New footbridge at Amersham

[astock5000]

londonreconnections.blogspot.com/2009/05/better-access-at-amersham.html

As part of its obligation to improve disabled access to its facilities, Transport for London has submitted a planning application to build a new foot bridge incorporating two lifts over the line at Amersham station.

[knap]

The images seem a bit overpowering for the station

An area of the forecourt of the station has been fenced off, are they going to be starting work soon, or is this for something else?

[Deleted]

I would agree, that it does seem to overshadow the station a bit.

[Ben]

The red brick seems a nice choice, not sure if its a fair match to existing brickwork though. The structures dont seem to be in keeping with the feel of the station however.

[Deleted]

A comment on the blog about the platform being made extremely narrow warrants some consideration I think. Hopefully they will sort that, don't want another Shepherd's Bush.

[Deleted]

Unlike Shepherds Bush, the reduced platform length is only around 3m long.

I'm sure the educated Amersham user will understand not to stand in the reduced width area - but then again

[Chris M]

Assuming common sense and trusting people to be sensible in this sort of situation are not hallmarks of the current HSE ethos.

[amershamsi]

The new bridge is to the west of where people normally stand (most people go out the station building and turn left rather than right) - I doubt people would bother going beyond it via the narrow bit of platform. While an increase in capacity between platforms is a good thing, the lack of a second exit, since the connection between the internal and external footbridges was shut isn't good. OK, there's the gate that lets you bypass the station building, but you'd still hit the jam to get out.

At a lot more cost, a new entrance on Station Road linking to a subway with lifts to the ends of the platforms, and steps to a bit further along would be the ideal. Also rather more hidden, less ugly, and also using the lay of the land better. But then again, there's nowhere near that kind of money available.

[metman]

Just seen the bridge- vile!

Could have kept it a little more in keeping with the station!

[knap]

You can see the planning application, which is ref CH/2009/0509/UA

by selecting Weekly List of applications validated between 26/4/2009 and 2/5/2009.

at

isa.chiltern.gov.uk/planningenquiry/publicaccess/

[Deleted]

Hope it doesn't take as long as the Pinner lifts.This together with the station refurb. took forever.I heard a rumour that at the point when the lifts were ready to be fitted in to the shafts they didn't fit and it was back to square one or two.
Anybody out there with the full story.
Having said that the station does look nice now and well maintained,and the lifts are a boon not only for older passengers but also those with hevy luggage and push chairs etc,

[slugabed]

May 15, 2009 17:39:20 GMT @landau1945 said:

the lifts are a boon not only for older passengers but also those with hevy luggage and push chairs etc,

Just playing Devil's Advocate here,but yes,these lifts are a boon to many passengers,but they seem to be a very expensive hammer to crack quite a simple nut.
Just how dangerous were the wooden barrow-crossings of fond memory?
They were still there in the 80s when,for year after year,no passengers were killed in any accident,yet passengers were allowed to use them under staff supervision,even on electrified lines.
I know that LT always had a bugaboo about Level Crossings of any sort,having just the one up on the Ongar line,but even NR is putting in lifts where there used to be barrow-crossings.
Any thoughts?

[stanmorek]

LUL and NR are expected to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.

Pinner has Otis machine room less lifts installed except they require machine rooms because they are smaller than standard size.

[knap]

Just wondered, if there is room, why can't ramps up to and down from the bridge be used instead of lifts? This may be cheaper than lifts and need less maintenance

[amershamsi]

there is room for ramps, more so if it was an underpass (as don't have to have as much vertical separation)

[max]

Another advantage of ramps is that they never break down.

[edwin]

Maybe ramps aren't used because it could cause wheelchairs to go down too fast, not really a good idea when near a platform with trains travelling up to 40mph... Also, it is probably rather tiring having to go all the way up or down a ramp by yourself in a wheelchair.

[stanmorek]

In general an area that LU assesses any step-free scheme is 'inclusion'. For instance a person may feel they are being discriminated against if they have to use a different route some distance away from other passengers to access a lift or ramp.

[Ben]

That sounds like a dangerous train of thought. Skip a step and suddenly staires become un-PC.

[amershamsi]

May 20, 2009 22:08:58 GMT @stanmorek said:

In general an area that LU assesses any step-free scheme is 'inclusion'. For instance a person may feel they are being discriminated against if they have to use a different route some distance away from other passengers to access a lift or ramp.

Does this mean that they'd remove the other bridge? a bit stupid to spend money doing that...

[Deleted]

May 20, 2009 21:48:55 GMT edwin said:

Maybe ramps aren't used because it could cause wheelchairs to go down too fast, not really a good idea when near a platform with trains travelling up to 40mph... Also, it is probably rather tiring having to go all the way up or down a ramp by yourself in a wheelchair.

Having had a mother who had to use a wheelchair, I'd say that this post is correct on both counts!

[astock5000]

May 21, 2009 9:47:38 GMT @amershamsi said:

Does this mean that they'd remove the other bridge? a bit stupid to spend money doing that...

If the old footbridge is removed, wouldn't they also have to do some work on the other bridge (the one that isn't part of the station any more), as it is joined to it? And, if the old bridge isn't removed then Amersham will have three footbridges!

[amershamsi]

they would, as there'd be a gap where the old exit joins the 'outside bridge'. Three footbridges with a bridge over a road at the end of the platforms too. Quite impressive.

I wonder whether the new bridge will be higher than the old bridge - the 'outside bridge' is about 3 feet higher than the 'inside bridge', and I have never worked out why that would need to be the case.

I still think that shallowish ramps leading down to an underpass would be far better than that eyesore of a bridge. Given that you could easily get a shallow ramp, going with less of a gradient than the hill side outside the station (the station is built on an embankment - there's quite a drop from the station building down to Station Road - over 14 feet, and quite a bit of that is flat, then I find it hard to see why not - after all, other stations are as bad - long distances to lifts and so on. Chalfont is meant to be step free but I can't see how that would work without either goung round via the steep slopes outside, or going down the fairly steep underpass (IIRC there's 2 or 3 steps that way, but it's been years since I've used the underpass there). With an underpass you won't be playing platform waiter skittles if going fast, and the amount of ramp needed is a less than a bridge.

[Deleted]

May 20, 2009 22:08:58 GMT @stanmorek said:

In general an area that LU assesses any step-free scheme is 'inclusion'. For instance a person may feel they are being discriminated against if they have to use a different route some distance away from other passengers to access a lift or ramp.

Please tell me this is a joke? Surely something is better than nothing?

[abe]

I expect that the old bridge will remain. It causes significant congestion in the evenings when a rush-hour train arrives, and having an extra bridge at the north end of the station will reduce this and improve passenger flows.