Fears of fatal crush at Bath Spa Station 'unfounded'
Supporters of the scheme to open up vaults at Bath Spa station derided protestors' claims that demolishing an access ramp could cause potentially fatal crushes.
Bath's MP, Don Foster, led the criticism, saying fears of protest group More Train Less Strain (MTLS) were unfounded.
MTLS told the Western Daily Press on Tuesday that passengers could be at risk of getting crushed if the ramp accessing the London-bound platform was removed.
But Mr Foster said experts approved all aspects of the scheme.
"There's a balance to be struck between opening up the long-hidden vaults and bringing back a great Brunel asset to the city and losing the ramp.
"This will create a really vibrant public space and also ensure a link between the railway station and bus station.
"I've received assurances from First and Network Rail that all the appropriate safety and emergency measures will be in place, so I think these fears are really unfounded."
David Redgewell, from the Campaign for Better Transport, backed up Mr Foster's comments.
"These protests from MTLS come far too late to change anything. The contractors are on site and have started work on the revamp of Bath Spa Station," he said.
"If this group had genuine concerns they have had plenty of opportunity to make those known. This application reached the planning stage five years ago."
MTLS is concerned over the size of the lift that would replace the ramp, claiming it would only hold four passengers.
But Mr Redgewell rejected this.
"Plans clearly show it will be a 16-person lift as at Bristol Temple Meads and Exeter St Davids, which have no problems with passenger safety and similar means of exiting and entering the platforms.
"It's too late to campaign on this and of the plans are compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act," he said of the Bath Spa scheme.
10 Comments
by Bob, Bath
Sunday, January 18 2009, 6:50PM
“Kirsten,
you have made a very good point, lifts should be used when ramps are unsuitable. The london bound ramp is unsuitable, its over 100 yards long, its shared with traffic, its exposed to the elements. I could go on....
The route for wheel chair bound people or people with other needs is clearly discriminatory”
by Kirsten Elliott, Bath
Monday, January 12 2009, 1:01PM
“Oh yes, I forgot to add the DDA suggests that ramps are always to be preferred to lifts - which should only be fitted where ramps are unsuitable. SInce a ramp exists, removing it and replacing it with a lift appears to be a clear breach of the act.”
by Kirsten Elliott, Bath
Monday, January 12 2009, 12:11PM
“No, I'm not daft - I've been talking to disabled people and asking their opinions - unlike Multi. When the new car park is built, retaining the ramp could make the station a much better experience than it is now for the disabled, parents with children in pushchairs and cyclists. The extra lift to which some of you refer is only available when the commercial unit is open. All lifts to be used as fire escapes must be in special shafts - neither of these appear to be. In that case, the lifts will have to be turned off.
I wonder how many of you have been in touch with interested authorities as I have - they have their reservations about these plans. I've looked hard at the station - at present the disabled parking spaces are conveniently at the top of the ramp - when the ramp has gone, the disabled will have to walk/wheel from the back of the station - unless they've been lucky enough to grab the one space at the front. I could go on. But ... the battle is far from over!”
by Sam, Bath
Sunday, January 11 2009, 9:44PM
“Kirsten, are you an idiot? Do you really think it's safe for disabled people to go up and down an old ramp, that is hazardous at the best of times.. If you think you taking legal advice over this will do anything, then good luck wasting your money..”
by Derek, Corsham
Saturday, January 10 2009, 5:39PM
“I have to agree with Bobs comments. At present people who are travelling to London who are not able to use the stairs have to buy their tickets then walk up the ramp in the wind , rain most recently ICE......whilst also avoiding the traffic...this is perilous....
As Bob noted there is a secondary lift and there is also another stairs!!!!”
by Bob, Bath
Friday, January 09 2009, 5:41PM
“I think the point that has passed people by is that the station currently has NO lifts...
It can not be acceptable under DDA or other legslation to require wheel chair bound people to take their chances on the ramp which is shared by cars and taxis. The current situation is far from DDA compliant and presents a real danger.
I have looked at the new plans for the station as well. The scheme clearly shows that there will be new lifts installed on both the north side of the station and the southside, there will also be a secondary lift on the north side in the event of a malfunction or maintenance requirements I assume......
The proposed scheme would be a vast improvement, is this a case of the people of Bath not wanting change or improvement yet again!!!!”
by Malcolm Cupis, Bridgeyate
Thursday, January 08 2009, 8:14AM
“"Vibrant public space" = place where youths will congregate, intimidate passers-by, graffiti, get drunk, fight and mug late night commuters.”
by Kirsten Elliott, Bath
Wednesday, January 07 2009, 8:16PM
“Of course, in my first post, that should say - without the ramp rather than without the lift - although if the ramp is removed, in the event of a fire, you probably won't have a lift either because, as I have pointed out to Multi, lifts stop if there's a fire.”
by Kirsten Elliott, Bath
Wednesday, January 07 2009, 8:06PM
“... oh yes - and they have yet to persuade the fire brigade that this is acceptable. This scheme has been drawn up with virtually no input from the fire brigade - I know - I asked the fire brigade.”
by Kirsten Elliott, Bath
Wednesday, January 07 2009, 8:02PM
“My information is that First and Network Rail do not yet have the relevant permission from the Department for Transport for the lift on the Up platform - and it is very good information which I have received today. They have yet to convince the authorities there that these plans are acceptable - and the authorities may well take some convincing. They are in possession of photographs that I sent them which clearly show that without the lift, the station could be extremely unsafe. I have also pointed out that the loss of the ramp will make the station very much less friendly towards the disabled. Whatever Mr Redgewell may think, that is almost certainly an offence under the Disability Discrimination Act, and I will be taking legal advice over this if the plan is not dropped.”