Todmorden Curve

[PhilipW]

It isnt the track that costs, it is the signalling. There are three new signals, one movement of a signal and alterations to others. Messing about with interlocking isnt cheap.

Still £8 million is an awful lot. What is it -- Track £1 million and Signals £7 million !!!

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

What exactly do you mean by this phraseology?

Well it was a slightly tongue in cheek response as to whether a service that starts and ends in the same place is a circle or not. I say it is, but 4SRKT says it isn't. I understand what he means, if it terminated at Victoria with a long layover then it's effectively two different services. But if it's not run as a true circle then you lose the benefit of having a through service for, say, passengers from Rochdale to Bolton, especially if they are forced to get off at Victoria.

I can understand the passenger benefits, those from Accrington and possibly Rose Grove and Burnley? could catch either an anti-clockwise or clockwise service to get to Manchester without changing. But the benefits for passengers are outweighed in my opinion by the fact the service wouldn't be robust enough, nor able to easily get back to normal, in times of disruption. The alternative is a simple connection at Blackburn, which would be much better for a robust and reliable service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The alternative is a simple connection at Blackburn, which would be much better for a robust and reliable service.

Should the Todmorden Chord project come to fruition, it would leave Blackburn as a main rail hub as it is a 4 platform station that has had much done to it to make it a modern part of the Interchange, as it already offers services to West Yorkshire, Colne, Bolton, Manchester, Clitheroe, Preston and Blackpool.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Still £8 million is an awful lot. What is it -- Track £1 million and Signals £7 million !!!

Ground works are expensive too, even if the previous lines embankments/cuttings are there it costs a lot to survey them and bring them up to scratch.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

It's still not £8 MILLION pounds to lop some trees back! Even at an average of £20 per hour, it's still 400,000 man hours! We've been conditioned to expect these figures from public sector/railway projects, and the fact that they are going to need possesions mean that costs are always going to be higher than a simple engineering project. But there is no way that if this project was to be completed purely with private money it would cost this much.

But as is the way when you're not spending your own money, you tend not to get value for money. Taken to a basic level, would you book the same hotel at the same price with your own money as you would when travelling on expenses?

 

[YorkshireBear]

It's still not £8 MILLION pounds to lop some trees back! Even at an average of £20 per hour, it's still 400,000 man hours! We've been conditioned to expect these figures from public sector/railway projects, and the fact that they are going to need possesions mean that costs are always going to be higher than a simple engineering project. But there is no way that if this project was to be completed purely with private money it would cost this much.

But as is the way when you're not spending your own money, you tend not to get value for money. Taken to a basic level, would you book the same hotel at the same price with your own money as you would when travelling on expenses?

When i say ground works i do not mean lop some trees down. I mean surveying the embankments to check they are safe and then making them safe which is very expensive. Geotechnical engineers do not charge small sums in my experience.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

No they don't, and they charge a hell of lot more when the pubic sector is paying, because of poor cost control.

It's still 400,000 man hours at £20 an hour. You really thing it takes that many hours to fabricate a few hundred yards of track, clear vegitation, survey the banking, lay the track and modify the interlocking. 400,000 hours??

 

[Sox]

No they don't, and they charge a hell of lot more when the pubic sector is paying, because of poor cost control.

It's still 400,000 man hours at £20 an hour. You really thing it takes that many hours to fabricate a few hundred yards of track, clear vegitation, survey the banking, lay the track and modify the interlocking. 400,000 hours??

I work as a Project Manager on high voltage transmission schemes and I can say that we go to the far end of a f@rt in terms of procedural observance, design ratification, environmental surveys, site supervision, training, procurement, corporate governance, safety, cost control, commissioning, etc.

Although outside my area of expertise, £8m for a couple of hundred yards of railway track is even beyond me.

 

[boing_uk]

It's still 400,000 man hours at £20 an hour. You really thing it takes that many hours to fabricate a few hundred yards of track, clear vegitation, survey the banking, lay the track and modify the interlocking. 400,000 hours??

