Hughby
Member
According to http://bicester-bedford.persona-pi.com/ the Public Inquiry closes today. Presumably a report is then presented to the Secretary of State who then says 'Make it so' (or not!).
Here's hoping...
Here's hoping...
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]
- Thread starter aylesbury2
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,386
Well that’s the traditional next stage, except that in the case of Manchester Piccadilly extra platforms the Secretary of State seems to have taken a third option, he seems to be just ignoring it and hoping it’ll get forgotten...
Ploughman
Established Member
More like letting someone else get lumbered with it.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,386
True... so that’s four possibilities!
Quite a way to go yet. The Inquiry closes, but the Inspector now needs to write the report, taking a balanced view of the evidence presented, making sure everything is watertight legally, and determining a recommendation to the Secretary of State.
The recommendations to the SoS are either
1) “make it so” (usually with conditions attached)
2) “do not make it so because of reasons x, y, z etc”
The SoS can then decide to accept the recommendation, or, in the case of 2) ignore it and make the order with further conditions.
It can take several months for the inspector to prepare the report, and then several months more for the SoS (strictly speaking, his minions) to consider it. In the latter case, usually because it needs also to include an agreement on funding with Treasury, and then a slot of the Grid (Government announcement schedule).
DarloRich
Veteran Member
thanks for adding this information. I doubt it will be welcome! There seems to be a view here that the enquiry closes and work starts!
Taking the rather more simple Felixstowe line level crossing closure TWO:
Inquiry closed 26/1/18
Report submitted 26/3/18
Order Made 14/8/18
Werrington grade seperation
Inquiry closed 24/11/17
Report submitted 7/3/18
Order made 24/7/18
Hughby
Member
Thanks for the replies and clarifications.
I was more than slightly 'tongue in cheek' when I said 'Make it so'. I do understand that the real world is never that simple.
Still hoping though...!
I was more than slightly 'tongue in cheek' when I said 'Make it so'. I do understand that the real world is never that simple.
Still hoping though...!
There's a fairly broad-brush interview with Rob Brighouse, MD of East West Railway Company, in New Civil Engineer available at https://www.newcivilengineer.com/la...on-overseeing-job-he-started/10042503.article. Some excerpts that give the flavour:
He then goes on to suggest that there is a compromise needed on when to bring in a development partner to the project. Where to make the compromise depends on what are essentially political questions and issues for negotiation - how much private finance to allow or exploit and the price, in terms of risk-protection, autonomy and retention of intellectual property by the contractor, that government has to pay. In the interview, the implicit focus is on phase 3, the central section.
Brighouse expects movement on this when the then Chancellor makes his autumn statement.
I am fairly certain that the personalities involved will by then have changed. B. Johnson will not tolerate Hammond as Chancellor and will shuffle Grayling off Transport to procrastinate somewhere else.
I had not appreciated before reading this interview how important the question of intellectual property IP was in civil and railway engineering. More fool me - my own field is information systems, where issues of who owns what and how to protect fragile rights are everyday concerns. This may point to a single engineering partner, and / or perhaps to a very limited role for Network Rail in Phase 3.
“We are a single focus company,” he says. “The reason why [transport secretary Chris] Grayling asked us to do this is two-fold: one is to bring that absolute focus to get this built and the other is to look at innovative and new ways of getting things built in the UK.
“He has asked us to challenge the industry norms in terms of financing, maintenance, construction and operations and look at what is the most appropriate degree of vertical integration, but all with the objective of delivering the best possible customer service.”
...
“One of the challenges we face is breaking with tradition and getting the market to think in a different way, not being hide bound or constrained in the normal way,” he says.
“I want the market to come to me and say: ‘this is what stops me from doing a good efficient and quick job’”.
“He has asked us to challenge the industry norms in terms of financing, maintenance, construction and operations and look at what is the most appropriate degree of vertical integration, but all with the objective of delivering the best possible customer service.”
...
“One of the challenges we face is breaking with tradition and getting the market to think in a different way, not being hide bound or constrained in the normal way,” he says.
