"A Flyover at Woking could be reality in the next 5 years"

[randompixel]

James Waight, head of strategic planning for Network Rail, told councillors at Woking Borough Council overview and scrutiny meeting on Monday, June 18, there were a number of changes proposed, including a new station. He said the town was an important part of the Wessex Route network which covers Surrey and the South East.

Woking is the first station from the Wessex Route to benefit from the Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline, which allows Network Rail to find third parties to bid to fund improvements to their stations. Mr Waight said due to an increase in passenger numbers over the next 12 years, there was a "significant challenge on our hands in terms of accommodating the number of people wishing to travel by rail".

He said a number of measures were being looked at to deal with this population growth, one being the work of the fly-over. He said the work to separate the lines at Woking station would mean they can "actually separate the Portsmouth and the Bournemouth trains and allow two more additional slots to access Waterloo station every hour".

Mr Waight said this would take about five years adding: "This is a £200 to £300 million piece of engineering. It takes a long time to plan and get it right." The photo below shows the new £250m Norton Bridge flyover, which opened in 2016, and something similar is being looked into for Woking: He added it could even be a dive-under as opposed to fly-over, depending on the water table. They are currently working on a £5.2million study looking into which would be best for the station. The proposed new link will take services from the Portsmouth line over the main South West line to just west of Woking station. He added: "It effectively means those services can keep on running south while trains are carried on over it." Mr Waight said: "There would be an element of disruption while that work is taking place. We don't have any dates yet but we will know of any temporary closures years ahead of that work."

A new platform six will also enable 30 additional slots before 2043. He said that coupled with digital railway engineering and Crossrail 2, it will cope with the increase in passenger numbers.

He updated councillors to the Victoria Way bridge which carries nine tracks over the road. They were due in 2020 to carry out light maintenance to the structure which Mr Waight said could include anything from a new coat of paint to something more substantial. A study has been started to assess now whether the road under the arch needs widening, with £655,000 provided by Woking Borough Council for the first two stages of the changes. He said this and the line separation and fly-over could be delivered as one piece of work if funding is found from housing developments in the area.

Network Rail is also looking into how it can link up the Wessex Route with Heathrow Airport. Mr Waight said: "We are very cognisant of the fact that having access to the airport by rail in this area is very difficult. We have demonstrated there is a very good economic case to do this and we have reported our findings online." He said they had identified there could be 4.5 million passenger journeys by 2020 directly into the airport from the Woking area, including staff and air passengers. Cllr Douglas Spinks said: "There is a vast amount of work going on between Network Rail, Surrey County Council and ourselves to bring these projects forward and I'm really optimistic we are going to see some real step changes in the next controlled period."
https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/flyover-woking-station-could-reality-14803929

Seeing the old thread is locked: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/woking-junction-could-get-a-flyover.143852/page-3

So they're looking for other people to pay for it? The council?

 

[snowball]

So they're looking for other people to pay for it? The council?

I think he's expecting it to be paid for as a CP6 enhancement, funded like any other. I don't see anything in the article to suggest otherwise. Nor would it be fair to expect the council to pay for it, since it will beneit the whole route. Nor would the council have that sort of money.

Enhancements in CP6 will be approved individually, rather than announced as a programme at the beginning of the CP as happened previously. Each one will not be formally announced until it is at a later stage in the pipeline.

 

[AM9]

I think he's expecting it to be paid for as a CP6 enhancement, funded like any other. I don't see anything in the article to suggest otherwise. Nor would it be fair to expect the council to pay for it, since it will beneit the whole route. Nor would the council have that sort of money.

Enhancements in CP6 will be approved individually, rather than announced as a programme at the beginning of the CP as happened previously. Each one will not be formally announced until it is at a later stage in the pipeline.

It won't benefit Woking much, - even Surrey will only get limited benefit. The real winners would be Hampshire and Dorset/Wiltshire.

 

[randompixel]

Ah, yes. I think I misunderstood this part "Network Rail to find third parties to bid to fund improvements to their stations", but that makes sense now. Ta

 

[Lucan]

How on earth does Norton Bridge relate in any way to a proposed flyover at Woking? The photo in the link shows a line crossing another at near right angles - that would not happen at Woking. It was SurreyLive that said Norton Bridge BTW, not the NR spokesman; it seems that SurreyLive just Googled for a photo of a railway bridge.

