Unsafe footbridge closes half of South Bank station

[ainsworth74]

WOW. Really????????? it has done VERY well then!

EDIT - with a new stairway to the Saltburn facing platform added when the "new" station opened?

Hard to be certain but a footbridge appears on OS maps from around 1952, its hard to believe that another bridge was built between then and 1984 when "New" South Bank was opened hence I'm fairly sure that it dates from then. And as you say a new stairway was added to the Saltburn bound platform, when you look it clearly is of a different construction to the other parts of the bridge particularly the stairways which you'd expect to be identical of the bridge dated from 1984.

 

[DarloRich]

Hard to be certain but a footbridge appears on OS maps from around 1952,

I assume it was a useful walking link ( pre station) between the town and the steelworks/riverside/dock/wharf area

 

[BankQuayLowLvl]

OpenStreetMap seems to show a tunnel under the line just west of the station. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/54.584411/-1.179796

Can anyone with local knowledge confirm what's actually going on here? Think it's an error - from satellite it looks to me like it's an abandoned bridge abutment rather than a tunnel portal.

 

[Darandio]

OpenStreetMap seems to show a tunnel under the line just west of the station. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/54.584411/-1.179796

Can anyone with local knowledge confirm what's actually going on here? Think it's an error - from satellite it looks to me like it's an abandoned bridge abutment rather than a tunnel portal.

You are correct. It's a removed bridge.

 

[ainsworth74]

Can anyone with local knowledge confirm what's actually going on here? Think it's an error - from satellite it looks to me like it's an abandoned bridge abutment rather than a tunnel portal.

Correct, there's no tunnel there just the remains of a bridge.

I assume it was a useful walking link ( pre station) between the town and the steelworks/riverside/dock/wharf area

Indeed, I assume that's why it's there as early as that.

 

[BankQuayLowLvl]

You are correct. It's a removed bridge.

Correct, there's no tunnel there just the remains of a bridge.

Thanks both, will update accordingly.

 

[ainsworth74]

At the meeting of the Tees Valley Combined Authorities Transport sub-committee on 22 November the subject of this station came up in the papers:

South Bank Station
Development of the project continues in collaboration with Network Rail. The aim of the project is to provide a new footbridge, with access ramps to replace the current life expired footbridge to provide connectivity over the railway, and a refurbished platform to meet current accessibility guidance. However, the project is very complex due to site constraints, which will require changes to track and infrastructure to create a larger footprint to enable the station to be rebuilt on the current site.

The existing footbridge has recently been closed by Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council (RCBC), who own and maintain the bridge, due to safety concerns. Conversations are ongoing between RCBC, Network Rail and Northern to find a resolution.

Deeper in the document in Appendix 1 there is some discussion of timescales for the project mentioned above (the new bridge, which was being proposed before the current bridge became unsafe) this has slipped and project start is now targeted for January 2026 with completion by March 2027. Though everyone's favourite phrase appears as well:

Recent updated costs suggest budget pressure which will require value engineering and / or descoping.

In answer to a public question about when the station will re-open the following answer was given:

The footbridge at South Bank station is owned and maintained by Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council and it is therefore their responsibility. However, TVCA is working with the Council, Network Rail and Northern to try to ensure that access is reinstated, at the earliest opportunity, to the eastbound platform; and over the railway to connect the community with Teesworks and other businesses on Smith’s Dock Road and the surrounding area.

TVCA is continuing to develop proposals for improvements at South Bank station, to improve accessibility to the east bound platform, which currently can only be accessed down a flight of stairs. Further details will be made available when the proposal is more developed and there is a preferred option agreeable to all parties. However, this will not be a quick solution. Further feasibility and design work will need to be carried out to develop the preferred option as well as Network Rail approvals granted before construction can commence.

I wouldn't expect anyone to be using platform 2 at South Bank until 2027 at the earliest personally! On the plus side performance of Northern services towards Saltburn has improved as not calling at South Bank often means they're now waiting time at Redcar Central or gaining back time if delayed

 

[eastdyke]

Thanks for the update! Was thinking about South Bank just the other day.

