Car driver and passenger drown under Liverpool Railway Road Bridge

[Haywain]

Personally, I see a prosecution, possibly by the HSE. We shall wait and see.

We shall wait and see what comes out of the inevitable inquest, but I struggle to see how Network Rail would bear any liability.

 

[John Luxton]

Maybe have a staff presence at the bridge 24/7 ready to close the road at a moments notice in the event of rain and flooding until a permanent solution can be found?

What happens when it doesn't rain?! Some prominent road liable to flooding signs would be the best immediate solution. There were no signs at this location. In some recent news reports I have seen temporary signs, but these must have been placed there prior to the road reopening as they were certainly not there when I last drove that way around a month ago. Better still an electronic sign which could be activated by rising water levels.

 

[Edsmith]

What happens when it doesn't rain?! Some prominent road liable to flooding signs would be the best immediate solution. There were no signs at this location. In some recent news reports I have seen temporary signs, but these must have been placed there prior to the road reopening as they were certainly not there when I last drove that way around a month ago. Better still an electronic sign which could be activated by rising water levels.

When it doesn't rain the staff member twiddles their thumbs, obviously only a temporary measure but this tragedy cannot be allowed to happen again. An electronic sign or traffic lights activated by rising water levels would be ideal but these things aren't infallible just like low bridge warnings aren't, what if it fails?

 

[Towers]

I think the courts may disagree with you wrong on this, I see both Liverpool City Council and Network Rail both in the dock in the months to come.

It's 2100 Saturday night, dark.
The lighting in the underpass often doesn't work or is very, very dim.
If you're driving towards Sefton Park (ie Westbound, towards the river) it is pretty dark beyond the bridge.

- The legal test would be, could someone with ordinary vision have easily seen the flood in this unusual, dark, covered location?
- Did the structure's owners, maintainers and associated utilities do enough to prevent this?

I know the diveunder well, and 25 years ago when the drainage was well maintained by LCC it still got a substantial puddle when it rained. In this modern world of councils not doing any maintenance and the water firms denying any responsibility, this happens - and a metre deep flood is to be expected.

Personally, I see a prosecution, possibly by the HSE. We shall wait and see.

I can’t see it being NR’s problem, they own the structure of the bridge but presumably have zero powers or responsibility for the road beneath it? That’s the highway authority or local council’s issue surely.

 

[stuu]

When it doesn't rain the staff member twiddles their thumbs, obviously only a temporary measure but this tragedy cannot be allowed to happen again. An electronic sign or traffic lights activated by rising water levels would be ideal but these things aren't infallible just like low bridge warnings aren't, what if it fails?

Or alternatively, add some gates at each end and close the road when heavy rain is forecast. That's the most likely outcome I would have thought. Minimal spend, minimal ongoing cost

 

[John Luxton]

Or alternatively, add some gates at each end and close the road when heavy rain is forecast. That's the most likely outcome I would have thought. Minimal spend, minimal ongoing cost

Forecast and reality are often different things! I am still awaiting for some of those beasts from the easts to arrive as well as several non materialising heatwaves predicted. Reaction to circumstances on the ground is a much more reliable method otherwise unnecessary closures occur. I would favour permanent road signs warning of possible flooding which would be backed up by electronic warnings when the actual rain does hit the ground.

 

[The exile]

When it doesn't rain the staff member twiddles their thumbs, obviously only a temporary measure but this tragedy cannot be allowed to happen again. An electronic sign or traffic lights activated by rising water levels would be ideal but these things aren't infallible just like low bridge warnings aren't, what if it fails?

If “this tragedy mustn’t be allowed to happen again” then the solution is very very simple: close the road. However, I suspect that most people would prefer to take the risk.
It’s an interesting question for the autonomous vehicle lobby - how will such a vehicle distinguish between an inch or so of muddy water and several feet of it?

 

[Parjon]

In the past months it looks to me like significant amounts of vegetation have been removed from the bridge area.

We know that things like trees and bushes being removed can cause mudslides but they also play a part in absorbing water.

The cascade of water and rapidly developing situation makes me wonder whether any clearance had any part in this.

 

[John Luxton]

In the past months it looks to me like significant amounts of vegetation have been removed from the bridge area.

We know that things like trees and bushes being removed can cause mudslides but they also play a part in absorbing water.

The cascade of water and rapidly developing situation makes me wonder whether any clearance had any part in this.

