Denmark Hill station: Beyond a joke

[craigyboy71]

I just wish Peckham Rye station would get an urgent revamp as it's terrible, especially during busy commuting times. Stairs too narrow, no lifts, not enough ticket barriers for the volume of people, too few ticket machines.... I could go on and on.... Are they waiting until the works start on creating a public square at the front of the station??

[edcam]

You are right on this but believe me, compared to Denmark Hill, PR Station is state of the art and a design dream.

craigyboy71 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I just wish Peckham Rye station would get an

> urgent revamp as it's terrible, especially during

> busy commuting times. Stairs too narrow, no lifts,

> not enough ticket barriers for the volume of

> people, too few ticket machines.... I could go on

> and on.... Are they waiting until the works start

> on creating a public square at the front of the

> station??

[Tamineh]

Appalling conditions for station users esp during peak times. I welcome a second ticket machine, but don't really think that's the main issue here - actually extending the ticket hall would be a better solution, it's remarkable how anyone thought the size/capacity of the current entrance would ever meet the needs of such a busy station.

[Nigello]

People practically trample all over each other to get through the warren-like staircases and walkways whilst a handful of coffee sippers lounge in an overly-large cafe that could be better used to accommodate passengers. Who thought that up?

[Michael Palaeologus]

My fear is that a second machine would only cause more congestion as space is reduced and more people queue for tickets. I have regularly seen the rush hour crowds of KCH staff trying to get into the station, spill out into the road.

I suspect only a death will spur any action.

Ever noticed the inability of the new construction to cope with heavy rain? Instant flooding.

The old station, not so much.

[Chris82]

I agree with most of the comments made about Denmark Hill station. As someone with a serious health condition using the station can be extremely stressful when it's very busy. That said I do rather like FCB's coffee!

If the closure of the ticket office goes ahead (which in itself is a shame...) then I hope they won't just be leaving it empty but will reconfigure the space within the building to allow a wider entrance and more room for ticket machines. You think a modern 'box' like that new station (as awful as it is) would be fairy easy to adapt and extend, but perhaps not...

The additional entrances people have mentioned would make a lot of sense, though I think 'gating' stations is a big priority for operators - particularly TfL/London Overground who are likely to be running the station in a few years if Southeastern is devolved to them - and so I don't see this happening. Fortunately TfL also take station improvements more seriously than the other train operators and so perhaps they will be more likely to invest in improvements.

[James Barber]

Hi TB,

The new ticket machine is planned to be outside the left hand side ticket counter just beside the wide gate.

A one-way would only work with a several more members of staff. I doubt this will happen. Rightly the rail network is under pressure to become more efficient rather than add lots of costs. Repeated above inflation ticket price rises aren't acceptable. Hence the RMT fighting so hard against Southern introducing Driver Only Operated trains on the few remaining routes.

The one ray of sunshine will be if TfL take over this station - it clearly needs to be redone having been mightily screwed up.

The root cause appears to have been Southwark Council planners saying the walkway couldn't be dramatically widened. The project team being solely funded under Access for All and not for huge growth of passenger numbers. Hence new facilities that only a minority wish to use and are not fit for current purpose.

I've raised the over crowding as a H&S issue with the Office for Rail Regulation the body responsible for H&S on the rail network so far with no joy.

[d.b]

Chris82 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------You think a modern 'box' like that new

> The additional entrances people have mentioned

> would make a lot of sense, though I think 'gating'

> stations is a big priority for operators

Couple of things here.

First, as you might have seen at other stations, these kind of side gates aren't always open. Typically they are open for either late nights/sundays when the station office may not be manned, or rush hour when numbers are much larger. Most other times side gates are closed so people are forced through barriers for better enforcement of ticketing. This covers e.g. the 4-5pm after school window.

Second, the barriers at denmark hill are usually set permanently open during rush hour periods anyway to try and prevent further chaos while hundreds of people are crushing through two barriers. N.b. it has been particularly awful the past couple of days since one of the barriers isn't reading oyster properly.

Agree with you on FCB coffee, it's one of the best I've had in London!