Recent updated costs suggest budget pressure which will require value engineering and / or descoping.

Oh dear. It's about as basic a bridge as you could have in its existing form.
Has anyone considered a repair?

 

[ainsworth74]

Oh dear. It's about as basic a bridge as you could have in its existing form.

Ah different project. That's the for an all singing all dancing new bridge with proper accessibility (so those who cannot manage stairs can actually use the whole station!) that's being referred to. A project which pre-dates the present situation. I think it was publicly announced back in around March of this year. So that's the one that's now being subject to delay and value engineering.

Has anyone considered a repair?

I am of the understanding that around two/three years ago the bill was estimated (by qualified people) as being at least £200k for works to make the bridge secure for at least a few more years. Problem being that Redcar & Cleveland Council are quite a small council and that would seemingly have absolutely blown their structures budget. Meaning it was unaffordable. Now that the condition has obviously worsened enough to warrant closure and a few more years of inflation as well I bet that bill has gone up by a reasonable amount. Meanwhile R&Cs finances are no better and are arguably even worse now than they were back in 2021/22.

Meanwhile Network Rail are probably taking a view of "not our problem guv'nor" and Northern are, in some respects benefiting, as apparently the replacement bus is funded by R&C council whilst the performance of the trains that should be calling at South Bank but aren't has actually improved as they're now saving the time from the station calls.

This bridge ain't getting repaired unless Tees Valley Combined Authority dip into their pocket meaning I think the current situation is going to remain until the new bridge opens hopefully in early 2027. I'll put 50p on it.

 

[eastdyke]

Ah different project. That's the for an all singing all dancing new bridge with proper accessibility (so those who cannot manage stairs can actually use the whole station!) that's being referred to. A project which pre-dates the present situation. I think it was publicly announced back in around March of this year. So that's the one that's now being subject to delay and value engineering.

I am of the understanding that around two/three years ago the bill was estimated (by qualified people) as being at least £200k for works to make the bridge secure for at least a few more years. Problem being that Redcar & Cleveland Council are quite a small council and that would seemingly have absolutely blown their structures budget. Meaning it was unaffordable. Now that the condition has obviously worsened enough to warrant closure and a few more years of inflation as well I bet that bill has gone up by a reasonable amount. Meanwhile R&Cs finances are no better and are arguably even worse now than they were back in 2021/22.

Meanwhile Network Rail are probably taking a view of "not our problem guv'nor" and Northern are, in some respects benefiting, as apparently the replacement bus is funded by R&C council whilst the performance of the trains that should be calling at South Bank but aren't has actually improved as they're now saving the time from the station calls.

This bridge ain't getting repaired unless Tees Valley Combined Authority dip into their pocket meaning I think the current situation is going to remain until the new bridge opens hopefully in early 2027. I'll put 50p on it.

When I looked earlier this year I thought that a rebuilt station was 'in the pipeline', together with accessible bridges.

Bridges alone would be £10-£15m without a rebuilt station. Presumably footbridges of a 'brutalist engineering' ramped type, like Barnetby, would suit the location better rather than with lifts. And that is if there is room for such 'between the tracks' [which I thought back then would be very doubtful].

The fact that responsibility for the existing bridge falls to R&CC is a pure anachronism. The current transport authority TVCC should be all in for this.
Welding set for Christmas?

 

[ainsworth74]

When I looked earlier this year I thought that a rebuilt station was 'in the pipeline', together with accessible bridges.

Refurbished platforms is what I've heard but who knows. There's supposed to be a "Transport Hub" coming along as well separate to the new footbridge but that seems to be some sort of park and ride and highway improvements. I reckon in totality it's probably a rebuilt station but who really knows.

Bridges alone would be £10-£15m without a rebuilt station. Presumably footbridges of a 'brutalist engineering' ramped type, like Barnetby, would suit the location better rather than with lifts. And that is if there is room for such 'between the tracks' [which I thought back then would be very doubtful].

