Horton in Ribblesdale station to get footbridge, with lifts.

[ainsworth74]

Ahh I see. I think I'd missed the freight issue and had no idea about the walkers either!

 

[BrianW]

The problem is that a new freight service will be introduced which requires the train, to access the siding, to be plonked across it for a considerable period of time before reversing in.

So to allow a train to park is worth a new footbridge with lifts- that just sounds an amazing cost. And I'm trying to imagine the fellwalkers and runners waiting for the lift ...

 

[alistairlees]

Here's a shot of the barrow crossing (courtesy of Google Maps).

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

As you can see, the land behind the platform is neither that high nor that steep, and it wouldn't really be much problem to fit in a ramp behind this leading to an underpass somewhere near the barrow crossing (possibly a little further away to allow for the correct gradient). Steps going up to the Pennine Way, from the underpass, would be fine.

Ongoing costs would be very little compared with lifts.

This proposal is how we make the railways less accessible, not more accessible - by incrementally pricing them out of contention with other forms of transport.

It's gradual and insidious.

 

[YorksLad12]

So to allow a train to park is worth a new footbridge with lifts- that just sounds an amazing cost. And I'm trying to imagine the fellwalkers and runners waiting for the lift ...

This link *might* work: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.1493245,-2.3020042,3a,75y,177.29h,86.8t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMQqy3S7g_yQvGvGo1OL9cECfhE-3uyyqRZhJR_!2e10!3e11!6shttps://lh5.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipMQqy3S7g_yQvGvGo1OL9cECfhE-3uyyqRZhJR_=w203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya52.39511-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352

If it does, then the footpath is the fence line on the right, running down to platform level. They wouldn't need to run down to platform level and then back up if there's direct access.

If the link doesn't work, zoom in on Google Maps and use Pegman to choose user-generated content on the southbound platform.

Edit: Snap, @alistairlees !

 

[Neptune]

I work the line and can assure you that a bridge is required for safety. When dropping hoards of walkers off on a summer weekend on the down platform you are on the inside of the curve blind to southbound traffic due to the train they’ve just got off. Despite advising them not to cross until our train is out of sight and not to cross in large groups the walkers always know better and I’ve seen a few near misses with freight trains over the last 20 years.

Lift shafts needn’t be ugly. At Hebden Bridge they have clad them in wood and they blend in nicely. I’m sure that modern materials can be made sympathetic to the station design. If done right the lift shafts could be clad from local stone and there’s absolutely no reason why the actual stairs and bridge cannot be of the Midland Gothic design using modern methods.

The trouble is NR will probably go for a bland modern design.

A subway is a crazy idea and would no doubt cost far more due to excavation and land stabilisation costs before we even consider the actual cost of fitting it out and keeping it waterproofed (my son is a chartered civil and structural engineer so I asked him).

 

[Bletchleyite]

So to allow a train to park is worth a new footbridge with lifts- that just sounds an amazing cost. And I'm trying to imagine the fellwalkers and runners waiting for the lift ...

Erm, it's going to have stairs as well.

 

[30907]

This proposal is how we make the railways less accessible, not more accessible - by incrementally pricing them out of contention with other forms of transport.

Just a reminder that the proposal to add lifts comes from the local authority - and the cost will presumably be partly borne by the freight facility.

That said, for wheelchair (etc) access to the platforms how about lockable gates, CCTV monitored and released from Blea Moor box?

 

[alistairlees]

Drainage of an underpass in this location should not be any substantial issue as the exit on the other side of the station is somewhat lower than track level, and the road goes down to the river. If the underpass were the low point it might be more of an issue.

Lifts need replacing around every 20 years, and servicing every six months. Over (say) a 100-year lifespan that’s an additional 10 lifts, plus 200 services. That’s probably north of £1m extra. And for an underpass? No mechanical maintenance.

 

[Class 170101]

Surely as much as it pains me to say it a Barnetby style footbridge (monstrousertery) would be better with ramps for wheelchair users and a shorter stepped route for everyone else.