[Penguin68]

Mr Barber wrote:- Repeated above inflation ticket price rises aren't acceptable. Hence the RMT fighting so hard against Southern introducing Driver Only Operated trains on the few remaining routes.

I'm afraid this is a non sequitur - reducing staffing costs would help avoid further price rises - the RMT fighting against this will have the tendency to increase costs above the level of Driver Only Operated Trains (by the wages of the Guard). There are arguments in favour of the RMT action - but not those of economy.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Presumably a reduction in costs doesn't necessarily lead to reductions to ticket prices - it could just as easily lead to increases in executive pay, profits and dividends?

Denmark Hill is an accident waiting to happen.

[Earl Aelfheah]

BTW - The 'redevelopment' of Denmark Hill was originally a ?4.18 million project to make Denmark Hill accessible. The works overran by more than a year and cost an additional 2 million pounds. It was a disgraceful example of mismanagement of public finances and a total lack of accountability. It's only a matter of time until there is a serious incident there imo (I hope I'm wrong).

[Earl Aelfheah]

.

[Penguin68]

Presumably a reduction in costs doesn't necessarily lead to reductions to ticket prices

You are right, of course it doesn't, reduced costs are an opportunity either to increase profits or (in a competitive environment, which this isn't) reduce prices. My point was that an action which would reduce costs cannot be prayed in aid as a contributor to above inflation price rises - with unions working to counter the cost-reduction seen as champions of working against price rises through their actions.

I do not expect that the cost reductions achieved by Driver Only operation will in any way lead to reduced prices to customers - although a regulator with even a single tooth might at least more firmly resist calls to allow increased prices, in the light of cost reduction.

The RMT arguments about safety play rather better here - the trains in question do not have automatic cut-outs which stop operation when the doors are jammed open (e.g. by a punter) (unlike tube trains) - they rely on someone (now the guard and driver, in future just the driver) to notice a trapped passenger and act accordingly. There has been at least one incident of dragging recently.

[Chris82]

d.b Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> First, as you might have seen at other stations,

> these kind of side gates aren't always open.

> Typically they are open for either late

> nights/sundays when the station office may not be

> manned, or rush hour when numbers are much larger.

> Most other times side gates are closed so people

> are forced through barriers for better enforcement

> of ticketing. This covers e.g. the 4-5pm after

> school window.

>

> Second, the barriers at denmark hill are usually

> set permanently open during rush hour periods

> anyway to try and prevent further chaos while

> hundreds of people are crushing through two

> barriers. N.b. it has been particularly awful the

> past couple of days since one of the barriers

> isn't reading oyster properly.

Thanks for this. I had thought about this before writing my original post, but I thought the gates were sometimes closed during rush hour at Denmark Hill. However, I've not been commuting consistently in rush hour for a while since I've been ill, tending to go between 9.30 and 10.30 a lot. If you're right then there's nothing to lose.

Hopefully TfL will be our saviour on this. I don't think they will automatically be rebuilding every station, but with Thameslink allegedly going to 4 trains per hour eventually, Overground to 6tph and Southeastern improvements following devolution, there really might not be any other option to cope with numbers but to extend the entrance.

[Cardelia]

Would it be possible to move the destination boards to somewhere outside of the station entrance so that they can be seen from the road? One (admittedly small) contribution to congestion in the mornings is where the scrum to get through the ticket barriers completely stops moving because one passenger stops to see the status of their train.

[jimlad48]

Fully share concerns on Denmark Hill station. Problems seems to be twofold - access in, which is now causing queues to build up outside the station, coupled with the sharp dogleg left then right turn which blocks people and channels them, particularly if people decide to stand on the passageway or stairs.

The station is a deathtrap waiting to happen - if there is a fire or incident in those passages, it will be a miracle if anyone gets out. I didnt think it could be worse than the old situation where you essentially had one door to walk in / out of, but it is under the new system.

I know during the renovation they managed to put a side gate in temporarily for access which made an enormous difference - adding a gate directly onto the new footbridge would make an enormous difference to the station by providing an alternate exit.