Well that's the tricky part. There's quite a lot of room to play with within the railway boundary as is but to use it will mean doing some combination of moving the station and moving the permanent way. Because the current location is far too cramped to fit anything in that meets modern standards.

The fact that responsibility for the existing bridge falls to R&CC is a pure anachronism. The current transport authority TVCC should be all in for this.

Indeed but sadly that's not the reality on the ground even though clearly TVCA should be taking on the responsibility for dealing with this. Guess their too busy with the Mr Houchen's pet projects in the Teesside Airport direction...

Welding set for Christmas?

Of which year?

 

[Meerkat]

Meanwhile Network Rail are probably taking a view of "not our problem guv'nor" and Northern are, in some respects benefiting, as apparently the replacement bus is funded by R&C council whilst the performance of the trains that should be calling at South Bank but aren't has actually improved as they're now saving the time from the station calls.

Are the council legally responsible for providing access to the station then, through the original Act or something like that?

 

[ainsworth74]

Are the council legally responsible for providing access to the station then, through the original Act or something like that?

Not a clue. This isn't the original station, the original station was a few hundred meters further to the west of the current station until it was knocked down to allow the construction of a new dock access road. Since there has been a bridge at this location since at least the 1950s (though this bridge is believed to have been built in the 1970s) the new station built in the early 1980s presumably just took advantage of there being a footbridge in the location. Indeed if you look at the stairs down to platform 2 you can clearly see they're of a different construction to the rest of the bridge.

I imagine any such legal agreements from then are probably lost to the sands of time (or buried deep some combination of the National Archives, Network Rail's archive, and the Teesside Archives). If any such agreement exists of course. In the 1980s this would have been state owned British Rail liaising with another arm of the state (Cleveland County Council) so I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit more informal and there were no specific legal agreements written down at all!

 

[ainsworth74]

Just to briefly update on this, the situation remains unchanged however at the most recent Transport Committee meeting of the Tees Valley Combined Authority (11 March 2025) there was the following update on page 77 of the papers to support the meeting (see below link to the Committee's papers):

South Bank Station
18. The existing footbridge at South Bank station, which provides both access to the eastbound platform and a pedestrian and cycling access over the railway, has recently been closed by Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council (RCBC), which owns and maintains the bridge, due to safety concerns.

19. This means that there is no access over the railway line at this location, requiring those walking, wheeling and cycling to take a diversionary route, which adds approximately 1.2km to their journey. In the absence of trains towards Redcar Central being able to stop at the station, a bus / taxi service is in operation between Middlesbrough, South Bank and Redcar Central stations.

20. Consulting engineers on behalf RCBC have undertaken an enhanced structural inspection of the bridge and early findings reveal that the bridge is beyond economical repair and demolition is the only viable option. TVCA is working at pace with Network Rail, RCBC, Northern and others to seek to demolish the existing footbridge and install a temporary bridge to enable pedestrians access over the railway line and to open South Bank Station as soon as possible.

21. TVCA had already commissioned consultants to carry out a feasibility study to look at improvements to accessibility at South Bank station, to ensure it complies with current standards and provides access for all users and connectivity over the railway line ensuring access to the western part of the Teesworks site from the neighbouring communities. The existing station site is heavily constrained and therefore following comprehensive feasibility work, in consultation with key rail industry stakeholders, the preferred option is to build a new train station a short distance to the west of the existing station.

22. Consideration needs to be given to the case for providing a new footbridge at the current South Bank station site purely for the purposes of crossing the railway at this key location and for accessing the Teesworks Site and employment opportunities. TVCA is now working with Network Rail to further develop the proposals for this project and start to develop the business case.

I can't imagine anyone is particularly surprised that demolition is the outcome of further investigations! But I'll be fascinated to see how they fit a temporary bridge into the available space. Will have to be done very delicately!

Transport Committee - About

teesvalley-ca.gov.uk