It won't benefit Woking much

Must have missed the bit about two extra trains per hour to London, nor had to put up with delays due to knock-on effects with conflicting up train paths approaching Woking.

 

[swt_passenger]

Typical of local journalism showing Norton Bridge. There are any number of nearby flyovers or diveunders on the SWML either side of Woking that would have made reasonable examples...

 

[The Ham]

So they're looking for other people to pay for it? The council?

From the article:

A study has been started to assess now whether the road under the arch needs widening, with £655,000 provided by Woking Borough Council for the first two stages of the changes. He said this and the line separation and fly-over could be delivered as one piece of work if funding is found from housing developments in the area.

That would imply that it's a mix of Council funding and contributions from local developments.

Even if those funding sources aren't anywhere near enough to fund the whole project (which I would be surprised if they were) the funding will reduce the cost needed from the NR budget making the project better value for money to NR.

 

[AM9]

...

Must have missed the bit about two extra trains per hour to London, nor had to put up with delays due to knock-on effects with conflicting up train paths approaching Woking.

So how many years of disruption and millions of pounds is that worth to Woking Borough council, (or more to the point, the average Woking council tax payer)?

 

[Lucan]

So how many years of disruption and millions of pounds is that worth to Woking Borough council, (or more to the point, the average Woking council tax payer)?

I was not saying Woking should pay for it; the government should. It would be a national benifit but which would also be a significant benefit to Woking. It is time the government put more money into railways instead of subsidising freight by road.

 

[DarloRich]

It will be paid for out of the CP6 pot IF it offers suitable value for money. The local council could help with part funding but I doubt they have a lot to piddle in finance wise!

Typical of local journalism showing Norton Bridge. There are any number of nearby flyovers or diveunders on the SWML either side of Woking that would have made reasonable examples...

It will be a file picture or one supplied by NR to explain what a flyover is. The local paper isn't going to waste time and money sending a snapper oit to snap a particular local bridfe when a free picture does the job! ARGH

 

[swt_passenger]

Why should the Woking flyover as proposed by NR cause significant major disruption? Experience of (for example) the new Heathrow flyovers on the relief side was that they were mostly built around the operational railway.

 

[randompixel]

I doubt the flyover/under would cause that much trouble. The demolition of one side of the station and the new Platform 6 might however.

 

[swt_passenger]

I doubt the flyover/under would cause that much trouble. The demolition of one side of the station and the new Platform 6 might however.

Again, wouldn’t it be likely that they’d build a completely new entrance on the P5 side in its new location first, with the footbridges then extended, before starting on P6? Woking station’s probable changes are fairly trivial in comparison to what was achieved at Reading, I don’t think they’ll cause enough disruption that people should worry about chaos...

 

[Lucan]

It will be a file picture or one supplied by NR to explain what a flyover is. The local paper isn't going to waste time and money sending a snapper oit to

A quick Google for "Wimbledon Flyover" gave this far more relevant scene. They could even have reversed it to make it more like Woking. Incidentally, it is beyond me why a structure similar to this, not for high speed, should :-

take about five years ... "This is a £200 to £300 million piece of engineering. It takes a long time to plan and get it right ...."

 

[Shalford]

Another reason to get this infrastructure built is for the proposed southern link to Heathrow that in some of the proposals will terminate in Basingstoke/Guildford having joined the South West Mainline via the junction at Byfleet. The service frequency looks like 2TPH to both destinations.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

A quick Google for "Wimbledon Flyover" gave this far more relevant scene. They could even have reversed it to make it more like Woking. Incidentally, it is beyond me why a structure similar to this, not for high speed, should (quoted comment about 5 years to build)

Consider that they would have to work out the optimal design not only for the flyover but for the surrounding track layout that is both affordable with however much money turns out to be available and likely to allow whatever train timetable is likely to be required for the following 20 years or so (which in turn requires some forecasting and modelling of demand). Then they to get the design past the local authorities, through planning etc. Then they will have to carefully plan out the entire building process upfront, in enough detail to know almost exactly what is going to happen on a given week, so they know upfront when various components will need to be delivered, exactly when they may need to do work requiring weekend closures of the lines, what staff they'll need and so on. And only after they've done all that, can they start to actually build the thing, including making whatever changes are required to the existing track layout AND modify all the signalling, power supplies and so on in the area - all with the restriction of working around keeping the railway open for most of the time as they build it. It's possible that might even mean they need to move the track layout a couple of times, with a temporary layout in place to allow trains to keep running at various stages of the building process.