[Applespider]

Agreed - one at either side of the footbridge would be even better. At the moment, taking the footbridge (unless you get off the train at that end) adds footsteps for the majority of people disembarking. Those with Fitbits aside, it's human nature to take the shortest route even if it means a longer queue. Opening up exits at the footbridge would encourage those going to the bus stop (towards ED) to go that way. They don't have to be open permanently - just for an hour or so at each peak time.

Then again, I'm pretty sure when the plans first came out for the station, those on EDF expressed surprise and suggestions (and not just on here) and sadly, have been proven right. So I'm not holding my breath for anything sensible to happen now.

[Bic Basher]

Chris82 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> particularly TfL/London Overground who are likely

> to be running the station in a few years if

> Southeastern is devolved to them - and so I don't

> see this happening. Fortunately TfL also take

> station improvements more seriously than the other

> train operators and so perhaps they will be more

> likely to invest in improvements.

Southeastern no longer manage DH, the current operator in charge is Thameslink/GTR. They manage all stations on the Catford Loop with the exception of Peckham Rye (Southern).

[Zebedee Tring]

I thought that Thameslink and Southern were part of the same group (and indeed same franchise). So PR is really managed by the same group as DH.

[rendelharris]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I thought that Thameslink and Southern were part

> of the same group (and indeed same franchise). So

> PR is really managed by the same group as DH.

Yep, Govia hold Thameslink, Southern, Gatwick Express, Great Northern, London Midland and Southeastern franchises. The great selling point for privatisation was that once we got rid of monopolies there would be healthy competition which could only benefit passengers (sorry, customers). And if you believe that worked please PM me about a gold brick and some magic beans I have to sell...

[Bic Basher]

Southeastern and London Midland have their own management within the group and are legally separate companies.

[Jeremy]

There are plenty of examples of the privatisation/competition theory panning out well. But it failed spectacularly with trains. Either there's no actual alternative on the route you need, and you're stuck with whatever crap you're dealt (e.g. East Dulwich). Or the presence of alternative routes/fares causes confusion and people get slapped with ridiculous fines.

[????]

I think that support for re-nationalisation of the Railways, and i accept it's widespread, is dogma driven idiocy. Rose tinted memories from people of my age( in the extreme) but just naivety from those younger people that didn't use British Rail back in the day.

Are all private train operators great? No, but the massive increase in train use is the main problem here and the strains that puts on networks and the track infrastructure (in public hands anyway?). The operators are victims of their success.

Before privatisation;

- train use was in decline

- reliability was very poor

- rolling stock was dilapidated and falling to bits

- service/information was appalling despite more visible staff; it ranged from some occasional really excellent people to downright abuse (remember the Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch - this happened a lot) but was mainly shoulder shrugging indifference

-the railways ethos seemed run entirely on their provision of employment to its emplyees than any passenger concern

How nationalisisng and freezing fares will solve overcrowded over stretched services without a massive investment from THE TAXPAYER is beyond my logic - can someone explain how 2+2=5

It's dogma - don't believe it.

[Jeremy]

I'm not necessarily saying that re-nationalisation is some sort of silver bullet. But some privatisations work better than others... in the case of BA, or energy dereg, the element of competition brings benefits to the customers and pushes the providers to deliver better value. Not so with rail.

I'm easily old enough to remember British Rail... I'm not kidding myself that things were better back then. But the current state is a mess.

Massive investment is needed from the taxpayer regardless of ownership of the operators (network rail is still a public body after all).

[rendelharris]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> How nationalisisng and freezing fares will solve

> overcrowded over stretched services without a

> massive investment from THE TAXPAYER is beyond my

> logic - can someone explain how 2+2=5

>

> It's dogma - don't believe it.

But some of us want massive investment from the taxpayer, funded by some tax rises for those who can well afford it and closing of all offshore loopholes. Sensibly managed infrastructure investment will increase employment, tax revenues and reduce spending on benefits. And if there's one bit of infrastructure that needs investment, it's the railways.

ETA: And, as many economists have pointed out, at a time of historic low interest rates which we may not see again in decades if ever, what better time for a programme of borrowing for infrastructure investment?