and any signage that influences the routes and behaviour of passengers should be
collected during a site visit.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
58
3.9.3.9 Ticket purchasing points and service assumptions
Where applicable, the location of ticket purchasing facilities (automated ticket machines or ticket office
windows) should be marked on the CAD, and the associated assumptions relating to service rates at
these facilities and the method of queuing/queuing behaviour should be discussed with the project team.
3.9.3.10 Lift Assumptions
Where applicable, the assumptions relating to lift capacities, lift boarding and alighting rates, and lift
cycle times need to be considered.
3.9.3.11 Secondary revenue facilities
In terms of modelling retail and vending machines, the location of these facilities needs to be shown on
the CAD plan. A survey should capture the usage of the facility, the dwell time and the service rates. If
the unit is located on the concourse or platforms and queues are forming, then the queue length should
be monitored as well. This will assist the appropriate coding of the queue areas and provide a more
realistic simulation of reality.
The above provides a generic list of modelling inputs for a dynamic modelling assessment. Depending
on the scope and objectives of the modelling assessment, and the modelling package being used, not
all of the above data sets will necessarily be required. In some cases, additional information unique to
the assessment might be required.
3.10 Model outputs
The analysis requirements will be determined by the study objectives, and the outputs from the
modelling should look to support these analyses. The range of outputs available will depend on the
analysis capabilities of the modelling package being used.
The following standard modelling outputs provide a useful range of analysis options. These should be
used, in combination where appropriate, to provide a quantitative analysis and understanding of the
performance of the station or area being assessed against the study objectives.
3.10.1 Density maps (also referred to as Level Of Service (LOS) or Service
Factor maps)
These are spatial maps (superimposed on the station layout) indicating the levels of passenger density
experienced in the various areas of the station. They provide an indication of the levels and extent of
crowding and congestion within the space being analysed.
These maps adopt a range of colours (from blue to red) to reflect the different levels of passenger
density. For Network Rail projects, Fruin Level Of Service (LOS) classifications, as shown in Figure
1.2-2, should be used to define the colour ranges used in generating these density maps.
The density maps should reflect the average density over a configurable period of time, typically over 15
minute intervals (occasionally shorter time intervals may be appropriate for example at gatelines).
Sometimes max density maps are also useful to show the worst congestion experienced.
Instantaneous peak density maps are also available (also adopting the Fruin LOS); these are, however,
less useful as they do not give an indication of the duration of any congestion or crowding.
Legion provides an additional density-based map which can prove useful in analysing the performance
of a space. This map is referred to as a Cumulative High Density (CHD) map, and reflects the amount of
time the passenger density exceeds a particular density level. For example, if a density level of LOS C is
selected, the CHD map will indicate the amount of time the space experienced a passenger density
above LOS C.
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

59
3.10.2 Space utilisation maps
These maps indicate the amount of time a particular space was occupied or utilised over the time period
analysed. They are useful in demonstrating which areas carry heavily pedestrian traffic, where the main
routes and waiting areas are, and which areas are under-utilised.
These maps also typically use a colour scale to reflect the different levels of utilisation.
3.10.3 Flow rates analysis
A flow rate analysis is the measure of the rate at which pedestrians pass a specific point. It is useful in
determining the capacity of key locations or pinch-points within a station, or the rate at which passenger
enter, leave or pass through a location. Flow rates are used to assess stairs, escalators, gatelines and
passageways.
3.10.4 Clearance times
Clearance times provide an insight into the time taken for the last person to clear (leave) the station, or
an area within the station; for example, the time taken for the last person alighting a train to clear the
platform or pass through a gateline. Clearance times are useful in indicating how long it will take to
move passengers through a pinch-point (e.g. a gateline) or away from a risky area (e.g. a platform). The
below graph shows how quickly the gateline is cleared.


3.10.5 Journey times
J ourney times provide a measure of the time taken by passengers to walk between two points, either
from their point of entry to their point of exit, or between two points within the station.
For each scheme option and for the Base Case:
Average journey times for each selected point to point (as discussed in 3.8.4 Step 4) and for each
specified period of the day (e.g. AM peak). These journey time data are to be provided for the base year
and for specified future year(s). The selection of future years is discussed in Section 3.5.3. J ourney
time data may be required under different demand growth scenarios.
Example for gateline clearance time
Gatel i ne cl earance ti me
0
20
40
60
80
100
<1 1-2 2-3 3-4 >4
Time (in minut es)
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