£20 an hour? Paying the staff less than minimum wage then are you? It costs about three times as much a wage to employ someone, due to overheads, tax, profit margins etc.

My charge out rate by my employer is around £65 of which I see about 1/4 of that as take home pay and around 1/3 in my gross wages. The company sees a 12% profit margin.

And no, it is not just the work that you highlight above. Its the provision of plant, access roads, welfare facilities, environmental surveys (bats, newts and the like), spoil removal (landfill tax for instance), compensation payments for possessions, night working and all that, which also has to be taken in to account.

So, your 400,000 hours is now looking more around the 100,000 man-hours mark to begin with. But wait! There are no materials in that. Or plant.

It is a fact of life that civil engineering projects are not cheap. For instance I got quotes for the removal of a short (less than 50m) section of footpath to be made up in to verge. Cheapest quote was around the £30k mark from a local firm. And that didnt include the traffic management that would be required, at another £500 per day. And cost control is a very distinct part of my job, but I am also a realist when it comes to what things cost.

The Todmorden Curve is not just putting some track down; (without wanting to even contemplate the amount of work required to get it integrated in to the national network) it is a whole lot more than that I am very sure.

Unfortunately your astoundment at the costs is typical of many people these days when they find out just how much it actually costs to build something.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A £8.8 million bid has been lodged to finally provide a direct rail link between Burnley and Manchester. Council bosses want cash from the Government’s regional growth fund (RGF) to reinstate the Todmorden Curve after 40 years. Bosses also plan to use almost £2 million of the money to help prepare for the long-awaited £100 million regeneration of the Weavers’ Triangle area and have asked for £8.8 million, of which £7 million would be used to lay down new track where the curve is and make alterations at Todmorden railway station, including changes to signalling. The remaining £1.8 million would go on highways improvements in Trafalgar Street, in the heart of the Weavers’ Triangle, and on new lighting and landscaping nearby.

Perhaps a reading of this statement shows the actual financial total of the entire budgetry bid, as some postings seem to consider all the bidding budget to be totally rail expenditure.

Look at the following items stated in the OP posting:-
(A)..Almost £2 million towards the regeneration of the Weavers' Triangle area.
(B)..£1.8 million on highways improvements, new lighting and landscaping.

This makes the railway matters and the ancilliary matters more clearly defined. I trust that this will clarify matters.

 

[boing_uk]

Perhaps a reading of this statement shows the actual financial total of the entire budgetry bid, as some postings seem to consider all the bidding budget to be totally rail expenditure.

Look at the following items stated in the OP posting:-
(A)..Almost £2 million towards the regeneration of the Weavers' Triangle area.
(B)..£1.8 million on highways improvements, new lighting and landscaping.

This makes the railway matters and the ancilliary matters more clearly defined. I trust that this will clarify matters.

Quite incorrect Paul. And seeing as you are often so quick to point out inaccuracies and errors in other peoples replies, let me repay that favour to you and clarify what the statement says.

If you read the article, it is £1.8M for the highways works, with the remaining £7M for the rail part of the scheme. There is no magic £2M for "regeneration".

Given that the project has been costed up at between £7.5M to £8M, plus whatever the full costs of the highways works, it still means that there will still have to be some level of funding provided by Burnley Borough Council and Lancashire County Council. Probably somewhere in the region of about £3M, given the way these funding bids work.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

£20 an hour? Paying the staff less than minimum wage then are you? It costs about three times as much a wage to employ someone, due to overheads, tax, profit margins etc.

My charge out rate by my employer is around £65 of which I see about 1/4 of that as take home pay and around 1/3 in my gross wages. The company sees a 12% profit margin.

And no, it is not just the work that you highlight above. Its the provision of plant, access roads, welfare facilities, environmental surveys (bats, newts and the like), spoil removal (landfill tax for instance), compensation payments for possessions, night working and all that, which also has to be taken in to account.

So, your 400,000 hours is now looking more around the 100,000 man-hours mark to begin with. But wait! There are no materials in that. Or plant.