 

[Tio Terry]

I don't know the location so cannot comment on that.
Just because a footpath isn't currently wheelchair accessible does not mean you should not make provision for it to be so.
The Equalities Act is quite clear, any changes to access infrastructure must be PRM compliant.
Networkrails standard designs are approved by all those bodies involved in providing PRM facilities so will, no doubt, be utilised without the need for any kind of redesign because of cost.
Because the rail service is currently limited that is no reason not to provide fully compliant facilities. Services may increase in the future and we are supposed to be future proofing our current works.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't know the location so cannot comment on that.
Just because a footpath isn't currently wheelchair accessible does not mean you should not make provision for it to be so.

I would suggest you need to know the location before making a pronouncement of that kind. It is not feasible for the footpath to be wheelchair accessible. You'd just be making provision for a wheelchair user to get into an adjacent field for no purpose.

 

[Tio Terry]

I would suggest you need to know the location before making a pronouncement of that kind. It is not feasible for the footpath to be wheelchair accessible. You'd just be making provision for a wheelchair user to get into an adjacent field for no purpose.

I'm afraid the Law requires that any current or future works are fully PRM compliant. There are quite a number of hitherto inaccessible by wheelchair walks that are now accessed by the current range of multi terrain wheelchairs. Many of those servicemen and women injured in Afghanistan have led the way in showing just what can be done whilst using a wheelchair designed for such conditions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm afraid the Law requires that any current or future works are fully PRM compliant.

No, it doesn't, not least those works that are not providing for passengers.

There are quite a number of hitherto inaccessible by wheelchair walks that are now accessed by the current range of multi terrain wheelchairs. Many of those servicemen and women injured in Afghanistan have led the way in showing just what can be done whilst using a wheelchair designed for such conditions.

Have you ever actually walked up the footpath in question? If not please do so before making judgement.

 

[DB]

Have you ever actually walked up the footpath in question? If not please do so before making judgement.

I have to agree - it's really not a route which can ever be made suitable for wheelchairs!

 

[DB]

Lift shafts needn’t be ugly. At Hebden Bridge they have clad them in wood and they blend in nicely. I’m sure that modern materials can be made sympathetic to the station design. If done right the lift shafts could be clad from local stone and there’s absolutely no reason why the actual stairs and bridge cannot be of the Midland Gothic design using modern methods.

Hebden Bridge station has a subway rather than a bridge though, so the lift towers are lower down and less conspicuous.

To see NR's recent efforts just look at Kirkstall Forge - no amount of cladding is going to make something like that anything other than hideous!

Surely as much as it pains me to say it a Barnetby style footbridge (monstrousertery) would be better with ramps for wheelchair users and a shorter stepped route for everyone else.

It's only a small station - there wouldn't be space for a bridge like that, even if it was considered acceptable (which it wouldn't be).

 

[Tio Terry]

No, it doesn't, not least those works that are not providing for passengers.



Have you ever actually walked up the footpath in question? If not please do so before making judgement.

No. I've not walked the footpath in question. Closest I've got is Google Maps.

There appears to be plenty of room for a ramped footbridge to the south of the station platforms, which would alleviate the need for lifts.

Have you looked at All Terrain wheelchairs? Suggest you look at Terrainhopper and Action Trackchair to give you an idea of what kind of thing is used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have you looked at All Terrain wheelchairs? Suggest you look at Terrainhopper and Action Trackchair to give you an idea of what kind of thing is used.

They still won't get up there! A wheelchair capable of getting any sensible distance up that path would also be capable of climbing a flight of stairs.

 

[YorksLad12]

Yorkshire Three Peaks Challenge

The Yorkshire Three Peaks Challenge is 24-miles (38.6km) round trip route, and includes 1585m (5200ft) of ascent. Ingleborough, Whernside, Pen-y-ghent. 24-miles continuous, total ascent of 1585 metres.

www.threepeakschallenge.uk

Earlier this millennium I tried the Three Peaks. "Footpath" is a variable term, and it's not always a path as such; somewhere between Pen-y-ghent and Ribblehead I sank up to my ankles in a field with no-one to help me out (I had to put both hands under my thigh and pull, then swing my leg around, then do the other one, until I found firm ground. If you were wondering). If you use Google Maps to plot a walking route between Horton and Ribblehead via Ingleborough you'll get an idea of the elevation changes in the area.

It just happens that there's a fairly sensible - if steep - stretch down that slope and across the railway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

"Public footpath" just means "public right of way on foot only" - there's often no actual marked path nor does the ground have to be easily passable.

 

[Tio Terry]

They still won't get up there! A wheelchair capable of getting any sensible distance up that path would also be capable of climbing a flight of stairs.