o
f

p
a
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
60
The number of passengers relating to each selected point to point and for each period, for the base year
and for specified future years and under different demand growth scenarios, as required. Passenger
numbers are likely to be based on survey data (following reconciliation exercises). Advice on
annualisation factors may be required. The breakdown of passengers between business, commuters
and other passengers may be required.
Advice on journey times for years other than the base year and the specified future years may also be
required; e.g. would straight line interpolation be appropriate?
Please contact the Economic Analysis Manager for further information.
3.10.6 Evacuation maps and/or evacuation times
When analysing evacuation scenarios, evacuation maps provide a spatial representation of how long it
takes for the final passenger to clear the respective areas within a station. The colours used in an
evacuation map reflect the elapsed time from the initiation of the evacuation to when the final passenger
clears that point. The evacuation times outputs are a similar analysis to the clearance times described
above. These maps and times dont include the impact the actual size of the fire has or the smoke. This
should be analysed separately by fire engineering consultants.
In addition to the above modelling outputs, animated video outputs (in either 2D or 3D) showing the
simulated movement of individual passengers passing through the station, or areas within a station, are
useful in illustrating passenger flows, the fluctuations in density levels and the build-up and dissipation of
crowding. The video outputs provide a good visual assessment of passenger circulation conditions,
which can help facilitate a better understanding of the performance of a space. They are also a valuable
method of communicating the model outputs, particularly to non-technical audiences.
Where applicable video outputs should be used to complement the above analytical outputs.
3.11 Auditing Models
An essential requirement when undertaking a Network Rail dynamic modelling assessment is the
carrying out of model audits at appropriate stages of the project. These should include:
- An audit of the validated Base Year model prior to undertaking any scenario modelling; and
- Audits at appropriate stages during the scenario modelling, typically before key conclusions and
decisions are to be made based on the modelling outputs.
There are two types of audits, and the responsibilities for carrying out the respective audits are as
follows:
- Internal Audits
The consultant undertaking the modelling assessment is responsible for, and must make provision to
carry out audits at the appropriate stages of the study; following the validation of the Base Year
model, and at key milestones during the scenario testing.
An audit checklist will need to be completed and a statement confirming the fit for purpose status of
the model will need to be provided.
The person appointed to do the audit must have the experience and qualifications to conduct a
modelling audit, and should be independent of the model development process. This person should
be included into the tender with an explanation on why they are qualified to audit their colleagues
work. Network Rail will consider this person as an auditor. If such a person is not available within the
consultancy appointed, the consultant is responsible for finding an appropriate external auditor.
- Independent Audits
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

61
Network Rail appoints (at their discretion) an independent third party to carry out an audit at any
stage of the modelling, particular on modelling assessments supporting large scale investment
projects.
Audits should be planned into the project programme and should be part of a formal process. The aim of
an audit is to confirm the correctness, accuracy and reliability of the modelling and its outputs, on which
to base findings, recommendations and decisions.
Please see section 3.13.4 for what should be included in the report.
3.12 Modelling Analysis and Interpretation
Based on the failure definitions described in Section 2.3.3, the analysis of the model outputs should
determine, under the necessary scenarios, whether:
- the station design achieves the planning requirements for the various station elements;
- there is a failure of design (unacceptable levels of congestion, crowding, delay and clearance
times);
- there is an absolute failure of one or more station elements (complete breakdown of circulation
conditions).
Table 3.13-1 provides a suggested approach for using the model outputs to demonstrate whether the
station design successfully achieves the planning requirements.
The dynamic modelling outputs should not only be used to demonstrate compliance with the planning
requirements. They should also be used to provide a more detailed understanding of the passenger
flows moving through a station. Because dynamic models generally provide a more realistic assessment
than static analysis, they are helpful in developing a better understanding of how the design and
operations affect the performance of the station. When analysing the modelling results, professional
judgement should be used to evaluate whether the individual elements and areas that constitute a
station are performing within acceptable levels.
Analysis of the modelling results should also identify opportunities to improve or optimise a design or
operational plan.
When generating the model outputs to be included in the final report or presentations all graphs, maps
and videos should be appropriately labelled, providing the title of the project, scenario name, time
period, and the type of analysis (i.e. platform clearance time, mean density map). The scale of graphs
should be the same for similar graphs. Maps and videos should contain a time stamp, and where
applicable, legends should be provided.
3.13 Modelling Documentation and Deliverables
The following documentation should be produced as part of the project deliverables for a static analysis:
- Site Visit/ Survey technical note (refer to Section 3.13.2)
- Audit checklists and report (refer to Section 3.13.4)
- Comparison report (refer to Section 3.13.5 and Appendix F)
The following documentation should be produced as part of the project deliverables for a dynamic
modelling assessment:
- Model Plan (refer to Section 3.13.1)
- Site Visit technical note (refer to Section 3.13.2)
- Validation report/technical note (refer to Section 3.13.3)
- Audit checklists and report ((refer to Section 3.13.4)
- Modelling Report (refer to Section 3.13.5 and Appendix F)
3.13.1 Model Plan

