Rich Picking and others raised the issue of whether the introduction of Oyster cards at Sydenham station would result in the gate on the "up" platform (from Spring Hill) being closed.
I have since written to Yvonne Leslie, Stakeholder Manager at Southern to check the situation. Here is her reply:
“We are working with Transport for London on installing ticket gates at stations along the East London Line including New Cross Gate, Brockley, Honor Oak Park, Forest Hill and Sydenham. At Sydenham, the plan is to put the gates in the booking hall adjacent to platform two and there will be an increase in staff at the station to manage these. It is not possible to provide gates at the access on platform one, so it will be closed in the main though it will remain an option for passengers who require step-free access to or from that platform and will be opened by station staff as necessary.”
In other words, the gate is going to be effectively closed.
I believe that this will be totally unacceptable to passengers using Sydenham Station. What do you think?
(And please accept my apologies for earlier giving you the ideas that the gate would remain open. I was clearly told this by Southern some months ago).
Oyster Cards mean reduced access to station
To say it's not possible to provide gates on the up platform is rubbish. The only reason they are not putting them there is the money it would cost.
I know someone, probably the Sydenham Society campaigned for a long time, to get the access gate open for the up platform and this is just another blow for people who have a genuine need for easy access to the up platform.
It's all very well saying the gate can be opened on request, but this is just not acceptable, disabled people and those with other difficulties should not have to be made to feel they need special arrangements and if staff are busy or not available they could be made to wait around in the cold and miss their train.
I know someone, probably the Sydenham Society campaigned for a long time, to get the access gate open for the up platform and this is just another blow for people who have a genuine need for easy access to the up platform.
It's all very well saying the gate can be opened on request, but this is just not acceptable, disabled people and those with other difficulties should not have to be made to feel they need special arrangements and if staff are busy or not available they could be made to wait around in the cold and miss their train.
I was on the platform a few weeks ago when the gate was closed. A mother and her pram were at the gates and she had sent her daughter around over the bridge and into the booking office to ask for the gate to be opened. The station person then strolled over the bridge while the train arrived on the platform, got to the gate and took a very long time to open the gate. As he opened the gate and see walked through it the train left, he just smiled, closed the gate and went back to the booking office.
I think its totally unacceptable not to have access on both sides. How ridiculous. Its not just 'disabled' people who'd have difficulty with all those stairs - what about old people!?
And speaking as someone who's always late – I don't fancy running for a train up and down those stairs either – I'm bound to come a cropper!
And speaking as someone who's always late – I don't fancy running for a train up and down those stairs either – I'm bound to come a cropper!
I agree with the posts so far. Speaking from a personal point of view it's very handy for people coming from the Kirkdale end of Sydenham - whether for platform 1 or going over the bridge to platform 2. And re the comment about disabled commuters or parents with buggies/prams - are they supposed to shout across to the ticket office for assistance?? I wouldn't be surprised if Southern spent thousands installing a railways complaint 'help' intercom to the office rather than a barrier on platform one.
If they surveyed the percentage of passengers using the platform 1 gates I'm sure the proportion would be pretty high.
If they surveyed the percentage of passengers using the platform 1 gates I'm sure the proportion would be pretty high.
This almost certainly does break Disability Discrimination law which obliges publicly accessible facilities to do everything reasonably possible to remove barriers to disabled people. It is not enough to provide level access that is substantially below the standard of the main access and the means to make it equivalent are perfectly within TFL's power. Even putting an intercom would probably not be enough as it would still remain a second-class provision. I assume they will contest this quite strongly as this situation is probably replicated in many stations. I don't know why they can't have open access anyway and simply a swipe card point as in many tube stations (such as Finchley etc.). They are also particularly obliged to create equality of access when they are providing new services.
Referring to http://tinyurl.com/2ffofw highlights this as a specific issue. However I am not sure if the person challenging this has to have a disability - a call to their helpline might provide valuable advice.
Referring to http://tinyurl.com/2ffofw highlights this as a specific issue. However I am not sure if the person challenging this has to have a disability - a call to their helpline might provide valuable advice.
Access Gate to Sydenham station up line closing
Well sorry to be a killjoy but hooray I say if the gate closes. Perhaps the people in Peak Hill Gardens will be able to park outside or near to their own homes for a change.
I can understand the frustrations for the disabled and mothers/fathers with pushchairs but it should not be beyond the wit of British Rail to come up with a viable alternative access.
I confess I use the gate to get to the other side as I travel to East Croydon every day but would be quite happy to have the extra 100 yard walk around.
Also we have to 'run the gauntlet' through all the smokers gasping a drag before they venture onto British Rail property. Charming! Can someone please tell me why smokers just throw their cigarette ends onto the ground and tread on them, consequently leaving a disgusting pile of dogends all around the gate entrance. Since that gate has been open it has become a very dirty area where people just throw their rubbish, food debris, etc before getting on a train, or alighting from one. Lots of questionable groups of people just hanging around at the railway end of Peak Hill Gardens at all hours of the night.