“I want the market to come to me and say: ‘this is what stops me from doing a good efficient and quick job’”.
He then goes on to suggest that there is a compromise needed on when to bring in a development partner to the project. Where to make the compromise depends on what are essentially political questions and issues for negotiation - how much private finance to allow or exploit and the price, in terms of risk-protection, autonomy and retention of intellectual property by the contractor, that government has to pay. In the interview, the implicit focus is on phase 3, the central section.
Brighouse expects movement on this when the then Chancellor makes his autumn statement.
I am fairly certain that the personalities involved will by then have changed. B. Johnson will not tolerate Hammond as Chancellor and will shuffle Grayling off Transport to procrastinate somewhere else.
I had not appreciated before reading this interview how important the question of intellectual property IP was in civil and railway engineering. More fool me - my own field is information systems, where issues of who owns what and how to protect fragile rights are everyday concerns. This may point to a single engineering partner, and / or perhaps to a very limited role for Network Rail in Phase 3.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I notice that the track and ballast has been removed from the flyover at Blethcley.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 930
Engineering companies are suffering, like many others, from a situation where their potential customers ask for proposals then eventually use their ideas but go with another supplier. It costs a lot to make a bid for work and their should be some reward if their innovative ideas are used.
Completely agree.
I suspect a lot of the EWR experiment on alternative ways and methods will ultimately be a failure and cost more because DfT doesn't get the practacilites of doing things.
A small organisation like EWR will end up outsourcing a lot which theoretical means it could be more efficient as they only pay for what they need (DfT type thinking) but the reality are there huge issues such as be negligible internal IP and assuming that estimates of work required are realistic. Planning process issues (not even on the Steventon scale) could easily increase the workload on a task 5 fold. A few on those type issues and the cost and timescale (inc. impact of general employment cost of the project) and what is cheaper in theory isn't.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I suspect EWR will just let a design-build-operate-maintain to one of the big contractors, possibly with a TOC on board too. Similar to the Cardiff Core Valley Lines or something like the Metrolink extensions.
work-traveller
Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2012
- Messages
- 411
Ladder23
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,816
Is it true that the demolition of stewartby brickwork chimneys being taken down is because of network rails claim that they’re unsafe with the close proximity to the line? I spoke to a chap today who said they want to run HST’s and electrify it all, so they have to go. Is it to early to ask what could possible run through there, and will the new trains remain?
hooverboy
On Moderation
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 1,372
well that is as good a claim as any.
in the case of the brickworks site, it's also been stated that the intention was to use it for housing, and the chimneys would also present a serious hazard.
si the whole site needs tearing down and starting from fresh, listed status or not.
given the housing market is starting to look a bit shakey,I would not be entirely sure that housing would be developed here on any great scale in the near future anyway....so as I suggested before, it would be better to use this opportunity to develop it into a stabling shed/TMD in place of present bletchley and bedford facilities.That way you could also have enough room for a fenny-MKC chord, and use the run in from bedford TMD to bypass st johns into bedford midland.
work-traveller
Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2012
- Messages
- 411
No plans to electrify that line anytime soon (the Electric Spine project has been put on ice and this wasn't even in the first or second phase of that beforehand), no plans to increase the current linespeed of 60mph so no HSTs, no objection from NR to the continued existence of the chimneys. I bet Bedford Borough Council and any developers would love to see the chimneys demolished though - and will be happy to let people think that it's NR's doing.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
where do people get this stuff from?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Who was this "chap"?
Has demolition work started? Approval was granted in January 2018.
The owners/developers of the site (Hanson) have long wanted to get the chimneys knocked down depsite Historic England saying there is no real case for demolison. They are grade 1 listed so represent a serious financial risk to the developers in that they have to maintain them.
NR have commented that the chimneys are close to the railway and that if they were to collapse there is a risk to the railway. However as far as i am aware NR have lodged no objection to the chimneys continued existence. In any event it is not within their power to order/manage any demolition.