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
62
A lack of appropriate planning when undertaking a dynamic modelling assessment often leads to poor,
inconsistent, inefficient and in some cases inaccurate modelling. The value of developing a detailed
Model Plan should not be underestimated as it will provide the following benefits:
- Consistent, robust, reliable, fit-for-purpose modelling approach.
- Good documentation of modelling inputs and assumptions.
- Assist the review and audit process.
- If required at a later stage, will facilitate easier and efficient transfer of the model to other parties not
involved in its original development.
- A good Model Plan reduces risk of potential errors when building a model and helps in quick
identification and resolution of errors.
The Model Plan is a technical document, setting out how the model was built. It should be viewed as the
user manual for the model, providing all relevant information about the model development. Anyone not
familiar with the model should be able to gain, from the Model Plan, an appropriate understanding of the
structure of the model, as well as any logic, mechanisms, naming conventions and input data adopted.
The Model Plan should be a separate document from the Modelling Report, and should be able to be
read as a standalone document. Although some of the information in the Model Plan will also be
presented in the Modelling Report, the Modelling Report should not contain the more technical elements
intended primarily for those involved in the development tasks of a model.
The Model Plan is a technical document intended for modelling practitioners who have technical working
knowledge of the modelling software.
The content of a Model Plan should as far as possible and where appropriate include the following:
- All input data used in the model and the original source of the respective data sets should be
recorded.
- A list of all input data files, including any working spreadsheets used in preparing and formatting
the data.
- A list of the original CAD files and their source, and any modified CAD files used for the purposes of
modelling in form of a register.
- A list of all assumptions used and, where relevant, a brief explanation of the logic behind adopting
the assumptions and when they were agreed.
- A list of all model parameter settings.
- A list of the different pedestrian or passenger types used in the model, and their respective
parameters, such as speed (or speed profile), size and mobility status.
- An explanation of the naming convention adopted, both for objects within the model and for the
naming of relevant modelling files, particularly when multiple scenarios are being modelled.
- A description of the physical layout of the model in the form of a layout diagram(s), showing and
labelling the scope of the area modelled, all entry and exit locations, and any key internal locations
(e.g. gatelines, information screens, ticket purchasing facilities, activity areas).
- The operational configuration (i.e. direction of operation) of elements such as ATG gates,
escalators and one-way routes.
- Pedestrian flow diagrams illustrating the key circulation routes and any constraints to circulation
such as no-entry points or one-way routes.
- A description of the model structure, explaining the logic, modelling mechanisms, linking
methodology and any other relevant technical information relating to the model development.
- Any deviation from modelling best practice.
- The scenarios modelled, highlighting any differences between respective scenarios.
- A summary of the Base Year model validation results.
- Observations from site visit.
Although an initial sign-off of the Model Plan will be required at an early stage of a project, it should be
viewed as a live document and should be kept up-to-date during the whole model development
process. An up-to-date Model Plan will be one of the deliverables required of a dynamic modelling
study.
For all dynamic modelling projects, Network Rail will require that a clear, easy to understand, consistent
naming convention for modelling files and modelling objects will be set-up and adopted, and that this
Station Capacity Assessment Guidance

63
naming convention is clearly documented in the Model Plan. Anyone inheriting an existing model will
adhere to the original naming convention. Adopting a sensible and consistent naming convention when
developing a dynamic model is important for several reasons including:
- Reducing the risk of potential errors within the model and making model debugging easier
- Assisting model audit and review, by making the process of following and understanding the model
structure easier
- Helping facilitate handing over the model to other parties (those not involved in its original
development)



S
t
a
t
i
o
n

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

G
u
i
d
a
n
c
e



Table 3.13-1 Model output interpretation
Element Application of planning standard Analysis of model output
Gatelines (serving through
platforms)
- Exit bound flows (alighters) gateline should be
designed to accommodate the peak train alighting demand
(bound for the unpaid side) within 2 minutes (Section
2.4.2.2)

- Clearance time anal ysis used to show, for the peak train(s), no paid side accumulation of
passengers 2 minutes after the first person off the train arrives at that gateline. [It is
acknowledged that due to longer walk distances in some case, some passengers might
take longer to exit the platform area or reach the gateline, and this will be reflected in the
modeling results. However, there should be no paid side queuing 2 minutes after the first
person.]
- Platform bound flows (boarders) - gateline should be
designed to accommodate the peak 5 minute entry flow to
the platforms with no prolonged build up of congestion
(acknowledging that short periods of queuing may occur if
people arrive in pulses)
- Peak 5 minute average density maps (generated using Fruin LOS for queuing) to
demonstrate queuing on the non-paid side is acceptable [queuing is generally considered
acceptable as long as it doesnt block other routes through the station (particularly the exit
gates) and the peak 5 minute average does not exceed LOS D (for queuing)]
Gatelines (serving
terminating platforms)
- Exit bound flows (alighters) gateline should be
designed to accommodate the peak train alighting demand
(bound for the unpaid side) within 3 minutes (Section
2.4.2.3)
- Clearance time anal ysis used to show, for the peak train(s), no paid side accumulation of
passengers 3 minutes after the first person off the train arrives at that gateline.
[It is acknowledged that the model will show some queuing on the paid side of the gateline
average density/LOS maps. This is acceptable as long as the queuing doesnt block
other routes through the station (such as blocking the entry gates)]
- Platform bound flows (boarders) - gateline should be
designed to accommodate the peak train boarding
demand (bound for platforms) within 5 minutes
- Peak 5 minute average density maps (generated using Fruin LOS for queuing) to
demonstrate queuing on the non-paid side is acceptable [queuing is generally considered
acceptable as long as it doesnt block other routes through the station (particularly the exit
gates) and the peak 5 minute average does not exceed LOS D (for queuing)]
Passageway (one way) - Should operate within 50 pax/m/min for the peak minute
flow. This corresponds to a LOS D. (see Section 2.4.4.1)
- Flow rate analysis used. To recognise short peak pulses within the modelling approach to
assessments, fail to meet the standards if the flow rate exceeds 50 pax/m/min for two or
more consecutive minutes with the modelled periods.
- Average Density/LOS map average density over peak 5 minute period should not
exceed LOS D (walkways)
Passageway (two way) - Should operate within 40 pax/m/min for the peak minute
flow. This corresponds to a LOS C. (see Section 2.4.4.1)
- Flow rate analysis used. To recognise short peak pulses within the modelling approach to
assessments, fail to meet the standards if the flow rate exceeds 40 pax/m/min for two or
more consecutive minutes with the modelled periods.
- Average Density/LOS map average density over peak 5 minute period should not
exceed LOS C (walkways)
Stairways - There should be no perceptible queuing at the top or
bottom of staircases in a model. (see Section 2.4.4.4)
- Average Density/LOS maps used to show no significant build up of queuing at the top
and bottom of stairs. Average density over peak 5 minute period should not exceed LOS
C (queues)


