Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 5221
There are some who call me... Tim
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2014, 10:40:51 » |
|
In which case, yes, a ramp or lifts is a requirement. The former is cheaper. Lifts have to be monitored....are staff present all day?
There's no requirement to provide a ramp/lifts when a footbridge is being replaced, only if it is a new facility. I think you're wrong....any new build needs to reflect HSE▸ regulations. If they simply renovated, I agree with you, but new build needs to reflect current regulations. Stapleton Road footbridge was rebuilt to accommodate the wires last year, without ramps or lifts. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2014, 10:47:35 » |
|
totally, from the ground up? On railway property?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Network SouthEast
|
|
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2014, 10:59:27 » |
|
I've never heard of a lift having to be monitored on site apart from ChrisB's posts here. There are many examples of lifts that are active without anyone on site - monitoring can be done remotely. FGW▸ may decide they like to only keep lifts operational when stations are staffed, but that is their prerogative.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2014, 11:02:56 » |
|
Indeed, they can be actively monitored by CCTV▸ - but escape/release of pax if the lift fails has to be achieved quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2014, 11:05:41 » |
|
totally, from the ground up? On railway property?
Tilehurst certainly was. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2014, 11:09:57 » |
|
hmm, I'm only repeating what TOCs▸ and Network Rail have both said to me in the past. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Network SouthEast
|
|
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2014, 11:15:21 » |
|
Indeed, they can be actively monitored by CCTV▸ - but escape/release of pax if the lift fails has to be achieved quickly.
FGW▸ station staff are not trained lift engineers. The response time for failures is the same whether they are there or not. The telemetry of a lift can be monitored off-site, not just CCTV. It happens in numerous apartment blocks, car parks, bridges and even... railway stations elsewhere in the country. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2014, 11:35:28 » |
|
It seems that Grandfather rights can be used to replace a footbridge, but new additional ones definitely need ramps or lifts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2014, 11:39:28 » |
|
Yes, that's right. Similar restrictions apply at Reading where the new platforms 12/13/14/15 need escape stairwells at the ends of them, whereas the existing rebuilt platforms do not.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 5221
There are some who call me... Tim
|
|
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2014, 11:40:27 » |
|
totally, from the ground up? On railway property?
Indeedy. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
|
|
|
|
BerkshireBugsy
|
|
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2014, 11:43:44 » |
|
Yes, that's right. Similar restrictions apply at Reading where the new platforms 12/13/14/15 need escape stairwells at the ends of them, whereas the existing rebuilt platforms do not.
I may be wrong but I thought P4/p5/p6 had escape stairwells - but I don't believe p1/2/3&7 do |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BerkshireBugsy
|
|
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2014, 13:55:39 » |
|
Thanks TC‡ - I note the statement that says "some car parking spaces will be out of use whilst the work is in progress" (or something like that). That will be the "free" ones parallel to the platform then  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2014, 16:19:48 » |
|
I may be wrong but I thought P4/p5/p6 had escape stairwells - but I don't believe p1/2/3&7 do
P6 was a brand new platform so definitely needed an escape route. P4 and P5 effectively changed from 8 car to 12 car, that probably justified an escape route anyway, it was shown in the original planning application, but during the project a decision was taken to rebuild most of the existing platforms anyway. P1-3, 7 and 8/9 are considered to be resurfacing on the existing footprint, but there's very little of P10/11 that's original. Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