It is a fact of life that civil engineering projects are not cheap. For instance I got quotes for the removal of a short (less than 50m) section of footpath to be made up in to verge. Cheapest quote was around the £30k mark from a local firm. And that didnt include the traffic management that would be required, at another £500 per day. And cost control is a very distinct part of my job, but I am also a realist when it comes to what things cost.

The Todmorden Curve is not just putting some track down; (without wanting to even contemplate the amount of work required to get it integrated in to the national network) it is a whole lot more than that I am very sure.

Unfortunately your astoundment at the costs is typical of many people these days when they find out just how much it actually costs to build something.

Yes of course there are extra costs but 3 times? I find that hard to believe, but whatever.

True story, an access route to a signalbox needed basically rebuilding. The railway paid £10,000 because they used central procurement. A builder friend of the Local Operating Manager said the job should cost no more than £2000. But he, of course, wasn't allowed to do.

So please, don't try to tell me the railway get's value for money, because I've seen it first hand how they are ripped off left right and centre. As soon as someone else is paying, costs rocket because nobody cares to check because it's not their money. It's not unique to the railway, someone rear-ended my motor and the crash repairers quoted £9500 to repair. The guy who offered to pay cash and the same job got done for £1200. As soon as someone else is paying, you can triple the true cost.

 

[boing_uk]

Yes of course there are extra costs but 3 times? I find that hard to believe, but whatever.

Then I suggest you take a look at the True Cost of an Employee Calculator.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/9118171.__9m_bid_submitted_for_Burnley_to_Manchester_direct_rail_link/

£9m bid submitted for Burnley to Manchester direct rail link

9:10am Saturday 2nd July 2011

By Chris Hopper »
Reporter

AN AMBITIOUS £9million bid has been lodged to finally provide a direct rail link between Burnley and Manchester. Bosses also plan to use almost £2 million of the money to help prepare for the long-awaited £100million regeneration of the Weavers’ Triangle area. The plans, which could see Burnley to Manchester trains running in 2013, were also backed by MP Gordon Birtwistle. Burnley Council has led the bid, which also has support from Lancashire County Council, Network Rail and newly-appointed Weavers’ Triangle developer Barnfield.

The bid predicts about 500 jobs would be created by the rail work and Weavers’ Triangle improvements, with potentially hundreds more people heading into Manchester from Burnley for better-paid jobs. Mike Cook, Burnley Council’s regeneration director, said: “This is a proper bid. It is certainly the biggest development there has been as far as the Todmorden Curve goes.”

In his response to my posting, boing-uk stated that I had not quoted correctly and that "there is no magic £2 million for regeneration".

It says in the article above, which I show again for purposes of accuracy, that bosses plan to spend almost £2 million OF THE MONEY FROM THE BID to help prepare for the regeneration of the Weavers' Triangle area.

I have only quoted what is said in the article, in which the £2 million for regeneration is stated to be part of the total inclusive bidding submission.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Then I suggest you take a look at the True Cost of an Employee Calculator.

Yep, viewed it, still don't agree sorry. Most of those costs are either optional (car, gym etc) or largely fixed costs (HR/training etc). The extra costs incurred by winning the contract to construct the Todmorden Curve are NOT 3 times, as that assumes that a whole company has to be created in order to fulfill the contract, the marginal costs are much smaller.

But if you want to believe the railway or any public (or quasi public) sector body gets good value for money from infrastructure or procurement I'll let you believe that.

 

[bluenoxid]

Yep, viewed it, still don't agree sorry. Most of those costs are either optional (car, gym etc) or largely fixed costs (HR/training etc). The extra costs incurred by winning the contract to construct the Todmorden Curve are NOT 3 times, as that assumes that a whole company has to be created in order to fulfill the contract, the marginal costs are much smaller.

But if you want to believe the railway or any public (or quasi public) sector body gets good value for money from infrastructure or procurement I'll let you believe that.