Could be but early photos taken of the area during and shortly after construction of the underpass in the early 20th Century showed much less vegetation. The current problems seem to stem from the late 1960s onwards when surrounding vegetation became more established. Of course in recent years even less vegetation control has been implemented. So not too sure what impact the vegetation and its removal has had

 

[urbophile]

Wouldn't it be possible to raise the road level, even if restricted height signs had to be installed and double-deck buses barred?

 

[Prime586]

I can’t see it being NR’s problem, they own the structure of the bridge but presumably have zero powers or responsibility for the road beneath it? That’s the highway authority or local council’s issue surely.

The water coming down into the underpass via the road and pavement surface drainage wasn't the only cause of the couple's car being inundated, it was in addition the water pouring over the retaining wall between the two bridges. NR is responsible for managing the drainage from the trackbed. If it turns out the source of the water coming over the retaining wall was from a blocked cess drain, NR would be responsible. If it was coming from blocked/breached storm drain on Briardale Road, the council and/or local untility company (United Utilities, in Liverpool's case) would be responsible (United Utilities have already stated it was not due to a burst pipe).

Trackbed drainage can outflow into existing watercourses, the surrounding land via soakaways, or in built up areas into the local authority's storm drains (see page 15 of this PDF for a site plan that shows examples all three methods) . In that location, there are no watercourses and limited scope for land drainage (there is the Liverpool College playing fields on the other side of the tracks, but in the torrential rain that would probably be saturated already), so I would expect most of the trackbed drainage feeds into the storm drain system.

In the past months it looks to me like significant amounts of vegetation have been removed from the bridge area.

We know that things like trees and bushes being removed can cause mudslides but they also play a part in absorbing water.

The cascade of water and rapidly developing situation makes me wonder whether any clearance had any part in this.

No amount of vegetation would have absorbed the flow of water coming over that wall. Vegetation has very limited capabilty of absorbing water in a flash flood situation.

 

[Edsmith]

If “this tragedy mustn’t be allowed to happen again” then the solution is very very simple: close the road. However, I suspect that most people would prefer to take the risk.
It’s an interesting question for the autonomous vehicle lobby - how will such a vehicle distinguish between an inch or so of muddy water and several feet of it?

And I suspect the same people would be saying something different if it did happen again especially if it was one of their family.

 

[John Luxton]

Another minimum cost warning indicator could be the fitting of those depth of water measures each side of the road on the approaches rather like those found at fords and some tidal roads. Low tech but a good indicator of depth, but they would have to be well illuminated at night.

 

[stuving]

It strikes me that there are two unusual things about this location. Firstly, while a dip in a road under a bridge that drains poorly is common enough, this one is much deeper than most. The examples I can remember could never flood to even a metre depth, because before then the water would be escaping onto surrounding land or along the road.

The other thing is that there is a road bridge over another road, and it does not rise towards the bridge from both sides - Briardale Road and the railway beside it fall gently from the north side. It is not uncommon for very heavy rainfall to overwhelm road drainage, and the excess water then floods the road surface. It can then move along the road much more freely than in a drain, or along a railway formation. Here, that water running down Briardale Road would reach the northern corner of its bridge over Queens drive, where there is a side road (a kind of service road or slip road for Queens Drive). That road appears (if Google earth is to be trusted) to drop a couple of metres and then rise again, and that dip is where the video I've seen shows water cascading down into Queens Drive.

Sitting here with the hindsight now available to us, I can say that the combination of these two factors should have been identified as a significant risk - the road above makes flooding more likely, and the depth aggravates the worst case outcome.

 

[TPO]

As personal responsibility continues to be eroded in the UK, where does this sort of thing stop? Dips under railway bridges are not that unusual, and the combination of an elderly driver (77), flash-flooding and the extreme difficulty/impossibilty of draining such a site in those conditions means that the rarity of the situation is surely to be regarded as an Act of God? I imagine that signs warning of a flood risk and/or even more lighting would have made little or no difference to such a driver attempting to pass the spot. The BBC News photos show lamp posts at regular intervals along the road, and, assuming they were working, reflections would have beeen obvious off the flood surface. Cars today give ever greater feellngs invincibility to their drivers, and can result in that feeling being proved horribly false, as here.

I tend to agree, especially about the invincability thing. Yet many modern vehicles struggle in water, as others have said just look up the Rufford Ford videos on the internet, some makes of car clearly have the air intake very low and so suffer. Also notable is that towing out a car with electric handbrake can be a problem as when the engine stops or the doors are opened the handbrake is applied automatically.....