S
t
a
t
i
o
n

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

G
u
i
d
a
n
c
e

Table 3.13-1 Model output interpretation
Element Application of planning standard Analysis of model output
Stairway (one way) - Should operate within 35 pax/m/min for the peak minute
flow. This corresponds to a LOS D.
- Flow rate analysis used. To recognise short peak pulses within the modelling approach to
assessments, fail to meet the standards if the flow rate exceeds 35 pax/m/min for two or
more consecutive minutes with the modelled periods.
- Average Density/LOS map average density over peak 5 minute period should not
exceed LOS D (stairs)
Stairway (two way) - Should operate within 28 pax/m/min for the peak minute
flow. This corresponds to a LOS C.
- Flow rate analysis used. To recognise short peak pulses within the modelling approach to
assessments, fail to meet the standards if the flow rate exceeds 28 pax/m/min for two or
more consecutive minutes with the modelled periods.
- Average Density/LOS map average density over peak 5 minute period should not
exceed LOS C (stairs)
Escalator - Should operate within 100 pax/min for the peak minute
flow. (see section 2.4.4.5)
- There should be no perceptible queuing at the top or
bottom of escalators in a model.
- Consideration should be given to whether this flow rate of
100 is realistic for the escalator in question. Depending on
the modeling software used it may be necessary to alter
the flow rate parameters within the model.
- Flow rate analysis used. To recognise short peak pulses within the modelling approach to
assessments, fail to meet the standards if the flow rate exceeds 100 pax/min for two or
more consecutive minutes with the modelled periods.
- Average Density/LOS maps used to show no significant build up of queuing at the top
and bottom of escalators. Average density over peak 5 minute period should not exceed
LOS C (queues)
- Average queuing time for an escalator should be within 0-15 seconds of a platform and 0-
30 seconds of the concourse.
Concourse Accumulation
Area
- Should be sufficiently sized to accommodate all waiting
customers without waiting customers blocking concourse
through routes. It is acknowledged that models may
present localized higher densities higher than those
recommended in Section 2.4.3 (1.0 sqm/pax), reflecting
the way people wait in such areas, however the average
density of a holding area should not exceed this density
- Average Density/LOS maps (walkways). Density levels averaged over peak 5 minute
periods should not exceed 1.0 pax/sqm (approx. LOS D)
[it should be accepted that there will be small localised hot-spots (LOS >D), however in
general peak 5 minute average density should not exceed LOS D.
Concourse through route - Concourse accumulation should not be permitted to
extend over any run-off areas or into the clear walkways
through the concourse.
- Queuing space in front of ticket machines or ATMs should
be kept clear
- The model should show clear walkways though the
concourse operating at a flow rate of no more than 40
pax/m/min for the peak minute flow. This corresponds to a
LOS C (see Section 2.4.3.4)
- Density maps, Space Utilisation maps and visual inspection of simulated pedestrians to
show that accumulation of waiting passengers do not extend in to circulation areas, run-
offs and queuing areas.
- Peak 5 minute average density levels in circulation corridors should not exceed LOS C
(walkways).


S
t
a
t
i
o
n

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

G
u
i
d
a
n
c
e


Table 3.13-1 Model output interpretation
Element Application of planning standard Analysis of model output
Platform Waiting Area - The average density within the waiting area for each
carriage block of the platform should not exceed
0.65sqm/pax during the waiting period for the busiest train.
This corresponds to the upper limit of LOS C service.
- Areas of localized queuing should not operate at LOS D or
higher for more than 5 minutes during the peak 15 minute
period
- Queuing should not prevent people from passing through
to access the far ends of the platform (or from leaving the
platform if alighting a train)
- Platform clearance time should not exceed the minimum
gap between trains (dictated by signaling constraints, as
opposed to be timetabling) for that particular platform.
- It is acknowledged that there will be localized areas of higher densities (particularly around
carriage door locations), however the average should be within this threshold for each
individual part of the platform (see Section 2.4.5.2)
Platform Circulation Route - Circulation space should be preserved to allow people to
move at a rate of 40pax/m/min
- Where platforms function as passageways, the peak
minute flow should not exceed 40 pax/m/min for the
busiest section of the platform (this corresponds to a LOS
C)
- Density maps and visual inspection of simulated pedestrians to show that accumulation of
waiting passengers on the platform do not extend in to circulation areas on te platform.
(see Section 2.4.5.3)
- Peak 5 minute average density levels in circulation corridors should not exceed LOS C
(walkways).