#

Optional. A car optional. :roll: Perks have to be paid for and gyms and private insurance have to be paid for by the company's that hire them. The Fixed costs of HR also have to be paid for by the company's hire. You are working on the idea that Network Rail are undertaking the work, whilst it is likely that NR is going to sub contract this work to another company which will have its own procedures and contracts to fulfil. Every piece of work has to pay towards overheads and fixed costs and this is another piece of work.

 

[boing_uk]

A £8.8 million bid has been lodged to finally provide a direct rail link between Burnley and Manchester. Council bosses want cash from the Government’s regional growth fund (RGF) to reinstate the Todmorden Curve after 40 years. Bosses also plan to use almost £2 million of the money to help prepare for the long-awaited £100 million regeneration of the Weavers’ Triangle area and have asked for £8.8 million, of which £7 million would be used to lay down new track where the curve is and make alterations at Todmorden railway station, including changes to signalling. The remaining £1.8 million would go on highways improvements in Trafalgar Street, in the heart of the Weavers’ Triangle, and on new lighting and landscaping nearby.

Perhaps a reading of this statement shows the actual financial total of the entire budgetry bid, as some postings seem to consider all the bidding budget to be totally rail expenditure.

Look at the following items stated in the OP posting:-
(A)..Almost £2 million towards the regeneration of the Weavers' Triangle area.
(B)..£1.8 million on highways improvements, new lighting and landscaping.

This makes the railway matters and the ancilliary matters more clearly defined. I trust that this will clarify matters.

In the interests of furthering clarity and correcting the two erroneous statements by Paul Sidorczuk he has highlighted two elements in the article which are actually one and the same thing. I have reprodocued both above.

They are not two seperate items, as Paul Sidorczuk has implied in his previous post.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

#

Optional. A car optional. :roll: Perks have to be paid for and gyms and private insurance have to be paid for by the company's that hire them. The Fixed costs of HR also have to be paid for by the company's hire. You are working on the idea that Network Rail are undertaking the work, whilst it is likely that NR is going to sub contract this work to another company which will have its own procedures and contracts to fulfil. Every piece of work has to pay towards overheads and fixed costs and this is another piece of work.

Indeed. Still not "three times the cost", if it is, there is some serious fat in the company. And no, not every employee will be entitled to a car, or gym membership. But no matter, if you want to believe the railway gets value for money, you believe that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In the interests of furthering clarity and correcting the two erroneous statements by Paul Sidorczuk he has highlighted two elements in the article which are actually one and the same thing. I have reprodocued both above.

They are not two seperate items, as Paul Sidorczuk has implied in his previous post.

I do not mind you correcting my post #100, which you did earlier, as the report must have been non-factual by the reporter. You were correcting that part of his article, which reflects well on your insight into the matter of what exactly was contained within the financial sectionalisation of the monies required as a total part of the bid for the next stage of the process that would be revealed in October 2011.

Since then, as a mark of respect to you over that matter, I made a further posting # 104, which I thought had clarified matters in an amicable manner. If you felt the need to make a further comment, you should have made reference to this particular posting. In my naivety, I assumed that this would be the end of the matter.

I now find that once again you have again quoted my post # 100 in yet another posting.....and have totally ignored what I went to the trouble to explain in my post # 104. Please read my posting # 104 which is self-explanatory. I do not wish to involve myself into any fruitless "point-scoring"...nor was this ever my intention. , as it reiterates what was said in the article by a member of the council and was reported by the reporter in the press article. None of these words are mine, but those that the reporter chose to put in his report. If you still have a problem, please take this up with the reporter concerned.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It was said that news would be given around this period with regard to the successful bid. Can someone clarify when this is likely to be.

 

[bluenoxid]

Regional Growth Fund bids are based on the ever unreliable seasonal deadline. I am unaware of any bids having been announced.

http://www.bis.gov.uk/RGF

Mind you, success does not mean quick access to money.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/23/government-regional-growth-fund-cash

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The words "the autumn" as featured can be somewhat long-ended in meaning.