Yorkshire Three Peaks challenge for Mountain Trike wheelchair rider

Custom built manual, electric assist and fully electric Mountain Trike products with rugged good looks, lightweight aluminium frames, high-end mountain bike technology and all fully tested for your ultimate comfort and safety.

www.mountaintrike.com

David completes three-peaks challenge in all terrain wheelchair

Custom built manual, electric assist and fully electric Mountain Trike products with rugged good looks, lightweight aluminium frames, high-end mountain bike technology and all fully tested for your ultimate comfort and safety.

www.mountaintrike.com

It can be done!

 

[Bletchleyite]

If his chair was able to do that (knowing how scrambly some of the bits of route are) it could probably also climb a flight of stairs on a footbridge!

That's impressive, though.

 

[DarloRich]

I don't know the site myself, but looking at pictures there is a steep bank behind the "far" platform, as might be expected for a station where the railway follows a contour on a slope. This would need digging back several metres to make a big enough hole for the stairs and lifts, probably requiring a prolonged closure to bring in that sort of excavation plant. If not washed away by the rain in the meantime, it would then need a major retaining wall, all of which would have to be built in situ even if the subway itself could be pre-fabricated and jacked in. I can't find an overall view of the forecourt, but it seems to be a sloping approach road up to the level of the platform, and if that's correct then much of it would need to be dug out to make the space to launch said subway under the tracks. The railway needs to be on a fairly high embankment for a jacked structure to work.

The station approach is quite a way below the track at the point it turns right and continues to ascend towards the station building.

Yes, there would need to be work to excavate behind the platform, but you wouldn't need access across the tracks all of the time. Plant and materials could be moved in and out at the end of the day.

The issue not considered is the angle and length of approach ramps required to design a subway that meets current DDA regulations.

At the risk of being branded a heretic I've idly wondered if at a station like this whether a barrow crossing wouldn't make more sense...

BURN HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can anyone think of a modern station bridge with lifts which isn't a monstrosity? I won't expect a monstrosity will be acceptable here, so it will be interesting to see how they manage it.

Nope. Specifically the extra height for the lift towers tends to make them ugly (can't they use piston lifts and bury the mechanism underground?)

Imagine not providing access for all because it looked awful................

( also, you know, tax players money and all that)

So to allow a train to park is worth a new footbridge with lifts- that just sounds an amazing cost. And I'm trying to imagine the fellwalkers and runners waiting for the lift ...

No - allowing people of all abilities to use the station and the trains serving it is the key.

Also I imagine the fell runners might, you know, run up the stairs..........................

 

[DB]

No - allowing people of all abilities to use the station and the trains serving it is the key.

You have rather missed the point, which is that the barrow crossing could remain for disabled users (of which there won't be many, as the station doesn't get a lot of passengers - and it could have remotely-locked gates with an intercom and CCTV to the signal box to avoid it being used when it wasn't needed). The purpose of the bridge would be for pedestrians to get across when there was shunting going on (at which point the other platform would be blocked, so nobody would need to get to it to catch a train). Given that the path beyond the station goes up a big hill with a rough path, no-one who isn't capable of using a footbridge with steps would be able to go up there either.

Obviously, where there's a genuine need for people with disabilities to be able to get over a bridge then this should be made possible, but tokenistic gestures don't seem to have much purpose.

 

[Tio Terry]

You have rather missed the point, which is that the barrow crossing could remain for disabled users (of which there won't be many, as the station doesn't get a lot of passengers - and it could have remotely-locked gates with an intercom and CCTV to the signal box to avoid it being used when it wasn't needed). The purpose of the bridge would be for pedestrians to get across when there was shunting going on (at which point the other platform would be blocked, so nobody would need to get to it to catch a train). Given that the path beyond the station goes up a big hill with a rough path, no-one who isn't capable of using a footbridge with steps would be able to go up there either.

Obviously, where there's a genuine need for people with disabilities to be able to get over a bridge then this should be made possible, but tokenistic gestures don't seem to have much purpose.

But doesn't that totally miss the point of the Equalities Act? The idea is that the standard access arrangements should be equally useable to both able bodied and PRM's. Making "Special Arrangements" for PRM's is not being equal!