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
3.13.2 Site Visit technical note
A technical note should be written up recording any observations or information gathered from the site
visits. This does not have to be a stand alone report. It may be included in the Model Validation report or
the Modelling Report.
3.13.3 Model Validation report
Model validation is the process of confirming that a model accurately reflects reality, and involves
comparing modelled outputs from a base year scenario with the real life observations and surveyed
data from an equivalent period. This in turn requires the development of a Base Year model reflecting
the current year demand (or an earlier year where validation data is available) and the collection of
validation data.
Model validation is a default requirement when undertaking a Network Rail dynamic modelling
assessment, and therefore the requirement to develop a Base Year model should be included in the
modelling methodology. Any deviation from this requirement should be discussed and agreed with the
Network Rail Senior Station Capacity Specialist prior to commencement of the study.
Validation of a pedestrian model should cover the following criteria:
Step 1 - High-level visual comparison between congestion levels and passenger flows
This is an initial validation step, and is not a quantitative analysis. It provides a preliminary sense check
of the model to identify any obvious inaccuracies or issues that require resolving before continuing with
the validation analysis.
Step 2 - Comparison of the OD Matrices
A comparison of the resulting OD matrix from the model versus the input OD matrix, to confirm the
model is accurately simulating the intended origin-destination flows.
Step 3 - Comparison of congestion levels (LOS) at key locations
A qualitative assessment of the modelled congestion levels (typically described in terms of LOS) against
observed passenger crowding and congestion, for the same area under the equivalent demand
scenario. This assessment may be subjective, but should be based on professional judgement and
could be complemented by photos taking during site visits.
Step 4 - Comparison of screen line counts
A comparison of modelled flows versus surveyed passenger counts at the same location and for the
equivalent time period, for key locations within the study area
Step 5 - Journey time comparison
A comparison of the modelled journey times between key origin and destination pairs, or between two
points within the study area, with surveyed journey times between the equivalent points.
Step 6 - Flow rate comparison
An analysis of capacity flow rates at key elements such as escalators, stairs and through ATGs, to
confirm compliance with either surveyed or planning standard capacity flow rates.
A Base Year model can be considered validated if the variations between the modelled outputs and the
corresponding surveyed data are less than 10%. If the variations are greater than 10%, the reasons for
the variations should be investigated. Where necessary the Base Year model should be revised with the
aim of achieving validation.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
68
If model validation is not achieved, the reasons behind the variations between the modelled and
surveyed data must be explained. These variations should be discussed with the appropriate
representative from Network Rail (for example the Senior Station Capacity Specialist) to determine the
significance of the failure to validate on the ability of the model to accurately and reliably simulate future
year and/or design option tests.
A validation report or technical note should be developed, summarising the validation results and
explaining any non-validation issues. The report should also confirm the suitability of the Base Year
model to be used as a basis for any subsequent modelling tests.
Network Rail will be required to sign off the Base Year model validation before any subsequent
scenarios are modelled. The Base Year model will then be used as the reference model on which all
subsequent modelled scenarios relating to changes in the station design or operations, or future
demand scenarios will be based.
Passenger surveys should be designed with the validation requirements in mind. The appropriate
validation data sets should be collected during the passenger surveys. Alternatively, independent
surveys should be conducted on separate days to collect the validation data.
3.13.4 Audit report
The following items should be covered within an audit:
- Data inputs and modelling assumptions are reasonable and appropriate for the assessment.
- Data inputs and modelling assumptions are accurately specified with the model.
- The model has been developed in accordance with best practice guidance.
- There are no errors in the model.
- The correct scenarios have been simulated.
- The model outputs have been generated correctly.
- The model development has been appropriately documented.
It is recommended that an audit checklist is used when carrying out an audit. The recommended audit
checklist for static modelling assessments is provided in Appendix D+E, which should form the basis of
a dynamic model audit checklist (additional items will be required).
3.13.5 Modelling Report
The Modelling Report will constitute the main deliverable from a modelling assessment, and may include
a summary of some of the information from the other documents. Alternatively the site visit and
validation notes, and audit checklist and report may be included as appendices to the Modelling Report.
The Modelling Report is intended for the Network Rail client and other stakeholders who may not
necessarily have a technical knowledge, and therefore should not include the more technical information
contained in the Model Plan.
The Modelling Report should cover the following aspects:
- A background to the study
- The objectives of the assessment
- An explanation of the scheme being assessed
- A summary of the demand data and modelling assumptions
- The scenarios tested
- Any relevant modelling considerations
- The modelling outputs and analysis
- Conclusions and recommendations
The Modelling Report should include drawings, maps and photographs to aid the explanation of the
scheme and location of the site. A suggested Modelling Report template is provided in Appendix F.

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
In addition to the above documentation, the modelling deliverables should also include:
- The modelling files for all scenarios simulated
- The final CAD files used in developing the model
- The demand data files used to generate the modelling demand inputs
- Where applicable, videos files produced from the models.
3.14 Business Case Analysis
The guidance outlines the data required by Network Rail for the business case analysis. For a static
analysis the journey time and other data is shown in Section 3.8.4. For dynamic modelling the data is
shown in Section 3.10.5.
These requirements assume that the business case analysis itself is carried out by Network Rail.
However if the consultant is required to carry out this analysis, the outputs should, in addition, include:
- The annual value of the walk time benefits/disbenefits for each option relative to the Base Case,
using DfT appraisal guidance (WebTAG) (e.g. values of time and a weighting of 2 for non-work time
walk time benefits). Values should be discounted and shown for each year of the appraisal period
- The annual value of any revenue and/or non-user benefits/disbenefits associated with the walk time
changes
- The Present Value (PV) of the above benefits/disbenefits and of other benefits and costs as
required, in accordance with WebTAG. The Benefit Cost Ratio, the full TEE tables and the
Appraisal Summary Table, if relevant, should be presented, in accordance with WebTAG
- These data should be provided for the central growth scenario and under any additional growth
scenarios/sensitivities, as required
3.15 Project closure
At the end of each GRIP stage/ the project all deliverables including survey data, technical notes and
reports, all spreadsheets and modelling files will have to be provided in electronic format in form of a CD
or memory stick to the Senior Station Capacity Specialist. These will then be archived and are readily
accessible for future use.