The same "invincability" trait is seen when people go out in winter weather (e.g. snow) without any thought of consequence because their magic car will always get them home. Car (and mobile phone) use has very much reduced the general awareness of weather conditions and the real dangers they can pose to us, it's not so much the weather has changed but the lack of general resilience of folk, especially in the city.

Dig a big hole under the road surface to use as a tank, then add in a (powerful) pump and a pipe to somewhere the water can flow away to. Expensive and needs maintaining, but that's what exists in other places

The death of 2 people is a pretty good place to draw a line surely. If the reality is more flash flooding, more regularly with deeper flooding then we need systems and approaches to deal with that. Yes that means much more warning in driving tests but other awareness raising including at the site. The dip at this site is particularly big, so it does feel like it needs a better on-site solution.

Draw a line then, close the road. Simples. Allow access through for walking and cycles. Could even call it a Low Traffic Neighbourhood......

We shall wait and see what comes out of the inevitable inquest, but I struggle to see how Network Rail would bear any liability.

Oh, I am sure there's plenty of adults who would try to blame the Big Bad Railway for their own errors. Not for the first time.

TPO

 

[urbophile]

Draw a line then, close the road. Simples. Allow access through for walking and cycles. Could even call it a Low Traffic Neighbourhood......

Much as I instinctively sympathise, and would love to see the whole country a low traffic neighbourhood, in the short term this would be a disaster here. Sad as this recent tragedy is, the likelihood of more accidents and more fatalities in that neighbourhood would increase if the traffic of a major ring road (which Queens Drive is, even though at that point it is reduced to single carriageway) were diverted onto the already busy but much narrower roads which are the only feasible diversion. The railway does act as a major barrier in this part of Liverpool.

 

[childwallblues]

Much as I instinctively sympathise, and would love to see the whole country a low traffic neighbourhood, in the short term this would be a disaster here. Sad as this recent tragedy is, the likelihood of more accidents and more fatalities in that neighbourhood would increase if the traffic of a major ring road (which Queens Drive is, even though at that point it is reduced to single carriageway) were diverted onto the already busy but much narrower roads which are the only feasible diversion. The railway does act as a major barrier in this part of Liverpool.

I have driven and cycled on this road hundreds of times so I know it well. I have read this thread from the start and some of the theories and suggestions are the work of fantasy.
One theory put forward by my wife is did the driver take ill? If so we will all have to wait for the result of the post mortem.
Cars in their thousands use this road evert week and any closure and subsequent diversions would put an intolerable strain on the surrounding roads. At present the schools are off so the traffic is lighter but they go back next week and chaos in the area can be expected.

 

[vinnym70]

There are a lot of roads in the UK and elsewhere in the world where the road dips under something else.
Unfortunately, water has a strange habit of following what gravity tells it to do and mostly clearance of such spaces relies on good drainage or pumps, either of which can fail when most needed.
There was a similar incident many years ago now after some very heavy rains. I remember it well because the road where it happened was closed and I was travelling home after my grandfather's funeral.
I can remember looking towards the closed road and seeing a car deeply submerged. Even as a new driver at the time I don't think I'd ever have thought the route was viable.

I don't believe there is anything in the learner driver experience (theory or practical tests included) that helps new drivers understand how little water it takes for cars to become boats. And very leaky boats at that.

 

[Haywain]

I don't believe there is anything in the learner driver experience (theory or practical tests included) that helps new drivers understand how little water it takes for cars to become boats. And very leaky boats at that.

I think the problem is that they don't become boats, leaky or otherwise!

 

[vinnym70]

I think the problem is that they don't become boats, leaky or otherwise!

They do - rather briefly though. Maybe boat is too broad of a term but cars do have a tendency to float sufficiently enough for even a reasonable flow of water to move them in a direction they're not pointing in once the water is 6 inches deep or more. Of course, that is rapidly overcome by water ingress because cars are far from waterproof.

 

[Ediswan]

They do - rather briefly though. Maybe boat is too broad of a term but cars do have a tendency to float sufficiently enough for even a reasonable flow of water to move them in a direction they're not pointing in once the water is 6 inches deep or more. Of course, that is rapidly overcome by water ingress because cars are far from waterproof.

Agreed. The classic scenario is to try and cross a ford which is just too deep, float, drift off downstream into deeper water, then sink.

 

[Parjon]

Of course a fford would have something like this. I don't see why the road can't have several of these along the length of the dip

 

[Lewisham2221]

Quite shocking that there is no warning signage in place given the known issues at this location. The lack of lighting beneath the road bridge is also noteworthy.