 

[edwin_m]

But doesn't that totally miss the point of the Equalities Act? The idea is that the standard access arrangements should be equally useable to both able bodied and PRM's. Making "Special Arrangements" for PRM's is not being equal!

There's also a reasonableness clause in there somewhere I believe.

 

[DB]

But doesn't that totally miss the point of the Equalities Act? The idea is that the standard access arrangements should be equally useable to both able bodied and PRM's. Making "Special Arrangements" for PRM's is not being equal!

What would you be denying them access to? They'd be able to get across to the other platform via the barrow crossing when needing to catch a train, and if not catching a train wouldn't need to get over there as the path the other side would be inaccessible to them anyway.

Special arrangements exist in many areas - and pressing a button on an intercom and asking for the barrow crossing to be unlocked hardly comes into that category anyway.

 

[Tio Terry]

What would you be denying them access to? They'd be able to get across to the other platform via the barrow crossing when needing to catch a train, and if not catching a train wouldn't need to get over there as the path the other side would be inaccessible to them anyway.

Special arrangements exist in many areas - and pressing a button on an intercom and asking for the barrow crossing to be unlocked hardly comes into that category anyway.

If you read the earlier comments today you will see that PRM's with their wheelchairs have completed the Three Peaks, so they can go beyond the platform.

Whilst Special Arrangements may well exist in many places, any new works is required to comply with the Equalities Act and that means equal usage and equal access, so using an intercom DOES come into that category. There's also the the inequality of a PRM being delayed because the barrow crossing is unsafe to use whilst an able bodied person is not delayed because they can use the bridge, again, that's not equal treatment.

 

[Spartacus]

Yorkshire Three Peaks challenge for Mountain Trike wheelchair rider

Custom built manual, electric assist and fully electric Mountain Trike products with rugged good looks, lightweight aluminium frames, high-end mountain bike technology and all fully tested for your ultimate comfort and safety.

www.mountaintrike.com

David completes three-peaks challenge in all terrain wheelchair

Custom built manual, electric assist and fully electric Mountain Trike products with rugged good looks, lightweight aluminium frames, high-end mountain bike technology and all fully tested for your ultimate comfort and safety.

www.mountaintrike.com

It can be done!

Really though, it can't. Look at the details, there's a heck of a lot of manhandling by other people involved, including towing, as well as a good deal of David getting out of the wheelchair and the two being carried seperately. This video illustrated just some of it.

It's a totally mute point anyway in relation to the access arrangements between the platforms. The arrangements need to be wheelchair accessible, as they should be. I've said before that if it's designed right the footpath should be able to meet a bridge and ramp part way up as there's a good number of steps down to railway level from the Ingleborough direction which could be eliminated/incorporated into the bridge.

If you want to improve the path then the access road to the station would then, somehow, have to be rebuilt as that's a long way from being compliant with current legislation, it's far too steep.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you read the earlier comments today you will see that PRM's with their wheelchairs have completed the Three Peaks, so they can go beyond the platform.

In a very specialist wheelchair and with assistance - which could also get him up a flight of stairs.

Whilst Special Arrangements may well exist in many places, any new works is required to comply with the Equalities Act and that means equal usage and equal access, so using an intercom DOES come into that category. There's also the the inequality of a PRM being delayed because the barrow crossing is unsafe to use whilst an able bodied person is not delayed because they can use the bridge, again, that's not equal treatment.

If the PRM would miss their train, yes, but they wouldn't. Access to the platform is not necessary other than to board a train.

In any case, the PRM is more likely to be disadvantaged due to the lift being broken!

It's a totally mute point anyway in relation to the access arrangements between the platforms. The arrangements need to be wheelchair accessible, as they should be.

They already are via the barrow crossing. The service train cannot arrive if the line is blocked by the freight, so this issue is all about hikers.

 

[Neptune]

As I mentioned up thread. The barrow crossing is at the south end of the station and a northbound train in the station blocks the view of any southbound freight hammering through. I’ve mentioned that I’ve seen near misses due to people assuming it’s a rural line so there’ll be no other trains about.

A footbridge would make this a safer station with access for all. It just needs designing sympathetically to suit the environment which I sadly suspect won’t happen.

Too many people on here seem to think that a rural station doesn’t deserve decent facilities for everyone. A barrow crossing on a 60mph blind bend at a station where large groups do alight and cross the line together is not as safe as a footbridge.