 

[bluenoxid]

The words "the autumn" as featured can be somewhat long-ended in meaning.

Aye, I was hoping that the party conference season might prise something out of these funds but it looks like we might have to wait. It's a shame because this project has so much potential.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It will soon be November. Has anyone any news as to the date when the result of the successful/unsuccesful bid proposals will be put into the public domain?

 

[WatcherZero]

I heard Skem station application had already been rejected.

 

[John55]

The answer is today!

£8.8 MILLION RGF SUCCESS FOR BURNLEY
Published Monday 31st October 11
Rail link to Manchester and Weavers’ Triangle bid approved
The Deputy Prime Minister has approved an £8.8 million bid for the re-instatement of the Todmorden Curve rail link and redevelopment of the Weavers' Triangle in Burnley .

 

[cle]

Great news. Couldn't see much else rail related in the RGF that was approved - except a freight project near Halton - so curve potential there too?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The answer is today!

£8.8 MILLION RGF SUCCESS FOR BURNLEY
Published Monday 31st October 11
Rail link to Manchester and Weavers’ Triangle bid approved
The Deputy Prime Minister has approved an £8.8 million bid for the re-instatement of the Todmorden Curve rail link and redevelopment of the Weavers' Triangle in Burnley .

This was the headline news on the BBC North-West News at 1330 today with a member of Burnley Council being interviewed. The TV interviewer made the point that both the rail route and Weavers Triangle project are benefiting from this decision. Perhaps it might be reported in more depth later this evening on the 1830 BBC North-West News.

 

[Sox]

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/9335117.Major_boost_as___9million_rail_link_cash_announced_for_Burnley/

Major boost as £9million rail link cash announced for Burnley

11:10am Monday 31st October 2011
By Peter Magill »
Chief reporter
Print
Email
Comments(18)
Tweet


VITAL plans to restore the 'Todmorden Curve' - speeding rail links between Burnley and Manchester - have been given a £9million boost.

Town hall bosses are celebrating after Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg confirmed the project to restore 500 yards of track would benefit from a Regional Growth Fund investment.

The announcement completes a regeneration hat-trick for Burnley, following the £3.8million European Regional Development Fund backing for the Burnley Bridge Business Park and confirmation that a new university training college will be constructed within the Weavers’ Triangle.

The RGF proposals should reduce train travel between Burnley and Manchester’s Victoria station to around 35 minutes.

Currently commuters are forced to extend their journey to Hebden Bridge, to connect with a Manchester-bound service, or change at Blackburn.

Supporters of the bid included Burnley Council, Barnfield Investment Properties, Network Rail and Lancashire County Council.

Council leader Coun Charlie Briggs said: “I am really proud of all those who have made this possible, and proud of the partnership working between businesses and the public sector.

“Our local MP, Gordon Birtwistle, has been an important influence as he been very active in pressing the case for this and a number of other economic development priorities.”

Mr Birtwistle added: “There were many who believed this day would never come, who believed our heritage had no part in our future, who doubted Burnley could ever have a commutable ‘city-offer’.

“This is a sign that we’re on the way. This government has delivered, and over the coming years jobs will result from this announcement. This is great news for Burnley and the surrounding area too.”

County councillor Tim Ashton, Lancashire’s transport cabinet member, added: “Creating a fast rail link between Burnley and Manchester is our number one priority in terms of improving rail transport in the county in response to the needs of our communities.

“Reinstating the Todmorden Curve is vital for boosting jobs and economic growth in this part of Lancashire, so I am very pleased that central government has recognised the hard work of all involved and approved this bid.

“We look forward to working with all the other partners to make this fast rail link a reality.”

Simon Leyshon, of Network Rail, said: “Rail travel across the whole country is at an all- time high and demand is set to continue to grow.

“The Todmorden Curve project will put Burnley within commuting distance of Manchester and open up all the tourist and leisure opportunities the city has to offer.”

 

[Deerfold]

Any money announced for services to actually run over it when it's built?