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix A - Glossary
The following is a non-exhaustive list of definitions for some of the terminology used in this document:
ATG Automatic Ticket Gate
Auditing The independent verification of a model by a third party not involved in the modelling
process
Business Case The use of economic principles to justify a station improvement scheme (in this case)
CIS Customer Information Screen; screen in the station providing the passengers with train departure
and arrival information
Concourse Area within a station away from platforms with significant passenger activity such as ticket
purchase, information gathering, retail outlets and passenger waiting space
Demand Patronage using the station for use in station capacity analysis
Dynamic Modelling An analysis of station capacity using a commercially available micro simulation
software package
Forecast An estimate of patronage in a given future year
GRIP Guide to Railway Investment Projects
Legion A commercially available pedestrian micro simulation software package recommended by
Network Rail for the modelling of station capacity
Levels of Service A measure of passenger/customer density derived by Prof. J ohn J Fruin in 1971.
Three levels have been derived, for walkways, stairways and queuing areas, and these form the basis of
some of the analyses in this document.
O-D Matrix A matrix of demand showing origins and destinations of movements within the station
Peak period The period during the traffic day with the highest patronage. Usually the AM Peak (0700-
1000) or the PM Peak (1600-1900). This is derived from survey or a forecasting exercise
PIP Passenger Information Point
Run-off The space in front of an escalator, staircase or ticket gate where passengers re-orientate
themselves and move away from the element. This space should be kept free of obstructions
Sensitivity Test A test to understand the degree to which certain model outputs will vary subject to
changes in demand, operations, or the weather, for example
Service Perturbation A disruption to what is considered an acceptable deviation from at timetabled
service
Static Analysis An analysis of station capacity against relevant standards using a spreadsheet
Terminus Station A station where trains are not able to pass through without having to reverse or
change direction
Through Station A station where trains pass through without having to reverse or change direction
TOC Train Operating Company
Validation The use of observed survey data to demonstrate that a model is performing in the way it
should be

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix B Determining the Requirements for a Station
Capacity Assessment
Station Name:
Project Name:
Project Sponsor:
Project Manager:
Project Number:
Please provide a project number so the Station Capacity Specialist can book time to it.

Step 1: Classify station according to Network Rail classification tables
Delete categories that not apply to the station
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category D
Category E
Category F

Step 2: Define type of scheme
Describe the scheme type:


Step 3: What is the objective of the study?
Describe the scheme type:


Step 4: Determine the stage in the planning process
What GRIP stage is the project in?


Step 5: Preliminary assessment
Has the scheme an impact on pedestrian flows?


Is the change permanent?


How many passengers are likely to be affected?


Does the scheme meet minimum planning standards or are any derogations likely to be required?


Is it in a safety critical area?


Has any previous assessment been carried out?




Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Step 6: Data Collection
What information is available? Please highlight if any NR to provide data is available. If something is
not available it needs to be highlighted in the remit.

Data Element Required
static
Required
dynamic
Network
Rail to
provide
3
rd
party/
observati
on
Consultant to
suppl y
Demand Observed station entry/exit
flows
x x x
Demand Observed origin-
destination matrix
x x
Demand Observed counts at key
locations
x x x
Demand Recorded gateline data useful x x
Demand Recorded third party (e.g.
LU) data
useful x
Demand Forecast station entry/exit
flows
x x x
Demand Forecast origin-destination
matrix
x x x
Observed passenger journey times x x x
Video data capture useful useful x
Layouts Existing station CAD
drawings
x x x
Layouts Proposed station CAD
drawings
x x x x
Layouts Train stock CAD drawings useful x
Train service Data Timetables useful x x
Operational assumptions station
elements
x x On site
Operational assumptions station
control plan
x x x
Operational assumptions evacuation
plan
x x x
Operational assumptions station
signage
useful useful On site
Ticket purchase activity within the
station
x x x
Lift capacities and cycle times x x
Secondary revenue facilities location
and use
x x

Step 7: Suggested methodology
Please suggest what analysis should be carried out

Step 8: Drawings and photographs
Please attach relevant drawings, sketches and/ or photographs to this form.



Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix C Tender Remit Structure
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Objectives of Study
1.3 Relevant Considerations
1.4 Interaction with Third Party Stakeholders

2. Study Brief
2.1 Scope of Study
2.2 Available Data and Date Collection Requirements
2.3 Proposed Study Methodology
2.4 Analysis Requirements and List of Study Outputs
2.5 Scenarios to be assessed
2.6 Validation Requirements
2.7 Auditing Requirements
2.8 Deliverables and Reporting
2.9 Project Programme and Timeframes
2.10 Site Visit

3. Submission Format
3.1 Management Summary
3.2 Technical Proposal
- Detailed Methodology
- Project Delivery
- Experience and Capabilities
- Key Personnel
- Reporting and Liaison
3.3 Commercial and Pricing
3.4 Project Programme and Fee breakdown
3.5 Auditing and Quality Assurance

4. Tender Evaluation Criteria
The table below is a suggestion on how tender proposals could be evaluated from a technical point of
view. Costs are excluded from this as this is a commercial criterion and should be carried out by
procurement.