Allowing for all that, 5 years doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

 

[AndrewE]

I'd be surprised if anything (even on this relatively small & local scale) could be delivered in 5 years, given the fragmented state of today's railway...
Won't it take longer than that to build the potential costs of disruption into the next franchise?

 

[Cricketer8for9]

Considering most of the junctions west of Wimbledon had been changed to flying/burrowing before 1900 one may wonder why it took the LSRW/Southern until 1936 to build the Wimbledon Flyover...

 

[swt_passenger]

Consider that they would have to work out the optimal design not only for the flyover but for the surrounding track layout that is both affordable with however much money turns out to be available and likely to allow whatever train timetable is likely to be required for the following 20 years or so (which in turn requires some forecasting and modelling of demand). Then they to get the design past the local authorities, through planning etc. Then they will have to carefully plan out the entire building process upfront, in enough detail to know almost exactly what is going to happen on a given week, so they know upfront when various components will need to be delivered, exactly when they may need to do work requiring weekend closures of the lines, what staff they'll need and so on. And only after they've done all that, can they start to actually build the thing, including making whatever changes are required to the existing track layout AND modify all the signalling, power supplies and so on in the area - all with the restriction of working around keeping the railway open for most of the time as they build it. It's possible that might even mean they need to move the track layout a couple of times, with a temporary layout in place to allow trains to keep running at various stages of the building process.

Allowing for all that, 5 years doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.

They aren’t only just starting now, they’ve been discussing this for quite a few years, and had included a potential track layout in the 2015 Route Study.

I think the build process is being exaggerated somewhat. It isn’t going to be anything like as complicated a change as for example Bermondsey or Windmill Bridge...

 

[AndrewE]

They aren’t only just starting now, they’ve been discussing this for quite a few years, and had included a potential track layout in the 2015 Route Study.

I think the build process is being exaggerated somewhat. It isn’t going to be anything like as complicated a change as for example Bermondsey or Windmill Bridge...

I'm not a gambling man, but does anyone want to join in a sweep on when it might open for traffic? Unfortunately only 1 person can claim "never!"

 

[swt_passenger]

Considering most of the junctions west of Wimbledon had been changed to flying/burrowing before 1900 one may wonder why it took the LSRW/Southern until 1936 to build the Wimbledon Flyover...

IIRC from a discussion elsewhere a good few years ago, they coped with a “paired by direction” layout all the way to Waterloo as long as they could because all the conflicting crossings on the mainline side happened in the throat with all traffic at low speed. Once they reached capacity, they then decided to switch the approach back to “paired by use” at the terminus. This flyover could potentially have been located anywhere between Waterloo and Wimbledon or Raynes Park, but I expect the first location clear of road or rail overbridges with enough distance for the ramps must have been the one chosen.

 

[AndrewE]

That's a nice explanation. Thanks.

 

[The Ham]

Another reason to get this infrastructure built is for the proposed southern link to Heathrow that in some of the proposals will terminate in Basingstoke/Guildford having joined the South West Mainline via the junction at Byfleet. The service frequency looks like 2TPH to both destinations.

I had always thought that extending the Woking Stoppers to Guildford would be sensible once the junction was built, however with the 2tph to Guildford from Heathrow I'm reconsidering this.

Especially when you consider that once Crossrail 2 is built there could be more services to/through Guildford and that you could have 3tph on the Woking Stoppers (or maybe more).

Given that the current semi fast services to Waterloo from the likes of Basingstoke and Alton require some people to change to/from them from/to the Woking Stoppers and others would change to faster services anyway then it could be better to not provide new Crossrail 2 services to these locations. Instead, assuming that we end up with 3tph on the Woking Stoppers, extend these on a 1tph frequency to reach of Basingstoke, towards Alton and to at least Guildford.