Sorry but the Sydenham Society with their big fight to secure this gate open did not consider the residents of the area.....
I can understand the frustrations for the disabled and mothers/fathers with pushchairs but it should not be beyond the wit of British Rail to come up with a viable alternative access.
I confess I use the gate to get to the other side as I travel to East Croydon every day but would be quite happy to have the extra 100 yard walk around.
Also we have to 'run the gauntlet' through all the smokers gasping a drag before they venture onto British Rail property. Charming! Can someone please tell me why smokers just throw their cigarette ends onto the ground and tread on them, consequently leaving a disgusting pile of dogends all around the gate entrance. Since that gate has been open it has become a very dirty area where people just throw their rubbish, food debris, etc before getting on a train, or alighting from one. Lots of questionable groups of people just hanging around at the railway end of Peak Hill Gardens at all hours of the night.
Sorry but the Sydenham Society with their big fight to secure this gate open did not consider the residents of the area.....
I agree that it must be annoying for you gilljp –
but since they're not going to rebuild the whole bridge in order to have logically laid-out platforms (as I have had the nerve to suggest in the past!) surely you can see that it would be unreasonable to put the interests of a few dozen or so residents in the immediate area before the needs of the entire station-using population of Sydenham.
but since they're not going to rebuild the whole bridge in order to have logically laid-out platforms (as I have had the nerve to suggest in the past!) surely you can see that it would be unreasonable to put the interests of a few dozen or so residents in the immediate area before the needs of the entire station-using population of Sydenham.
On a personal level, it would be MOST frustrating if they closed the gate.
However, I'm really not sure how they would introduce an Oyster-controlled set of barriers on Platform 1. The best they could do I would have thought would be to have an Oyster reader without barriers. Which half defeats the object.
Can anyone suggest how barriers could be implemented?
However, I'm really not sure how they would introduce an Oyster-controlled set of barriers on Platform 1. The best they could do I would have thought would be to have an Oyster reader without barriers. Which half defeats the object.
Can anyone suggest how barriers could be implemented?
-
goonerchamp
- Posts: 167
- Joined: 28 Jun 2005 12:18
- Location: Sydenham, Sydenham where the f**k is Sydenham
Maybe they could build a decent shelter and incorporate these new barriers into this new structure - widening the current opening and building out on to the pavement outside the the current gate (not sure how much if any of this land Southern own/ are able to build on) but this would surely be the the only way they can put barriers on this platform short of building something further down the platform where there is waste ground between the platform and the street - this would require a complete rethink of the platform !! - gladly I access the station from the main entrance and as such am not affected at present 
it wouldn't be too hard to erect barriers across the end of the platform just as you turn left after entering the gate. the trains stop a bit further up from this point.
does anyone know what's happening? it's no good pissing and moaning about what might happen, rather than what's going to happen.
about living next to the station...why choose to live near a station if it's going to annoy you?
i agree on the smokers, though. dropping butts on the ground is the acts or ignorant and dirty pricks.
does anyone know what's happening? it's no good pissing and moaning about what might happen, rather than what's going to happen.
about living next to the station...why choose to live near a station if it's going to annoy you?
i agree on the smokers, though. dropping butts on the ground is the acts or ignorant and dirty pricks.
I worked in the railway industry for 4 years, as an architect, specifically dealing with upgrading stations to make them disabled compatible, easier access, providing gates etc. The reason i left was because the amount of beauracracy and health and safety legislation which is pandemic in the industry.
The simple reason why they cannot provide gates at the current location on platform 2 is because there is not enough space. You have to have enough room in front of the gates so that when crowds coming off a train do not endanger themselves by pushing towards the platform edge (as they bunch up to go thro the gates) or impinging people who want to walk across the bridge and out platform 1. The only way would be to push the gates further into the road, which the railway company does not own, and would also mean that the road would be reduced in width to provide safe passage for passengers once through the gates (which would affect the innocent people who live down this road). I suppose you could take down some of the trees but then people would be up in arms about that as well. You cannot just have an open gate, as this defeats the object of gates in the first place. Railway companies have to prove that they are providing as best possible solution for disabled people etc. It does not mean that they have to spend thousands trying to implement something which would not be seen to be economically feasible.
Most rail companies in fact have the procedure where they provide a taxi for disabled people to travel to the nearest station where disabled access is ok. It would even be difficult to provide lifts to the bridge at Sydenham as the only current location would be onto the current bridge and there is not enough space to pass the existing bridge from a lift shaft onto platform 2. If i remember rightly, and this is costs of around 2-3 years ago...but to put lifts in at this station alone, would cost between £100 to £200k. I know it sounds alot, but generally costs of working on a railway are 3 times that of working in a standard building; mainly i may add, its down to health and safety, and the difficulty of working on a railway and keeping it open.