Table D1: Tender evaluation scoring


Where scores are as follows:
0 =bad internal feedback, no experience with NR, no understanding
1 =no/ little experience with NR but good experience outside NR and good internal feedback, poor
understanding
2 =medium experience with NR, good internal feedback, good experience outside NR, medium
understanding
3 =experienced, excellent internal feedback, understanding of project and provide what is asked for
4 =fully experienced, excellent internal feedback, full understanding of project, provide more than asked
for
Table D1: Tender evaluation scoring
Weight
ing score total score total score total score total
1
Company experience and reputation
(i.e. internal feedback)
2 3 6 3 6 2 4 3 6
2 Understanding of project 3 4 12 3 9 3 9 2 6
3 Methodology 4 4.0 16.0 3.3 13.3 1.7 6.7 3.3 13.3
3.1 Data Collection 4 2 2 4
3.2 Static analysis 4 4 2 3
3.3 Scenarios 4 4 1 3
4 Proposed team 2 4 8 4 8 2 4 3.5 7
4.1 Skills 4 4 3 3
4.2 Experience 4 4 1 4
5 Reporting 2 4 8 4 8 2 4 3 6
6 Programme 2 4 8 3 6 3 6 2 4
TOTAL 64 56 38 48
Consultant 4 Consultant 1 Consultant 2 Consultant 3

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix D Static Analysis Audit Checklist
Completed? Static Modelling Audit Checklist
Yes No N/A
1 Information and data

1.1
Request all appropriate information from Network Rail or appropriate sources prior to the
commencement of the project. This may include:
- Survey data/ reports;
- Previous Modelling Reports or station assessments;
- Gate-line information from TOCs/Network Rail (where appropriate);
- Train carriage boarding and alighting profiles (where appropriate);
- CAD information (where appropriate);
- Timetable information (where appropriate);
- Ticket data (where appropriate);
- Passenger profiles; and
- Other information where applicable.

1.2
Review the information made available to assess if it is appropriate and sufficient to carry out the
static modelling required and if it suitable for the project.

1.3
Is data and information made available sufficient to start discussions with Network Rail and agree
the scope of works?

1.3
If data or information available is not sufficient or appropriate, then investigate if data can be gained
through other sources or liaise with Network Rail to agree way to progress (i.e. through surveys and
data collection).

2 Scoping

2.1
Agree the scope and detail of the static modelling assessment required with Network Rail. For
example the assessment of all or a selection the following may be required and this needs to be
agreed with Network Rail:
- Emergency evacuation testing;
- Ticket gate-line operation (Including WAGs);
- Platforms (Boarding and alighting);
- Platform extension
- Concourse performance;
- Timetable changes;
- Ticketing arrangements;
- Escalators capacities;
- Passageway assessments;
- Stair capacities; and
- Other requirements.

2.2
Ensure that a site visit (s) is carried out during the time periods being analysed to ensure
familiarisation with the station at start of project by the consultant.

2.3
Identify all operational or management information required for the assessment is gathered early on
in the project. For example, the direction of escalators or the orientation and number of inbound/
outbound tickets gates operating in the AM or PM peak periods or the operation of one way
passageways during certain times of the day.

2.4 Is further data collection required for the project to proceed?

2.5 Is scope agreed with Network Rail and a project plan in place?

3 Data and input assumptions

3.1 Agree that available data and information is appropriate to use and fit for purpose.


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
3.2
Agree any sensitivity tests (perturbation, escalators not working etc) and any factoring of passenger
demands for testing future scenarios is agreed with Network Rail.

4 Anal ysis

4.1
The assessment should be carried out using the guidance contained within the Network Rail Station
Capacity Guidance document where appropriate.

4.2
Reference of the Network Rail Station Capacity Guidance document and assumptions used should
be documented clearly in the reporting process. The calculations and electronic files (Excel) should
also be made available to Network Rail on completion of a project.

5 Audit

5.1
Prior to the completion of the static modelling process an audit should be carried out by a qualified
person who is independent of the static modelling development and the calculations made.

6 Summary and reporting

6.1
The presentation of results and calculations made of the assessment should be made in a concise
and structured manner with figures included where appropriate.



Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix E Audit Report

Executi ve Summary

1. Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Objectives
1.3 Study Overview
1.4 Methodology
1.5 Modelling Scope
1.6 Scenarios Assessed

2. Input Data and Assumptions

2.1 Station Layout (CAD Plan)
2.2 Demand Data
- Origin Destination Matrices
- Arrival Profiles
2.2 Train Service Information
2.3 Modelling Assumptions

3. Results and Analysis

Presented in terms of scenarios tested and analyses (possibly a section per scenario
modelled, including conclusions for that scenario)

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix F Static Assessment Report Template

Executi ve Summary
Covering brief background to the project, headlines from survey, key findings of the existing station and
options and recommendations

1. Introduction
Background of the station and project

2. Objectives
Describe what it is that Network Rail wants to achieve

3. Scope
What the scope of the project is in terms of geography and actual work

4. Methodology
How the assessment is being carried out

5. Site description
Describe the site in its environment and of the station itself. Include pictures, maps and station plans.

6. Passenger flow survey
Include scope and approach, recordings of incidents and disruption, on-site observations using pictures,
key findings from the survey, survey validation

7. Growth forecasts
Describe what the forecasting methodology is.

8. Static Analysis Methodology
What elements of the station are being assessed and how? Is a deviation from the guidance required
because of site circumstances?

9. Static Analysis of current layout with current and future demand
Describe the AM and PM outcomes of the existing situation and the existing layout with future demand.

10. Static Analysis of Option x
Describe the AM and PM outcomes of the options individually.

11. Conclusions
Headlines from the survey, summary of existing station and how it would look in the future, key findings
of the options and recommendations





Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Appendix G Modelling Report Template

Executi ve Summary
Covering brief background to the project, headlines from survey, key findings of the existing station and
options and recommendations

1. Introduction
Background of the station and project

2. Objectives
Describe what it is that Network Rail wants to achieve

3. Scope
What the scope of the project is in terms of geography and actual work

4. Methodology
How the assessment is being carried out

5. Site description
Describe the site in its environment and of the station itself. Include pictures, maps and station plans.