I would expect to see an abundance of prominent signage installed as a result of this. Perhaps including supplementary signage worded along the lines of "Do not attempt to pass if road is flooded" and maybe even "danger of death" added, in addition to "road liable to flooding" signs. Ideally with prominent reflective yellow surrounds, good lighting and perhaps red road markings to highlight the risk.

 

[Lucan]

Living rurally I have driven through quite a few fords and floods, and the right technique is to drive in slowly, and to stop and back out if the water starts getting deep. My criterion to back out is when it reaches the level of the bottom of the door sills, something that can be checked by opening the door and looking out if you cannot judge it. The car is unlikely to stall at this depth but even if it does you can still easily get out and wade out. They should teach this stuff in driving schools. I have heard advice, typically voiced in pub bars, that you should charge through at high speed - that is ridiculous.

Another approach is to wait until someone else has driven through and see how they fare. I read half-serious advice from someone in the Australian outback where fords can be ill-defined and the traffic is very light. They would park with the rear of their truck towards the ford as if they had just come through and stopped for a breather, and then wait for the next vehicle to come along. That next vehicle would think they had just come through successfully so would go straight through themselves, thus demonstrating if it was safe or not!

 

[Parjon]

That would be a pretty nasty thing to do to someone.

In this case, due to the level of water and the angle and length of the descent, you wouldn't be able to edge into the flood. It would get too deep too quickly.

 

[John Luxton]

The Coroner has opened and adjourned the inquests until February. It appears that Network Rail, United Utilities and Liverpool City Council are all in the frame as part of the investigation.

Answers needed over couple's death on flooded road, inquest hears

Elaine, 75, and Philip Marco, 77, died after becoming trapped in their vehicle in Liverpool.

www.bbc.co.uk

At the opening of the inquest, senior coroner Andre Rebello said Liverpool City Council, Network Rail and United Utilities needed to answer questions.
The inquest heard emergency services were called after 21:20 BST to Queens Drive by members of the public reporting that an occupied vehicle was submerged in water.

 

[Haywain]

Network Rail, United Utilities and Liverpool City Council are all in the frame as part of the investigation.

Needing to answer questions is not being "in the frame".

 

[Edsmith]

Needing to answer questions is not being "in the frame".

From what I heard on the news the questions for NR are about drainage from the bridge onto the road below.

 

[John Luxton]

Needing to answer questions is not being "in the frame".

Perhaps if it is referring the scope of the investigation it is certainly "in the frame" as all three were mentioned.

 

[Prime586]

The other thing is that there is a road bridge over another road, and it does not rise towards the bridge from both sides - Briardale Road and the railway beside it fall gently from the north side. It is not uncommon for very heavy rainfall to overwhelm road drainage, and the excess water then floods the road surface. It can then move along the road much more freely than in a drain, or along a railway formation. Here, that water running down Briardale Road would reach the northern corner of its bridge over Queens drive, where there is a side road (a kind of service road or slip road for Queens Drive). That road appears (if Google earth is to be trusted) to drop a couple of metres and then rise again, and that dip is where the video I've seen shows water cascading down into Queens Drive.

I did a detour round this area at the weekend on my bike to get the 'lie of the land'. If it wasn't for the embankments that were built for the hump back bridge that takes Penny Lane over the railway the area would basically be flat. Briardale Road rises towards the north end where it meets Penny Lane, as it joins onto it half-way up the eastern embankment of the bridge. However, the first few 'Dale' side roads that lead off it from that end also slope downhill towards Dovedale Road (the road that runs parallel to Briardale Road, the jucntion of which on Penny Lane is where the embankment starts), so any runoff is just as likely to run down those towards Dovedale Road as it owuld be down Briardale Road towards the road bridge and Queens Drive. The sliproads that connect Briardale Road to Queens Drive are both virtually flat (looking at old OS maps, they are at the level the land was at before the construction of the underpass).

I coulldn't see much around the road bridge parapets due to the vegetation, but in doing a bit more probing of the available Streetview imagery I did find this one from July 2022 that shows heavy water staining on the retaining wall adjacent to the road bridge parapet, and from the damp spots on the road and pavements it looks like there had been recent rain, so there is potentially something up with the land drainage in that area. There is also water staining on the rail bridge parapets and pavements beneath them indicating water runs down off the trackbed beneath the bridge's bearing pads, but thatis obviously not the source of the flow seen in the videos.