The best situation here would be to provide a new gate further up the platform (as noted in a previous posting), accessing onto the waste ground currently bordering the road, and here they could possibly provide shelter and gates accordingly. Gates also always have to be manned. If they are not, the gates are again just left open, and again whats the point in that.
have to admit i always have to use the platform 1 entrance as i always have to buy a ticket, even though i am on the kirkdale side of the station, so i can understand the inconvience of the closed gate.
Its all pretty simple stuff really. I know it all sounds very protacted but unfortunately we live in a health and safety and litigation society. Trouble is, we all want everything to be perfect in life, and life just is'nt like that!
The simple reason why they cannot provide gates at the current location on platform 2 is because there is not enough space. You have to have enough room in front of the gates so that when crowds coming off a train do not endanger themselves by pushing towards the platform edge (as they bunch up to go thro the gates) or impinging people who want to walk across the bridge and out platform 1. The only way would be to push the gates further into the road, which the railway company does not own, and would also mean that the road would be reduced in width to provide safe passage for passengers once through the gates (which would affect the innocent people who live down this road). I suppose you could take down some of the trees but then people would be up in arms about that as well. You cannot just have an open gate, as this defeats the object of gates in the first place. Railway companies have to prove that they are providing as best possible solution for disabled people etc. It does not mean that they have to spend thousands trying to implement something which would not be seen to be economically feasible.
Most rail companies in fact have the procedure where they provide a taxi for disabled people to travel to the nearest station where disabled access is ok. It would even be difficult to provide lifts to the bridge at Sydenham as the only current location would be onto the current bridge and there is not enough space to pass the existing bridge from a lift shaft onto platform 2. If i remember rightly, and this is costs of around 2-3 years ago...but to put lifts in at this station alone, would cost between £100 to £200k. I know it sounds alot, but generally costs of working on a railway are 3 times that of working in a standard building; mainly i may add, its down to health and safety, and the difficulty of working on a railway and keeping it open.
The best situation here would be to provide a new gate further up the platform (as noted in a previous posting), accessing onto the waste ground currently bordering the road, and here they could possibly provide shelter and gates accordingly. Gates also always have to be manned. If they are not, the gates are again just left open, and again whats the point in that.
have to admit i always have to use the platform 1 entrance as i always have to buy a ticket, even though i am on the kirkdale side of the station, so i can understand the inconvience of the closed gate.
Its all pretty simple stuff really. I know it all sounds very protacted but unfortunately we live in a health and safety and litigation society. Trouble is, we all want everything to be perfect in life, and life just is'nt like that!
Sydeman - I take the points you are making. But as you say it wouldn't be immensely difficult or expensive to move the entrance a little further up the platform. Yes, life isn't always perfect but we really aren't talking rocket science here. If Tesco wanted a new door on one of their supermarkets they'd have it done in an instant.
Yes cost is a factor. But we are talking here about a private rail company who are too mean to provide reasonable services for their customers in case it affects their profits. They've had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Oystyer scheme by TFL and want to implement it at the lowest possible cost.
We can change this decision. I was involved with the recent campaign to ensure that our services both to London Bridge and along the Loop Line were preserved. When we started, people told us it was too expensive or too difficult to operate all these extra trains - but despite this we got these decisions reversed.
What we need to do is start a campaign. This will involve leafletting the station, visiting our MPs, GLA member, councillors etc and involving other organisations like Travelwatch. It isn't onerous but it does involve people doing something.
We could organise a short meeting in a local pub so we can discuss this issue and what we can do about it.
What do people think?
Yes cost is a factor. But we are talking here about a private rail company who are too mean to provide reasonable services for their customers in case it affects their profits. They've had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Oystyer scheme by TFL and want to implement it at the lowest possible cost.
We can change this decision. I was involved with the recent campaign to ensure that our services both to London Bridge and along the Loop Line were preserved. When we started, people told us it was too expensive or too difficult to operate all these extra trains - but despite this we got these decisions reversed.
What we need to do is start a campaign. This will involve leafletting the station, visiting our MPs, GLA member, councillors etc and involving other organisations like Travelwatch. It isn't onerous but it does involve people doing something.
We could organise a short meeting in a local pub so we can discuss this issue and what we can do about it.
What do people think?
This is such an important issue to commuters I plan to run a frontpage story on Monday featuring a lot of good comment from the Forum.
I also have the planned STF meet at the Woodman on Thursday. Why don't we devote a half hour of this to the issue?
Let me know if you can lead on this and I will incorporate it into the report.
Admin
I also have the planned STF meet at the Woodman on Thursday. Why don't we devote a half hour of this to the issue?
Let me know if you can lead on this and I will incorporate it into the report.
Admin
Thanks Nasaroc. I like the comment about it not being rocket science! i used to say that to myself literary everyday, only to be fraughted at every step of the way by the nonsensical and unrealistic world which occupies the railway industry! Common sense is not a phrase which exists in railway language. A campaign though would be a good start. It would be more economical and easier for them to put in a proper gate and enclosure off platform 1 somehow, than to put in lifts