Electrification of the Marston Vale was removed from scope quite some time ago and the speed limit is to remain the same. Whilst i would be very happy to get an HST to work every morning by the time the work is complete the HST will be retired in any event.
well that is as good a claim as any.
no it isnt. The developer has permission to knock them down: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-42874915
Goodness me. it absolutely would not make any sense to use Stewartby for a TMD. None. For one thing you would need about 10 miles of OHLE to allow the electric trains that live at Blethcley the ability to run to their new depot!
Also, despite the obvious crayoning, the TMD at Blethcley is not the only impediment to a curve being built.
The brick works site with the chimneys plans for 1000 homes. That is only part of the site and a small part of the development planed for villages along the Marston Vale. The houses are needed now. The number of people needing house isn't going to go down anytime soon!
Indeed...
thanks - but experts here say no work is being done on E-W....................................
Ladder23
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,816
No idea hence why I’m on this thread because I like to try and find out what actually is happening. The “chap” is just someone who was working alongside me yesterday whilst I was doing some maintenance work on the level crossing at stewartby.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,979
Do we need a TMD in the area of Bedfordshire? I mean, before you start saying its a good idea you should have a cause for it. I like the idea of one being there though and have said as much in the past.
My friend is a security guard and often walks the rails of Forders Sidings. I never realized but there is more rail there than I originally thought and I can't figure out what it could have been used for.
The area circled apparently has tracks under the dirt.
And all these as well. I have only ever seen one train in Forders at a time and never knew all this track existed.
My friend is a security guard and often walks the rails of Forders Sidings. I never realized but there is more rail there than I originally thought and I can't figure out what it could have been used for.
The area circled apparently has tracks under the dirt.
And all these as well. I have only ever seen one train in Forders at a time and never knew all this track existed.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
your top picture is the old London waste terminal. Your bottom picture is the area that was used as an aggregates/materials store for the WCML upgrade. Both are assigned for commercial redevelopment. Kimberley Colleage is the first part of that work. The area in the bottom picture could get used for a similar purpose for E-W rail
( there were also sidings for the brick works in the area. )
the is no "cause".
A Sisyphean task!
Ladder23
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,816
It’s a busy layout none the less! I would love to see any footage of it in its busy days. I’ve never seen a train go into those sidings
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I have seen the bin train in there once or twice. The loo still gets used from time to time
Ladder23
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,816
Is the landfill still active then? I do wonder when the next train in will ever be, id like to see it. Would this be similar to the ones that run to cricklewood waste yard?
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,979
The last train I've seen to enter those sidings is in my video here -
- Landfill from the Bluebell railway extension.
As for your comments Darlorich, the London waste terminal as far as I am aware used only the lines that go under the lifter device for obvious reasons. I don't see any reason for those other higher up tracks to be there..
There were no busy days. Its most common use was from mid 70's until about 2006 where 2 trains per day from Cricklewood called Easidispose trains transported Londons waste to the Stewartby clay pit.
As for your comments Darlorich, the London waste terminal as far as I am aware used only the lines that go under the lifter device for obvious reasons. I don't see any reason for those other higher up tracks to be there..
There were no busy days. Its most common use was from mid 70's until about 2006 where 2 trains per day from Cricklewood called Easidispose trains transported Londons waste to the Stewartby clay pit.
Ladder23
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,816
Thanks for sharing, I have always been keen to look into these waste carrying trains. I’m sure they I used to see them pass through Luton/ Leagrave, (green) but I am lead to believe they don’t come north of cricklewood now via the MML
Last edited:
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,575
Happy memories of the Stewartby "brickliner" trains in the 1970s.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,979
They were re branded at some.point I saw them yellow.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
It surely must be difficult to obtain the full required permissions to demolish any Grade 1 listed edifice? Can anyone cite any recent matter where a Grade I listed edifice was demolished.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
There are often examples in private eye. However those tend to be dodgy people breaking the rules. Here the council agreed the chimneys were unsafe and have given permission subject to a replacement being built. Will it be the same height as the originals? Pass.
- Status