6. Passenger flow survey
Include scope and approach, recordings of incidents and disruption, on-site observations using pictures,
key findings from the survey, survey validation

7. Growth forecasts
Describe what the forecasting methodology is.

8. Dynamic Modelling Methodology and Key Assumptions
What elements of the station are being assessed and how? Is a deviation from the guidance required
because of site circumstances?

9. Dynamic Model of current layout with current and future demand
Describe the AM and PM outcomes of the existing situation and the existing layout with future demand.

10. Dynamic Model of Option x
Describe the AM and PM outcomes of the options individually.

11. Conclusions
Headlines from the survey, summary of existing station and how it would look in the future, key findings
of the options and recommendations


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
3.16 Appendix H - Timetable Template

This table summarises how timetable information should be provided when building a Legion model.



Timetable template
REP NO TIME PLAT DESTINATION STOCK ARR REP NO SEAT CAP. ALIGHTING BOARDING
2J 09 07 06 2 Hampton Court 8 455 06 55 2D90 472 survey survey
2D09 07 09 1 Epsom 8 455 07 01 2J 10 472 survey survey
2F09 07 20 2 Woking 8 455 07 10 2D10 472 survey survey
1D09 07 24 1 Dorking 8 455 07 15 2M10 472 survey survey
2J 11 07 36 2 Hampton Court 8 455 07 25 1D10 472 survey survey
2D11 07 39 1 Guildford L 8 455 07 31 2J 12 472 survey survey
2F11 07 50 2 Guildford WK 8 455 07 40 2D12 472 survey survey
1D11 07 54 1 Dorking 8 455 07 45 2M12 472 survey survey
2G13 08 03 2 Guildford C 8 455 07 55 2O90 472 survey survey
2D13 08 09 1 Guildford L 8 455 08 02 2J 14 472 survey survey
2F13 08 20 2 Woking 8 455 08 11 2D14 472 survey survey
1D13 08 24 1 Dorking 8 455 08 15 2M14 472 survey survey
2J 15 08 36 2 Hampton Court 8 455 08 25 2O92 472 survey survey
2D15 08 39 1 Guildford L 8 455 08 31 2J 16 472 survey survey
2F15 08 50 2 Woking 8 455 08 41 2D16 472 survey survey
1D15 08 54 1 Dorking 8 455 08 45 2M16 472 survey survey
2J 17 09 06 2 Hampton Court 8 455 08 55 2O94 472 survey survey
2D17 09 09 1 Guildford L 8 455 09 01 2J 18 472 survey survey
2F17 09 20 2 Woking 8 455 09 10 2D18 472 survey survey
1D17 09 24 1 Dorking 8 455 09 15 2M18 472 survey survey
2J 19 09 36 2 Hampton Court 8 455 09 25 1D18 472 survey survey
2D19 09 39 1 Guildford L 8 455 09 31 2J 20 472 survey survey
2F19 09 50 2 Woking 8 455 09 40 2D20 472 survey survey
1D19 09 54 1 Dorking 8 455 09 45 2M20 472 survey survey


Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
3.17 Appendix I Relevant Documentation
Network Rail Documentation
A range of different existing Network Rail documents have been used to compile this document. These
include the following:
Managed Station Design Guidance (Draft Issue 3), Network Rail, March 2007
41

Guide to Platform Extensions (Draft Issue 1.1), Network Rail, April 2009
Developing Modern Facilities at Stations, Railtrack, November 1998
Rail Safety Principals and Guidelines, Health and Safety Executive, J uly 1997
Guidance on Automatic Ticket Gates at Stations GI/GN7515, Railway Safety and Standards Board,
February 2003
42

Interface between Station Platforms, Track and Trains GI/RT7016, Railway Safety and Standards
Board, December 2007
Rail Industry Standard for Station Infrastructure RIS7700-INS, Railway Safety and Standards Board,
December 2007
Managed Stations Manual, Network Rail, August 2008
National Control Instructions and Approved Code of Practice Section 4.7 Station Overcrowding and
Special Events, Network Rail, J une 2008
National Control Instructions and Approved Code of Practice Section 4.6 Train Evacuation, Network
Rail, J une 2008
Company Fire Safety Handbook, Network Rail, September 2010
Fire safety risk assessment transport premises and facilities, Department for Communities and Local
Government, February 2007
Fire Safety Fire Risk Assessment, Network Rail, September 2010
Fire Safety Managed Stations, Network Rail, September 2010
Non-Network Rail Documentation
A number of existing documents from other sources have also been used to compile this document.
These include the following:
Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice, Department for Transport
and Transport Scotland, J uly 2008
Station Planning Standards and Guidelines, London Underground, 2008

41
This document does not exist anymore but its contents will form part of the following three documents: Guide to
Station Planning and Design, Spring 2011; Design and Construction Handbook, Spring 2011; Station Design
Guidance, Summer 2011
42
Mandatory requirements from GI/RT7015 and guidance GI/GN7515 will be replaced by a voluntary standard on
automatic ticket gates RIS-7701-INS to be issued in March 2011

Station Capacity Assessment Guidance
Station Planning Standard 1-371, London Underground, December 2008
Premises Stairways and Ramps Standard 1-133, London Underground, 2009
Architectural Design Criteria for Road and Rail Transit Systems, Land Transport Authority, Singapore,
J uly 2009


Network Rail
Kings Place
90 York Way
London N1 9AG

Tel: 020 3356 9595

You might also like