In doing so it provides better connections between some of the more minor stations, however leaves more of the Crossrail 2 paths for longer distance services for other services.

One possible service could be a service from London to Salisbury where the service divides with one or continuing to Southampton and the other going to Weymouth via Yeovil. Such a service would primarily be for passengers from London to Basingstoke, Andover and Salisbury so the extensions are less of a concern. However those extra sections could attract a few London passengers (making the through route viable) as well as those passengers who would be the main focus, that being those West of Basingstoke.

 

[30907]

IIRC from a discussion elsewhere a good few years ago, they coped with a “paired by direction” layout all the way to Waterloo as long as they could because all the conflicting crossings on the mainline side happened in the throat with all traffic at low speed. Once they reached capacity, they then decided to switch the approach back to “paired by use” at the terminus. This flyover could potentially have been located anywhere between Waterloo and Wimbledon or Raynes Park, but I expect the first location clear of road or rail overbridges with enough distance for the ramps must have been the one chosen.

And wasn't 1936 when Waterloo was resignalled with colour lights? The Southern wasn't known for its profligacy....

 

[HSTEd]

Costs like that make Shinkansen look like better deals.

 

[swt_passenger]

...then it could be better to not provide new Crossrail 2 services to these locations...

There is no intention for Crossrail 2 to go anywhere near Woking or Guildford. All the published destinations are reached via branches nearer London, eg turning off at Raynes Park or New Malden.

 

[swt_passenger]

And wasn't 1936 when Waterloo was resignalled with colour lights? The Southern wasn't known for its profligacy....

That might well have been highly relevant to the timing of the change. I wonder if there are any specific books on the subject, I’ve got the usual Middleton Press photographic histories but nothing on the signalling side.

 

[The Ham]

There is no intention for Crossrail 2 to go anywhere near Woking or Guildford. All the published destinations are reached via branches nearer London, eg turning off at Raynes Park or New Malden.

I know that Crossrail 2 doesn't reach Woking, however I didn't say that it would be getting Crossrail 2 services. The extra services would be possible through removing the metro services from Waterloo to Crossrail, with (IIRC) 9 paths an hour being possible.

 

[coppercapped]

That might well have been highly relevant to the timing of the change. I wonder if there are any specific books on the subject, I’ve got the usual Middleton Press photographic histories but nothing on the signalling side.

From G. T. Moody's book Southern Electric (Ian Allan 1957), page 61:

In January 1935, the Southern Railway announced that £500,000 would be spent on improving and re-signalling the lines into Waterloo. The layout of the four lines from Hampton Court Junction was up, up, down, down as far as Waterloo "C" box, whence three up and two down lines continued to the terminus (this excludes the Windsor lines). Although it was the practice to divert an incoming train at "C" box to a route into the terminus which would cause the least interference with other up and down lines, the layout had become liable to cause delay, and with the steadily increasing traffic reorganisation had become necessary.

and

It was decided to construct a flyover at Durnsford Road, Wimbledon, the only suitable site, to carry the up local over the up and down through lines. Thence to Waterloo the four lines would be re-arranged to form up and down through and up and down local lines, with an additional up main through relief from Vauxhall to the terminus. Colour light signalling would be installed, with a power-operated cabin at Waterloo.
The flyover was constructed of steel girders, cased in concrete, and mounted on concrete columns. It was 2,174ft long, rising at 1 in 60 at the Wimbledon end, crossing the through lines on the skew and then falling at i in 45. Work on it commenced in September 1935.

The change to colour light signalling at Waterloo was made on Sunday, October 18th (1936). The new signalbox, on the up side, built mainly of concrete, contained 309 electrically-interlocked levers in three frames for main local, main through and Windsor lines respectively.

and most amazingly to modern observers

The changeover was made smoothly; the 12.35am to Hampton Court was signalled out by semaphores and the 1.30am to Salisbury by colour lights.

One hour was needed in 1936 to change over the signalling...

 

[swt_passenger]

From G. T. Moody's book Southern Electric (Ian Allan 1957), page 61:
One hour was needed in 1936 to change over the signalling...

Brilliant thanks.