Provide step free access at St. Erth Station (footbridge with lifts) Stakeholder workshop - 16 October 2018 31-Oct-18 / 1
Agenda Start time Topic Leading 11:00-11:10 Welcome and introductions Facilitator 11:10-11:35 Setting the scene Sponsor & Client & Contractor 11:35-12:05 GRIP 3 options Contractor & DPE 12:05-12:35 Lunch 12:35-13:50 Discussion about options and finishes Facilitator 13:50-14:05 Short break 14:05-14:50 Decide option to take forward and finishes to be explored for Facilitator next workshop 14:50-15:00 Next steps Sponsor & Client 31-Oct-18 / 2
Housekeeping & Introductions 31-Oct-18 / 3
Setting the scene Alina Wolfe Murray, Commercial Scheme Sponsor, Network Rail Tim Wood, Project Director, Cornwall Council Kenneth Sabel , Heritage Specialist, Atkins 31-Oct-18 / 4
Current situation The station building and the footbridge at St. Erth station are listed. The footbridge doesn’t offer step -free access. Wheelchair users have to travel to Penzance and return to St. Erth in order to change platforms. People with luggage also struggle on the stairs. The size of the footbridge is not adequate for the large numbers of people who use the station during the summer. Crowding occurs at the bottom of the stairs; this poses safety concerns and affects passenger experience. The footbridge also limits the development of the railway. A solution must be found to improve accessibility and passenger experience and to increase capacity. This will support other developments around the station, such as the Multi-Modal Hub. 31-Oct-18 / 5
Context St.Erth Multi Modal Hub - Due to open in March 2019 - To encourage rail use on the main line and branch line - Ramp and steps from south car park will initially provide access to station platform 31-Oct-18 / 6
31-Oct-18 Project purpose ➢ To develop options for a footbridge with lifts and stairs at St. Erth Station aiming to get Listed Building Consent to replace the current Grade II listed footbridge ➢ To select the option to progress to Approval in Principle design and Listed Building Consent (full GRIP 4) ➢ To support the case for the introduction of the footbridge in the DfT-funded Access for All programme for CP6. Announcement of list for AfA funding is expected by April 2019 The development phase for the footbridge project is funded by Cornwall Council. Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 7
Why are we here? To discuss options for the replacement footbridge with lifts at St. Erth Station. ➢ Identify stakeholder views ➢ Discuss general arrangements options for a replacement footbridge with lifts at St. Erth Station ➢ Discuss potential finishes ➢ Decide which general arrangements option/s will be taken forward ➢ Decide which finishes will be explored further to reach a single option design 31-Oct-18 / 8
How are we going to do this? Understand the context ➢ Why is a replacement footbridge with lifts required? ➢ What other options were considered and discarded in the past? ➢ Heritage significance of St. Erth station What is the new approach? Presentation of new general arrangements options for a replacement footbridge with lifts Discussions about options and potential finishes: ➢ pros and cons from stakeholders Discuss and decide the option/s and potential finishes to be taken forward. Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 9
Remit for the footbridge The key elements for the replacement footbridge are: ➢ Single span footbridge, with both steps and lifts ➢ Located where the current footbridge is situated or as close to the existing location as possible (reasons for this will be discussed later) ➢ On the southern side, the preferred option (if viable) would be for the lift to also serve the car park level ➢ Contemporary, airy design, with glass panelling / glazing on the sides of the single span ➢ The designs will minimise visual impact when the footbridge is viewed from the platforms and will have to include a heritage impact assessment. The key stakeholders have stated that any new designs would need to be considerate and mindful of the heritage significance of the station. Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 10
Heritage significance of St. Erth Station History of the station ➢ Built c.1852 in the Third phase of national railway development ➢ Station building and terminus platforms at the east (NE) of the station are original. The station stopped just west of the building’s frontage with a level crossing close to where the bridge is now. ➢ Between 1888 and 1908 the original platform was extended south, the wrought iron framed bridge was built and Treloweth Lane was diverted under a railway underbridge. At this time the approach to the station building changed from the west to the north. The south platform and stone hut were also built at the same time. ➢ Between 1908 and 1936 the two platform canopies nearest the bridge were built in a sympathetic simple style, largely in timber, with some ironwork. ➢ Recently the small stone and timber faced building east (NE) of the station building was added. ➢ The main platforms remain relatively unaltered since the 1930s. ➢ The setting has changed dramatically over time, with views of the bridge from the north now filtered through tree screening and the former marshalling yard to the north removed Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 11
Heritage Significance of St Erth Station Significance and characteristics of the station ➢ Fairly intact surviving example of a modest station, of the Third phase, that developed in the mid-19 th to early 20 th century ➢ Changing station orientation, platforms and buildings were added as needed and tell the story of the phased development of the station and its changing uses/needs over time ➢ Functional single storey rock faced granite and slate roofed buildings, with lightweight simple largely timber canopies and simple framed bridge-in the lightweight elements the structure is visible. ➢ Throughout its development the materials have been the standard materials of their period, used simply, with only a modicum of decoration (granite, Delabole slate, cast iron and timber in 1850s, wrought iron and timber 1888-1908, and iron/steel and timber post 1908). 31-Oct-18 / 12
Heritage Significance of St Erth Station Significance and characteristics of the station (cont …) ➢ Structures are relatively functional and structure is legible and lightweight-except the main station building makes a statement through its arched openings and solid construction. ➢ The fascias of the railway canopies and bridge with vertical boarding and decoration are characteristic of railway canopies and unify the design, thus making the structures legible as railway structures. ➢ The chamfered timber of the platform canopies also provides unifying character. ➢ Ironwork is painted a consistent colour, further unifying the design. ➢ The existing bridge is large compared with the earlier structures, but its lightweight nature and contrasting construction make it subordinate to the rest of the station, which has been designed to harmonise with its mid-19 th century features. 31-Oct-18 / 13
Heritage Principles ➢ New bridge should respond to the character of the station without overawing it and the settings of its historic structures ➢ Design responses should be modern/of its time, rather than pastiche, as using excessive stone and slate can produce a structure that is too bulky/heavy ➢ Maintain visual tree filter screening north of the bridge ➢ Maintain distance from the station buildings ➢ Contrast is acceptable, provided colours/form do not jar and the bridge does not dominate the station. ➢ Structure should be legible (as with the historic station) ➢ There should be commonalities in design (colour/materials) with the station structures (design references). 31-Oct-18 / 14
Previous options – why were they discarded? Subway ➢ Discarded due to high cost, suitability of ramps for disabled people (due to difference in levels, several turns required); sense of security Walkaround ➢ Route out of the station, under the bridge. Gradients not suitable for disabled people; to provide acceptable footpath width, the road under the bridge needed to be narrowed, impacting traffic. Connection to platforms either side of road underbridge from Station Road ➢ This was proposed to access the footway under the road bridge with ramps approx. running parallel to the railway. Gradients too steep. Concerns about lengthy closure of the railway, as construction required structures to support the rail line. Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 15
Previous options – why were they discarded? Footbridge options which didn’t get Footbridge with lifts (2014): reduced the Listed Building Consent mass by replacing the ramps with a lift. Footbridge with ramps (2013): mass and balance would be unacceptable for this location Presentation Title: View > Header & Footer / 16
Recommend
More recommend
