Barriers at Sheffield Station - Application Rejected (Nov 2009)

[Cyclone 10]

How do you determine whether somewhere is a mandatory ticket area?! Is that even a real term, what even is a mandatory ticket area?! With or without barriers, the bridge is not an outright full right of way but a PERMISSIVE right of way - ie you are allowed to pass through it, it isn't a God given right. Just because something is in a public area doesn't automatically mean you have the right to access it come what may.

 

And as someone already pointed out, you claim that in EMT's utopia that you would need a ticket to pass through the bridge but you can't buy a ticket until you have crossed that very same bridge. Well try getting your facts right (either that or stop being modest with the truth) because whether or not you like it the ticket machine at the Supertram end of the bridge it IS there all the same and allows you to buy a ticket if the barriers ever become a reality. And you know it's there.

Shame it doesn't sell a full range of tickets or allow for collection of pre booked tickets.

 

On another note, there really should be a better 24 hour crossing than the current main alternative to the station - one that is bright, clean and accessible for everyone but that's not rocket science and has been covered in depth on the other thread.

 

A mandatory ticket area is one with a sign saying that you must not enter without a valid ticket and may be fined if you are caught in that area without one.

The DLR have them clearly marked with red lines on the floor saying "Do not pass without a valid ticket".

[Plain Talker 11]

With the barriers refused, EMT are now breaking the terms of their franchise, as installation of the barriers is a committment put in by the Government. This could result in them being fined, options on the franchise refused, or even having the franchise removed. EMT have to either install the barriers, or show that they have done everything they can to get the barriers installed, or face the consequences with the Government.

 

On the other hand, the new East Coast operator, run by the Government, has immediately dropped the plans for barriers at York (which were in a similar stalled state to Sheffield) in the aim to improve relations between the operator and the public using the station. Whether the Government will allow EMT to remove this franchise committment remains to be seen.

 

Wrong. Wrong wrong, wrongitty wrong-wrong wrong.

oh, and, erm... Wrong.

 

The barriers are NOT "mandatory".

 

The mandate was that the TOC (Train Operating Company) find the best way of improving security and lessening revenue loss.

 

That, oddly enough doesn't have to involve barriers. The obligation was to investigate the means of doing that, it wasn't to install "gating, full-stop".

 

The fact that the small lobby on the supertram side is nowhere near big enough to safely install gating was brought up at the meeting this afternoon, as was the massive difficulties blind people would have in finding and operating the barriers.

 

Many good, pertinent, and eloquent points were raised by objectors, who included representatives from Friends of Sheaf Valley Park, RASC (Residents Against Station Closure) and The Civic Trust as well as other concerned groups and members of the public, about what a detriment the proposed barriers would be.

 

An excellent case was made for the refusal of the planing permission, and the fact that an unporecedented 1200+ obkections were raised, individually and as groups really speaks of how unwelcome the barriers would be.

[ptigga 10]

They work fine most of the time, I've been through S Pancs once or twice a week since they were installed and there is rarely a queue.

I guess you caught it on a bad day.

 

I guess so.

[Plain Talker 11]

Derby station has no through route to anywhere.

 

Derby now has a footbridge, which takes foot passengers to the pride park shopping centre, (which also contains the Derby County Ground, Pride Park.)

 

It was opened not too long ago (about a year?) and has the idiotic barriers in place requiring users to have an electronic pass issued by the TOC, or a ticket, in order to pass.

[CheekyBandit 10]

These barriers seem different to the Thameslink (or whatever that franchise is called now) barriers on the downstairs platforms.

 

Called this now.

[FireFight 10]

Derby station has no through route to anywhere.

 

The barriers are Derby are completely pointless if you have intent to avoid them because there are other ways to access the platforms.

[Bilge 34]

Great news.

 

Why not build another bridge further up from the platforms over into Pond St bus station, then buses could be integrated better with the trains and we could have a proper interchange with no need to cross a busy road when transferring from bus to train and vice versa. Has this been considered at all?

 

Cost is one reason why not, but maybe funds are available from some euro/regeneration/transport pot or other. There must be an alternative to the barrier proposal?

[ormester101 10]

emt are a business and dont give a dam about sheffield as a whole to them having a bridge as a link is massive inconvenience if they appeal they so they dont care about anyone other than themselves.

[woodmally 10]

I appreciate there is a thread about this topic but I felt this excellent news deserved a thread of its own so people notice it. If the mods disagree then please move it.

 

As the title suggests, planning board met today and refused the application for barriers at the station. EMT say they will continue to operate manned gates but as we have seen this has been on an occasional basis and very sporadic.

 

Well done to the Council for sticking to their guns and making the right decision.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/8374527.stm

 

This is a smoke screen. All it means now is that someone is employed to check tickets manually. It still doesnt solve the key issue. That EMT should not be stopping people using the footbridge to get to the interchange and or the station to actually buy the ticket.

[ormester101 10]

This is a smoke screen. All it means now is that someone is employed to check tickets manually. It still doesnt solve the key issue. That EMT should not be stopping people using the footbridge to get to the interchange and or the station to actually buy the ticket.

 

this could cause angry confrontations as well like it has already

[Spotter14 10]

I appreciate there is a thread about this topic but I felt this excellent news deserved a thread of its own so people notice it. If the mods disagree then please move it.

 

As the title suggests, planning board met today and refused the application for barriers at the station. EMT say they will continue to operate manned gates but as we have seen this has been on an occasional basis and very sporadic.

 

Well done to the Council for sticking to their guns and making the right decision.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/8374527.stm

 

BARRIER STAFF as the title suggests , staff that will operate barriers but will now operate them manually but not very sporadic as you suggest but on a permanent basis - barriers in one way or another are here to stay !

[wibbles 10]

BARRIER STAFF as the title suggests , staff that will operate barriers but will now operate them manually but not very sporadic as you suggest but on a permanent basis - barriers in one way or another are here to stay !

 

I stand corrected if I'm wrong but I'm sure I heard that a law or railway bylaw exists which in its basic terms means that ticket staff cannot prevent people from actually using the footbridge. I've tried in vain to find something to confirm this but I can't.

I doubt EMT will fund fully staffed 'human' barriers on a permanent basis.